for Energy Efficiency Parminder Sandhu, P. Eng

Transcription

1 Certifying Manufacturing Plants for Energy Efficiency Parminder Sandhu, P. Eng

2 Strategic Goals of Plant Certification Fosters an organizational culture of continuous improvement in energy efficiency i Develops a transparent system to validate energy intensity improvements and management practices, and thus Creates a verified record of energy source fuel savings and carbon emission reductions with potential market value that could be recognized both nationally and internationally

3 Benefits of Plant Certification Establishes systematic means to achieve continuous improvement Standards for energy management and system assessments Tools and resources to assist in implementation Process for validation Focus on reducing energy intensity per unit of output

4 Benefits of Plant Certification Helps plants get on the path to improvement by adopting tools and resources Promotes buy-in to energy efficiency Applies to most companies (a wide range of industries) Delivers value to all plants, not just those that pursue certification Creates a transparent way to compare energy efficiency

5 Superior Energy Performance Partnership Collaboration of industry, government, and non-profit organizations Seek to improve the energy intensity of U.S. manufacturing through a series of initiatives. Support Plant Certification program

6 Certifying Plants for Energy Efficiency lant Cer rtification Program Design P Energy Management Standard Performance Criteria- System Assessment Standards Measurement & Verification Protocol Pilot Plant Program To Test Certification Standards d and Overall Certification Process

7 What Is an ANSI-AccreditedAccredited Certified Plant? Complies with ANSI MSE 2000:2008 Energy Management Standard (eventually an ISO standard) Achieves a minimum energy intensity improvement over the past two years May apply System Assessment Standards for energy systems in plant facilities (initially pumping, compressed air, steam, process heating) May use certified practitioners recognized by third party to assist in complying with standards Uses measurement and validation experts recognized by a third party to verify implemented energy savings Uses ANSI-accredited process to achieve third-party plant certification

8 Why an Energy Management Standard? Most energy efficiency in industry is achieved through changes in how energy is managed in an industrial facility, rather than through h installation ti of new technologies; An energy management standard provides a method for integrating ti energy efficiency i into existing industrial i management systems for continuous improvement; All existing and planned energy management standards 1 are compatible with ISO 9000/ ; Companies who have voluntarily adopted an energy management plan (a central feature of an EM standard) have achieved major energy intensity improvements 2. 1 International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 2 Btu/lb of product

9 Business Benefits Implementation of an energy management plan assists a company to: Develop a baseline of energy use Actively managing energy use and costs Reduce emissions without negative effect on operations Continue to improve energy use/product output over time Document savings for internal and external use (e.g. emission credits)

10 Energy Management Results Companies who have used energy management to achieve major energy intensity improvements include: Dow Chemical achieved 22% improvement ($4B savings) between 1994 and 2005, and is now seeking another 25% from 2005 to 2015 United Technologies Corp reduced global GHG emissions by 46% per dollar of revenue from 2001 to 2006, and is now seeking an additional 12% reduction from 2006 to 2010 Toyota s North American (NA) Energy Management Organization has reduced energy use per unit by 23% since 2002; company-wide energy-saving efforts have saved $9.2 million in NA since 1999.

11 Components of an EM Standard d Typical features include: 1. a strategic t plan that t requires measurement, management, and documentation for continuous improvement for energy efficiency; 2. a cross-divisional isional management team led by a representative who reports directly to management and is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the strategic plan; 3. policies and procedures to address all aspects of energy purchase, use, and disposal;

12 Components of an EM Standard d 4. projects to demonstrate continuous improvement in energy efficiency; i 5. creation of an Energy Manual, a living document that evolves over time as additional energy saving projects and policies i are undertaken and documented; d 6. identification of key performance indicators, unique to the company, that are tracked to measure progress; and 7. periodic reporting of progress to management based on these measurements

13 Energy Management Standards d Current Status Several countries already have national energy management standards (Denmark, Ireland, Sweden, US, Thailand, Korea) The EU has developed a regional energy management standard Energy management standards are under development in China, Spain, and Brazil ISO has initiated work on an international energy management standard ( ), with preparatory assistance from the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)

14 ANSI MSE 2000:

15 Toward an International EM Standard March 2007 April 2007 Sept 2007 Feb 2008 April 2008 UNIDO hosted the first meeting to put forward the idea of an energy management standard, sends request to ISO on behalf of participants Request accepted by ISO Secretariat UNIDO initiated a program to foster coordination between developing and developed countries for the development of an international standard (regional meetings, industry surveys) ANSI (U.S.) / ABNT (Brazil) leadership proposal submitted to the ISO Proposal approved by ISO Technical Management Board Preparatory meeting in Beijing hosted by UNIDO and Standardization Administration of China

16 ISO Energy Management Scope Standardization in the field of energy management, including: energy supply, procurement practices for energy using equipment and systems, energy use, and any use-related disposal issues. The standard will also address measurement of current energy usage, and implementation of a measurement system to document, report, and validate continuous improvement in the area of energy management.

17 ISO Project Committee 242 September 8-10, 2008, 1st PC 242 Meeting in Arlington, VA 90 participants p from 25 countries from all regions of the world, as well as UNIDO, which has liaison status Two-year accelerated schedule to have ISO ready for publication by the end of 2010 The future ISO will: Establish a framework for industrial plants, commercial facilities or entire organizations to manage energy Have broad applicability across national economic sectors, potentially influence up to 60 % of the world s energy use.

