Meter and disaggregate plant consumption by asset, find idle load, leaks and peak exposure, and propose reductions with the evidence and the process risk named — an engineer decides, and the agent moves no setpoint.
Read interval meters, sub-meters, utility bills and the tags your BMS, SCADA and MES already record.
02
Take production output, shift calendars, weather and asset run states over the same interval.
Reason
03
Disaggregate consumption to asset, utility and process, and reconcile the parts against the incoming meter.
04
Separate load that tracks production from load that runs regardless — idle, off-shift, standby and leak.
05
Model consumption against production volume and weather, so a change is read against an adjusted baseline.
Decide
06
Name the process parameter a proposal would touch, and route it to change control rather than offer it as a tweak.
07
Hold anything that alters pressure, temperature, flow or air change for the engineer who owns that process.
Out
08
Present each reduction with its evidence, its estimate, its process risk and what would have to be re-measured.
09
Retain the meter data, the baseline model, the adjustments applied and every proposal an engineer turned down.
→Product statement
The agent measures, disaggregates and proposes. Changing a setpoint, a schedule or a process parameter stays with the engineer who owns it, under your change control.
Example workflow
One proposal, end to end
AgentHuman
1Interval data readMeters, sub-meters, BMS and SCADA tags, utility bills and the tariff those bills are struck on
2Load disaggregatedConsumption split to asset, utility and process, then reconciled against the incoming meter
3Baseline modelledConsumption fitted against production volume, weather and shift pattern over the baseline period
4Candidate foundIdle or off-shift load, leak-rate drift, a scheduling gap, or a peak the tariff makes expensive
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run without a person in the loop — reading, disaggregating, baselining and finding candidates all finish before an engineer is asked to read anything. A candidate that moves a process parameter ends that stretch on the spot.
5DecisionSplits on whether the change touches a process parameter
Utility side only
Goes to the engineer as a proposal.
Touches a process parameter
Held for change control and the process owner.
Energy or process engineer
Reads the disaggregation, the estimate against the adjusted baseline and the process risk, then decides whether the process can take the change.
Accept · Reject · Send to change control
Accepted — handed back▼
6Proposal put to an engineerThe estimate against the adjusted baseline, the evidence behind it and the process risk named
7Saving re-measuredAt 30 and 90 days against the adjusted baseline, alongside what was accepted and what was rejected
Rejections
Why an engineer turned a proposal down is counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Changing any setpoint on plant or utility equipment.
Altering compressed-air pressure, dryer or receiver settings.
Changing HVAC air change, temperature or humidity limits.
Adjusting a furnace, oven or curing profile.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Meter, sub-meter and disaggregate consumption by asset and process.
✓Model an adjusted baseline against production volume, weather and shift.
✓Find idle load, off-shift load, leak drift and peak exposure.
✓Propose a reduction with its evidence, its estimate and its process risk.
The agent writes proposals and measurements. Moving a setpoint and declaring a saving are not its to write.
Changing chilled-water, steam or process-water conditions.
Switching off, idling or restarting any asset.
Shedding load or acting on a peak event.
Signing off a saving as achieved.
Example output
One compressed-air proposal, annotated
Everything the agent proposes is attached to the meter data, the baseline and the process risk it was built from.
Energy output · one proposal on one utilityIllustrative example
Asset
Off-shift draw
Meter mapping
Proposed
Confidence
Saving
Compressed-air header
31% of run load
Walked down
Isolate zone 4 off-shift
82%
Estimated, not yet verified
As receivedSub-meter intervals and the run states SCADA records. The mapping to this header was confirmed on a walk-down.
Evidence usedOff-shift draw, 12 weeksZone 4 valved alreadyNo trace heating on it
Why this proposalZone 4 runs nothing off-shift and feeds no trace heating. Header pressure is untouched.
ActionAcceptRejectSend to change control
What the score decidesConfidence is in the mapping, not the saving — measured after the change, never before.
Value
Where AI adds value
The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.
Where the value landsValue 01 – 04
Every metered intervalSub-meters, BMS and SCADA tags, utility bills
03Measure & baseline
Read the plant against its output
Split consumption to asset, utility and process, and measure it against production volume, shift pattern and weather rather than against last month.
01Approved path
Give the engineer the workings
Each proposal arrives with the load it came from, the baseline it was measured against and the parameter it would touch — so the argument is about the process, not the number.
02Human review
Put the process risk in front of a person
A pressure, a profile or an air-change proposal reaches the engineer who owns that process, with what it would change, before anyone touches a keypad.
