leveraging best practices & emerging technologies to optimize industrial process heating

Industrial Process Heating Optimization

J a s o n S m i t h , L E E D A . P .

Industrial Energy Eff ic iency Summit N a s h v i l l e – T N J u l y 1 7 - 1 8 , 2 0 1 3

Global Network:

Global Sales ~ 143,000 Units (~ 12,000,000 BHP)

• Asia ~ 140,500

• North America ~ 2,500

~ 500 Trillion Btu Annual Energy Savings Worldwide

~ 180 Million Metric Tons of Annual CO2 Reductions Worldwide

Miura – North America:

Current North American

regional offices:

Sales and service

networt in the U.S. &

Canada via certified

local representatives

Satellite offices

established in Mexico &

Brazil in 2011

Made in the U.S.A.:

New U.S. manufacturing

operational in 2009

(Rockmart, GA)

Presentation Overview:

Introduction

Overview of Optimization Approach / Process

Review of Thermal Energy Management BEST PRACTICES

First Steps to Optimization – Assessment & Benchmarking

Leveraging New Technologies to Back-fill Performance Gaps

Case Studies of Successful Applications

Optimization Approach: Key Concepts

Holistic / System-wide

Inclusive

BEST PRACTICE-rooted

Data-driven

Process / Load-specific

Controls-focused

Target-driven

Recurring

Long-term

Optimization Approach: Process Assess & benchmark current system

performance relative to process loads

Maximize heat recovery within system

“Right-size” system relative to optimized

heat recovery

Optimize system load matching / management

capability for process requirements

Configure system to reduce potential for future

secondary / infrastructure energy losses

Implement long-term system & infrastructure

BEST PRACTICES management program

Implement continuous system monitoring &

management

Implement recurring optimization “gap analysis”

Unlocking U.S. Energy Efficiency Bang for Buck – Industrial Sector 2009 McKinsey EE Report for DOE / EPA:

http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/electricpowernaturalgas/US_energy_efficiency

Energy Mgmt for

E/I Processes

Waste Heat Recovery

Steam Systems

~ 13 Quadrillion Btu’s at an avg.

capital investment of ~ $7 / MMBtu

http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/electricpowernaturalgas/US_energy_efficiency

U. S. Boiler Inventory: Energy Consumption U.S. Industrial Boilers – Energy Consumption: ~ 6.5 Qbtu / yr

or up to 40% of all energy at industrial facilities

Equivalent CO2 Emissions: ~ 500+ MtCO2 / yr

Food

Bo

iler

Fue

l C

on

su

mption

(TB

tu / y

r)

Paper Chemicals Refining Primary

Metals

Other

Mfg

500

1,000

1,500

2,500

2,000

Optimization Objectives: Enterprise Sustain-ability “Triple Bottom Line”:

Social Responsibility

Environmental

Stewardship

Economic

Prosperity

• Reduced Fossil Fuels Consumption

• Reduced GHG Emissions

• Reduced Water Consupmtion

• Reduced Fuel Costs

• Reduced Operation Costs

• Increased Operational Efficiency

• Extended Product Stewardship

• Online Maintenance System

• Safe & Easy Operation

Optimization Drivers: Emissions Compliance NOx Map of ozone non-attainment areas in the U.S.

(existing / future projected counties):

Ground-level ozone pollution - primary driver of

NOx emissions regulation in the U.S.

Optimization Drivers: Emissions Compliance EPA Boiler MACT Focused on regulating large & “dirty” fuel boiler

emissions via emissions limits & smaller boilers via

regular tuning provisions

Final amendments issued 01/31/2013 for major source

& 02/01/2013 for area source boilers

Major source boilers defined as those emitting 10 TPY

of any single regulated hazardous air pollutant or 25

TPY of combined pollutants

Area source boilers are those that fall below major

source emissions of HAP’s

Establishes “large boilers” as having heat input

capacity of 10 MMBtu/hr or greater & “small boilers”

as those below 10 MMBtu/hr heat input capacity

Specifies compliance deadline criteria differentiating

new vs. existing boilers (including energy assessment)

Optimization Drivers: Emissions Reductions Carbon Content Comparison of carbon content of major fuels:

Coal ~ twice the carbon content of natural gas

CO2 Equivalents (lbs/MMBtu)

