410 likes | 558 Views
Kelly Kissock Director: University of Dayton Industrial Assessment Center Dayton, Ohio U.S.A. I ndustrial Assessment Center One-Day Assessment. U.S.-Brazil Industrial Energy Efficiency Workshop Rio de Janeiro , Brazil August 8-11, 2011. Industrial Assessment Center Program .
E N D
Kelly Kissock Director: University of Dayton Industrial Assessment Center Dayton, Ohio U.S.A. Industrial Assessment Center One-Day Assessment U.S.-Brazil Industrial Energy Efficiency Workshop Rio de Janeiro, Brazil August 8-11, 2011
Industrial Assessment Center Program • Sponsored by U.S. Department of Energy • Program began during 1970s “energy crisis” • 26 centers at universities throughout the U.S. • 25 no-cost assessments per year for mid-sized industries • Goals: • Help industry be more resource-efficient and competitive • Train new engineers in industrial best-practices • Improve practice and science of energy efficiency
Eligibility for IAC Assessment • Manufacturing facility SIC: 20 to 39 • Annual energy costs: $100,000 - $2,500,000
Structure of IAC Assessment • Gather and analyze data before visit • Team of faculty and students visit plant for one day • Work closely with clients to identify and quantify energy saving opportunities • Write custom, confidential, independent report with specific savings suggestion • Call after 9-months to see what was implemented
University of Dayton Industrial Assessment Center • Performed over 825 assessments since 1981 • Check implementation results after one year • Half of recommendations implemented • Energy use reduction ~5%
Recruiting the Student Team • 5 undergraduate and graduate engineering students • Senior students mentor junior students • Require specific classes • Energy Efficient Manufacturing • Energy Efficient Buildings • Design of Thermal Systems
Embed Energy Management into IAC Report Develop baseline Identify and quantify saving opportunities Measure savings to sustain efficiency efforts
Baseline Four Components of Plant Baseline • Process Description and Plant Layout • Utility Analysis • Plant Energy Balance • Lean Energy Analysis
Process Description and Plant Layout Process Description Plant Layout
Utility Billing Analysis • Analyze rate schedule • Verify billing amounts • Check for saving opportunities: • Primary/secondary • Power factor correction • Meter consolidation • Demand reduction potential • Benchmark costs
Lean Energy Analysis • Model energy use as functions of weather and production • Decompose energy into: • Production-dependent • Weather-dependent • Independent • Use models for: • Quantify “Leanness” • Identify savings opportunities • Measuring savings
Quantify Energy “Leaness” “Independent” is energy not added to product LEA = (1 – Independent) Electricity LEA = 49%
Average LEA Scores 58% 39%
Calibrated Energy Use Breakdowns • Use plant-supplied lists of: • Major elec equip • Major gas equip • Estimated operating hours • Create energy breakdown by equipment • Calibrate breakdown against: • Lean energy analysis • Plant energy bills Electrical Energy Breakdown Natural Gas Breakdown
Approach for Identifying Savings • Each manufacturing process is unique • Can’t become experts in every manufacturing process • Found that manufacturing processes comprised of different sequences of same “building blocks” • Developed: “Integrated Systems + Principles Approach”
Energy Systems Lighting Motor drive Fluid flow Compressed air Steam and hot water Process heating Process cooling Heating, ventilating and air conditioning Combined heat and power
Principles of Energy Efficiency Inside Out Analysis Understand Control Efficiency Think Counter-flow Avoid Mixing Match Source Energy to End Use Whole-system, Whole-time Frame Analysis
1. Inside-out Approach Energy flow from outside to inside plant
2. Understand Control Efficiency All systems sized for peak-load, but operate at part-load Control efficiency quantifies loss from controlling system to operate at part-load
3. Think Counter Flow T Q Parallel Flow x T Q Counter Flow x
4. Avoid Mixing Availability analysis tells us Useful work destroyed with mixing Examples CAV/VAV air handlers Separate hot and cold wells Material reuse/recycling
6. Whole-system Whole-timeframe Design Dopt = 200 mm when Tot Cost = NPV(Energy)+Pipe Dopt = 250 mm when Cost= NPV(Energy)+Pipe+Pump Energy250 = Energy200 / 2
Assessment Day • Briefing • Plant tour to identify opportunities • Meet to prioritize • Gather data to quantify • Debrief
Lighting • Maximize day lighting • Illumination survey and light inventory • Placement • Distribution efficiency • Control • Upgrades
Motor Drive Systems • Minimize end-use • Reduce transmission losses • Optimize repair/replace policy
Fluid Flow • Minimize friction losses • Efficient flow control • Slow fans • Trim pump impellors • Employ VFDs for variable flow • Pump-slow pump-long
Compressed Air Systems • Minimize air use • Minimize leakage losses • Minimize pressure • Compress outside air • Optimize control mode • Optimize multi-compressor operation • Reclaim heat
Boiler / Steam Systems • Match energy source/use • Insulate hot surfaces, pipes and open tanks • Maintain steam traps • Maximize combustion efficiency • Preheat boiler feed water • Explore combined heat and power
Process Heating • Maximize heat delivery efficiency (heat product not air) • Minimize batch heating losses • Minimize air leakage and openings • Insulate hot surfaces • Maximize combustion efficiency • Reclaim heat to preheat combustion air or charge
Process Cooling • Heat-exchanger networks to minimize cooling loads • Maximize temperature set points • Maximize use of cooling tower • Replace air-cooled with water-cooled chillers • Stage chillers or employ VFD chillers • Use absorption chillers if waste heat is available • Employ VFDs cooling tower fans
Heating, Ventilating, Air Conditioning • Employ temperature setback • Insulate un-insulated envelope • Minimize ventilation loads and balance plant air pressure • Outside air: • If needed, use 100% eff MAU • In unneeded, use 80% eff unit heater • Employ economizers for year-long cooling loads • Improve distribution effectiveness
Combined Heat and Power • Feasibility, sizing, economics • Steam to Power • Power to Thermal • Heat to Power
Prioritize Savings Opportunities Savings by System Type Cumulative Payback and Savings
Measure Energy Savings (Using LEA Baseline Model) Savings Pre-retrofit Post-retrofit
Track Normalized Energy Intensity Normalized Energy Intensity decreased 5.4%.
Share Methods and Software http://academic.udayton.edu/udiac