program name or ancillary texteere.energy.gov u.s. assessment approaches and resources michaela...

Program Name or Ancillary Text eere.energy.gov

U.S. Assessment Approachesand ResourcesU.S. Assessment Approachesand Resources

Michaela Martin, PEProgram ManagerSave Energy Now InitiativeOak Ridge National Laboratory

U.S.-Brazil Industrial Energy Efficiency WorkshopRio de Janeiro, Brazil August 8-11, 2011

2 | Industrial Energy Efficiency eere.energy.gov

Discussion Overview

• Targeting Energy End-Uses and Savings Potential• U.S. DOE Assessments

– Crosscutting – System-specific

• Assessment Resources– Experts– QuickPEP, or ePEP– Assessment Standards

• Large Plant Assessment Results• Compressed Air Assessments (Dr. Kissock)• Process Heating Assessments (Dr. Muller)


U.S. Energy Footprint for Industry

US Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS)• Surveys a sample of US plants

every 4 years• Inventory of fuel usage• Maps end-uses of energy• Overview of current energy

management practices by US industry

• Statistical sample representing 200,000 manufacturing plants

• www.eia.doe.gov


End-Use Footprints in US Plants

Process HeatingSteamPumpsFansCompressed Air

Top Energy Consuming End-Use Systems


System-Based Consumption

• Fired heating systems– Steam– Process heating

• Electrical systems– Pumps– Compressed air– Fans

Why System Energy Efficiency Matters

5


Targeting Savings Potential by System Type

Potential Energy Saving Opportunities

Typical Energy Consumption Rates

* Other ancillary energy usages such as lighting represent less than 2% of energy consumption

Process Heating/ Steam Systems

60 – 80%

Electric MotorSystems

8-15%Pumping Systems

7-15%CompressedAir Systems

2-7%Other*< 2%

10% to 30% 5% to 10% 10% to 20% 10% to 20% 5% to 10%


Percent of Total U.S. Manufacturing Energy

Small 5%

Mid-Size37%

Large58%

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

U.S. Manufacturing Plants: By Size

Small Plants

Mid-Size Plants

Large Plants

Num

ber

of U

.S.

Pla

nts

All Plants

84,298112,398

4,014

200,710

ITP uses two types of general assessment

approaches, to meet the needs of plants of all sizes.

System-Specific Assessments >>0.5 TBtu/yr

Crosscutting Assessments

0.026 – 0.49 Tbtu/yr

Industrial Energy Assessments


Mid-Size37%

Large58%

Small 5%Industrial Assessment Centers (IAC)

Cross-Cutting Energy Assessments

Plant Energy (Size) based Approach

4,014 large plants use 58% of the energy

Energy Saving Assessments (System focused)


Targeted Companies Implementing Entities Duration Services Subsidies/

Financing

Large energy -intensive plants (≥500 Billion BTU/year in primary energy)

Energy Experts - BestPractices Qualified Specialists

3-day system assessment

Apply DOE’s software tools and technical expertise to a specific area

Free and cost-shared for LEADER companies

Provide hands-on training to plant personnel, identify energy savings opportunities

Small and medium enterprises (> 26 Billion Btu/year, but <500 billion Btu/year in primary energy)

University-based Industrial Assessment Centers (IACs, many IAC Directors are Qualified Specialists)

1-day assessment

Highly trained IAC faculty and students apply DOE software tools and technical expertise

Free of charge to SMEs if eligible Identify energy-, waste- and

productivity-savings opportunities

U.S. DOE Industrial Energy Assessments Recap


• U.S. DOE Industrial Technologies Program conducts a qualification training program to provide qualified energy experts by system area

• Qualification workshops include classroom and hands-on instruction by highly experienced energy professions, written exams, and certificates

• Energy Experts are available for system-specific areas (e.g., compressed air, pumping, process heating, steam, and fan systems)

DOE Qualified Energy Experts


• Plant description• Utility supply data• Energy use

information

• Overview of plant energy• Energy cost distributions• Preliminary assessment• Areas for improvement• Energy reduction potential

INPUTS

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/quickpep_ml

OUTPUTS

Plant Energy Profiler (PEP)