18 ISO 50001, Energy Management

19 Why System Energy Efficiency Matters Industrial systems include those systems that contribute to industrial production processes, such as: motor systems (pumping, compressed air, and fan), steam systems, and process heating systems. % Manufacturing Energy Use by Type of System 1 Electrochemical - 2% Process Cooling -1% Motor Systems 12% Other Facilities 8% 4% Process Heating 38% Steam 35% Energy Efficiency Improvement Opportunities 20% or more typical for motor systems 10% or more for steam & process heating systems Most plants do not manage these systems for energy efficiency 2 1 Does not include offsite losses MECS plants indicated energy management activities for 6.3% steam, 16,6% compressed air, 7.5% process heating systems

20 Why are These Systems so Inefficient? Most managers are unaware that these systems are energy inefficient System performance is not measured No data = no way to assess performance or performance improvement Management focus on production, not energy efficiency Separate budgets for equipment purchases and operating budgets For energy intensive industries, incremental improvements can be lost in the white noise of total energy use

21 Additional Barriers Resistance to change- both individual and organizational Perceived risk Lack of a consistent organizational structure to effectively manage energy use. Not part of the corporate culture- not a core value Constantly changing environment Production levels and product types evolve over time Trained people move to new jobs Facility engineers have no time to research detailed information on system services Quality of available information varies widely; may have a commercial bias Difficult to make an informed decision among market offerings Providers of quality system assessment services struggle to distinguish themselves in an ill-defined market of poorly informed consumers

22 Building Blocks for System Standards USDOE s BestPractices Well-developed training program for motor, compressed air, fan, pump, steam, and process heating systems System assessment software designed to help consultants and plant personnel to quickly identify opportunities Qualified Specialists- equipment suppliers, consultants, t and highly hl skilled end users experienced and tested in system optimization for their area of specialty Established process for conducting system assessments (Industrial Assessment Centers, others) Compressed Air Challenge - Levels of Assessment State and Regional industrial energy efficiency programs- Focus on Energy (WI), Industrial Energy Efficiency Alliance (Pacific NW)

23 Save Energy Now Initiative The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE): Created initiative in 2006 based on more than a decade of experience in industrial system energy efficiency Trains DOE energy experts to work with plant energy teams to identify opportunities for improving i steam, process heating, pump, or compressed air systems through Energy Savings Assessments (ESAs) Through energy experts, trains plant personnel to apply DOE software analysis tools to identify additional opportunities Recognizes plants with high energy savings resulting from implementation

24 Save Energy Now Results assessments completed Implemented energy savings: TBtu/ $ million Planned energy savings: 27.4 TBtu/$334 million Identified total energy savings: 55.5 TBtu Identified energy cost savings: > $548 million Total potential carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions reduction: 3.6 million metric tons 2 4 years Modify steam turbine operation Use oxygen for combustion Change process steam use 9mo mo. 2 years Heat feed water with boiler blowdown Lower excess oxygen Flue gas heat recovery > 4 years Install CHP system < 9 months Improve insulation Implement steam trap program Clean heat transfer surfaces Estimated Payback Periods for Recommended Actions Identified in 2006

25 What is a System Assessment Standard? System Assessment Standards: Are designed to create a market threshold for industrial energy efficiency assessments from the current body of expert knowledge Provide a standardized framework for conducting assessments of industrial systems Establish minimum requirements and guidance for: organizing and conducting assessments, analyzing the data collected, and reporting and documentation,

26 A System Assessment Standard: Provides greater transparency and higher value to industrial facilities, which will Improve the energy utilization of the industrial facilities; Offer industrial facilities a well-defined path for initiating a process of continuous improvement for energy intensity, and Increase support for implementation of system improvements. Helps define the market for both users and providers of these services

27 System Assessment Portfolio Draft standards and guidance common framework subject to consensus review process. ANSI accreditation through the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME); technical working group tasked with periodic updates Create awareness training on the use of the system assessment standards and guidance Conduct pilot applications of the standards and guidance for each system type Prepare standards of knowledge for individuals to effectively apply each system assessment standard in industrial facilities Create a professional training and certification program specific to each system type, administered i d by a third party

28 Measurement and Verification Protocol Verify results and impacts of energy efficiency projects y p gy y p j Specify parameters required to quantify facility energy efficiency Track energy efficiency/intensity changes over time Build off experience: IPMVP, utility experience, OSHA Star, etc. Balance credibility of validated performance and overall cost to become certified

29 Future Certification Infrastructure Overall Plant Certification Standard Third Party Certifying Organization (TBD) Energy Management Standard System Assessment Standards Energy Management Practitioners System Assessment Practitioners Manufacturing Plants Seeking Certification Measurement & Verification Protocol Measurement & Verification Certifiers

30 Certified Practitioners Third Party Certifying Organization (TBD) Energy Management Practitioners System Assessment Practitioners Manufacturing Plants Seeking Certification Measurement & Verification Certifiers

31 Comprehensive Plant Energy Management Energy Intensity Baselining US manufacturing plants certified based on demonstrated energy intensity improvement Utility, State, Federal Incentives; Carbon Credits Energy Management Standard System Assessment Standards Energy Saving Actions Measurement & Verification ANSI-Accredited 3 rd Party Certifier Recognition & Credits Tools, Training & Assessments

32 Looking Forward: Key Milestones June 2011: National a launch of third- party certification program June 2008: Texas Pilot project begins field testing ANSI energy management standard and system assessment standards May 2009: Select third-party certifying i organization May 2009: Begin field testing of measurement and verification methodology in pilot plants Feb. 2010: First plants are ANSI certified for energy efficiency, based on pilot program results June 2010: Begin training certified practitioners in energy management and system assessments Dec. 2010: ISO Energy Management Standard published; replaces ANSI energy management standard

33 More Information Aimee McKane Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory P.O. Box 790 Latham, NY Paul Scheihing US Department of Energy Washington, DC