Contents

1. Executive summary ...................................................................................................3

2. Background to the Industrial Energy Efficiency Accelerator.............................................4
3. Background to the plastic bottle blow moulding sector ...................................................6
What the sector manufactures ....................................................................................6
How the sector manufactures......................................................................................7
Factors affecting business decisions .............................................................................9
Customer demands..........................................................................................9
Legislation.................................................................................................... 10
Energy reduction incentives...................................................................................... 10
4. Key findings ........................................................................................................... 11
How energy is used in processing .............................................................................. 11
Extrusion blow moulding ................................................................................ 11
Injection stretch blow moulding....................................................................... 12
Impact of bottle weight ............................................................................................ 12
Impact of speed of production................................................................................... 13
Equipment idling..................................................................................................... 14
Heat loss ............................................................................................................... 15
Operator practice .................................................................................................... 16
Energy management ............................................................................................... 17
5. Opportunities.......................................................................................................... 18
Innovation in process control .................................................................................... 18
Control of granulators (EBM)........................................................................... 18
Production planning (ISBM) ............................................................................ 18
Innovative equipment .............................................................................................. 19
Induction barrel heating (EBM)........................................................................ 19
Barrel insulation (EBM) .................................................................................. 20
Infrared lamps (ISBM) ................................................................................... 20
Summary of opportunities ........................................................................................ 21
6. Next steps ............................................................................................................. 22
Work together ........................................................................................................ 22
Install smart metering ............................................................................................. 22
Think strategically................................................................................................... 22
Get support............................................................................................................ 22
7. Methodology........................................................................................................... 23
8. Acknowledgements.................................................................................................. 25

2







1. Executivesummary
One way for industry to achieve significant CO
2
reductions is to improve energy efficiency
in sector-specific manufacturing processes. The Carbon Trust has been working with a
number of industry sectors, as part of its Industrial Energy Efficiency Accelerator (IEEA),
to identify where savings can be made in each one. This novel approach aims to deliver
quick and substantial reductions in industrial process emissions by accelerating
innovation in process control and the uptake of low carbon technologies.

The plastic bottle blow moulding industry in the UK processes more than 630,000 tonnes of polymer
a year through extrusion blow moulding (EBM) and injection stretch blow moulding (ISBM). The
split between the two processes is roughly 42% EBM and 58% ISBM. Products include containers
for food, medicine, soft and carbonated drinks, household and personal care products, automotive
products and industrial applications.
In the UK, there are approximately 154 blow moulding sites. The sector consumes around 755
gigawatt hours (GWh) of energy each year and emits around 400,000 tonnes of CO
2
(tCO
2
). Most of
its energy consumption is electricity, used in turning raw material into plastic.
We worked with the plastic bottle blow moulding sector in 2008 and 2009 to gain a better
understanding of energy use in the manufacturing process and to identify ways of improving energy
efficiency.
We focused our investigation on EBM and ISBM because these processes account for most of the
CO
2
emissions of this sector.
The detailed data we collected reveals a number of opportunities for making significant reductions
in carbon emissions. These opportunities fall into two broad areas:
innovation in process control
innovative equipment.
The data we gathered indicates that taking action to become more energy efficient and to reduce
carbon emissions can be a sound investment. Overall, the plastic bottle blow moulding sector could
take a more strategic approach to reducing emissions. It could work more actively with customers
and suppliers, and it could put itself in a better position to take advantage of the low carbon
economy.
In this report, we discuss the opportunities for energy efficiency and carbon reduction.

3







2. BackgroundtotheIndustrialEnergy
EfficiencyAccelerator
Industry is responsible for 25% of the UKs total CO
2
emissions
1
. Experience at the
Carbon Trust supports the view of the Committee on Climate Change, which indicated
that savings of between four and six million tonnes (Mt) of CO
2
(up to 4% of current UK
emissions) should be realistically achievable in industry with appropriate interventions.

