New Methodology of Assessing Wasted Energy in Industrial Sector: Assessing Industrial Systems contribution to Thermal Pollution 

Authors

  • Constantin Pitis BC Hydro, 900-4555 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC V5H4T8, Canada

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12974/2311-8741.2013.01.01.3

Keywords:

Benchmarking, Conservation Potential, Energy at Risk, Industrial Systems and Processes, Measurements & Verification, Thermal Pollution, Waste Energy.

Abstract

Thermal Pollution represents “the release into the environment of substances that are innocuous themselves but at a temperature higher than the ambient altering the physical characteristics of the air or water with which they mix” (Science Dictionary). The quantity of the heated air dumped in the atmosphere is intrinsically related to efficiency of industrial systems, processes and industries. Increasing efficiencies of industrial systems, processes and industries will directly reduce the thermal pollution.

In other words, all energy savings obtained by increasing energy efficiency of industrial systems and processes (IS&P) represents avoided Thermal Pollution.

To date, studies of energetic performances of industrial systems and industries have lagged behind those used in the commercial and institutional sectors due to:

Variability and complexity of IS&P,

Variability of material and environmental conditions,

The absence of a large population of comparable data required for a regression-based approach that would enable the normalization of material and environmental conditions, and thus allow for a useful comparison of energy performance at the process level.

The reluctance of industrial firms to share data on industrial processes that is often considered proprietary.

Paper proposes: an energetic assessment of Thermal Pollution by using a new rating system model describing the energy efficiency of any industrial equipment, system drive or process independent of a comparison with other processes. Comparative element across an industrial sector that is traditionally used, is replaced with a theoretical goal. The rating is then solely based on how close the true energy consumption within an industrial process gets to that ideal state.

Proposed methodology splits energy consumption in 2 (two) specific components: Ideal energy (EIdeal) and Energy at Risk (E@R) – that represents actually the Thermal Pollution (Th.P). By considering these two energy types Benchmark Energy Factor (BEF) can be defined.

The (BEF) will enable a new approach towards energy efficiency in the industrial sector and help level the playing field for energy management reducing the waste energy and therefore Thermal Pollution. It will be demonstrated that Energy at Risk (Thermal Pollution) variation is embedded in (BEF).

Once Energy at Risk (E@R) is known, it will be logical proceeding with benchmarking plants, industrial systems or/and processes assessing their capability of managing E@R (waste energy or Th.P) by focusing on in-situ testing and making educated decision towards reducing wasted heat and thermal pollution.

Case studies on proposed methodology are presented at the level of equipments, industrial system drives, plants, processes, and industries. The methodology of determining the magnitude of thermal pollution is applied to a typical national industrial system by using conservation potential obtainable when Integrated Industrial System Drives (IISD) are to be used.

The scope of this paper is to uncover Th.P. as new pollutant that can be included in EPA Clean Air Act making available to consultants, designers, end-users, utility programs and environmental organizations reliable criteria of reducing thermal pollution of the existing or new industrial systems or plants as part of the climate change mitigation. 

References

World’s Electricity Consumption - 2009, http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Electric_energy_consumption

DoE, USA ‘‘Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007’’, Industrial Energy Efficiency, HR6-132, http://www.afdc. energy.gov/laws/eisa 2007

Appavou F. Energy Efficiency in Industry – Show me the money. Presentation 2011. http://eemo.gov.mu/English// DOCUMENTS/EFFICIENCY.PPT. [Accessed Sep. 2013].

Wellerstein A. The Hiroshima-Equivalent 2013. http://blog. nuclearsecrecy.com/2013/06/07/a-modest-proposal/

US DoE and EPA. ENERGY STAR Helps Manufacturers Improve the Energy Performance of their Operations 2010. Available from: http://www.energystar.gov/ia/business/ industry/estar_and_manufacturers.pdf?e2de-517a [Accessed Nov 2012].

U.S. Council for Energy-Efficient Manufacturing. A Roadmap for Achieving Continual Improvements in Energy Performance 2012. Available from: http://www.superiorenergyperformance. net/ [Accessed Jan 2013]

Gosman N, Pitis CD, Rosemann A, Zeller M. Energy at Risk: Opportunities for applying benchmark energy factors in the industrial sector. ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Industry, paper # 81, Available: aceeeconf@ aceee.org, ACEEE, USA 2013.

Hepbaslia A, Kalinci Y. A review of heat pump water heating systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev doi:10.1016/j.rser., Available:http://www.ecaa.ntu.edu.tw/weifang/hp/heatpumpE ng/A%20review%20of%20heat%20pump%20water%20heati ng%20systems.pdf, [Accessed Oct 2011].

Pitis CD Kleingeld M, van Rensburg J. A new approach to the efficiency concept in South African Industry. J Energy Southern Africa Proc 2007; 18(1): 51-63. Cape Town, South Africa, Available from: http://www.uct.ac.za/ JESA, 2007.

Pitis CD. Power Savings obtained with Integrated Industrial System Drives. IEEE International Systems Conference SysCon 2012, Vancouver 2012; Paper #1569517381, Available from: http://ieeesyscon.org/content/sessions, 2012.

Artobolevskii II. Teoriia mekhanizmov i mashin, 2nd ed. Moscow-Leningrad 1952.

Schifo JF, Radia JT. Theoretical/Best Practice Energy Use Metal casting operations. US DoE – EERE 2004; pp. 19-24. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/resources/metal casting/pdfs/doebestpractice_052804.PDF [Accessed Feb. 2011].

Jones JAT, Bowman B, Lefrank PA. Electric Furnace Steelmaking. in The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel, R.J. Fruehan, Editor, The AISE Steel Foundation: Pittsburgh. USA 2004; pp. 525-660, 1998.

Saburo U. On the Specific Heat of Carbon Steel”-Bibliothek Frankfurt am Main 4 B 13.76 2010; ISSN: 0040-8778, Sendai –University, Japan, Available: http://digital-b.ub.uni-frankfurt. de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/14044, [Accessed Feb. 2011].

Ruth E, Caamano R. Environmental performance benchmarking of manufacturing plants in Mexico and the United States. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses; ProQuest 2001. Available from: http://www.ce.cmu.edu/greendesign/ docs/ruth-reyna-caamano.pdf 2005.

Advanced Melting Technologies. Energy Saving Concepts, Opportunities for the Metal Casting Industry BCS Inc Columbia, MD report for DoE – Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy 2005.

[Accessed Feb. 2011] http://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/resources/metal casting/pdfs/advancedmeltingtechnologies.pdf

Schifo JF. Theoretical/Best Practice Energy Use In Metal casting Operations” USA, Keramida Environmental, Inc., 2005; p. 4.

Pitis C. Using General Efficiency Concept in Selection Decisions of Dedicated Equipments. IEEE – EPEC2010, Paper 27, Halifax 2005; http://www.ieee.ca/epc10/index.htm, August 2010.

International Performance Measurement & Verification Protocol (IPMVP) Volume I: Concepts and Options for Determining Energy Savings (2012) – National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Blvd.Golden, CO 80401-3393 Available from: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy02osti/31505.pdf, [Accessed Jan 2013].

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) USA: http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/index.html

Downloads

Published

2013-04-04

How to Cite

Pitis, C. (2013). New Methodology of Assessing Wasted Energy in Industrial Sector: Assessing Industrial Systems contribution to Thermal Pollution . Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering Technology, 1(1), 23–33. https://doi.org/10.12974/2311-8741.2013.01.01.3

Issue

Section

Articles