Get DataMate free
Case study · Morgan Sindall

Maendy Primary School: 57% across eighteen months, generator and grid

52,129 kWh down to 22,636 kWh across 7 cabins, from 7 May 2024 to 31 October 2025. The longest track record in our estate, and the only one that spans a change of power source.

Get DataMate free

or check how your site compares

Measure it · Fix it · Scale it · Check how your site compares

Other ways to start

  1. Recommended first step

    Get DataMate free on your next project

    We monitor your cabins until consumption settles, and you get the wastage review.

    Your cost: coordination, and one engineer at the board.

    Get DataMate free
  2. Talk about full AutoMate

    For teams ready to standardise cabins across projects.

    Your cost: a 30-minute call.

    Book an AutoMate call
  3. Check how your site compares

    Answer a few questions about your welfare setup, and see whether it looks higher-risk than comparable monitored sites.

    Your cost: 20 seconds and an email address for the result.

    Check how your site compares

What the 57% includes

This site ran on a generator until 10 September 2024 and on grid afterwards. The 57% is the whole period, and it includes the diesel saved while the generator was running: 3,792.6 litres of 5,292.

The diesel is counted once, as fuel. The generator sub-period’s kWh are those litres, so counting both would double-count the same saving. The £11,669 below is on the grid basis only, at 25p/kWh; it is not the whole-period figure converted, and the two should not be added together.

The site

ClientMorgan Sindall / SEWSCAP 3
SiteMaendy Primary School, NP44 1NH
PowerGenerator until 10 September 2024, grid afterwards
Cabins7
Monitored period7 May 2024 to 31 October 2025 (~18 months)

The result

57% reduction across the
whole 18-month period
29,492 kWh saved
May 2024 to Oct 2025
£11,669 saved on the grid basis
at 25p/kWh
Before52,128.64 kWh
After22,636.28 kWh
Saved, whole period29,492.36 kWh = 57% · £11,668.63 on the grid basis at 25p/kWh
Generator sub-period71%, a sub-period, not the site result
Grid sub-period43,985.87 → 20,066.97 kWh · 23,918.9 kWh saved = 54%, a sub-period, not the site result
Diesel saved3,792.6 litres of 5,292, during the generator period
Per cabin~58 kWh saved per cabin per week across the grid sub-period

25p/kWh is the rate Morgan Sindall told us they pay on this site, and the £ figure is on the grid basis. Rates are customer-supplied and range from 24p to 30p across the sites we publish, so a £ figure from one site is not comparable with another. We never average or total £ savings across sites. Standing charge excluded. VAT excluded. Costs shown are consumption only.

Why the generator figure doesn’t transfer

Generator periods save more than grid periods because generation is less efficient, so there is more waste available to remove. 71% is a generator sub-period, not a site result, and it would not repeat on a grid-only site. We publish the whole-period figure as the result and show the sub-periods underneath it.

What we found

The itemised findings are in the monthly report; ask us for them

Which circuits ran out of hours, which drying rooms were left on, which appliances drew power nobody had accounted for: that is set out line by line in this project’s monthly report. We publish the measured result here and leave the itemised list where it was written, rather than summarise it from memory.

Ask us and we’ll take you through what we found on this site: info@gaiagroupuk.com.

What changed

The circuit-by-circuit control list, not published, available on request

Which load categories went onto contactors here is in the commissioning record for the project. We publish what was controlled and never how the rules were configured, and for this site the commissioning detail has not been written up for publication yet, so we would rather leave it off the page than approximate it.

Ask us and we’ll tell you what went under control here: info@gaiagroupuk.com.

How this was measured

Every saving above is valued at what the equipment actually drew, not at its rated power: the time a load was switched off multiplied by that load’s measured average consumption in the conditions it was running in. That average is taken across every hour in the comparison, including the hours the load drew nothing, so it accounts for the periods a thermostat would have cycled the load off anyway, which makes the figure materially smaller than rated-power arithmetic would give.

Measured against the site’s own benchmark, at circuit level, in kWh. How we calculate a saving.

Check how your site compares All case studies