I came across a recent article discussing the question: is the current system of certifications, standards and labels evolving in ways that improve product design, help companies and consumers make more sustainable purchasing decisions and lead to better overall policy?

Many believe that the needle is moving in a big way, but it is not always easy to see this progress amongst the ongoing proliferation of ‘green’ standards, eco-labels and outright greenwashing in the marketplace. The article outlined three key points about green certifications, standards and labels.

• We need to stop looking to regulation to ensure a sustainable future. Voluntary action must be encouraged. But companies considering voluntary action want reasonable assurance that they are on a level playing field in relation to their competition and that they will be rewarded in the marketplace for taking positive steps. Standards, labels and certifications can help companies by both providing understanding of what they must do to achieve a certain level of desired performance, and providing tools to help them communicate those achievements in a way that will generate business value.
• Let the good ones evolve. Good eco-labels are underpinned by good standards which develop over time. Typically, proprietary and consortia standards are the first to emerge when a new market requirement emerges; such as the desire to rate the sustainable attributes of a building (LEED), or to define carbon neutrality (The CarbonNeutral Protocol). These standards are typically created by small groups with deep knowledge of the technical details of the new market requirement. Proprietary and consortia standards that withstand the test of time evolve and, eventually, are either underpinned by, or become, voluntary consensus standards developed using a formal multi-stakeholder process.
• Don’t expect perfection. No standard is born perfect or ever attains perfection. The best standards, be they proprietary, consortia or voluntary consensus, are open, transparent (no black box!) and have a governance system that requires constant review and updating. The eco-labels and certifications that survive and thrive during the current proliferation will be those that are underpinned by rigorous processes and are designed in a way that clearly communicates what has been accomplished.

Evidence does exist that standards are beginning to make progress, and one need only look to the ongoing evolution and extraordinary success of the United States Green Building Council’s (USGBC) LEED Green Building Rating System to demonstrate that.

With over 40,000 certified and registered projects all over the world in under ten years, the USGBC has achieved one of its primary stated goals – “to transform the built environment marketplace”. Today, thanks to LEED, environmental attribute based competition is fierce throughout the built environment value chain and some architectural firms have essentially ‘forgotten’ how to design non-LEED buildings. Furthermore, the US government and many municipalities in the US now require that all public buildings be built to the LEED standard. To be sure, greenwashing does occur in this sector, but with much less frequency now that green building specifiers are more knowledgeable and are asking better, more informed, questions. The power of influence has also spurred the development of several LEED- compatible product sector specific standards for carpet, furniture, textiles and other products. Solid evidence that the needle is moving!

In the end, the importance of a well informed populous cannot be overstated. Sustainability, in all its dimensions, is an incredibly complex topic that defies measurement by one standard set of criteria. Done well, standards, labels and certifications are tools that can help consumers and businesses make better, more sustainable, decisions. Continued ‘movement of the needle’ will be dependent on both being well informed and engaged.

In today’s difficult market environment business decisions are being weighed more carefully than ever. Typical project valuation indicators such as ROI and simple payback times are no longer good enough. Savings from energy efficiency projects can be lost in the fog of obfuscating external factors. The focus is now on reducing carbon footprints and, by direct relationship, energy consumption. Too many high level executives can’t rationalize what 100,000 kilowatt hours of savings means to them and their business. In this context, it has become extremely useful to model energy consumption in terms of each firm’s unique key performance indicators.

If you are a restaurant it may be the number of meals you serve, if you are a retirement home it may be the number beds you have occupied, if you are an industrial manufacturer it is the number of widgets you make; establishing an energy cost-per-output is the first step in the process and is unique to every business model. Typically organizations expend vast resources to measure the cost of their inputs per unit of output yet ignore energy, a fundamental input into any business process output unless you’re output is giving advice such as a psychologist, even then, giving advice in the dark is disturbing, you’ve got to keep the lights on.

Defining your energy costs of production is an essential step to understanding how energy affects your productivity and profit margin. The most important action is to generate a baseline of energy cost-per-KPI. Once you know that you are using 40 kWh of electricity per widget you can effectively compare your energy efficiency across time in a way that is meaningful to every member of the organization. Too often energy expenditure is considered by a select few operational employees. Expressing energy in a metric everyone can understand aligns the interests of the entire organization and can act as a measuring stick for different business units. Doing this allows you to track the effect each business unit is having on the company-wide energy cost-per-KPI and reward performance accordingly. Eventually, once most business are measuring energy cost and consumption as a function of production levels these key metrics will provide important benchmarking applications to measure comparative performance among competitors as well. This, of course, depends upon impending energy and environment disclosure requirements.