04Build an evidence trail
Retain the meter data, the baseline model, the adjustments applied, the estimate, the engineer's decision and what the saving did at 30 and 90 days.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Metering & billingInterval meters · sub-meters Utility bills · tariff and demand data
Utility & building controlsBMS / BAS · compressed-air controllers Chiller and boiler plant · HVAC schedules
Process & production dataMES output · SCADA historians Shift calendars · asset run states
Agent
Energy optimization & utilities
Disaggregates load Adjusts the baseline Proposes with risk
Site contextWeather data · metering schematics Asset registers · change-control records
Integration availability depends on the client's existing systems and API access.
Agent controls
Six layers between the model and a setpoint
Each control wraps the one inside it. A proposal clears every layer before an engineer sees it, and the change itself sits outside all six.
L6 · Outermost — last line of defenceInward → L1 · closest to the model
L6Rollback / safe modeWithdraw proposals and fall back to your existing energy reporting if mapping or baseline signals degrade.Roll back
L5TraceabilityRecord the meter data, the baseline, the adjustments, the estimate and the engineer's decision.Record
L4Engineer approvalAccepting a proposal and taking it into change control stays with the engineer who owns the process.Gate
L3Process-parameter gateAnything touching pressure, temperature, flow or air change is flagged and held, not offered as a tweak.Hold
L2Baseline adjustmentProduction volume, weather and shift pattern are adjusted for before any saving is estimated.Adjust
L1Meter-to-asset mappingA proposal stands only on sub-metering that reconciles and has been walked down.Verify
Model coreReduction proposed — the load it came from, the estimate against the adjusted baseline and the parameter it touches
L1 – L2Decide whether a saving is real at all
L3Decides what counts as a process change
L4 – L5Keep the change with an engineer, trail intact
L6Pulls automation back when signals degrade
How Nestack evaluates it
Evaluate the whole measurement — not only the saving it estimates.
Coverage runs the whole depth of the workflow, and every layer is cut by slice.
Surface — the proposal the engineer opens
Depth of coverage ▼
E1Final-output evaluationDid the saving hold at 30 and 90 days against an adjusted baseline?
E2Step-level evaluationWas the baseline adjusted for production volume and for weather?
E3Tool evaluationDid it read the right meter, tag and interval for that asset?
E4Metering-to-asset accuracyDoes the sub-meter measure the asset the agent says it does?
E5Slice evaluationHow does it hold across asset types, seasons and shared utilities?
E6Business outcomeWhich proposals were accepted, and why were the rest rejected?
Floor — the saving still there in ninety days
Failure modes
Where each failure originates in the agent
Seven failure modes plotted against the five stages of the agent lifecycle. None of them moves a setpoint, sheds a load or signs off a saving — the engineer's decision and your own change control are the controls that stop them. If one gets through and a change is already running, the meter data, the baseline model and the adjustments held in the record are what the reversal and the re-measurement are built from.
Agent lifecycleDirection of processing →
01 · Metering1 mode
EO-01
Sub-meter on the wrong asset
A tag that has not matched the panel for years.
Stage gathersMeter, sub-meter and tag data mapped to assets
02 · Disaggregation1 mode
EO-02
Idle load that is deliberate
Trace heating, a sump pump, a standby that protects an asset.
Stage splitsConsumption to asset, utility and process
03 · Baseline2 modes
EO-03
A saving production volume made
Output fell that quarter; the measure did nothing.
EO-04
Weather did it, not the measure
A mild quarter reads as a chiller improvement.
Stage adjustsConsumption against production and weather
04 · Proposal2 modes
EO-05
A setpoint that is a process change
Air pressure, an oven profile, an air-change rate.
EO-06
Peak action against a commitment
A shed hour is the hour an order had to run.
Stage proposesThe reduction and the risk an engineer reads
05 · Verify / Change1 mode
EO-07
A saving that costs equipment life
Short cycling, low flow, a motor off its map.
Stage tracksWhat the saving did, and what changed since
Sev-1 · a process or a commitment is at riskSev-2 · a wrong number reaches the decisionSev-3 · the plant pays for it somewhere else
Two proposals of the same size are not the same measurement. A dedicated meter says what one machine drew; a header feeding four lines and a paint shop does not. Nestack reports performance by slice, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Shared utilities, no sub-meter
6.8%
3.6×
Review
Seasonal heating and cooling
5.3%
2.8×
Review
Compressed-air proposals
3.4%
1.8×
Watch
Single asset, dedicated meter
1.5%
0.8×
Normal
Bar: unheld-saving-rate lift vs. dedicated-meter baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks 2.0×2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
A saving that did not hold is the useful one
What an engineer rejected, and what the meter said ninety days later, come back as baseline corrections and limits on what may be proposed.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
A saving stops holding at 30 or 90 days, or one class of proposal keeps being rejected.
