Energy Conservation and Management - PowerPoint by gou46956

VIEWS: 60 PAGES: 19

More Info
									Barriers for Energy Conservation
            (A management view)


                                  By:
                         D K Singhal
            Chandpur Enterprises Ltd.,
                      Sumit Agarwal
        Shree Badri Kedar Papers Ltd.,
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.
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 India’s 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.
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.
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.
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.
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….
A simple question:

Do you really need this?
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.
              Investment: 10,000                      Investment: 3,00,000
              Saving: 43Amp                           Saving: 3Amp (Estimated)
              Payback: 3 days                         Payback: 3Years
       A                                 B                                       C
                               Investment: 3,00,000
                               Saving: 46Amp
                               Payback: 3Months

   For this mill, option A-B is better. But, had the mill
    operating at point B, should option B-C be followed?
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?
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?”
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:
After Energy Audit:
    Recommendation        Mill Comments/Actions
    (Reason for lower
    efficiency)
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.
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 mill’s decision was
    a better one as consultancy fee and investment
    in first case was very high, while final results
    were almost similar.
For Small Mills:
    It must also be noted that-
1.   Mill-1 had delayed energy audit by nearly 10
     month, as the audit fee seemed much higher
     to the mill.
2.   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.
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.
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.
Inferences:
        For small energy consumers, we need to develop low cost, simple
         and easy to use thumb rules in the first phase.
        For example-
    1.      1Amp saved = Rs.100/per day saving
    2.      Fan Pump ampere = Ton Per Day Production
    3.      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.
Thank You.



           D K Singhal
 deveshksinghal@rediffmail.com
    deveshksinghal@gmail.com
       Sumit Agarwal
sumit_agarwal15@rediffmail.com

								
To top