Presenting the Value of Energy Management and Reporting Systems to Operations and the Facility Financial Analyst

Industrial Technology ConferenceNew Orleans, LA

20 June 2017

Presentation Outline

• Part 1: The Energy Management and Reporting System (EMRS) as an Advanced Process Control (APC) application.

• Part 2: The APC operating characteristics that result in success.

• Part 3: APC project approval process.• Part 4: APC project financial performance.• Part 5: APC project sustainable performance.

2

3

Part 1: What is an EMRS APC

4

Part 2: Operating Characteristics That Lead to Success

• Safety – protect personnel and equipment• Avoid environmental excursions• Save the power house• Save the process• Save the money $$$

• Applications that can do this provide sustained operation with utilization greater than 80%.

Part 3: Project Approval Process

• Level 0 based on 3% to 10% of total energy spend

• Level 1 Statistical Performance Evaluation– Fossil Fuel Effectiveness (FFE)– Power Generation Effectiveness (PGE) – Steam Distribution Effectiveness (SDE)

• Level 2 Process Model– Downside, Expected, and Upside Business Cases

5

Part 4: Project Financial Performance ObjectivesAveraging versus Incremental Costing

• Facility Analyst uses Average Costing for:– Monthly operating performance– Evaluating new capital projects– Verifying the project results

• Process Controls use Incremental Costing for process operation optimization– The cost of the next K# of steam generation– The cost of the next MWH of electric generation

6

Steam Plant Cost Statement

7

Average Cost (Accounting)Q$Steam = (Q1Steam X Q1$Steam + Q2Steam X Q2$Steam + Q3Steam X Q3$Steam)

(Q1Steam + Q2Steam + Q3Steam)

Incremental Cost (Control System)B1 Steam Q1$Steam, B2 Steam Q2$Steam, B3 Steam Q3$Steam

ExampleAveraging versus Incremental Costing

• Boiler B1, B2, and B3 have 100KPPH Steaming Rate

• Steam Cost– B1 $1/KPPH– B2 $2/KPPH– B2 $3/KPPH

• Using Average Costing for controls gives a 63% error

8

-

20

40

60

80

100

B1 SteamB2 Steam

B3 SteamIndi

vidu

al B

oile

r Ste

amin

g Ra

te K

PPH Steaming Rate

Steaming Rate

300 KPPHAverage $2.00/KPPH, Incremental Cost $3.00/KPPH

9

$- $0.50 $1.00 $1.50 $2.00 $2.50 $3.00 $3.50

0 100 200 300

Stea

m C

ost $

/KPP

H

Combined Boiler Steamikng Rate KPPH

Steam Costing

Average Cost Incremental Cost

-

20

40

60

80

100

B1 SteamB2 Steam

B3 SteamIndi

vidu

al B

oile

r Ste

amin

g Ra

te K

PPH Steaming Rate

Steaming Rate

Project Savings Analysis• Develop a process model with an EMRS

optimizer rule set to evaluate 1 year of process operation.

• Evaluate 1 year of hourly averages

10

EMRS Results Format

• The difference between a full year of “Ideal” optimized cost minus the “Actual” cost gives the savings and can use the Averaging Costing Methods.

• The results are shown as:– Discretionary steam production reduction– Steam cost reduction of remaining steam from

boiler load allocation.– Generation improvements from PRV/turbine load

allocation– Tie Line/Generation arbitrage 11

Lost Opportunity Reports

• The Process Advisor compares the optimized operation against the process model baseline.– The difference is the Lost Opportunity– The savings is the baseline minus the lost

opportunity• The optimization method is to reduce the

hourly Lost Opportunity.

12

13

Part 5: APC Sustained Performance ReportingNot what went wrong but how can we do better?

Reporting:• Opportunity Duration• % Utilization• # Times On/Off• Lost Opportunity Cost

Questions?

• General– Papers are on the Texas

A&M archives.– More Information on the

DES-EMS.com website.– Contact: Jim Robinson– 484.868.1901

14