Programmable logic controllers (PLCs) can improve industrial efficiency by automating repeatable tasks, coordinating equipment, connecting control systems and capturing useful operating data. They do not create savings on their own: results depend on the control strategy, sensors, connected equipment, process design and how people use the information. The strongest upgrade decisions start with a measured baseline and track energy per unit of output, downtime, quality, maintenance and throughput.
Where PLCs can improve efficiency
A PLC reads input signals from devices such as sensors and switches, executes programmed logic, and controls outputs such as motors, valves, pumps and alarms. In a plant, its efficiency contribution is usually indirect: it can help equipment run only when needed, coordinate a sequence of operations, and make operating information available to operators or other systems.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
ISE Programmable Logic Controllers | $90.00 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
Programmable Logic Controllers: Principles and Applications | $142.03 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
Programmable Logic Controllers | $176.88 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
McGraw-Hill Education Programmable Logic Controllers | $27.17 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
Programmable Logic Controllers | $153.48 | Buy on Amazon |
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
That distinction matters. A PLC does not make a motor or process inherently energy-efficient. The outcome depends on what the controller is programmed to do and whether instrumentation, drives, equipment condition and operator response support the intended improvement.
Coordinate equipment and utilities
Control logic can coordinate machines or utilities so that they start, stop or change operating speed in response to process needs. At Codd Mushrooms, a PLC-based chilled-water control solution worked with variable speed drives. Mitsubishi Electric reports more than 5,400 kWh saved in the first week and potential savings of up to €40,000 per year; the annual figure is a stated potential, not a guaranteed or independently established result. Mitsubishi Electric’s case description illustrates why the application and connected equipment matter alongside the controller.
#1 Best Overall
Connect control and centralize oversight
Networked PLCs can provide a way to coordinate equipment across a facility and centralize control of production processes. In a 2018 industrial-facility case, Tommy Shannon describes phased upgrades that included network-based PLC integration and centralized control of production processing machines. Because the work also covered utilities, lighting, HVAC and other systems, its reported energy results cannot be attributed to PLCs alone. The case study is useful as an example of facility-wide coordination, not as a PLC-only savings test.
Reduce manual data handling
Automated data capture can reduce repetitive administrative work and the risk of manual transcription. Mitsubishi Electric’s October 2021 account of a semi-trailer manufacturer describes replacing a PC-based system with PLCs and using barcode-based data capture across three plants, with fewer manual tasks and less paperwork. The article reports reduced downtime but does not quantify a general labor or productivity gain. It quotes systems integrator ACS describing the new control systems as “problem-free and doing exactly what they wanted it to do”; that is ACS’s quoted assessment, not an independent measurement. The project account shows how control modernization can address workflow as well as machine behavior.
Relate energy use to production
Energy data is more actionable when it can be reviewed alongside production data. Siemens’ Brau Union Österreich customer story describes an energy management system used to collect and standardize energy and production data, examine batch-level energy use and report across sites. The story says around 1,000 measuring points were defined across five sites; that is the scale of this project, not a benchmark for other plants. Siemens attributes a 0.6% reduction in energy consumption per year to the system, a vendor-reported customer outcome rather than an independently isolated PLC effect. The customer story quotes Brau Union’s Eng. Johann Hölzl: “We need a cross-plant energy management system which allows easy data recording and standardized reporting.”
Outdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchPC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Modernize controls while supporting maintainability
Replacing or updating controls can improve the ability to integrate equipment, maintain a system and make changes without unnecessary disruption. Schneider Electric’s 2025 forest-industry case describes modernizing 45 PLC systems, integrating them with an existing distributed control system (DCS), and adding redundancy and online change capability. The vendor reports a 1.5-year return on investment for that customer. It is one modernization case, not a typical payback period; actual economics depend on project scope, labor, downtime, energy and other site-specific effects. Schneider Electric’s case also illustrates why integration and maintainability belong in an upgrade decision.
