4

Framework for Sustainable

Energy Reduction

With a good strategy in place, it needs to be implemented to reduce energy

consumed. There are many choices for tools, techniques and technology
available in the market to reduce energy use.
There are many articles, advertisements and leaflets marketing ‘new and
improved’ techniques and technologies promoting better or higher energy
efficiencies. Each technique has been developed based on its own set of
assumptions. Each has its own advantages, strengths and a fair share of failures.
How do we choose? Which techniques will guarantee success?
To borrow a phrase from Michael Porter, ‘execution [of a plan] is about
carrying out strategic choices made [by the management]’. ‘Practices that work
well in one company may [and may also not] have the same effect in another
company’ (Rosenzweig, 2007: 170, 174).
Figure 4.1 shows a model for energy efficiency maturity. It is similar to the
waste management hierarchy model. As the company moves upwards towards
each step, an increase in knowledge of the specific energy systems, trust and
accountability and capital expenditure is required in order to specify and
implement these improvement projects. The energy reduction potential will
also be correspondingly larger. This framework is developed to identify and
prioritise actions to reduce and eliminate the background noise described in
Chapter 3 and to generate the biggest energy reduction with the lowest capital
cost.
Energy savings can come from all plant machinery within a business. It is
not limited to any specific piece of equipment. In the market, there are many
consultants and suppliers that specialise in specific areas of energy savings in
utility systems: steam, compressed air, cooling water, chilled water, motors and
drives, and power quality. This is purely due to utilities being the most common
denominator in many businesses. The best practices to each of these systems
would be similar from one industry to another. There is a lot of literature on
best practices published in the market and online.
48 E n e r gy M a n a g eme n t i n B u s i n e s s

• Integrate several process and/or energy streams

• Improve the process
Integraon • Apply new technology

• Apply more efficient technology

• Use packings in cooling tower to lower temperature
Modificaon and improve efficiency

• Variable speed drives for motors

• Adapve and Predicve Controls
Control System • Opmal Load Scheduling

• Proper maintenance
• Economic insulaon
Good Housekeeping • Stop compressed air leakage
• Appropriate excess air in boiler
• Fire Fighng
• Minimal Documentaon
Reacve • Reacve

Figure 4.1 Energy efficiency maturity model

There are also some consultants and suppliers who specialise in less common
areas such as reliability, furnaces, and distillation and separation systems,
while others specialise in pushing the envelope of modern technology: advance
process control, dynamic simulation, computational dynamics. There are also
some consultants and suppliers whose capabilities are process or machine
specific.
To implement a successful energy reduction programme, managers and
engineers must recognise the fact that each consultant and supplier has their
strengths and limitations. The key is to implement projects while not losing sight
of the overall objective and the effect of each project on the other plant machinery.
Improving energy efficiency and reducing energy cost is also not just about
implementing best practices. Implementing best practices requires a certain
mindset involving shared company goals, company culture and proven results.
Lack of best practices is often not the only reason for poor plant performance
or high energy cost.
Commitment from the management to allocate resources and to take action
toward improving efficiency is required. A team can be formed to assist and
support the management by understanding the quantity of energy used in the
plant; the strength and weaknesses of implementing and sustaining an energy
reduction programme; the needs of the business, and by anticipating any likely
barriers to implementation.
When this is complete, the management can work with and via the
team to develop an energy management policy statement, set objectives and
 F r a me wo r k f o r S u s ta i n a b l e E n e rgy Re d u c t i o n 49

targets and prepare detailed action plans for their implementation. Roles and
responsibilities should be allocated to prioritise improvement actions and
investment requirements. Barriers to implementation need to be resolved.
Once improvement programmes are implemented, they need to be
continually monitored and controlled. A progress review needs to be put in
place for continual feedback, and continuously improved. Frequently, all of
the projects will not be implemented as a one-off investment and/or achieve
full savings in one step. The team will need to reassess the energy requirements
and repeat the improvement cycle as illustrated in Figure 4.2. The concept of
management systems is developed in Chapter 16.
A well-designed energy management and energy reduction programme can
save significant amounts of capital expenditure. The team’s challenge would
be to select a pathway forward for maximum effectiveness and efficiency. This
will involve selecting the right task and performing the task well. The easiest

Engage Whole Organisaon

Manage Resistance for Change
Allocate Appropriate Resources
Management Reporng
Quanfy Energy Usage
Define Objecve and Targets
Commit Define Responsibilies
Idenfy Management Strength and
Weaknesses
Analyse Stakeholder Needs
Understand Ancipate Barriers to Implementaon

Carry Out the Audit

Process
Review Progress
Plan Distribute Audit
Findings
Implement Seek Connual
Improvement
Develop Dra Acon
Plan
Develop a Policy Iniate Priority Acons and
Statement Measure Investments
Set Objecves and Carry Out Training and Raise
Targets Awareness
Prepare Detailed Acon Integrate energy into Business
Plans Processes
Allocate Roles and Overcome Barriers to
Responsibilies Implementaon
Review Improvements Measure Improvements
Apply Correcve Acons Document