• Natural Gas – 117 lbs

• Propane – 139 lbs

• Distillate Fuels – 162 lbs

• Residual Fuels – 174 lbs

• Coal (BC) – 205 lbs

• Coal (AC) – 227 lbs

Targeting Energy Efficiency Going Backwards to Move Forward

“Back-cast” or reverse-engineer solutions with a

specific targeted performance outcome in mind

ISO 50001, Energy Star, etc. assist in setting targets

Create portfolio of existing / emerging technologies

that meet the targeted path to objective

Targeting Industrial Energy Efficiency U.S. Industry U.S. DOE ITP / AMO:

Providing training & energy performance evaluations for U.S. industries focused on key energy intensive processes:

Steam

Process Heat

Pumps

Compressors

Motors

Targeting energy intensity reduction of 25% in U.S. industries within the next 10 years

Unlocking Energy Efficiency O&M BEST PRACTICES 10 Steps to Operating Efficiency:

1. Increase Management Awareness

of Facility Operating Efficiency

2. Identify Troubled Systems

3. Commit to Address Worst-

performing System

4. Commit to O.E. for Selected

System

5. Install Metering/Monitoring

of Selected System

6. Commit to Trending

Diagnostic Data from

M+M System

7. Use Trending Data to Select,

“Sell” & Complete OE Project

8. Publish Results

9. Select Next Troubled System

10. Start O.E. Process Over Again

Fund Future Projects from

Previous Energy Savings

DOE BEST PRACTICES: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/technical_assistance/m/steam.html#tipsheets

Optimization Areas with Potential Energy Savings:

Benchmark the Fuel Costs of Thermal Energy (~1%)

Minimize Radiant Losses from Boilers (1.5-5%)

Minimize & Automate Boiler Blow-down (0.5%-1.5%)

Utilize Efficient Burners / Combustion Systems (2-10%)

Minimize Boiler Idling & Short-Cycling Losses (5-10%)

Utilize Feedwater Economizer for Waste Heat Recovery (1-4%)

Utilize Boiler Blow-down Heat Recovery (0.5–2%)

Maintain Clean Water-Side Heat Transfer Surfaces (0-10%)

Implement a Steam Trap Management Program (0-2.5%)

Implement a Steam Leak Program (0-3%)

Reduce Steam Pressure of Steam Distribution System (0-3%)

Improve Insulation on Steam Distribution System (0-3%)

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/technical_assistance/m/steam.html

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Benchmark Energy Costs

EXAMPLE:

Operating pressure = 150 psig

Feedwater Temp. = 150oF

Fuel Type = Natural Gas

Fuel Unit Cost = $4.00/MMBtu

Cost of Steam ($/1000 lbs.):

($4.00/MMBtu / 106 Btu/MMBtu)

x 1,000 lbs (cost measure)

x 1,078 lbs/Btu (energy – steam)

/ 0.857 (combustion efficiency)

= $5.03 / 1000 lbs. steam

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Minimize Radiant Losses

EXAMPLE:

Radiant Surface Area = 60 ft2

Liquid Temperature = 170oF

Ambient Temperature = 75oF

Operating Hours = 3,000 hrs


Total Heat Loss:

1,566 Btu/hr X 60 ft2

= $93,960 Btu/hr

Annual Energy Savings:

93,960 Btu/hr X 2000 hrs

= 282 MMBtu /yr X $4.00/MMBtu

= $1,128 / yr

200 BHP

Firetube

Boiler

200 BHP

Miura

Boiler

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Minimize Boiler Blow-down

EXAMPLE: (Economic Impact)

M/U Water Savings = 2,312 lb/hr

Thermal Energy Savings = 311Btu/lb

Boiler Operation = 8,760 hrs/yr


Water/Sewer/Chemical = $0.005/gal

Fuel Savings:

2,312 lbs/hr X 8,760 hrs/yr X 311 Btu/lb

X $4.00/MMBtu / (0.80 X 106 Btu/MMBtu)

= $31,443 / year

Water & Chemical Savings:

2,312 lbs/hr X 8,760 hrs/yr X $0.005/gal /

8.34 lb/gal = $12,142 / year

Total Cost Savings:

