Compressed Air Best Practices - September 2008 - (Page 12) | 09/08 Focus Industry FOOD PACKAGING & PROCESSING | CO2 O kW A. Introduction In This food processor and packager is planning an expansion in the next couple of years. Details are unknown as to the future compressed air demands — but expansion is certain. The facility has excellent maintenance procedures but wanted to know if energy costs could be reduced in the com compressed air system, while still keeping an eye on the prospects of future growth. The compressed air system in use at this food processor is a dated system. The average age of the air compressors is 15–20 years old. While these machines are old, they appear to be in good ope operating condition due to good maintenance practices. The control systems, however, of these ma machines do not allow energy costs to be managed. Th The facility is also concerned about the potential presence of oil in the compressed air system. The contaminant removal system (CRS) is old and appears to be undersized. The facility has compressed air come into “indirect contact” with their food products on a regular basis. C onth of the M Air Audit d ompresse uditing a A ackager Food P Processor & Hollar By Lane B. Compressed Air Piping/Distribution Issues The piping system of the plant is adequately sized for the current demand. It is a straight line run from the compressor room to the various points of the facility. A large feed line enters into the individual buildings and then multiple smaller feed lines branch off and go to various air users within each building or site. While this seems to be delivering pressure adequately, all air systems can be improved if they are changed to a loop system. A loop system allows flow from both directions in the event that there is a heavy air user “hoarding the air” before it can reach more distant users. With the boiler room being located so far from the compressor room, this area would be virtually impossible to loop. Initial thoughts would be to use a separate small compressor just for this area, however since there has been additional equipment installed toward the lower end of the system, there is a demand for the air closer to the boiler room and the current configuration will work ok. September Audit of the Month Where: Southern U.S. Industry: Food Processing & Packaging Issues: Energy Cost and Air Quality Audit Type: Compressed Air Supply Side Financial Summary Investment: $57,200 Energy Cost Before Investment: $64,545 Energy Cost After Investment: $35,045 Energy Savings/Year: $29,500 Power Cost/kWh (blended): $0.05 Operating Hours/Year: 8,736 Simple Payback: 1.9 years System Before Audit Air Flow Min/Avg/Max: 36/350/459 scfm Air Pressure Min/Avg/Max: 65/100/107 psig Compressor HP Min/Avg/Max: 28/157/194 bhp Contaminant Removal System: 10–12 psig pressure drop. Potential oil carryover 12 www.airbestpractices.com http://www.airbestpractices.com
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.