A considerable benefit of expressing energy consumption in terms of KPI’s is the identification of major energy cost drivers. Developing an energy management plan is not overly useful if you don’t know what is driving your energy costs and what level of impact they have on your final output. By finding out which of your business processes have the highest cost per KPI you can then focus on improving the energy efficiency of those processes. In many cases the processes that can have the most impact are often the last to be considered if the cost-per-KPI data has not pointed you in the right direction.

Any business that wants to stay profitable must grow. Forecasting the costs associated with growth has long been a terribly inconsistent and difficult task to perform. In respect to energy costs this can be especially complex if costs-per-KPI have not been evaluated. With an energy cost-per-KPI metric the forecasting of future energy costs becomes a simpler exercise. The cost-per-KPI function can easily be reversed to determine what energy costs would be for varying levels of output. Production levels can then be forecasted and a sensitivity analysis can be performed to estimate the future cost of energy with various production levels. Similarly, a consumption-per-KPI calculation can be reversed to determine energy consumption requirements for certain levels of production; this will come in handy when planning energy infrastructure during facility expansion. At this point it helps to classify which energy costs are variable and which are fixed. It may be helpful to go so far as to determine variable-cost-per-KPI and fixed-cost-per-KPI functions separately. This information will also aid your organization while developing hedging strategies to reduce exposure. The forecasts can be used to determine how much energy will be required and, as a result, how large purchasing deals must be to guarantee adequate energy at a reliable price point in the future.

The evaluation of energy efficiency projects can also be made clearer through the use of cost-per-KPI metrics. ROI’s and simple paybacks do not tell the whole story. It can often be beneficial to examine how each measure may impact the cost-per-KPI metric. In this way the business impact of energy reduction projects can be evaluated next to labour-related and financing measures which are typically measured against your key performance indicators already. Measuring against KPI’s can also clarify the interrelationship between projects implemented concurrently. Typically, deriving the impact that a single project has on costs or consumption is impossible when multiple projects have been implemented at the same time. Measuring against KPI’s and drilling these values down to business units or cost centers help to clarify the impact each measure has on the company’s overall performance.

All companies may see value in diffusing energy related information in terms the entire organization can understand, however implementing this process requires a great deal of focus on gathering and maintaining effective and up to date datasets. Measurements against KPI’s are only as good as the data that is being used. Developing and implementing a comprehensive data plan focusing on accuracy is fundamental to effective measurement. The best KPI’s are leading indicators; keeping this information up to date is essential and crucial for effective reporting.

Using a cost-per-KPI metric will increase the clarity and effectiveness of communications throughout the business units of your company. When everyone can see the impact energy costs have on their business process they align themselves to manage the impact their individual business unit has on the company as a whole. The use of consumption-per-KPI metrics are invaluable when forecasting future energy requirements and developing hedging strategies. Cost-per-KPI metrics can be used as performance indicators themselves and can be used to compare the viability of energy projects as well as the performance of business units.

The old adage says “you can’t manage what you don’t measure”. Expressing energy as a per-KPI metric ensures that a firm is not only measuring the impact energy has on its operations, but that it is being measured in a meaningful way to all the firm’s stakeholders and decision makers.

Improving energy efficiency in your buildings is a cost effective way of controlling rising energy costs for your organization. However, major energy efficiency improvements can be capital intensive and resource consuming. Energy incentive programs have been designed to help offset these high costs and help to further reduce energy-related greenhouse gases (GHGs).

There is a wealth of incentive programs, each with different eligibility restrictions and financial benefits. The difficult part is becoming familiar with incentives options, understanding eligibility requirements, and handling the approval process. New incentive programs are constantly being introduced as older programs are eliminated. Remaining abreast of these changes requires a significant investment of time. Generally, a good rule of thumb is not to design your operating strategies around a specific incentive program. Rather, it is important to first address your internal needs and then to take advantage of the incentives that best align with your long term goals.