$31,443 (fuel savings) +

$12,142 (water / chemical savings)

= $43,585 / year

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Minimize Boiler Blow-down

EXAMPLE: (Environmental Impact)

Steam Pressure = 150 psig

Boiler Capacity = 100,000 lbs/hr


Water / Sewer / Treatment Costs =

$0.005 / gallon

Blow-down Reduction = 8% to 6%

Boiler Feedwater:

Initial = 100,000 lbs/hr / (1-0.08)

= 108,695 lbs/hr

Final = 100,000 lbs/hr / (1-0.06)

= 106,383 lbs/hr

M/U Water Savings = 2,312 lbs/hr

Boiler Water Enthalpy = 338.5 Btu/lb

For 60oF M/U Water = 28 Btu/lb

Thermal Energy Savings =

338.5 Btu/lb – 28 Btu/lb

= 310.5 Btu/lb

Reduced CO2 Emissions =

0.037 lbs CO2 / lb steam

= 37 lbs CO2 / 1,000 lbs steam

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Automatic Blow-down Controls

EXAMPLE:

Natural Gas-Fired Boiler

Boiler Output = 100,000 lbs/hr


M/U Water Temperature = 60oF

Boiler Efficiency = 80%

Water/Sewer/Chemical =

$0.004/gallon

Blow-down Reduction = 2%

Energy Savings:

= $54,400 (fuel savings)

+ $8,400 (water/chemical savings)

= $62,800 / year

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Efficient Burners

EXAMPLE:



Annual Fuel Input = 500,000 MMBtu


Existing Burner Efficiency = 79%

Burner Efficiency Improvement = 2%

Energy Cost Savings:

= 500,000 MMBtu/yr X $4.00/MMBtu X (1 – 79/81)

= $49,380 / year

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Efficient Combustion Systems

EXAMPLE:


Operating Pressure = 150 psig


Annual Input = 500,000 MMBtu

Stack Gas Excess Air = 44.9%

Net Flue Gas Temp. = 400oF

Existing Combustion Efficiency =

78.2% (E1)

Reduce Net Excess Air - 9.5%

Reduce Net Flue Gas Temp. - 300oF

Improved Combustion Efficiency =

83.1% (E2)

Assume Fuel Unit Cost = $4.00/MMBtu


= Fuel Consumption X (1-E1/E2) X Fuel Cost

= 29,482 MMBtu/yr X $4.00/MMBtu

= $117,928 / year

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Minimize Boiler Short-cycling

EXAMPLE:

Existing Boiler Output = 1,500 BHP (~50.2 MMBtu/hr)

Existing Cycle Efficiency = 72.7% (E1)

Replacement Boiler Output = 600 BHP (~20 MMBtu/hr)

Replacement Boiler Cycle Efficiency = 80% (E2)

Annual Boiler Fuel Consumption = 200,000 MMBtu


Fractional Fuel Savings:

= 1 – (E1 / E2) = 1 – (72.7 / 80) x 100

= 9%

Annual Fuel Savings:

= 200,000 MMBtu X 0.09 X $8.00/MMBtu

= $72,000 / year

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Waste Heat Recovery via Economizer

EXAMPLE:

Existing Steam Boiler



Pre-heated Feed-Water = 117oF

Stack Temperature = 500oF

Operating Hours = 8,400 hrs/yr


Annual Energy Cost Savings:

= 45,000 lb/hr X (1,195.5 – 84.97) Btu/lb

= 50 MMBtu/hr = 4.6 MMBtu/hr (Recoverable Heat)

= 4.6 MMBtu/hr X $4.00/MMBtu X 8,400 hr/yr / 0.80

= $193,200 / year

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Water Quality Management

EXAMPLE:

Annual Fuel = 450,000 MMBtu


Operating Hours = 8,000 hrs


Scale Thickness = 1/32”

Operating Cost Increase:

450,000 MMBtu / yr

x $4.00 / MMBtu

x 0.07 (% energy loss, scale)

= $126,000 / yr

Excessive Scale vs. Efficiency Reduction:

1/8” thick = 25% efficiency reduction

1/4” thick = 40% efficiency reduction

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Steam Trap Management

EXAMPLE:

Existing Failed Steam Trap


Operating Hours = 8,760 hrs/yr

Fuel Unit Cost = $5.00/klbs

Assume 1/8” dia. Trap Orifice

Stuck Open:

Steam Loss = 75.8 lbs/hr


= 75.8 lbs/hr X 8,760 hrs/yr

X $5.00/klbs

= $3,320 / year

Optimization BEST PRACTICES: Insulate Steam Piping

EXAMPLE:

Existing Steam System Survey

Un-insulated Steam Pipe:

– 1,120 ft of 1” pipe @ 150 psig

– 175 ft of 2” pipe @ 150 psig

– 250 ft of 4” pipe @ 15 psig

Annual Heat Loss:

1” line: 1,120 ft X 285 MMBtu/yr per 100 ft = 3,192 MMBtu/yr

2” line: 175 ft X 480 MMBtu/yr per 100 ft = 840 MMBtu/yr

4” line: 250 ft X 415 MMBtu/yr per 100 ft = 1,037 MMBtu/yr

Total Heat Loss = 5,069 MMBty/yr

Annual Cost Savings (80% efficient boiler, 90% efficient insulation):

0.90 X $4.00/MMBtu X 5,069 MMBtu/yr / 0.80

= $22,810 / year

Understanding Boiler Efficiency: Accounting for Load Variability

“Combustion Efficiency” (Ec)

• The effectiveness of the burner to ignite the fuel

• Per ANSI Z21.13 test protocol

“Thermal Efficiency” (Et) • The effectiveness of heat transfer from

the flame to the water

• Per the Hydronics Institute BTS-2000 test protocol

• Recognized by ASHRAE 90.1 standard

“Boiler Efficiency”

• Often substituted for combustion or thermal efficiency

“Fuel-to-Steam Efficiency” (A.K.A. Catalog Efficiency)

• The effectiveness of a boiler operating at maximum

capacity and a steady state, with flue losses and

radiation losses taken into account.

Understanding Boiler Efficiency: Accounting for Load Variability Current boiler efficiency metrics are limited to

best-case operation (steady-state)

Current boiler efficiency metrics are limited to

snapshot-in-time vs. annualized measurement

At any given moment, various boilers may be:

• Off and isolated (via modular, on-demand system)

• Off, but with through-flow from active boilers

• Operating at steady-state high fire

• Modulating

• Operating at steady-state low fire

• Cycling

• Idling

Incre

ased

Effic

ien

cy

Understanding Boiler Efficiency:

Fuel-to-Steam vs. In-Service Efficiency

Understanding operating efficiency = tracking energy losses

FUEL IN

Radiation Loss

Exhaust Loss

Start-up Losses

Blow-down Losses

Loss @ High Turndown

Radiation Loss @ Idle / Stand-by

Pre- & Post-purge Losses

IN-SERVICE

EFFICIENCY

Fuel-to-Steam Efficiency Changing Loads

Industrial Energy Assessment DOE Technical Resources DOE Regional Industrial Assessment Centers:

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/tech_assistance/m/iacs_locations.html



Optimization First Steps: Energy Assessment & Benchmarking You are not managing what you do not measure…

Select assessment method based on

targeted objectives

Select assessment period to capture standard

operating cycle characteristic of process

Plan on sampling one full additional operating

cycle as a back-check to primary data

Utilize measurement interval synergized with

production profile (process start/stop intervals)

Review past 24 months utilities statements to

account for seasonal, etc. load characteristics

not captured during assessment period

Courtesy of ENERGY

STAR Program Guide

Optimization First Steps: Energy Assessment & Benchmarking Meter existing equipment & collect data on

current consumption, including:

• Gas & water consumption rates

• Gas pressure at the meter

• Gas temperature at the meter

• Feedwater temperature

• Steam pressure

• Blow-down rate (via Conductivity)

Review utilities statements for seasonal load

variations / production peaks

Size loads and determine load “profile”

(high-low loads) correlated to production

Aggregate over-shoot & part-load operation

into overall net operating efficiency relative to

production profile

Courtesy of ENERGY

STAR Program Guide

Operating Efficiency Analysis: Benchmarking Tools Utilize mass balance approach to account for all

inputs & outputs:

Tank

Existing Boiler

Gas

Steam

Water

Gas Meter

Water Meter

Blow-down

Data Logger

Radiant Losses

Steam Demand

Boiler Operating Efficiency: Tracking Results Benchmarked performance of 25 boilers via assessment data:

Average Operating Efficiency = 66% at 33% average load factor

Every 5 m in.