PEP Tool Can Be Used to Determine Initial Approach

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/quickpep_ml/default.aspx


ASMESystem Assessment Standards

• Developed by US energy experts from utilities, industry, DOE, university IACs, national labs, consulting organizations

• Based on DOE’s system-based approach• Provides comprehensive approach for holistic assessments of

energy-intensive systems:– Pumping– Compressed Air– Steam– Process Heating

• Sets requirements for • organizing and conducting assessments• collecting and analyzing data• reporting results

• Standards and Guidance Documents available at:http://www.asme.org/kb/standards#des=EA

http://www.asme.org/kb/standards#des=EA


Save Energy Now System-BasedLarge Plant Assessments

Conduct Plant Visit

Analyze & Report Results

GatherPreliminary

Data

Implementation Follow-up

Train Plant Staff

• Teams are DOE Energy Experts and plant personnel

• Teams focus on fans, pumps compressors, steam or process heating systems.

• Plant personnel trained on DOE software tools

Successful Project Implementation


System-Type # of DOE Assessments Completed

Cost Savings Identified

Average Energy Cost Savings Per Plant Identified

Process Heating 235 $341M($536.7M R$)

$1.5M or 10.8%($2.36M R$)

Steam 342 $686M($1,079M R$)

$2.0M or 7%($3.1M R$)

Compressed Air 160 $34M($53.5M R$)

$213,000 or 2.4%($335,000 R$)

Fans 49 $48M($75.5M R$)

$687,000 or 2.9%($1.08M R$)

Pumps 91 $19M($29.9M R$)

$214,000 or 1.2%($336,800 R$)

DOE Save Energy Now System Assessment Results


TOP TEN FREQUENTLY IDENTIFIED PROCESS HEATING OPPORTUNITIESSAVE ENERGY NOW ASSESSMENTS - 2006 to 2011

Top Ten Frequently Identified Process Heating Opportunities

(ESAs - 2006 to 2011)No. of Times

Identified Average Energy MMBtu Savings

Identified (Source)

Average Source Energy Savings %

Identified (%)

Average Energy Cost Savings Identified ($)

Average Energy Cost Savings % Identified (%)

Average of Payback Period

Actual (yr)

Reduce oxygen content of flue (exhaust) gases 183 24,415 1.2 $177,471 1.3 0.9

Use of flue or Exhaust gas heat for combustion air preheating 123 67,325 3.6 $407,062 2.6 1.9

Proper insulation and maintenance of furnace structure or parts 120 24,476 1.0 $166,469 1.1 1.4

Reduce-eliminate openings and air leakage in the furnace 76 20,343 1.1 $154,529 1.3 1.0

Load or charge preheating using heat from flue or exhaust gas or other source of waste heat 72 30,173 1.5 $245,646 1.8 2.0

Heat cascading - use of flue or Exhaust gas heat from higher temp. process to supply heat to lower temperature processes

61 53,680 2.1 $407,020 2.3 1.5

Use of proper heating methods - replace inefficient and uneconomical methods with economical/efficient system

54 83,061 6.5 $407,523 3.6 3.0

Heat recovery from hot products or other heat sources (i.e. from walls) from a furnace - oven 44 82,963 2.8 $558,684 3.3 1.8

Furnace scheduling, loading, shut down - avoiding delays, waits, cooling between operations etc.

40 36,058 2.3 $323,857 2.8 0.4

Use of oxygen for combustion 37 85,949 2.6 $598,268 3.2 1.9

* Based on Save Energy Now assessments conducted between 2006 to 2011. Numbers are as of July 1, 2011.


