Chemical Processing - November 2007 - (Page 17)

EnErgy SavEr << Put energy into people issues it’s time for a little industrial energy waste amnesty A lot of people in the chemicAls industry are afraid to admit that they waste energy. consider the typical comment, “We are already as efficient as we can be.” top managers, especially, have no practical choice but to say this. if a facility manager says “sure, we have a number of inefficiencies, and they’ve accumulated under my watch,” how long can he expect to stay employed? Admitting to energy waste is an embarrassment with potentially dire consequences. Wasted energy is wasted money — a cost that the u.s. chemicals industry can no longer afford to ignore. the efficient use of steam, process heating, compressed air and other common plant utilities is the key to saving energy and money. this is a human endeavor as much as it’s technical. the latter should be straightforward — there’s a ton of and opportunities force facility managers and their staffs to rethink their approaches to energy use. depending on the facility, 30% to 50% of the potential energy savings can come from better management of current assets and operating procedures (see www.eere.energy.gov/industry/pdfs/energy_opps_analysis.pdf and www. steamingahead.org/library/enbridge05.pdf). industry’s decision-makers need to be made aware of the benefits and the hurdles to energy efficiency. specifically: • top managers must recognize and untangle organizational barriers that prevent departments within their facilities from collaborating to achieve potential energy savings. for example, it’s common for equipment operators to never see invoices for fuel and power consumed by their department. Accounting staff may not fully understand how energy consumption is related to invoices they review. disconnects like this show how energy waste can go unchecked. • finance people need to understand the monetary impact of energy improvements. financial payback analysis often fails to account for energy improvements’ indirect impact on productivity, safety, product quality, and other non-energy benefits. • facility maintenance staff need access to training and analytical tools that will help them to diagnose energy problems and evaluate solutions. • many procurement professionals need a better understanding of energy use and its relationship to equipment selection and operations. equipment purchased at the lowest initial cost will often prove to be more costly to own over its economic life, due to excessive operating and maintenance requirements. procurement directors need to develop total-cost-of-ownership criteria. revised procurement specifications can prevent decisions that inadvertently erode energy efficiency. engineering and procurement staff can collaborate to make standards for energy-efficient equipment purchases. they can establish a list of commonly-replaced equipment that’s preapproved to meet efficiency standards. this list can be a reference point both for staff seeking to order replacement equipment as well as for vendors who serve the facility. CP Christopher Russell, contributing editor CRussell@Putman.net http://www.energypathfinder.com, blog: http://energypathfinder.blogspot.com november 2007 • 17 Energy solutions often require unprecedented coordination. technical how-to references available, especially at www. eere.energy.gov/industry. But all of those resources are useless if people aren’t willing to admit they need them. manufacturing leaders need to declare “amnesty” for plant personnel who are on the front lines of energy use. people shouldn’t risk losing their jobs because of yesterday’s energy decisions. these causes took time to manifest, and are never limited to one individual’s actions. similarly, energy solutions often require unprecedented coordination of people across facility departments. effective energy improvements really depend on the quality of management systems. most industrial facilities, as well as their production processes and procedures, were designed when energy was relatively cheap, and therefore not a strategic concern to business managers. certain work habits evolved on the facility floor that saved time and effort and had little financial consequence when energy costs were less significant. however, the trade-offs between time and money change as energy prices escalate and become more volatile. equipment efficiency and reliability deteriorate through years of use. At the same time, new, higher-efficiency replacement equipment becomes available. these changing conditions www.chemicalprocessing.com http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry/pdfs/energy_opps_analysis.pdf http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry/pdfs/energy_opps_analysis.pdf http://www.steamingahead.org/library/enbridge05.pdf http://www.steamingahead.org/library/enbridge05.pdf http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry http://www.energypathfinder.com http://energypathfinder.blogspot.com http://www.chemicalprocessing.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Chemical Processing - November 2007

Chemical Processing - November 2007 Contents From the Editor ChemicalProcessing.com Field Notes In Process Energy Saver Compliance Advisor PAT isn't Standing Pat Pursue the Perfect Plant Eliminate Exchanger Tubing Troubles Portable Conveyor Speeds Paint Production Process Puzzler Plant InSites Equipment & Services Product Spotlight/Classifieds Ad Index End Point

Chemical Processing - November 2007

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.