Upload
wattan
View
33
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Integrated Systems + Principles Approach. Manufacturing Energy End-Use Breakdown. Source: California Energy Commission (2000). Energy Systems. Lighting Motor drive Fluid flow Compressed air Steam and hot water Process heating Process cooling Heating, ventilating and air conditioning - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Integrated Systems + Principles Approach
Source: California Energy Commission (2000)
Manufacturing Energy End-Use Breakdown
Energy Systems– Lighting– Motor drive– Fluid flow– Compressed air– Steam and hot water– Process heating– Process cooling– Heating, ventilating and air conditioning– Cogeneration
Principles of Energy Efficiency
– Inside Out Analysis– Understand Control Efficiency– Think Counter-flow– Avoid Mixing– Match Source Energy to End Use– Theoretical Minimum Energy Use– Whole-system, Whole-time Frame Analysis
Integrated Systems + Principles Approach
Integrated systems + principles approach (ISPA) = Systems approach + Principles of energy efficiency
ISPA is both effective and thorough.
Electrical Lighting Motors Fluid Flow Comp Air Steam Proc Heat Proc Cool HVAC CHPInside OutControl EfficiencyCounter-flowAvoid MixingMatch Source Energy to End UseTheoretical Minimum Energy UseWhole-system, Whole-time Frame Analysis
1. Inside-out Approach
Conversion Distribution UseEnergySupply
Energy Use
Inside-Out Analysis Approach
Inside-out Approach
Conversion Distribution Use
EnergySupplySavings
Energy End–Use Savings
Inside-Out Analysis Approach
Inside-out Amplifies Savings
Reduce pipe friction: Savings = 1.00 kWhPump 70% eff: Savings = 1.43 kWhDrive 95% eff: Savings = 1.50 kWhMotor 90% eff: Savings = 1.67 kWhT&D 91% eff: Savings = 1.83 kWhPowerplant 33% eff: Savings = 5.55 kWh
Inside-out Reduces First Costs
Original design– 95 hp in 14 pumps
Re-design:– Bigger pipes: Dp = c / d5
• (doubling d reduces Dp by 97%)– Layout pipes then equipment
• shorter runs, fewer turns, valves, etc…– 7 hp in 2 pumps
Inside-Out: Example
Aluminum die-cast machines Use 100 psig air to force aluminum to mold Need 40 psig air Purchase low-pressure blower and avoid
compressor upgrade Estimated savings = $11,000 /yr Estimated implementation cost = -$47,000
Inside-Out SummaryOutside-In
Small savings at high first costs
Focuses on support equip
Fosters extraneous and periodic efficiency efforts
Inside-Out Big savings at low first
costs Focuses on core
products and processes Internalizes and sustains
efficiency efforts
2. Understand Control Efficiency
Systems designed for peak load, but operate at part load
System efficiency generally changes at part load Recognize and modify systems with poor part-
load (control) efficiency
Control Efficiency
Energy
Production
Poor
Excellent
Air Compressor Control
FP = FP0 + FC (1 – FP0)
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00
Fraction Capacity (FC)
Frac
tion
Pow
er (F
P)
Blow Off
Modulation
Load/Unload
Variable Speed
On/Off
Power and Flow Control
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
By-pass Outlet Damper
Variable Inlet Vane Variable Frequency Drive
Volume Flow Rate (%)
Pow
er (%
)
Chiller Control
3. Think Counter-flow
Q
T
T
x
x
Q
Parallel Flow
Counter Flow
Counter-flow Stack Furnace Pre-heats Charge
Reverb Furnace Efficiency = 25% Stack Furnace Efficiency = 44% (Eppich and Nuranjo, 2007)
Counter-Flow Heat Treat
Extending hood saves $40,000 /yr
BurnersStack
Current Design
Recommended Design
Counter-Flow Heat Recovery
Vinegar Pasteurization and Cooling
Cool vinegar in steam in
steam outPasteurizedvinegar out
Heat exchanger Atransfers heat from hotvinegar to coolincoming vinegar.
Heat exchanger Ctransfers remainingheat from hot vinegarto city water.
Citywater
in
Citywaterout
Heat exchangerB transfers heatfrom steam toincomingvinegar.
135deg. F
70 deg.F
Counter-Flow Heat Recovery
Counter-flow heat exchanger saves $17,000 /yr
Cool vinegar in steam in
steam outPasteurizedvinegar out
Heat exchanger Atransfers heat from hotvinegar to coolincoming vinegar.
Heat exchanger Ctransfers remainingheat from hot vinegarto city water.
Citywater
in
Citywaterout
Heat exchangerB transfers heatfrom steam toincomingvinegar.
135deg. F
70 deg.F
Counter-flow Glass Heating
Counter flow increases convection heat transfer by 83%
Contact length = 2 x (5 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1) = 30 feet
Contact length = (10 + 9 + 8 + 7 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1) = 55 feet
Counter-flow Tile Kiln
TileExit
TileEntrance
Counter-flow tile kiln saves 33%
Counter-Flow Cooling
Counter flow enables 50 F to 70 F water saves 10x
4. Avoid Mixing
Availability analysis…Useful work destroyed with mixing
Examples– CAV/VAV air handlers– Separate hot and cold wells– Material reuse/recycling
HVAC Applications
Cooling Energy Use Heating Energy Use
Cooling Applications
Separate tank into hot and
cold sides
5. Match Source to End Use
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Compressed air Open loopcooling
Chillers Cooling towers
$/m
mBt
u co
olin
g
Pumping
Air Pumps Use 7x More Electricity
Lighting
Eyes See Best in Sunlight
6. Theoretical Minimum Energy Use
Always ask “how much energy is really required ?”
Not much.
2.5% of primary energy used to provide energy services Ayers (1989)
TME of Industrial Processes
Choate and Green (2003), Fruehan, et al. (2000), and Worrell, et al. (2000)
Parts on UV Curing Oven
Slowed belt, shut of excess lamps, saved 50%
7. Whole-System Whole-Time Frame Design
Design heuristic derived from natural evolution Nothing evolves in a vacuum, only as part of a system No optimum tree, fan, … Evolutionary perspective: ‘optimum’ synonymous with
‘perfectly integrated’ Optimize whole system, not components Design for whole time frame, next generation
Whole System “Lean” Manufacturing
400 ft/min 200 ft/min
200 ft/min
Whole System Energy Engineering“Optimum Pipe Diameter”
Dopt = 200 mm when Tot Cost = NPV(Energy)+Pipe Dopt = 250 mm when Cost= NPV(Energy)+Pipe+Pump Energy250 = Energy200 / 2
Whole-System Whole-Time Frame Accounting“Efficiency Gap”
“Numerous studies conclude 20% to 40% energy savings could be implemented cost effectively, but aren’t…..”
Discrepancy between economic and actual savings potential called “efficiency gap”.
Puzzled economists for decades: “I can’t believe they leave that much change lying on the table.”
Whole System Accounting:“Don’t Separate Capital and Operational Budgets”
Separate capital and operational budgets
Organizational sub-systems constrain optimums
Enlarge budgeting to consider entire company
Whole Time Frame Accounting:“Don’t Eat Your Seed Corn”
SP = 2 years (10 year life) is ROI = 49%
SP = 5 years (10 year life) is ROI = 15%
SP = 10 years (20 year life) is ROI = 8%