This article presents a transparent, defensible framework for evaluating ROI in industrial gas projects. It explains how organizations typically structure an ROI model, often referred to as a helium recovery calculator, including which assumptions stand up under scrutiny and how recovery, monitoring, and leak-reduction systems perform in both research and production environments. The approach relies on publicly available guidance from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the National Academies, rather than vendor-only claims.
The objective is straightforward: help facility directors, engineering managers, and finance leaders understand when these projects pay back, how to model risks and uncertainties, and why conservative assumptions consistently lead to more defensible investment decisions.
A credible ROI model must be auditable. Every savings claim should trace back to a measurable input, a documented assumption, or a published equation. This level of clarity is especially important when capital approvals require cross-functional buy-in from operations, EHS, and finance.
At a high level, industrial gas ROI is driven by three categories of value:
Reduced gas purchases through recovery or loss avoidance
Reduced energy consumption from avoided compressor runtime, pressure losses, or unnecessary system operation
Operational benefits such as improved uptime and reduced supply risk
The challenge is modeling these benefits conservatively.
A well-structured calculator should begin with a small, controlled set of inputs:
To maintain credibility, price and performance variables should always be tested with sensitivity ranges rather than single-point estimates.
A defensible annual savings calculation can be expressed as:
Annual Savings
= (Baseline Loss × Recovery or Reduction %) × Gas Price
Avoided Energy Cost − Incremental O&M Cost
For compressed air and similar systems, avoided energy can be calculated using published DOE equations that translate leak size, system pressure, and operating hours into avoided kWh. These equations are widely used in industrial energy audits and provide a solid basis for ROI modeling (see the DOE compressed air leak savings formula).
Simple payback is then calculated as:
Payback (years) = CAPEX / Annual Savings
While NPV and IRR are applicable for portfolio comparisons, simple payback remains the most common screening metric for facilities projects.
Any industrial gas ROI analysis should test how results change when key assumptions vary. This process, often called sensitivity analysis, helps teams understand whether a project remains viable under more conservative conditions.
Rather than relying on a single estimate, the model evaluates how payback changes when inputs move within reasonable ranges, such as:
These ranges are not performance targets. They represent realistic uncertainty in pricing, usage, and system performance.
If the project continues to meet internal payback criteria across these conservative cases, the investment is generally considered robust.
Research facilities face a distinct challenge: helium is both mission-critical and increasingly volatile in price and availability. Instruments such as NMRs, MRIs, and cryostats rely on a stable helium supply, yet traditional operating models assume continuous loss.
A typical helium recycling deployment introduces several system-level changes:
Rather than eliminating vendors, these systems reduce exposure to price spikes and supply disruptions.
The National Academies have explicitly identified instrument-level and facility-level helium recycling as a viable response to long-term helium supply constraints (see Helium recycling at research facilities).
Most successful installations rely on integrated, engineered solutions rather than standalone components, particularly when multiple instruments are involved. Examples of such systems are outlined under Industrial gas equipment solutions, with additional technical background in the Helium recovery systems guide.
To maintain financial credibility, research facilities typically model:
Consider a U.S. university core facility operating two NMR instruments with a combined helium consumption of approximately 3,200 liters per year. After installing instrument-level recovery units and a shared purification system, the facility recaptures roughly 65% of previously vented helium.
With an installed cost of approximately $195,000, annual savings typically range between $60,000 and $75,000, depending on local contract pricing. This results in a simple payback period of roughly 2.5 to 3.5 years.
These figures are illustrative, not guarantees. However, they align closely with outcomes reported by many U.S. research institutions. Importantly, facilities often cite reduced emergency refills and improved instrument uptime as equally valuable benefits.
In manufacturing environments, gas losses are frequently hidden. Compressed air and inert gas systems may operate for years with substantial leakage, increasing both gas and energy costs without triggering alarms or maintenance actions.
Leak detection and repair (LDAR), combined with basic metering, is one of the most reliable ROI levers available in industrial settings. According to the EPA, structured LDAR programs can reduce process-equipment emissions by approximately 56–63%, depending on sector and inspection frequency. For ROI modeling, this range should be treated as a conservative upper bound rather than an assumed outcome.
Once leaks are quantified and repaired, avoiding compressor runtime directly reduces energy consumption. DOE-published equations allow facilities to convert leak flow rates into avoided kWh, which can then be monetized using site-specific electricity rates.
Public case studies help anchor expectations. One example documented by NREL shows how improvements to a compressed air system and leak mitigation produced significant kWh savings, with a payback well under three years.
In practice, facilities implementing flow metering and quarterly LDAR programs often observe:
Not every facility requires a fully custom solution. However, as throughput increases and monitoring, safety, or integration requirements grow, engineered systems often deliver superior lifecycle economics.
Key decision factors include:
Facilities can explore standard configurations through industrial gas equipment solutions or initiate a project discussion focused on ROI assessment and system design.
A defensible ROI analysis for industrial gas projects prioritizes auditability over presentation. Inputs, assumptions, and calculations should be clearly separated so each component can be reviewed and validated independently.
In practice, teams often structure their ROI models to include:
Separating these elements helps prevent unrealistic assumptions, reduce calculation errors, and ensure results withstand technical and financial review.
ROI projections are only meaningful if systems remain compliant and data remains defensible. LDAR programs require documented inspection intervals, calibrated instruments, and consistent record-keeping aligned with EPA guidance.
Measurement quality also matters. Flow meters, analyzers, and sensors should have known uncertainty ranges, and data retention policies should support audits and continuous improvement.
Most organizations benefit from a phased implementation approach.
A typical 90-day roadmap includes:
Key KPIs to track include gas loss percentage, recovered or avoided volume, kWh saved, leak detection rates, blended gas cost, and payback versus plan.
Industrial gas ROI does not depend on aggressive assumptions. When modeled using conservative inputs, published methodologies, and disciplined measurement, recovery and leak-reduction projects consistently improve total cost of ownership in both research and manufacturing environments.
To move forward, organizations typically evaluate equipment and system options, refine assumptions using site-specific data, and build a deeper technical and economic case aligned with their operational requirements.
At In-Gas Solutions, we support this process with modular helium recovery and gas-handling systems designed for both research and industrial environments.
To learn more about the equipment used in helium recovery and handling, explore our Helium Gas Handling Equipment solutions.