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

0:000:351:101:452:202:553:304:054:405:155:506:257:007:358:108:459:209:5510:3011:0511:4012:1512:5013:2514:0014:3515:1015:4516:2016:5517:3018:0518:4019:1519:5020:2521:0021:3522:1022:4523:2023:55

PSI

HPExample Steam Load Profile

Benchmarking to Save Energy: In-Service Efficiency (ISE) Study

Metered ISE study provides

detailed load profile

illustrating process usage

impact on steam demand

Graphing load profile allows

for high level of precision in

“right sizing” of boiler

system optimized for

highest efficiency

Executive summary

provides estimated energy /

cost savings, O&M savings

& reduced CO2 emissions

Steam Cost Calculator: TCO (Total Cost of Operation) Analysis

Fuel Cost

Water Cost

Sewer Cost

Electricity Costs

Chemical Costs

Service Contract

O&M Costs

Future CO2 Costs

Projected

Lifecycle Costs

Leveraging Assessment Data: Natural Gas Rebate Programs Utilize assessment data to justify project savings for EE rebates

Growing list of state & utilities sponsored rebate programs…

Refer to www.dsireusa.org

http://www.dsireusa.org/

U. S. Boiler Inventory: Age Distribution U.S. Boilers – Age Distribution of Boilers > 10 MMBtu/hr:

C/I Boiler Inventory – 163,000 units w/ capacity of 2.7 Trillion Btu/hr

Optimization opportunity via implementing “state-of-the-shelf”

Pre-1964 1964 -

1978

Bo

iler

Cap

acity

(MM

Btu

/ h

r)

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

600,000

400,000

200,000

1969 -

1973

1974 -

1978

1979 -

1983

1984 -

1988

1989 -

1993

1994 -

1998

1999 -

2002

47% of existing inventory – 40+ yrs. old

76% of existing inventory – 30+ yrs. Old

Conventional Boilers – “Gap Analysis”: Opportunities for Innovation

Design Limitations of Conventional Boilers:

• Physical Size / Footprint

• Excessive Warm-up Cycle

• Excessive Radiant Losses

• Sub-optimal Response to Changing Loads

• Sub-optimal System Turn-Down Capability

• Sub-optimal Overall Operating Efficiency /

Load Management Capability

• Innate Safety Issues via Explosive Energy

• Lack of Integrated Emissions Controls

• Lack of Integrated Heat Recovery

• Lack of Integrated Controls / Automation

• Lack of Integrated Online Monitoring

Modular Boiler Technology: Filling Performance “Gaps” Reduction in system footprint per equivalent

output / improved asset mgmt flexibility

Reduction in system load profile-specific

energy losses via optimized load-matching

capability

Integrated heat recovery via packaged

feedwater economizer

Optimized heat recovery via low-temperature DA-

less feedwater system

Optimized low-emissions burner design

Integrated online monitoring dashboard system

for real-time mgmt of boiler controls & water

treatment systems (i.e., 24/7 system

commissioning)

Boiler System Operating Efficiency: Tracking Performance

Operating Efficiency Comparison:

Modular systems provide overall higher operating energy efficiency

with greater consistency from low to high LF

100

20 Load (%)

In-S

erv

ice E

ffic

iency (

%)

80

60

40

20

40 60 80 100

Modular System

Watertube Boiler

Firetube Boiler

Optimize system operating efficiency to maximize

efficiency credits in support of compliance

Optimize system operating efficiency to minimize

economic impact of MACT compliance

Leverage system modularity to minimize boiler

emissions “footprint” by strategic system

configuration

Leverage compact modular design to capture

supplemental energy savings by short-circuiting

existing aged infrastructure via point-of-use

configuration

Utilize low-emissions combustion technologies to

avoid impact of supplemental emissions mitigation

(FGR / SCR)

Modular Boiler Technology: Emissions Compliance

Managing Energy Load Variability: “Right-Sizing” Optimization

Understand load profile for typical production cycle

Quantify disparities between utility output & process needs

• Utility Design Safety Factor (1.33 – 1.5 ~2% EE Potential)

• Avg. LF over typical production cycle (LF<60% = EE Potential)

• Aggregate over-shoot + part-load intervals to identify potential ECM’s

Investigate opportunities to mitigate sub-optimal LF via scheduling

time

Max.

