"You'll save between 15% and 30%." It is the single most repeated —and least useful— sentence in any commercial conversation about migrating to the Wholesale Electricity Market (MEM). Useful because it sets the order of magnitude. Useless because the speaker rarely specifies what base the percentage applies to, what costs are excluded, and when the range collapses.
The uncomfortable truth: real savings depend on the structure of your current bill, your hourly profile, your load factor, the contract type you negotiate, and the transition costs that many forget to model. There are industries for which a well-structured Qualified User contract delivers 28% sustained savings. There are others where, after consulting fees and guarantees, net savings settle at 8% to 10%. This article unpacks the range and shows you how to project your own case honestly.
The 15–30% range: on exactly what?
When a consultant or supplier says "15–30%," they typically refer to total billed energy cost: the sum of energy (kWh), demand (kW), power factor, and associated charges. What's important to distinguish:
- It is not savings on the company's full electricity bill, because there are taxes and regulated transmission and distribution (T&D) charges that remain even if you migrate to the MEM.
- It is not instant savings in month one. Transition costs —guarantees, metering, fees— dilute net savings during the first 6 to 12 months.
- It is not linear over time. Your relative savings shift with each CFE Basic Supply tariff adjustment, every spot market move, and your contract's indexation.
That is the first honesty: the range is real, but the base of calculation matters.
The 3 sources of savings
MEM savings come from three combined components. Understanding each enables an honest projection.
1. Energy savings (10–20%)
The variable component —kWh consumed— is purchased on the MEM at marginal price. For industrial loads with an acceptable hourly profile, the average MEM price has been structurally below the equivalent component in CFE Basic Supply. The size of the savings depends on what percentage you contract at firm price versus exposure to spot, and on how the contract is indexed (natural gas, USD, USD/MMBtu).
2. Demand / capacity savings (5–12%)
Firm capacity —the committed MW— is contracted via CENACE's Long-Term Auction or bilaterally with a Qualified Supplier. The demand component in CFE Basic Supply is one of the most expensive items on an industrial bill; in a well-structured MEM contract, that component drops significantly. Industries with high load factor and predictable demand capture this source best.
3. Clean Energy Certificates — CELs (1–5%)
If your contract includes a percentage of renewable generation, you receive Clean Energy Certificates (CELs) that can be sold on the secondary market or applied against your own obligations. The CEL price has been volatile between 2022 and 2026, so this source must be modeled with prudent scenarios —not as the main driver of the business case—.
Combined, the three sources produce the 15–30% range. The split among them varies materially by industry.
Model case: a 2 MW manufacturing plant
To make the range tangible, let's model an industrial plant:
- Contracted demand: 2 MW
- Load factor: 60% (3 shifts, 5 days/week)
- Annual consumption: 10,500 MWh
- Total annual cost in CFE Basic Supply (2026 reference): MXN 28 million
With a reasonably well-structured MEM contract:
| Component | Modeled reduction | Annual savings |
|---|---|---|
| Energy (kWh) | 14% | $2.5M |
| Demand / capacity | 9% | $1.6M |
| CELs (5% renewable) | 2% | $0.4M |
| Gross savings | ~22% | $4.5M |
| Less year-1 transition costs | -$1.0M | |
| Net savings, year 1 | ~12% | $3.5M |
| Net savings, year 2 onward | ~21% | $4.4M |
The number most often cited in commercial decks is the gross figure. The number that matters for the business case is the net. The difference explains why some operations directors who migrated felt during the first 6 months that "savings weren't visible": they were on the books, just offset by transition costs.
Variables that move the real result
Four variables explain almost all of the range's dispersion:
Hourly profile. An operation that consumes mostly during low-MEM-price hours saves more. One that concentrates consumption during evening peaks may save half as much.
Operational stability. Suppliers price firm contracts based on predictability. A company with frequent unplanned outages, sudden expansions, or unexpected fluctuations pays risk premiums or stays more exposed to spot.
Firm/spot mix. A 100% firm contract protects against spikes but leaves significant savings on the table in normal years. A heavily spot-exposed contract maximizes average savings but can blow up a quarter.
Renewable component. Each point of renewable generation in your mix is an extra point in CELs and in ESG positioning. Contracted renewable energy has been structurally near or below conventional pricing in 2025–2026.
Costs that reduce net savings
The following items are frequently omitted in estimates:
- Consulting and regulatory advisory fees (one-time + maintenance)
- Financial guarantees (letter of credit, bond, deposit) required by the supplier and CENACE
- Metering and telemetry adjustments if the current meter doesn't comply with the CENACE Metering Manual
- New internal management (energy lead, monthly settlement monitoring)
- CRE administrative costs and fees
For a 2 MW plant, these costs typically total between MXN 800,000 and 1.5M in year one, depending on the starting state. After year 1 the recurring cost is modest —but real—.
When real savings are 10% and when they are 30%
Near 30% when: load factor above 70%, favorable hourly profile (off-peak consumption), protected indexation, renewable mix of 30% or more, you already comply with Grid Code (Código de Red), no metering investment needed.
Near 10–12% (net) when: load factor between 35% and 45%, peak-hour consumption pattern, metering system needs replacement, year 1 with high transition costs, very conservative 100% firm contract.
Most mid-sized Mexican industries land between 16% and 22% sustained net from year 2 onward —this is the realistic range we share in honest evaluations—.
How to project your own case from your last bill
Before committing, do this minimum exercise:
- Take your CFE bill from the last 12 months. Split into columns: energy, demand, power factor, T&D charges, other.
- Calculate your average load factor: (total kWh consumed / 8,760) / peak kW demand.
- Request at least 3 formal quotes from Qualified Suppliers using your real profile, not generic scenarios.
- Model year 1 and year 2 separately, subtracting transition costs.
- Compare against the base case of staying with CFE under projected tariff adjustments.
To go deeper into the mechanics of each savings source, also read Where MEM savings come from and the detailed comparison of Qualified Supplier vs CFE Basic Supply.
Risks of overpromising savings
Serious consultants and suppliers always give a range, not a single number. Anyone who promises "you will save 28%" without having seen your bill, your hourly profile, or your Grid Code status is selling, not analyzing. Companies that signed in 2022–2024 based on single-point promises are now in renegotiation or contract dispute. Information asymmetry is the main cause of failed UC contracts.
How Enerlogix projects your real savings
At Enerlogix Solutions, before proposing migration, we model your specific case using your actual bill. Plan 360 Management includes in its diagnostic phase a 24- and 36-month projection with optimistic, base, and conservative scenarios, separating gross savings, transition costs, and net savings.
For the full picture of the regime, see the Complete Guide to Qualified Users or our energy optimization service. If you want an honest projection of your case —with numbers, not promises—, request a free evaluation and we will review your bill to deliver an estimate with verifiable foundations.