02Diagnose
Traced to a mapping, an adjustment the baseline missed, a non-routine change on site, or a process the proposal did not know about.
03Improve
The mapping, the baseline model or the proposal rule is corrected — and any process parameter goes back through your change control with a named approver.
04Verify
Re-measured against the adjusted baseline over comparable volumes and seasons, not against the month before the change.
05Learn
The deliberate load, the unmodelled process or the tariff term becomes a check the next proposal has to clear.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. Re-basing for a new line or a tariff change is itself a change to the record — it is documented before the next saving is measured.
Typical build scope
Twelve workstreams across six weeks
The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, metering and access, disaggregation and baselines, evaluation, then engineer review and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Energy-workflow discovery and boundaries.
02Metering plan and meter-to-asset walk-down.
03Meter, BMS, SCADA and tariff data access.
04Interval ingestion and meter reconciliation.
05Load disaggregation by asset and process.
06Baseline model — production, weather, shift.
07Idle, off-shift and leak-drift detection.
08Peak-demand and tariff exposure analysis.
09Process-parameter flags, set by your engineers.
10Evaluation suite and replayed past measures.
11Engineer review and change-control handoff.
12Observability, deployment and Agent Care handover.
12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallelFinal scope and sequence confirmed in discovery
Engagement tiers
What each tier includes
Rows are the capabilities named in each tier's scope. Higher tiers include everything below them.
Capability✓ in scope · — not at this tierPilotOne utility, one areaProductionPlant-wide metering and baselinesAdvancedMulti-site / multi-utility
Introduced at Pilot
Load disaggregation for one utility✓✓✓
Meter-to-asset mapping and walk-down record✓✓✓
Adjusted baseline — production and weather✓✓✓
Idle and off-shift load detection✓✓✓
Proposals with the process risk named✓✓✓
Baseline evaluation✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Peak-demand and tariff exposure analysis—✓✓
Re-measurement at 30 and 90 days—✓✓
Observability and evaluation—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Asset-type and seasonal slices——✓
Multi-site and enterprise controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on the utilities and areas in scope, the state of your sub-metering, meter, BMS and SCADA integrations, tariff complexity and deployment requirements.
Separate from buildBuild pricing is separate from recurring Agent Care, which covers managed monitoring, evaluations, incidents and verified improvements after launch.
What we need from you
What you bring, and what we build with it
Each input maps to a piece of build scope and a week in the delivery timeline.
You bringWe build with it
01Your metering schematic and what each sub-meter actually feeds→Metering plan and meter-to-asset walk-downWeek 1
02Access to interval data, BMS and SCADA tags and your utility bills→Meter, BMS, SCADA and tariff data accessWeek 2
03Production output and shift calendars over the same period→Baseline model — production, weather and shiftWeek 3
04The loads that look wasteful and are not — trace heating, sumps, standby→Load disaggregation and deliberate-load exclusionsWeek 3
05Your tariff, demand charges and any ratchet or capacity terms→Peak-demand and tariff exposure analysisWeek 4
06Which setpoints and profiles are process parameters, and who owns them→Process-parameter flags, set by your engineersWeek 4
07Named engineers who accept a proposal and take it into change control→Engineer review workflow, then the change-control handoffWeeks 5–6
Nothing else is requiredDeployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.
Delivery timeline
Four phases across six weeks
Phases are drawn over the weeks they actually occupy. Week 5 carries both the replayed measures and the first proposals your engineers read.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Energy-workflow discovery, metering plan and the walk-downW2Meter, BMS, SCADA and tariff access, then interval ingestionW3Disaggregation, baseline model and deliberate-load exclusionsW4Idle, leak and peak detection, and process-parameter flagsW5Replayed past measures and the first proposals engineers readW6Engineer review, change-control handoff, then Agent Care starts
Reading the bandThe meter-to-asset walk-down in weeks 1 and 2 is physical work on your site. Nothing disaggregated before it is finished is worth reporting.
At the end of W6The agent has proposed against your own meter data, been read by the engineers who decide, and the route into your change control is agreed — then Agent Care takes over monitoring.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Manufacturing AI agent
Build an energy agent around your own meters.
Show us one utility, whatever sub-metering you have on it, and a year of bills, output and shift calendars. We'll disaggregate that load against your own production and weather, tell you which of last year's savings survive an adjusted baseline, and mark every proposal that would be a process change.