Capacity

(100% LF)

loa

d

Avg.

Output

(~33% LF)

DS

F

Max.

Output

(50-66% LF)

Managing Energy Load Variability: Conventional Systems

Conventional boiler systems expend large amounts of energy to

meet variable load conditions

Design limitations of conventional boilers prevent them from

efficiently responding to every-changing load demands

Result: Significant wasted energy & emissions at load swings

Single

1000 BHP

Boiler

time

loa

d

Managing Energy Load Variability: Modular On-Demand Systems

Modular on-demand boiler systems reduce energy consumption

required to meet variable loads by dividing the output capacity

among multiple small units (like gears in a transmission)

Modular systems are designed specifically to meet varying load

demands

Result: Significantly reduced energy & emissions at load swings

5-200 BHP

Modular Boilers

time

loa

d

Optimized Energy Management via Modularity Modular design concept:

200HP

TDR=1:3

Step(H,L)

200HP

TDR=1:3

Step(H,L)

200HP

TDR=1:3

Step(H,L)

200HP

TDR=1:3

Step(H,L)

200HP

TDR=1:3

Step(H,L)

Optimized Energy Management via Modularity Modular design concept:

Each boiler unit acts like a single piston in

the overall boiler system

1000HP boiler system

TDR=1:15

(15 steps of modulation)

Modular Capacity Range: Flexibility + Efficiency Boiler Types & General Capacity Ranges

Modular – Point-of-Use to District Energy Capacities

Bo

iler

Cap

acity

(MM

Btu

/ h

r)

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

Firetube

Boilers

Small

Watertube

Boilers

Large

Watertube

Boilers

Stoker

Boilers

Fluidized

Bed

Boilers

Pulverized

Coal

Boilers

MIU

RA

B

oile

rs

Max. Individual

Boiler Capacity

(+/- 10 MMBtu/hr

or 10,350 lbs/hr)

Multiple Boiler

Installation to

Meet Specific

Demand

(Multiple Boilers &

Controllers)

Max. Multi-Unit

Boiler Capacity w/

Single Controller

(+/- 150 MMBtu/hr

or 150,000 lbs/hr)

Modular Boiler Plant Configuration: Optimized load matching / management

Potential for hybrid base load / peaking

Optimized space utilization via compact

footprint

Optimized flexibility in capacity

expansion via modularity

Optimized N+1 via integrated back-up

capacity

Conventional Approach: Primary + Back-up

Modular Approach: Integrated Back-up

Reduce purchased capacity by ~ 30% while also

complying with N+1 requirements

200 BHP

Modularity = Flexibility: Optimize System N+1

200 BHP

600 BHP 600 BHP

200 BHP

Primary N+1

200 BHP

Primary N+1 Total Capacity = 1,200 BHP

Total Capacity = 800 BHP

Increasing Efficiency = Reducing Losses: Radiant Losses With energy efficiency, size matters…

Increase efficiency via reduced boiler thermal footprint

200 BHP

Firetube

Boiler

200 BHP

Modular

Boiler

1,000+

Gallons

65+

Gallons VS

Smaller Boiler Surface Area =

Significant Reduction

in Radiant Losses

FUELIN

IN-SERVICE

EFFICIENCY

Fuel-to-Steam Efficiency

Increasing Efficiency = Reducing Losses: Radiant Losses Radiant Losses: 12 MMBtu/hr input at 100% output

Option A – Conventional System:

Single 12 MMBtu/hr unit input

Rated at 2% radiant loss

240,000 Btu/hr energy loss

Option B – Modular System:

3 x 4 MMBtu/hr unit input

Rated at 0.5% radiant loss

3 x 20,000 Btu/hr losses =


FUELIN

IN-SERVICE

EFFICIENCY


2%

0.5%

0.5%

0.5%

Increasing Efficiency = Reducing Losses: Radiant Losses Radiant Losses: 12 MMBtu/hr input at 33% output