We believe that CO
2
savings far beyond those set in current policy targets are possible by working
more directly with organisations to clarify the opportunities. The impact of policy can also be
accelerated and increased if industry sectors are helped to understand their energy use and how to
make significant changes in a short timeframe, rather than gradually reduce their emissions over
time. Whats more, direct intervention can help embed a culture of innovation and good energy
management, resulting in a greater long-term impact.
Significant CO
2
reductions in industry are possible by working with those medium-sized industry
sectors that are outside of the EU Emission Trading System (EU ETS) but are affected by either
Climate Change Agreements (CCAs) or the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) Energy Efficiency
Scheme. These industries are moderately energy intensive and, in total, account for 84MtCO2
emissions per year
2
.
The Carbon Trust currently works with industry by supporting companies to reduce their carbon
emissions. The approach is applied across a range of industries but does not offer detailed advice
on sector-specific manufacturing processes. More energy intensive industries frequently cite the fact
that survey recommendations do not address the bulk of their energy use as a reason for not
implementing them. Between 50% and 90% of a sites energy consumption could typically be used
by a sector-specific manufacturing process.
In addition, the Carbon Trust Applied Research Scheme has supported the development of a
number of industry-related technologies. This scheme is offered in response to applications for
support, rather than targeting specific technologies.
Recognising the challenge of reducing CO
2
emissions from industry, and the carbon reduction
potential of sector-specific manufacturing processes, we looked at how we could best engage with
industry to significantly increase the rate of carbon reduction beyond that delivered by carbon
surveys. As a result, we developed the IEEA approach, which was launched as a pilot in 2008.
The IEEA approach focuses on identifying and addressing the reasons why opportunities to reduce
emissions in industrial processes are not put into action. It is a three-stage process:

1
Committee on Climate Change Report, December 2008.
2
Source: DECC CRC Presentation, Westminster Energy Forum, January 2009.
4









In 2008/09 we undertook the investigation and solution identification stage with three pilot industry
sectors: animal feed milling, asphalt manufacture and plastic bottle blow moulding. This report
details the results and key findings from the investigation into the plastic bottle blow moulding
sector.
5







3. Backgroundtotheplasticbottleblow
mouldingsector
The UKs plastic bottle blow moulding industry processes more than 630,000 tonnes of
polymer a year through EBM and ISBM. There are around 154 blow moulding sites, which
consume around 755GWh a year and emit around 400,000tCO
2
. Most of the sectors
energy consumption is electricity, used to turn raw material into plastic.
The sector is represented by the British Plastics Federation (BPF), although blow moulders make up
a very small proportion of BPF membership. The sector has had a CCA since October 2009.
What the sector manufactures
The plastic blow moulding industry produces containers for foods, medicine, soft and carbonated
drinks, household and personal care products, automotive products and industrial applications.
In this study, we have concentrated on EBM and ISBM. These processes are described in more
detail in the following section. The split between the two processes is roughly 42% EBM and 58%
ISBM.
ISBM containers are generally made from polyethylene terephthalate (PET), though other polyester
polymers may be used for specialised applications such as babies bottles. PET containers have a
clarity similar to glass and a very low gas permeability, which means they can be used for
carbonated drinks.
6







How the sector manufactures
The EBM and ISBM processes are made up of a number of stages. A simplified diagram of the EBM
process is shown in Figure 1, and the ISBM process in Figure 2.


Figure 1: Flow diagram showing the main stages of the extrusion blow moulding
process and the major energy demands

7








Figure 2: Flow diagram showing the main stages of the injection stretch blow
moulding process and the major energy demands

8







Factors affecting business decisions
As in all businesses, the decisions made by plastic bottle blow moulders are influenced by a number
of key factors. Figure 3 shows some of the most important factors that affect business decisions in
this sector.

Figure 3: Factors affecting business decisions in the plastic bottle blow moulding
sector
Customer demands
Immediate customers are usually drinks manufacturers or manufacturers of other liquid products.
Supermarkets and consumers, however, have an indirect but increasingly important impact on
suppliers, for example, through the carbon footprinting of products such as bottles of milk.
To minimise transport costs, many bottle blow moulding plants are located on filling sites owned by
drinks manufacturers, such as dairies. Often the bottle blow moulding company pays the site
owner, rather than the energy supplier, for the energy they use, and they pass the cost back to
them in the price of each bottle. So, if the bottle blow moulding company reduced its energy use,
the site owner would expect a lower price per bottle. This is clearly a disincentive for bottle blow
moulding companies to reduce their energy use.


