Investment in energy
efficiency
I heard from several chief engineers and
managers that they made significant investment in energy efficiency of
refrigeration plants, but their energy savings were much less than expected. Why
did that happen?
There are 2 parts of energy saving
process in industrial refrigeration:
- designing
energy savings
- operating
energy savings
We can get designing energy savings by
investing in sophisticated
PLC,
variable frequency drives, refrigeration system improvements, new compressors,
additional or new condensers and evaporators. This part requires significant
investment, usually around 90% of total investment.
To obtain operating energy savings, we
have to optimize operating set points and operating strategies. Implementation
of this part requires investment around 10% of total investment, because it
usually includes only consulting fees. What savings can we get from each part of
energy efficiency project?
Surprisingly, operating savings can give
us 60-90% of total savings and
designing savings can give us just 10-40% of total savings.
Many companies invested in energy
efficiency, but they only received designing energy savings. I believe that this
is a major reason of unsuccessful energy efficiency projects. Investment in
energy saving equipment gives us an opportunity to implement the best set points
and operating strategies. Companies have invested in this equipment, but they
continue to run refrigeration plants at old set points and operating
strategies.
Example. Optimum head pressure for our
refrigeration plant at given moment is 120 psig. Head pressure set point is 140
psig.
Operating energy savings. We know that
optimum head pressure is 120 psig, but we can not keep it, because our plant has
regular pressurestat (with differential 20 psig) to control the head pressure.
This pressure will fluctuate from 110 psig to 130 psig.
We can get some
energy savings by changing set point from 140 psig to 120 psig, but we will not
get the maximum energy savings.
Designing energy savings. We have bought
sophisticated
PLC, but
we do not know the optimum head pressure. Our plant is operating at 140 psig, at
the same setting that we had before buying
PLC. Our
energy savings is not significant.
Good full-scale energy efficiency
project. We know that optimum head pressure is 120 psig. We have
PLC to
keep it.
We have got maximum energy
savings.
Shifting of set point from140 psig to 120
psig can give us 70-80% of total
energy savings. Eliminating of head pressure fluctuating from 110 psig to 130
psig, by using
PLC, will
give us additional 20-30% of energy savings.
As I mentioned early, full-scale energy
efficiency project is pretty expensive. Do we have alternative to this project?
Yes. This is implementation of
operating energy savings.
Example. You have opportunity to invest $200,000 in energy efficiency. Good
full-scale energy efficiency project can give us 2 years payback or $100,000 in energy savings. Investment
of $20,000 in operating savings can
give us $70,000 in energy savings.
Investment of $20,000 in operating
savings of 10 refrigeration plants (total investment is $200,000) will give us $700,000 in
energy savings. It means that return of our investment is 7 times better for
operating savings than for full-scale energy efficiency project.
I believe that optimization of operating
set points and operating strategies is an excellent first step to improve
efficiencies of refrigeration plants. This step does not require major capital
investment and it gives you opportunity to test the waters.