Option A – Conventional System:

Single 12 MMBtu/hr unit at 33% =

4 MMBtu/hr input


Results in 6% total radiant loss

Option B – Modular System:

3 x 4 MMBtu/hr units (only 1 operating)

1 x 20,000 Btu/hr losses =


Only 0.5% total radiant loss

FUELIN

IN-SERVICE

EFFICIENCY


6%

0%

0%

0.5%

Increasing Efficiency = Reducing Losses: Exhaust Losses Utilize feed-water economizer for built-in

waste heat recovery

Feed-water economizers increase efficiency by

capturing waste exhaust gases to preheat feed-

water entering the boiler

Boiler efficiency can be increased by 1% for

every 40oF decrease in stack gas temperature

FUELIN

IN-SERVICE

EFFICIENCY


Enhanced Heat Recovery: Temperature Neutral Water Treatment Eco-friendly Silicate-based water treatment

Eliminates need for high temperature feed-water

(i.e., DA tank) to activate chemical treatment

Provides increased boiler efficiency

by +1-2% via reduced blow-down & low

temperature feed-water

Reduces boiler chemical treatment costs

due to more effective tube protection &

computer controlled chemical feed system

Reduces maintenance issues related to

constant monitoring & adjustment of

boiler water chemistry

Reduces boiler performance issues such as

feed-water pump cavitation, increasing pump

efficiency by +10-20%

FUELIN

IN-SERVICE

EFFICIENCY


Increasing Efficiency = Reducing Losses: Start-up Losses

FUELIN

IN-SERVICE

EFFICIENCY


Thermal shock - primary constraint on

boiler performance

Conventional boiler performance is limited by

thermal stress resulting in inefficiency by

requiring slow start-up & perpetual idling

Firetube boilers: 60-90 min warm-up cycle &

must remain idling in stand-by mode

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

0

(min)

20

40

60

80

100

(psi)

On-Demand Boiler

Coil-tube Boiler

Fire-tube Boiler

Increasing Efficiency = Reducing Losses: Losses at High Turn-down Modular boiler system:

Sequential boiler staging via “master” & “slave”

controllers for precise load matching capability

MP1 (master)

MT1 (slaves) Twisted pair cable

FUELIN

IN-SERVICE

EFFICIENCY


Online Monitoring / Management: “Dashboard” System Stand-alone online monitoring

system that interfaces with boiler

control system as thermal energy

management “dashboard”

Provides 24/7 online M&T/ M&V

online maintenance system

Real-time 24/7 operation,

fuel/water consumption,

efficiency & emissions

tracking capabilities

Communicates with operations

staff via workstation interface,

PDA, email alerts

Provides monthly reports

ＥＲ

internet

Web Server Client PC

Local

network

Online Monitoring / Management: “Dashboard” System 24/7 Real-time Operational Parameters:

• Firing Rate

• Steam Pressure

• Scale Monitor

• High Limit

• Flue Gas Temp

• Feedwater Temp

• Flame Voltage

• Next Blow-down

• Surface B/down

• Conductivity

• Date / Time

Complete Fully Integrated Boiler Plant

Typical integrated modular, on-demand boiler plant

Reducing Boiler “Footprint”

20% -

70%

Physical Footprint:

• Reduced space requirements

• Reduced energy plant construction costs

• Reduced boiler “hardware”

Energy Footprint:

• Reduced energy consumption / wasted energy

• Reduced explosive energy

• Reduced embodied energy

Environmental Footprint

• Reduced consumption of natural resources

• Reduced harmful emissions

• Reduced carbon footprint

20%

60%

Case Studies: Chemical Industry Fuji-Hunt Chemicals (Tennessee)

Boiler Upgrade – (2) EX-200 BHP units

Placed into service: 2011

Actual System Efficiency Improvement:

+24%

Estimated annual fuel cost savings: $165,000 / yr (370,000 therms / yr)

Estimated annual O&M cost savings:

$107,000 / yr

Project Simple Pay-back:

1.85 yrs

Estimated annual reduced CO2 emissions: 1,850 metric tons CO2 / yr

Jason Smith, LEED A.P. (770) 916-1695 Office

(678) 939-7630 Cell

[email protected]

Q u e s t i o n s :

mailto:[email protected]