9








Legislation
The plastic bottle blow moulding industry pays the Climate Change Levy (CCL). The BPF, on behalf
of the plastics sector as a whole, negotiated a CCA with the Government that began in October
2009. This gives participating companies 80% of the CCL back, subject to meeting energy efficiency
targets. In 2008, the CCL cost the blow moulding sector 3.5m.
The industry will also be affected by the CRC. Many sites use more than the 6,000 megawatt hours
(MWh) minimum for inclusion in the CRC and are included unless they are part of the CCA. Some
companies on the borderline for inclusion had an extra incentive to reduce their emissions before
the scheme began.
Energy reduction incentives
Energy use costs plastic bottle manufacturers a significant amount around 20% of overall
operating costs. The specific energy consumption for each site falls in the region of 1.5kWh/kg to
2kWh/kg. However, energy efficiency has not previously been a high priority for the sector.
Some companies have received advice and audits from the Carbon Trust, but most have not. The
industry argues that tight profit margins mean its focus must always be on cost management rather
than carbon management. This suggests a lack of awareness of the direct financial benefits of
carbon management within the sector.
It doesnt help that there is very little data for production and energy use within the manufacturing
process. Submetering of the process is poor or non-existent. Where data exists, there are no
resources to analyse or understand its implications.
Although the sector is increasingly willing to think about energy efficiency issues, there is a lack of
coordination and impetus. Many companies feel they are not getting the advice they need about the
impact of climate change legislation.

10







4. Keyfindings
We measured the typical energy use for both EBM and ISBM processes and found wide
variations depending on the way equipment was used, the size and schedule of
production and how operators carried out their work.
How energy is used in processing
Extrusion blow moulding
Figure 4 shows the energy flow through a typical extrusion blow moulding machine during normal
operation.

Figure 4: A breakdown of electricity consumption for an extrusion blow moulding
machine

This process uses electricity, and most of that energy is used to power the extrusion drive motor
and the motor that runs the hydraulic system used in machine movements.
The plastic material is melted using the heater bands on the outside of the extruder and by
frictional heat produced as the material passes through the extruder. Where the report refers to
other uses of energy in the process, this includes power for conveyors, material handling systems
and other ancillary equipment.
Although compressed air and water for cooling are also used in the process, we havent included
them in this study because energy efficiency improvements for compressors and chillers are widely
documented and are available from our website.
11







Injection stretch blow moulding
Figure 5 shows the energy flow through an injection stretch blow moulding machine.

Figure 5: A breakdown of electricity consumption during the blow stage of injection
stretch blow moulding

This process uses electricity, and more than 90% of that energy is used to heat the pre-forms
above their glass transition temperature (around 100C), so that they can be blown to the required
shape. The rest of the power is used for motion the direct electric motor that powers conveyors to
move the pre-forms and bottles around the machine; and for ventilation motors used to extract
hot air from the ovens, draw cooler ambient air into the machine or circulate air in the ovens.
Other resources include high- and low-pressure compressed air for blowing the pre-forms, and
water to extract heat from the blown bottles and keep the neck area cool in the ovens.
Impact of bottle weight
Figure 6 shows the variance in energy consumed per unit of material for the different sub-
processes, when different weight bottles are manufactured on the same machine.
The weight of the bottle has a significant impact on the energy used by the extruder and the
amount of heating required heavier bottles generally consume more energy per unit of material in
their manufacture. A process called light weighting, which reduces material and energy costs, is
carried out in consultation with the customer who sells the filled bottle.

12








Figure 6: Effect of different bottle weights on energy consumption for extrusion blow
moulding processes
Impact of speed of production
It was thought that the weight of material extruded per hour would affect the amount of electricity
consumed by the extruder and the heater bands. Surprisingly, the considerable variation in energy
used, even though extrusion rates stay the same, shows there is no correlation between energy use
and the amount of material being processed. This may well point to poor process setting.


Figure 7: The relationship between extrusion rate and power consumption of extruder
and heater
13







Equipment idling
Figures 8 and 9 show the total energy consumption of an extrusion and injection blow moulding
machine over time.
There are stoppages throughout the period and, in general, these are due to mechanical
breakdowns. The larger gaps may indicate that the machine has been switched off because there is
no operator available or production is not required. Bottle production often has to match the filling
rate, and problems at the filling line have an impact on the consistent operation of the bottle
production line. Another possible factor is that the speeds of the blowing machine and filling line
may be poorly matched.
However, even when the machine is stopped there is background power use from the heating
elements and ancillary equipment. The ISBM process can be more easily stopped and started than
the EBM process, which has advantages when the blowing machine has to match speed with the
filling line.


