Leveraging best practices & emerging technologies to optimize industrial process heating
-
Upload
tnenergy -
Category
Technology
-
view
463 -
download
2
Transcript of 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
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%)
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
Fuel Unit Cost = $4.00/MMBtu
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
Fuel Unit Cost = $4.00/MMBtu
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
Fuel Unit Cost = $4.00/MMBtu
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
Steam Pressure = 150 psig
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:
Natural Gas-Fired Boiler
Boiler Output = 50,000 lbs/hr
Annual Fuel Input = 500,000 MMBtu
Fuel Unit Cost = $4.00/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:
Natural Gas-Fired Boiler
Operating Pressure = 150 psig
Boiler Output = 45,000 lbs/hr
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
Energy Cost Savings:
= 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
Fuel Unit Cost = $4.00/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
Boiler Capacity = 45,000 lbs/hr
Steam Pressure = 150 psig
Pre-heated Feed-Water = 117oF
Stack Temperature = 500oF
Operating Hours = 8,400 hrs/yr
Fuel Unit Cost = $4.00/MMBtu
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
Boiler Capacity = 45,000 lbs/hr
Operating Hours = 8,000 hrs
Fuel Unit Cost = $4.00/MMBtu
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
Steam Pressure = 150 psig
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
Energy Cost Savings:
= 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
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 =
60,000 Btu/hr energy loss
FUELIN
IN-SERVICE
EFFICIENCY
Fuel-to-Steam 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
240,000 Btu/hr energy loss
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 =
20,000 Btu/hr energy loss
Only 0.5% total radiant loss
FUELIN
IN-SERVICE
EFFICIENCY
Fuel-to-Steam 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
Fuel-to-Steam 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
Fuel-to-Steam Efficiency
Increasing Efficiency = Reducing Losses: Start-up Losses
FUELIN
IN-SERVICE
EFFICIENCY
Fuel-to-Steam 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
Fuel-to-Steam 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
Q u e s t i o n s :