Barriers for Energy Conservation (A management view)

1
Barriers for Energy Conservation(A management
view)

• By
• D K Singhal
• Chandpur Enterprises Ltd.,
• Sumit Agarwal
• Shree Badri Kedar Papers Ltd.,

2
Attending Seminars

• In most of the seminars, intended for energy
  conservation, approximately half of the time is
  spent on over-emphasizing need for energy
  conservation. The presenters forget that the
  persons who are attending these seminars already
  are convinced that energy conservation is a must
  for them. As a seminar attendee most persons are
  interested to gain certain knowledge that can
  save some energy and hence some money in their
  plant.

3
In Seminars.

• Furthermore, most of the general nature data do
  not seem to be authentic, or, at least, seems
  doubtful. In a recent seminar, one presenter
  indicated Indias paper production to be 6.6
  million ton, while other indicated the same as
  7.7 million ton. On questioning, it was told that
  the data were taken from different studies by
  different agencies.
• These data may be of some use for government
  officers, but a common attendee, is only
  interested in determining the possible savings
  opportunity in his plant, and suitable ways for
  achieving the same.
• Wasting too much of time on such presentations,
  is a wastage of time and energy.

4
At the End of the Day

• Any management is interested to know from the
  attendee whether his attending the energy
  conservation seminar will be useful to the
  company or not. If yes, what would be the
  approximate amount of investment and what could
  be the gains.

5
Existing Trends

• Markets are very competitive, so conservation
  automatically becomes vital.
• Under such situation, no management can overlook
  energy conservation.
• Still, many approaches used by managers are
  techno-economically viable, but at the same time
  could prove not very acceptable.
• Some such cases are illustrated here.

6
Case 1 Fan Pump VFD

• In a small paper mill, the fan pump motor was of
  75HP, drawing nearly 83Amps.
• The system was running for past few years.
• Management refused option of VFD due to high cost
  (approx. 3Lac).(Payback app. 3Months)
• Manager revised situation and decided to have a
  VFD of lower rating costing nearly Rs. 2 Lac.
• This was again turned down by management due to
  funds problem.

7
Without a VFD

• The manager was enthusiastic, and decided to us
  pulleys for rpm reduction.
• As a result, load decreased to 54 Amps.
• After some time, pulleys were changed again.
• Load decreased to 40Amps.
• (Payback app. 3days)
• The manager demanded VFD again after a couple of
  month, indicating that he had already saved the
  money required for it.
• The management reply was.

8
A simple question

• Do you really need this?

9
Management Vision

• If you consider installation of VFD after
  reaching to 40 Amps as in previous case, payback
  period could be as high as 3-4 years.
• For this mill, option A-B is better. But, had the
  mill operating at point B, should option B-C be
  followed?

Investment 10,000 Saving 43Amp Payback 3 days
Investment 3,00,000 Saving 3Amp
(Estimated) Payback 3Years
A
B
C
Investment 3,00,000 Saving 46Amp Payback
3Months
10
Comments

• This mill had no portable energy audit equipment,
  but hired an energy advisor for conducting audit,
  who recommended the VFD initially.
• If a VFD is to work within a narrow speed range,
  please think twice.
• Is it really required?

11
Management Policy

• Energy conservation must be practiced for saving,
  considering techno-commercial viabilities, and
  must be suitably planned.
• Installation of energy efficient system should
  not be done just for others are doing so.
• Always consider, If there exists a low-cost
  midway?

12
Case 2 Boiler Efficiency

• In a small mill having a 5TPH boiler, management
  was worried about low efficiency.
• An energy audit firm conducted detailed analysis
  of the system, and came up with an 80 page report
  after nearly one and a half month of plant study.
• The major possible solutions recommended were

13
After Energy Audit
Recommendation (Reason for lower efficiency) Mill Comments/Actions
1 High moisture in fuel Bound to run fuel that is available in the market.
2 High ash in fuel Bound to run fuel that is available in the market.
3 Excess air A new ID Fan was procured and installed.
14
Layman's Approach

• At almost the same time, another mill nearby
  asked a one man consultant(?) for the similar
  problem, who suggested after just a walk through
  audit, to reduce ID fan rpm by changing pulley.
• Opinions may differ, but, first mill, after
  hearing about this case feels second mills
  decision was a better one as consultancy fee and
  investment in first case was very high, while
  final results were almost similar.

15
For Small Mills

• It must also be noted that-
• Mill-1 had delayed energy audit by nearly 10
  month, as the audit fee seemed much higher to the
  mill.
• Audit considered fuel properties that were
  prevailing at the audit time. In most of the
  small mills, there is a vide variation in fuel
  over the year.

16
Lack of Comparative Approach

• If we study BEE norms for the paper mills, data
  lack comparative approach. Any mill can look at
  its data and is supposed to decide where does it
  stand. But, if comparisons are made section wise,
  the managers concerned will obviously concentrate
  more towards their plants to achieve better
  results.
• For example, if there are two papermakers, often
  the discussion is how much vacuum do you apply on
  your machine? The higher vacuum user gets
  motivated to use lesser vacuum automatically.
  But, total paper machine specific energy is not
  so regularly discussed by them.

17
Benchmarks

• Benchmarks must be simple and easy to grasp by
  management.
• This is because kWH/T or kg bagasse per ton
  make better sense in management point of view
  than GJ/T. Many small mills do not even
  understand GJ/T. Though energy audit is not
  mandatory for small mills, yet, policy makers
  should not give attention only to large mills
  only.
• A such simple benchmark being followed by
  papermakers is KVM of vacuum per daily ton of
  paper. KVM has been taken by the model number of
  a well known Indian vacuum pump manufacturer.

18
Inferences

• For small energy consumers, we need to develop
  low cost, simple and easy to use thumb rules in
  the first phase.
• For example-
• 1Amp saved Rs.100/per day saving
• Fan Pump ampere Ton Per Day Production
• ID Fan Amperage 0.9 X Ton Per Day Fuel
• After some time, when it is observed that at
  least a certain percentage of units has been able
  to obtain satisfactory results, the mouth
  publicity will spread results very soon to other
  mills also.
• After most of the mills have achieved a certain
  benchmark, they will automatically get interested
  in implementing advance techniques e.g. energy
  auditing, process up gradation, automation of
  process operations etc. for better energy
  efficiency.

19
Thank You.

• D K Singhal
• deveshksinghal_at_rediffmail.com
• deveshksinghal_at_gmail.com
• Sumit Agarwal
• sumit_agarwal15_at_rediffmail.com