Figure 8: Power consumption (kW) of an EBM machine

14








Figure 9: Power consumption (kW) of an ISBM machine

Over 21 hours of monitoring, the machine operated for only 1.5 hours, but the heaters and
ancillaries were left on continuously. Switching off the granulator and other ancillary equipment
would have saved 150kWh of electricity. If the heaters had been switched off, a further 83kWh
would have been saved. Annually, that could add up to a cost saving of 1,900 for just one
machine.
The reason for leaving the heaters on was the length of time needed to heat up the barrel to a
stable condition. However, better production planning would allow ancillary equipment to be
switched off when not in use without disrupting production when the machine was needed again.
Another factor is that when a change of bottle size occurs, the change-over for the blowing
equipment is completed more quickly than the filling line change-over. This leads to a period of four
or five hours when the blowing machine is run sporadically, waiting for the filling line to be ready.
Reducing the change-over time would reduce energy use and, again, could be achieved with better
production planning.
Heat loss
On injection stretch blow moulding machines, heat is lost as hot air from the top of the oven.
Temperature and energy flow measurements showed this to be at a rate of around 30kW.
The extruder and the motors on the extrusion blow moulding machine radiate the most heat.
Between 30% and 60% of energy may be lost in this way, depending on machine size. Infrared
images of these areas during operation show temperatures of up to 110C. In Figure 10, the blue
zones represent areas of lower radiant temperature and move up the spectrum to red and white for
areas of higher radiant temperature.
15









Figure 10: Thermal image showing heat radiating from a motor
Operator practice
Although a number of factors affect energy use in these processes, operators are more likely to use
settings that are familiar, rather than tuning the machine for optimum energy and production
performance. This is due to a lack of technical knowledge in the industry, and a lack of data to
demonstrate links between operations and energy saving.
Figures 11, 12 and 13 show there is no correlation between bottle weight and energy consumption
or between extrusion rate and energy consumption, where a relationship would usually be
expected. Since most energy use is in heating and plasticising the material, lower material loads
should reduce energy. This suggests poor process control and a lack of awareness of energy
consumption when setting up processes.


Figure 11: Energy consumption of extrusion blow moulding machines for different bottle
weights

16








Figure 12: Energy consumption of injection stretch blow moulding machines for
different bottle weights


Figure 13: Energy consumption of extrusion blow moulding machines by rate of
extrusion
Energy management
There are few dedicated energy managers in the plastic blow moulding sector and there is little
specialist and independent support available. Sites capture little production information, and there
tends to be no energy use information at process level to inform energy management decisions and
measure improvements in performance. Managers are not generally aware of opportunities for
energy reduction and dont have the data to build a strong business case for change.
17







5. Opportunities
Before we carried out this study as part of the IEEA, very few plastic blow moulding sites
had been surveyed from the Carbon Trust. Most werent familiar with conventional
energy efficiency measures such as energy efficient motors, variable speed drives
(VSDs), efficient lighting and plant and pipe lagging.
The majority could certainly benefit from these measures. However, most of the energy use on
blow moulding sites is related to the actual process of producing plastic bottles. This study has
identified several other opportunities for process control innovations and innovative equipment
specific to bottle production.
Innovation in process control
These opportunities tend to be cheaper, have a shorter payback period than other types and tend
to be fairly straightforward to implement. For these reasons, they are also the most popular with
the industry.
Control of granulators (EBM)
The EBM process was monitored for more than 1,450 hours on a number of sites and machines. We
found that for 10.5% of the time when machines werent working, the granulators and ancillary
equipment were still running. It would cost nothing to make staff more aware of this and, by
turning off this equipment, save both energy and money. Alternatively, an automatic sensor could
be fitted to each granulator to switch it off when the machine was not producing bottles.
More than 80% of blow moulding sites could take this opportunity, leading to savings of around
11,000tCO
2
a year.
Cost
The cost of installing granulator control is around 2,000 a machine. The saving would be around
1,900 per machine per year, giving a payback time of just over a year.
Barriers
Lack of awareness and involvement of machine operators stands in the way of adopting better
granulator control. This could be easily addressed with an energy saving campaign and by sharing
best practice across the organisation.
Production planning (ISBM)
When the bottle size is changed on the filling line and blowing machine, it takes an average of eight
hours to reach a steady state of production. During this time, the blowing machine is left running
and still consumes energy at around half its full speed rate. During monitoring of 588 running
hours, energy wasted in this way amounted to 600kWh.
Bringing in better production planning at just half the UKs sites could save 35,000tCO
2
a year.