Compliance with Legislaon, Business

Requirements, and Management Systems

Figure 4.2 Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle

50 E n e r gy M a n a g eme n t i n B u s i n e s s

and most obvious would be to start with the cheapest and most cost effective
opportunities, i.e., the ‘low-hanging fruit’.
For many manufacturing plants and commercial buildings, good
housekeeping is a starting point to bring large energy variation under control.
Energy reduction projects should be aimed at identifying and reducing the
observed energy variation as shown in Figure 3.3.
Energy reduction opportunities classified as housekeeping include the
reduction in wastage, leaks, machinery idle time, production rate losses,
untended taps and hoses. It also applies to using simple and readily available
best practices such as implementing better cleaning methods, using sprays in
place of ‘fill and drain’, and using a vacuum cleaner instead of a compressed air
blower. Investment in employee education and training to increase awareness
of and the need for energy efficiency should be complemented by the adoption
of a zero tolerance policy for inefficiencies and ineffective use of utilities.
The rewards for good housekeeping in a business are widely recognised
but rarely practiced. The advantages include best return on expenditure, low
(or on some cases no) capital investment and less apparent energy wastage.
There is no threat to operations or processes as the risks involved are minimal.
However, it requires a constant effort to maintain high standards. In practice,
money-saving housekeeping has a habit of disappearing over time. A good
baseline for management control is essential and should be based on consistency
and the smallest energy variation in energy data. There is little point looking
for other energy savings unless housekeeping is under control.
The next category of energy saving measure is classified as control systems.
Energy reduction projects in this category further reduce the energy variations
seen during the housekeeping phase by introducing better operating conditions
for existing energy users and utilities. A thorough examination of energy and
utilities efficiency, system half-life etc. is introduced at this stage. The aim will
be to tighten the controls of existing processes and utilities, requiring them to
operate closer to the control limits. This will maximise efficiency, reduce excess
usage, increase cycles of concentration, reduce blow down. Better control and
measurement systems may be commissioned at this stage to facilitate accurate
readings and track improvements. High efficiency motors, soft starts and VSD
are also included at this phase.
There will be a higher investment required at this phase. The corresponding
rewards for tighter operating control systems are reduced energy and utilities
usage and higher process efficiency. However, as the energy reduction
opportunities now involve process and manufacturing operations, they may
cause other problems that affect product quality. For a well-designed and
implemented energy reduction programme, the impact of these problems is
small, identified early in its implementation and can be rectified. It requires
 F r a me wo r k f o r S u s ta i n a b l e E n e rgy Re d u c t i o n 51

more supervision and management of these projects and the associated

measurement and monitoring system than the housekeeping phase.
Good housekeeping and control systems are typically implemented at a
unit operations level, i.e., boilers, compressor trains, distillation trains etc. The
relative energy savings potential and its cost of implementation are shown in
Figure 4.3.

Machine, Plant, or
Site Level
Energy Reducon
Site Level
ALTERNATIVE PROCESS
Plant
Level

INTEGRATION
Machine
Level
MODIFICATION

CONTROL SYSTEMS

HOUSEKEEPING
Cost of Implementaon

Figure 4.3 Energy saving measures and their cost of implementation

When managers and employees are successful in instilling good housekeeping

and implement control systems, the business will be ready to exploit higher
energy reduction opportunities from performing simple process modification
to the existing facility. This will include: the reuse and recycling of thermal
energy, ideally locally; direct use without the need for tanks, pipe work and
pumps; waste heat recovery boilers, pre-heaters and economisers; redesign to
use less energy, e.g., close the open condensate systems, use of new packing in
separation columns.
These energy reduction opportunities can bring about further reduction in
energy consumption, product and raw material recovery. With the modifications
and recycling of energy there may be a better chance to transfer the risk of
contamination from the producing process to the receiving process, resulting
in poorer product quality, contamination with trace materials, scaling, fouling,
corrosion or microbiological growth in the system. It may also make the plant
and machines more complicated to troubleshoot. There will be a need for better
52 E n e r gy M a n a g eme n t i n B u s i n e s s

control and monitoring for all the same problems as identified in the previous
phase, but they are greatly enhanced and become much more apparent and at
a faster pace.
Control systems and process modification are typically, and more commonly,
implemented at the plant level. Further integration of processes and utilities at site
level is the next natural progression for higher energy reduction. Potential areas
for process integration include thermal pinch analysis, process intensification,
optimisation and enhancement, plant de-bottlenecking and uprating.
The advantage of successful process integration projects can be measured
in the value of energy recovered and also in product and raw material savings.
With less energy being consumed, less energy will be wasted. However, it would
inevitably cost more than the other phases described earlier, more equipment
may go wrong and it would be even more complicated to troubleshoot.
Therefore, it would require a good level of management supervision to design
a successful energy reduction programme at this phase and to avoid over
integration of the process.
The highest available form of energy efficiency would be from a step change
perspective by commissioning an alternative and more modern process. This
could range from installing and operating a combined heat and power (CHP)
system, using evaporative cooling, evaporative humidifiers, using renewably
sourced energy, refitting an existing steam reformer with the latest designs and
improvements, to applying dynamic simulation and predictive controls and a
complete change of process technology.
Before applying new technology for a step change in performance, it is essential
to understand where energy should and should not be used. Cost, practicality,
management and risk need to be weighed carefully before sanctioning such an
option. The specific alternative process may not be ‘off the shelf’ and would
require vision, investigation, research and many months of plant trials.
The rewards for using an alternative process are numerous. While the
financial reward may be negative in the short and medium term, it may
give rise to improved operability, reduced health and safety risk, less waste
water, smaller and simpler waste treatment – and may even have a simpler
measurement and control requirement.
One of the risks associated with an alternative process is that it may eventually
change one problem area for another in the process. Poorly considered and
planned alternatives may also be less efficient and/or environmentally poor.
As such, this phase may be best suited for new plants and green developments
rather than in old plants where capital has already been invested.
The exact energy reduction for each business and location will depend
heavily on where they are in the energy efficiency maturity model, where they
want to be and how fast the business wants to close the gap.