Top Ten Frequently Identified Steam Opportunities


Identified

Average Energy MMBtu Savings

Identified (Source)


Identified (%)




Actual (yr)

Change Boiler Efficiency 376 29,136 0.9 $206,326 1.3 1.7

Reduce Steam Demand by Changing the Process Steam Requirements 301 81,455 2.0 $482,680 2.7 1.9

Improve Insulation 233 13,016 0.5 $97,611 0.6 1.1

Implement Steam Trap Maintenance Program 153 22,327 0.6 $167,057 0.7 0.7

Change Condensate Recovery Rates 136 27,587 0.7 $250,288 0.9 1.4

Add or Modify Operation of Backpressure Steam Turbine 123 68,992 1.1 $479,187 2.1 2.6

Modify Feedwater Heat Recovery Exchanger using Boiler Blowdown 113 15,486 0.4 $108,806 0.5 1.2

Implement Steam Leak Maintenance Program 113 14,617 0.3 $73,991 0.4 0.8

Change Boiler Blowdown Rate 98 15,729 0.3 $135,379 0.5 2.1

Reduce or Recover Vented Steam 68 20,143 0.8 $137,822 0.9 0.8


TOP TEN FREQUENTLY IDENTIFIED STEAM OPPORTUNITIESSAVE ENERGY NOW ASSESSMENTS - 2006 to 2011


Top Ten Frequently Identified Compressed Air Opportunities


Identified


Identified (Source)


Identified (%)




Actual (yr)

Improve End Use Efficiency 132 5,020 0.4 $27,305 0.3 1.6

Reduce Air Leaks 123 7,711 0.6 $41,198 0.5 0.8

Reduce System Air Pressure 81 4,503 0.3 $26,032 0.3 0.7

Multiple Compressor Control (install / improve) 80 9,057 0.7 $50,911 0.7 0.9

Open Blowing 32 9,942 0.5 $58,226 0.5 1.4

Improve Trim Compressor Part Load Efficiency 28 6,553 1.0 $37,665 1.0 0.8

Reduce Run Time 28 6,165 0.5 $33,251 0.5 1.2

Improve Compressor Intake Condition 17 2,273 0.1 $11,082 0.1 1.1

Adjust Cascading Set Points 12 4,996 0.4 $32,873 0.4 0.5

Reduce Supply Side Pressure 10 3,589 0.2 $18,100 0.2 1.1


TOP TEN FREQUENTLY IDENTIFIED COMPRESSED AIR OPPORTUNITIESSAVE ENERGY NOW ASSESSMENTS - 2006 to 2011


Top Ten Frequently Identified Pump Opportunities


Identified


Identified (Source)


Identified (%)




Actual (yr)

Excessive valve friction loss all of the time 83 11,629 0.2 $55,878 0.3 1.6

Less than optimal equipment for the application 58 7,611 0.2 $42,107 0.2 3.3

More flow than required to meet system requirements 50 6,161 0.3 $35,012 0.2 1.4

Excessive valve friction loss part of the time 31 10,114 0.3 $56,864 0.3 3.3

Excessive recirculation 26 7,012 0.3 $40,893 0.3 1.5

Degraded equipment performance 15 6,242 0.6 $44,321 0.6 3.3

Unneeded flow path 9 3,088 0.1 $20,373 0.1 2.0

Change time of use 7 7,314 0.2 $52,650 0.2 0.8

Excessive friction loss due to system design 4 8,589 0.3 $51,794 0.2 1.0

System specs exceed system requirements 4 7,843 0.2 $51,723 0.1 0.3


TOP TEN FREQUENTLY IDENTIFIED PUMPING SYSTEM OPPORTUNITIESSAVE ENERGY NOW ASSESSMENTS - 2006 to 2011


Top Ten Frequently Identified Fan Opportunities (ESAs - 2006 to 2011)

No. of Times Identified


Identified (Source)


Identified (%)




Actual (yr)

