I tend to find the information on the copper.org site useful, if taken with a sufficiently large grain of salt.
Generally on a topic they describe a reasonable set of calculations to perform to determine cost effectiveness, and then use these calculations to run examples which are skewed heavily in favor of buying more copper.
Sometimes they make assumptions which it pays to double check.
On the magnetic ballast versus electronic ballast paper, for example, I think that they overstate the cost differential between magnetic and electronic ballast, and then they emphasize the fact that accountants will often require cheaper up-front costs if the long term payback is too slow.
In other papers they will emphasize long term savings even if it means greater up-front costs, if that is the situation that sells more copper.
The cost versus payback of 'premium efficiency' motors is one that requires considerable customer education, and copper.org is doing that. For motors that run more than 50% of the year, a more expensive, more efficient machine (probably with more copper in it) will have a relatively swift payback.
In my personal sphere of benefit, they are helping to push the technology for cast copper rotors in induction motors. This would be a benefit to me, since the technology is particularly useful for VFD fed machines. As you reduce the resistance of the rotor cage, you increase the efficiency of the machine, however you also tend to _reduce_ the starting torque and increase the locked rotor current. Make a really low resistance rotor, and you essentially _must_ use a VFD.
-Jon