The main challenge in qualifying for any program is to speak the language of the incentive provider. Familiarity and effective communication are required to make the best possible use of the flexibility of the application process, and having someone experienced with the particular program to assist you is of great benefit. Often it is not worth the intellectual capital to learn the terms and conditions of a program for a single application.

Energy Incentive Programs

There are a number of energy incentive programs available across Canada, which typically is divided into the following categories:

• Assessments;
• Retrofits;
• Renewable Power; and
• Solar, Water and Air Heating Systems.

Once the incentive category is defined, you should evaluate which type of energy incentives to apply to, which includes:

• Discount/Coupon;
• Grant;
• Loan;
• No/Low Interest Loan;
• Rate Reduction;
• Rebate; Subsidy; and
• Tax Incentive.

It is also important to remember that energy incentive programs are sector specific, which includes:

• Residential;
• Multi-Residential;
• Business and Commercial;
• Institutional, Commercial & Industrial (ICI); and
• Low Income.

Examples of Energy Incentive Programs in Canada

New Brunswick
Energy incentive programs are available through the New Brunswick Energy Efficiency and Conservation Agency to assist existing commercial building owners and operators in making their buildings more energy efficient.

Nova Scotia
Programs are offered by Nova Scotia Power and Heritage Gas. Nova Scotia Power offers a rebate on the installation cost of a solar water heating system for residential or commercial buildings. Through The Natural Gas Equipment Program, Heritage Gas uses financial incentives to encourage the conversion to natural gas of existing space and water heating equipment, as well as laundry, cooking and processing equipment.

Quebec
Energy incentives are available through Hydro Quebec, Gaz Metro, and Gazifère for a wide range of energy saving practices such as boiler upgrades; more efficient lighting, motor, monitoring and tracking; and provide funding for studies on ways to reduce energy consumption.

Manitoba
Many different energy incentive programs are available through Manitoba Hydro that cover building envelopes; lighting; boiler systems; commercial kitchen appliances; monitoring and tracking; assessments; and geothermal power.

British Columbia
Energy incentive programs are offered through BC Hydro, Terasen, and Fortis BC, and cover lighting; motors; monitoring and tracking; and boilers.

Ontario
There are 63 energy incentive programs currently available in Ontario, with 33 different sponsors including The Government of Ontario, Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), Enbridge, and Union Gas.

Whether you’re looking to implement a total energy management program or short term energy efficiency strategies, evaluating and understanding what energy incentives are available is of great value.

This short e-book describes what a building simulation is, its benefits and available energy incentives in Ontario.

To view this presentation in PDF format click here.

On Monday July 26^th the Democrat’s climate change legislation was pulled from the senate in an attempt to spare the embarrassment of a fourth cap and trade bill failing to pass. With the entire Republican Party in opposition of the legislation and wavering support from fellow democrats the bill lacked ample support to enact significant government mandated environmental policies. 

The main point of contention in the legislation was one of President Obama’s major campaigning points, the introduction of a cap and trade policy on carbon emissions in the United States. The cap and trade policy is a market-based approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants. By setting a cap on the amount of emissions a firm can emit they are forced to either reduce their carbon emissions or be forced to pay for the market cost of their emissions. On the flip side those companies who are able to reduce their emissions receive monetary incentives through the market by selling their carbon offset. 

But even with this setback the Democrats still plan to push a more limited climate change bill through that includes the reform of offshore drilling, additional alternative energy incentives, and remedies for the conservation of energy and water. 

The offshore oil reform, heavily influenced by the recent BP oil spill in the Gulf, will focus on the accountability and liability cap for companies. The liability cap for companies is suggested to be raised from its current $75 million to $10 billion, to ensure that companies are more accountable for their offshore drilling sites. Additionally with the suggested raised cap it ensures that companies will be fully liable to cover damages in the event of an environmental disaster. 

As for alternative energy incentives in the new proposed legislation the major push is on the auto and housing industries. The legislation outlines incentives for the auto industry to begin converting trucks to run on natural gas and for cars to run on electricity. For the housing industry the bill includes the energy efficient measure “Home Star” endorsement, incentivizing small fixes around the house such as plugging window leaks, and proper insulation of the home. 

On the whole, while the main focus of the climate change bill was its downfall, the revised bill is looking to be pushed through within the next few weeks. With this we can expect to see the gradual steps towards a more environmental conscience America fuelled by alternative energies. 