Use Variable Speed Drive 80 12,892 0.2 $72,004 0.2 2.7

Install new appropriately sized fan 34 20,891 0.7 $131,866 0.7 3.5

Shut off unneeded fans 18 18,975 1.2 $125,246 0.9 1.5

Change belt drive ratio 18 2,851 0.3 $15,658 0.3 0.6

Install new appropriately sized impeller 16 24,430 0.5 $117,680 0.4 2.9

Improve arrangement of air intake 5 8,237 0.1 $48,240 0.1 1.1

Reconfigure pollution control equipment 5 17,393 1.1 $112,005 1.1 8.6

Recover heat from exhaust air 4 95,384 2.6 $588,210 3.5 3.6

Rearrange ductwork at fan inlet or discharge 3 82,387 0.7 $300,633 0.6 1.3

De-tip fan blades 2 2,093 0.1 $10,300 0.1 3.9


TOP TEN FREQUENTLY IDENTIFIED FAN SYSTEM OPPORTUNITIESSAVE ENERGY NOW ASSESSMENTS - 2006 to 2011


0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

325 CHEMICAL MANUFACTURING

322 PAPER MANUFACTURING

331 PRIMARY METALS

311 FOOD

336 TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT

327 NON-METALLIC MINERAL PRODUCTS

OTHER

326 PLASTICS AND RUBBER PRODUCTS

324 PETROLEUM AND COAL PRODUCTS

332 FABRICATED METAL PRODUCTS

334 COMPUTER AND ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS

212 MINING

333 MACHINERY MANUFACTURING

321 WOOD PRODUCTS

339 MISCELLANEOUS MANUFACTURING

335 ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, APPLIANCES

313 TEXTILE MILLS

314 TEXTILE PRODUCT MILLS

323 PRINTING AND RELATED SUPPORT

312 BEVERAGE AND TOBACCO PRODUCTS

221 UTILITIES

315 APPAREL MANUFACTURING

337 FURNITURE AND RELATED

541 PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC & TECHNICAL

NUMBER OF ASSESSMENTS

IND

US

TR

Y T

YP

E (

NA

IC)

YEAR 2006 - 2011 (905 SENAs)

Majority of Assessments Conducted In 6 Major Industries


TOP TEN FREQUENTLY IDENTIFIED OPPORTUNITIES FOR IRON & STEEL INDUSTRY 2006 to 2011

Top Ten Frequently Identified Opportunities for Iron & Steel Industry(ESAs - 2006 to 2011)



Identified (Source)


Identified (%)




Actual (yr)



Proper insulation and maintenance of furnace structure or parts 35 41,153 0.6 $317,627 0.8 1.3

Reduce-eliminate openings and air leakage in the furnace 28 22,488 1.2 $174,128 1.4 0.9

Load or charge preheating using heat from flue or exhaust gas or other source of waste heat 23 38,522 1.8 $316,448 2.0 1.6

Furnace scheduling, loading, shut down - avoiding delays, waits, cooling between operations etc.

23 54,782 2.5 $489,121 3.2 0.5

Improve End Use Efficiency 20 3,169 0.2 $14,457 0.2 2.0

Use of proper heating methods - replace inefficient and uneconomical methods with economical/efficient system

19 165,900 12.5 $549,849 3.7 3.3





Top Ten Frequently Identified Opportunities for Chemical Industry


Identified


Identified (Source)


Identified (%)




Actual (yr)





Implement Steam Leak Maintenance Program 40 10,341 0.3 $53,778 0.6 0.9




Modify Feedwater Heat Recovery Exchanger using Boiler Blowdown 27 26,353 0.4 $191,210 0.6 1.3



TOP TEN FREQUENTLY IDENTIFIED OPPORTUNITIES FOR CHEMICAL INDUSTRY 2006 to 2011


Top Ten Frequently Identified Opportunities for Pulp & Paper Industry(ESAs - 2006 to 2011)



Identified (Source)


Identified (%)




Actual (yr)



Change operating parameters 57 50,494 0.5 $343,719 0.9 0.1


Excessive valve friction loss all of the time 45 4,594 0.2 $23,269 0.2 2.0




Reduce or Recover Vented Steam 25 15,255 0.3 $135,256 0.6 0.4

Install more energy-efficient equipment 25 13,249 0.2 $89,684 0.3 0.8


TOP TEN FREQUENTLY IDENTIFIED OPPORTUNITIES FOR PULP & PAPER INDUSTRY 2006 to 2011


• Compressed Air (Dr. Kissock)• Process Heating (Dr. Muller)

System-Assessment Examples

program name or ancillary texteere.energy.gov u.s. assessment approaches and resources michaela...

Documents

energy end

energy footprint

manufacturing energy

ancillary energy usages

system type potential

manufacturing plants

needs of plants

sample of us plants