18







Cost
Better production planning should cost companies nothing and give immediate payback.
Barriers
The main barrier is the shortage of time and skills to educate and train staff. Changing operational
practices for energy saving reasons is often disregarded because meeting production targets is seen
as more important. This shows that companies dont recognise that energy efficiency actually brings
financial and operational benefits.
Innovative equipment
These options tend to involve capital outlay, so businesses need solid evidence to be able to draw
up a case for adopting them. Because equipment isnt renewed very often in this industry, it would
also take longer for a significant impact to be felt in the sector as a whole.
Induction barrel heating (EBM)
Our monitoring shows that around 8%-10% of energy consumption in bottle blow moulding is used
in heating the barrel. The injection moulding industry has brought in a new method of barrel
heating that cuts energy use by between 50% and 70%. This induction heating method is
illustrated in Figure 14.


Figure 14: Heating the barrel using induction energy

Around 80% of plastic bottle blow moulding sites in the UK could adopt induction heating leading
to savings for the whole sector of around 50,000tCO
2
a year.


19







Cost
The estimated cost of adopting induction barrel heating is 16,500 per machine. The payback
period should be just less than two years.
Barriers
Transferring induction heating technology to extrusion blow moulding isnt a simple process
because of the use of cooling fans at the front of the barrel. Its also not clear what level of CO
2

savings can be achieved, which makes it difficult to build a business case for investment. This
technology would need to be tested and adapted for extrusion blow moulding before wider adoption
in the sector.
Barrel insulation (EBM)
Clip-on barrel insulation is used in the extrusion blow moulding industry and can save up to 45% of
the energy use. However, it has to be removed whenever operators need access to the heater
bands, and is rarely replaced after removal. The solution would be integrated units with insulated
heater bands.
Around 80% of plastic bottle blow moulding sites in the UK could take up this option leading to
savings for the whole sector of around 32,000tCO
2
a year.
Cost
The estimated cost of integrated barrel insulation is 3,500 per machine. The payback period
should be 18 months.
Barriers
The main barrier is lack of awareness among operators of the energy and cost saving benefits.
Infrared lamps (ISBM)
Improving infrared lamp technology could bring significant savings in energy consumption in the
ISBM process. Making the lamps more reflective and lowering power consumption are target areas
for some manufacturers and, if implemented, could save around 15% of energy.
If just half the sector adopted these improvements, there could be a saving of 4,000tCO
2
a year.
Cost
The cost of improved infrared lamps is around 10,000 and could have a payback of around two
years. It is more likely, though, that the lamps would be replaced only when the whole machine
was replaced.
Barriers
When manufacturers specify new blow moulding machinery, the energy efficiency of the infrared
lamps is only one of several factors and unlikely to take priority.


20







Summary of opportunities
Figure 15 summarises the financial case for the major opportunities identified for reducing carbon
emissions in plastic bottle blow moulding.
Opportunity Cost per machine Payback Annual C0
2

savings (tonnes)
Production planning (ISBM) Minimal Immediate 35,000
Control of granulators (EBM) 2,000 <1 year 11,000
Barrel insulation (EBM) 3,500 18 months 32,000
Infrared lamps (ISBM) 10,000 2 years 4,000
Induction barrel heating (EBM) 16,500 2 years 50,000

Figure 15: Summary of opportunities
21







6. Nextsteps
Generally speaking, the level of awareness of the need to save energy in the plastic bottle blow
moulding sector could be improved. Comparison to other industrial sectors suggests that the
sectors CCA will raise that awareness and be an incentive for energy efficiency. However,
companies in the blow moulding sector still need to do more to get staff involved and raise
awareness of the opportunities to improve energy efficiency and save money. Companies need to
develop a culture in which accepted practices are challenged.
Work together
Cross-sector collaboration, particularly between machine suppliers and manufacturing companies,
could lead to the development and adoption of more energy efficient equipment. Companies could
also benefit from cross-sector training and sharing best practice. The CCA gives the BPF the
mandate to bring the sector together in this way.
Install smart metering
All companies in the sector would benefit from detailed submetering of the manufacturing process
at their sites. This would give them information for more efficient day-to-day operation of the
process, as well as providing evidence to justify investment in more significant energy saving
opportunities.
Think strategically
The low carbon economy offers opportunities for manufacturers. Customers buying decisions may
change, and supermarkets are already measuring the carbon footprint of some of their products.
Managers of plastic bottle blow moulding companies need to think strategically about how the low
carbon economy will affect them and how they can position their business to take advantage of this
new business environment.
They need to work more closely with customers to understand how purchasing decisions may
change and to influence those decisions. There is a real opportunity to increase market share by
reducing energy use and then using this fact as a selling point.
Get support
Companies should ensure they are taking advantage of all the available support and financial
incentives to help them reduce energy and carbon emissions now. We offer a range of support to all
sizes of business, and there is more information about our range of services on our website at
www.carbontrust.co.uk.
The sector should also continue to work with the Carbon Trust as part of the IEEA to maximise
energy savings from the manufacturing process.
22