This saying still holds in the rapidly developing discipline of total energy and environmental management. Many organizations are now struggling to elevate the procurement and utilization of energy to an enterprise level as a response to drivers such as volatile energy prices, emerging supply technologies, and greenhouse gas emissions regulatory and reporting requirements.

Energy data and information systems and processes are an important foundation for successful energy management planning, implementation and continual improvement. These systems are also consistent with continuous improvement approaches applied to other corporate priorities such as financial or inventory controls.

The collection and validation of data and information required for an effective energy management program can be a complex task which will only increase as energy end users face an increasing amount of energy-related data and information inputs.

Organizations that do not adequately arm themselves with the data and information related to their energy use will not be able to track progress towards their goals and will end up working in an environment that lacks the transparency and accountability required to achieve success.

But measuring alone will not achieve and maintain the results that are possible with a good energy management strategy and implementation. Energy-related information quickly loses its value in the absence of aligned management and administrative structures, designed to continually work towards energy management goals.

Why is energy management becoming an enterprise-level challenge? Why is it moving from a “technical” activity assigned to operational staff and moving firmly on to the agenda of CEO’s and CFO’s? There are a number of critical elements that make up a total energy and environmental management approach. The success in addressing each and every one of these elements relies on well-structured and maintained energy data and information systems and procedures.

Corporate Energy Committee
In the same vein as well-known enterprise level corporate committees, the establishment of a corporate energy committee is an important foundation for an optimal energy and environmental program. The committee can also be the place where high-level, energy and environmentally related corporate concerns can be addressed, such as risk, image and compliance.

Energy is becoming a larger part of overall risk assessments because of price volatility, supply security and government compliance. The days of ‘greenwashing’ are over as consumers will demand detailed facts and figures and possibly third party verification and accreditation in support of such claims. Governments are getting serious about energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emission reductions, regulatory acts such as Ontario’s Energy Efficiency Leadership Act within Bill 21 and the United States Waxman-Markey Bill. All of these aspects demand significant data collection and manipulation and enterprise level decision-making.

Energy and Environmental Policy
Organizations are often highly motivated to adopt energy efficiency and other green policies and promote them to the public. But in the absence of good data and information systems and organizational structures it is very difficult to assess the costs of implementing and maintaining these policies, thus undermining their effectiveness.

Energy and Emissions Baseline
An energy and emissions baseline report provides an overview of an organization’s energy consumption, costs and emissions for a recent fiscal period and becomes a critical benchmark against which the success of future energy and environmental policy and programs can be measured. The baseline is entirely dependant on data and information related facilities energy use, energy supplier information, water and treatment usage and relevant facility metrics which affect energy consumption and cost such as production data, hours of operation, facility area etc.

Opportunities Assessment
A review of every facet of an organizations energy related operations addresses the gap between existing and best management practices. This includes financial, accounting, procurement operations, design, construction and environmental functions. In combination with the baseline report data and information, the opportunity assessment is used identify opportunities for energy efficiency and environmental improvement as well as the potential costs and benefits.

Strategic Plan
The strategic plan sets out the corporate energy management objectives. It addresses the importance and impact of energy management on the company’s profitability, sustainability and, ultimately, its value. The plan outlines the framework in terms approach, resources, and timeline for implementation. Based on these strategic considerations, more detailed action plans can be developed for each area as described below.

Budget and incentives required to resource energy efficiency and environmental programs are reliant on high quality data and information systems. The budget is typically based on historical consumption and cost data from the baseline report. Access to government programs typically requires detailed analysis of expected results and reporting on the performance post-implementation.

Energy and emissions monitoring and reporting requires relevant data to be captured continuously monitored over time so that periodic reports can be prepared to show how the company is progressing towards its stated objectives and targets, and versus budget.

Diligent energy procurement requires reliable data and information in support of monitoring developments in energy procurement markets, assessing direct purchasing strategies, and implementation and management of direct purchases.

Energy efficiency for existing facilities is a fundamental goal of total energy management. This typically involves employee awareness programs and capital expenditures to improve energy-using equipment and systems. Both approaches rely on well structured data systems to assess feasibility, prioritization, calculate paybacks and reporting on expected results.