Rank #3
What reported savings do—and do not—show
Published examples show that industrial projects involving PLCs and related control or energy measures have produced reported improvements. They do not establish a typical savings percentage or prove that PLC installation alone caused every improvement. A useful reading of each case asks what was changed, what boundary was measured, over what period, and whether production or facility conditions changed at the same time.
| Case | Reported result | Important context |
|---|---|---|
| Tommy Shannon, industrial facility, 2018 | 146,600 kWh of ongoing annual energy savings after the first phase; more than 450,000 kWh in further annual energy reduction after three years of phased upgrades and monitoring. | The first phase included compressed air, exterior lighting, water heating, and control of incoming water and gas services. Later work included HVAC, IT infrastructure, centralized production-machine control, LED lighting and occupancy controls. The facility expanded and production grew during the work; maximum import capacity was reduced. Case study |
| Codd Mushrooms, Mitsubishi Electric | More than 5,400 kWh saved in the first week; up to €40,000 per year in potential savings. | PLC-based chilled-water control used variable speed drives. The annual figure is potential, not a guaranteed result. Publication date is not stated on the result page. Case description |
| Brau Union Österreich, Siemens | 0.6% less energy consumption per year, attributed by Siemens to the energy management system. | Vendor-reported customer outcome. The project collected and standardized energy and production data across five sites and defined around 1,000 measuring points. Publication date is not stated on the story page. Customer story |
| Forest-industry modernization, Schneider Electric, 2025 | 45 PLC systems modernized; reported ROI of 1.5 years. | One customer case involving integration with an existing DCS, redundancy and online changes—not a general payback expectation. Case study |
These figures are not directly comparable: they describe different systems, project boundaries and types of outcome. Energy savings, reduced downtime, labor reduction and return on investment are distinct measures. Use case studies to identify possible approaches, then evaluate a proposed change against your own baseline.
Rank #4
- Programmable Logic Controllers | 6th Edition
- ABIS_BOOK
How to evaluate a PLC efficiency project
- Define the operational problem. Identify the bottleneck or loss to address: excess energy use, idle equipment, inconsistent sequences, manual data entry, avoidable downtime, scrap or difficult maintenance. Specify which machines, utilities or production steps are in scope.
- Record a baseline before changing controls. Gather energy consumption, production volume, downtime, quality losses, maintenance activity and relevant operating conditions over a representative period. Record system boundaries and production mix so that a later comparison is meaningful.
- Choose measures that reflect the goal. Track energy per unit of output rather than energy alone when production levels vary. Pair that measure with relevant operational indicators such as throughput, downtime, scrap or rework, maintenance and labor spent on manual handling.
- Check the control and integration fit. Review existing sensors and instrumentation, motors and drives, HMI, industrial networks, and interfaces to DCS or manufacturing execution systems (MES). A controller upgrade may need complementary equipment or integration work to deliver the intended function.
- Plan for reliability and support. Consider redundancy where appropriate, spare parts and support, staff familiarity, programming documentation and whether online changes can be made safely. These affect the lifecycle cost and maintainability of the system, not just commissioning.
- Estimate site-specific economics. Compare implementation, integration and commissioning costs with plausible energy, labor, downtime and quality effects. State assumptions and calculate ROI for the project’s scope; do not treat another facility’s payback as a prediction for yours.
- Verify results after commissioning. Compare post-upgrade performance with the baseline over an appropriate period, accounting for changes in production and operating conditions. Investigate if an improvement appears only in total energy, but not in energy per unit of output, or if gains in one measure coincide with deterioration in another.
When a PLC upgrade is a strong fit
A PLC project is most compelling when a defined operational problem can be addressed through better control, coordination, connectivity or data capture—and when the facility can measure whether the change worked. The business case is weaker if the target is vague, key inputs cannot be measured, or a controller replacement is expected to compensate for unsuitable equipment or a poorly designed process.
Quick Recap
Best Value
- Good candidate: a repeatable sequence needs more consistent control, or machines and utilities need to respond to process demand.
- Good candidate: operators lack timely, standardized production or energy data, and the project can connect useful measurements with output or batch information.
- Plan carefully: an existing DCS, network or machine interface must be retained or integrated, or the plant needs redundancy and maintainable online changes.
- Do not assume: a PLC by itself will lower energy use, guarantee uptime, or deliver a particular ROI. Those outcomes require an effective application and site-specific verification.
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