7. Methodology
The purpose of the work undertaken in stage one of the IEEA with the plastic bottle blow moulding
sector was to examine the sector-specific manufacturing process in-depth, to understand energy
use and links with other systems, and identify possible ways to improve energy efficiency.
The focus of the investigation was extrusion blow moulding and injection stretch blow moulding, as
these processes are used by most companies in the sector and account for most of the sectors
carbon emissions.
We contacted the BPF, the trade body for the plastics sector in the UK, with a view to using its
influence in the industry. Unfortunately, it was unable to get involved in the project in stage one.
So a number of potential host companies were independently identified, using the knowledge and
experience of the project team and through research. Sites were selected to ensure representative
data in terms of the processes, products and types of equipment used. After a number of meetings,
four major companies volunteered to take part in the accelerator two working with extrusion blow
moulding and two with injection stretch blow moulding.
We installed electricity submetering equipment to cover the main energy using items of plant on
the sites below:
Site no. Company Site Process Annual energy consumption
1 RPC Raunds EBM 12GWh
2 Robert McBride Manchester EBM 13GWh
3 Britvic Norwich ISBM 14GWh
4 Highland Spring Blackford ISBM 6GWh

The methodology used in this study included:
an initial information gathering phase to build relationships and an understanding of the
process and sector
desk-based research into equipment and innovation
analysis of historic process and energy data and new submetered data, using advanced
techniques to identify areas of poorer performance and quantify energy efficiency
opportunities
site visits and discussions with industry contacts and site personnel
workshops to identify and address barriers to taking up opportunities.
A range of data from submetering of the main components of the blow moulding process was
collected in this study:
extruder (kW)
granulation unit (kW)
hydraulic pump (kW)
23







heating (kW)
total (kW).
These readings were taken every half-hour to get an accurate breakdown of power consumption
without generating unwieldy data sets. Capturing data at 10-minute intervals and to the nearest
0.1kW instead of 1kW would have given greater detail to allow further investigation. As well as
continuous monitoring, the flow rate of the cooling water on some of the machines was also
recorded, along with the incoming and outgoing water temperatures. Thermal images of some of
the machinery were also taken.
Host sites provided production data on the number of bottles produced and run times, and this was
checked for anomalies in comparison with the energy data.
A workshop was held to get more people from the plastic blow moulding sector involved in
discussing energy saving opportunities and the barriers to taking up energy efficiency opportunities.
Although no representatives from the BPF were able to attend, the Polymer Machinery
Manufacturers and Distribution Association and several member companies were represented.
24








8. Acknowledgements
This report has been produced by the Carbon Trust with support from AEA Technology Ltd, David
White Consulting, Atkins, the Plastics Machinery Manufacturers and Distributors Association, Britvic,
Highland Spring, RPC Containers Ltd and McBride.















25









The Carbon Trust receives funding from Government including the Department of Energy and Climate Change, the Department for Transport,
the Scottish Government, the Welsh Assembly Government and Invest Northern Ireland.

Whilst reasonable steps have been taken to ensure that the information contained within this publication
is correct, the authors, the Carbon Trust, its agents, contractors and sub-contractors give no warranty
and make no representation as to its accuracy and accept no liability for any errors or omissions.

Carbon Trust trademarks, service marks or logos used in this publication, and copyright in it, are the property
of the Carbon Trust. Nothing in this publication shall be construed as granting any licence or right to use
or reproduce Carbon Trust trademarks, service marks, logos, copyright or any proprietary information in
any way without the Carbon Trusts prior written permission. The Carbon Trust enforces infringements
of its intellectual property rights to the full extent permitted by law.

The Carbon Trust is a company limited by guarantee and registered in England and Wales under
Company number 4190230 with its Registered Office at: 6th Floor, 5 New Street Square, London, EC4A 3BF.

CTG019

The Carbon Trust 2010. All rights reserved.