Emissions and carbon offsets trading is a critical components of future carbon management mechanisms. If a cap and trade mechanism is put in place, organizations will be hampered if they have not established rigorous energy and emissions accounting systems.

Conclusion
All of the issues listed above, when considered as a whole, are critical management issues that cannot be properly addressed without the appropriate measurement tools and management processes.

“You can’t manage what you don’t measure” is much more than an overused cliché. Organizations that don’t embrace the challenge run the risk of being left behind in the emerging green economy.

Demand Response and Demand Side Management are terms used by electric utilities to describe programs developed to influence the electricity usage patterns of customers. Many people get confused by these two terms. However, don’t be concerned. Tom Peters, co-author of the best selling business book “in Search of Excellence” says “If you’re not confused, you’re not paying attention.”

What is Demand Response?
Demand Response (DR) is a term used for programs designed to encourage end-users to make short-term reductions in energy demand in response to a price signal from the electricity hourly market, or a trigger initiated by the electricity grid operator. Typically, DR actions would be in the range of 1 to 4 hours and include turning off or dimming banks of lighting, adjusting HVAC levels, or shutting down a portion of a manufacturing process. Alternatively, onsite generation can be used to displace load drawn from the electricity power grid.

What is Demand Side Management?
Demand Side Management (DSM) programs encourage the end user to be more energy efficient. DSM measures can include lighting retrofits, building automation upgrades, re-commissioning, HVAC improvements, variable frequency drives, etc.

In order to provide an incentive for end-users to develop DR capability, many utilities and power regulators across North America have developed suites of DR programs. These same entities also provide incentives for DSM.

Benefits to Electric System
The ability of customers to shed loads during periods of peak demand through demand response activities is beneficial to the electric system as a whole for two main reasons. First, under tight electricity supply and demand conditions demand response can significantly reduce peak prices and overall price volatility for all users. Second, by reducing system peaks, demand response may reduce the need for very expensive new generation, transmission, and distribution facilities to meet these peaks in demand.

Historically, DR and DSM programs have caused some confusion for electricity users. Broadly speaking, both programs are similar in that they offer benefits to the electricity user and can be part of an effective energy management program. Yet different to the capacity that they are designed to operate under different circumstances with different electricity reduction goals. DR and DSM programs are not interchangeable but, if their respective advantages and limitations are properly understood, they can compliment one another, which will allow a more successful overall energy management program.

Advantages & Limitations
Capital Expenditure and Payback Cycle
DR programs are attractive since they require relatively little capital expenditure and they have a short payback cycle, if automated control systems are already in place. In contrast, energy efficiency measures can be capital intensive and the payback cycle is usually longer, even where generous incentives are offered to organizations that implement energy efficiency programs.

Price Risks
DR programs also offer a minimal price risk: when prices are low, there are no DR opportunities but customers still benefit from a low electricity bill. DSM programs are more risky in this sense because if energy price expectations do not materialize, financial saving will be reduced and the payback cycle is lengthened.

Sustainability
DSM programs are advantageous in that they have a long-term effect on the sustainability of the facility and will reduce total energy use. In addition to long-term financial savings, using less energy will mean reduced greenhouse gas emissions and environmental sustainability. The short-term nature of DR programs, by comparison, means that they have little effect on the total amount of energy used in the building over a longer period of time.

Electricity versus Other Energy Sources
While DR programs are limited to electricity users, DSM programs can be extended to any application in the facility that uses energy, regardless of whether it uses Natural Gas, Propane, Water or another energy source.

Visual Comparison
Figure 1 shows the effect of energy efficiency on a typical facility’s electricity load. The effect is a load reduction for all hours of the day. Although the reduction does not always have the effect described, the philosophy is to establish a net reduction across all hours.

Figure 1 – Effects of Energy Efficiency

 
Demand Response, as shown in figure 2, is reducing electricity usage when prices are high. In hours 11, 14 and 17 the electricity prices spiked and the facility reacted by reducing its demand in those hours.

Figure 2 – Effects of Demand Response

Building an Energy Management Program with DR and DSM
As mentioned at the beginning of the article, while DR and DSM programs are not the same, the electricity user is not confined to choosing either one program or the other. For example, the quick payback benefits of DR programs can be used to fund longer-term DSM programs while DSM projects such as automation upgrades can become an enabler for DR. Used under the correct circumstances; DR and DSM actions are very effective at achieving energy management goals.

Instrumental to a successful DR or DSM program is real-time monitoring and tracking. This will be the topic of the next article.

In 1979, just a year out of school, I jumped at an opportunity to move into energy management, a bold move for an electrical engineer who slept through most of his thermodynamics classes. It was an opportunity to help companies save energy and money. At the time, I was working for a utility. My employer justified helping customers because it allowed them to use their generating capacity and infrastructure more effectively.  The government, which regulated the utility, encouraged this activity as it also helped to conserved valuable natural resources and secure its supply for future generations.

The more I got immersed in energy management I found that saving energy improved productivity, increased profitability and created jobs. While working on industrial heat recovery projects in the late 80s, I realized the enormous impact that saving energy can have on reducing harmful emissions, including greenhouse gases, to the environment. No matter where I travel to work, these same benefits of energy management exist. Energy management is a “Win-Win-Win” proposition – its good for people, the economy and the environment.  As I look back over my energy management career, I can safely say I have never lost any sleep over that impulsive decision, almost 30 years ago, because saving energy is the right thing to do.

Today, more than ever, energy management is not only the right thing to do, it is the socially responsible thing to do. The inefficient use of energy, by growing global economy, is threatening to deplete our natural resources and suffocate the earth with greenhouse gases.

Fundamentally, we need energy to provide a safe, reliable and comfortable environment in which to live and work. We need energy to travel, and to produce the goods and services we need. A good organization needs to understand the energy supply train – how energy can be transformed from its raw state (oil, natural gas, wood, water, wind solar, etc), into an energy commodity  (Btus, GJ, kWhs), transported and cost effectively converted to meet the needs of the end user in an environmentally responsible way. This is a broad and complex topic. It requires knowledge of government policies and regulations, finance, risk management, accounting, marketing, human resources, economics, engineering, technology, the environment and, let’s not forget, thermodynamics. To complicate matters further, all of these areas are constantly changing. Successful energy management requires a process that can deal with all of these factors.

In upcoming articles, I will be addressing how to drive this energy management process as it relates to the commercial, industrial and institutional end user.  I intend to provide sound timely advice and support for developing and implementing effective energy management programs. I will discuss topics such as:

• Corporate commitment;
• Strategic planning;
• Government and utility incentives;
• Energy awareness;
• Project development and implementation; and
• Renewable energy opportunities.

So, I will end off this first article with a thought taken, and slightly modified, from a cartoon my kids used to watch. “What are we going to do in the next article? The same we do in every article. Try to save the world!”

Energy Exchange will deliver you meaningful and relevant content surrounding a myriad of topics related to sustainable energy. Energy Exchange will strive to provide topical information that will help you make informed decisions when it comes to energy management practices.

Energy Advantage is a total energy management organization with a depth of expertise in the energy and environmental area. We look to deliver tangible results in terms of reduced risks, costs and environmental impacts to organizations across North America. We want to help you stay informed on emerging issues, provide best practices in energy management and offer opinions and advice on effective energy solutions. Look for articles that surround topics such as energy procurement, energy reporting, environment management, energy efficiency and sustainable energy management.

So why read Energy Exchange? With over 12 years of experience in the energy and environmental industry we have a lot of extensive knowledge that we would like to share. We strongly believe in continuous learning and want to help you stay informed and educated by sharing our expertise on emerging trends, developments and best practices.

Energy Exchange articles will be written by internal energy and environmental experts and marketing professionals. We will be posting twice a week, so keep an eye out for new content! You can also subscribe to our RRS feed to receive updates of Energy Exchange.

We are really excited to launch a series of energy management articles by Peter Rowles. Peter is an engineer and energy expert with over 20 years of experience in the energy industry. The series will address how to successfully drive a sustainable energy management program within an organization. Articles will focus on program development, energy savings initiatives and making the program operational.  Topics include:

• Corporate commitment;
• Strategic planning;
• Government and utility incentives;
• Energy awareness programs;
• Monitoring and tracking; and
• Emission credit creation.

We value the importance of feedback and would love to hear your views. Please feel free to comment on any of our postings.

Thank you for visiting Energy Exchange. We hope you enjoy and value our expertise.

Sincerely,

Experts at Energy Advantage