By James Turner, executive director, Process Technology
Three ways facilities can develop the best possible energy efficiency program, improve return on investment and reduce emissions.
This article is the second in a two-part series about improving the energy efficiency of industrial projects. Read the first article about key traps to avoid when designing projects.
As technologies improve, industrial refining, chemicals and petrochemical facilities are improving their energy efficiency. The U.S. Energy Information Agency noted that between 1998 and 2018, manufacturing energy intensity decreased by 26% even as output increased by 12%, indicating energy efficiency improvements. However, owners of industrial facilities are striving to do even more to reduce carbon emissions. Energy efficiency projects typically have the highest relative return on investment and ease of implementation when it comes to decarbonization opportunities. In fact, a comprehensive energy efficiency program can yield a 10% to 30% reduction in project energy requirements.
In addition to applying best practices and managing controls and operations well, here are three ways facilities can develop the best possible energy efficiency program, improve return on investment and reduce emissions.
1. Benchmark against similar units
By benchmarking designs against similar units, an owner can highlight areas that may be ripe for improvements. For example, while working on a study for an integrated refinery and petrochemical complex in the Middle East, Fluor developed a project energy efficiency program. By examining the energy intensity of the licensor’s designs and comparing them to benchmarks, team members determined which licensors had the most energy-efficient designs and included that analysis in the licensor selection criteria. Energy optimization techniques were also applied to non-third-party licensed processing units, like the crude/vacuum unit, to reduce energy intensity by up to 40%.
2. Select processes and equipment based on energy intensity
Selecting high-efficiency processes can make a significant difference. For example, a key process in refining depends on direct contact condensers. In warm weather areas, this process typically requires expensive, energy-intensive refrigeration systems. Fluor downstream distillation process technology expert Henry Kister optimized the design, splitting the condensing section into two separate pump-around circuits where the bottom is air cooled and only the top is refrigerant cooled, thereby minimizing refrigeration requirements. This patented design approach reduces the overall energy intensity of this process by about 40%, as well as lowering the direct contact condenser’s total capital cost.
3. Optimize heat recovery equipment design
Heat transfer equipment is a significant part of an industrial facility design and can contribute up to 30% of process capital costs and 90% of operating costs. Effective heat transfer equipment design can reduce equipment and energy costs, as well as carbon dioxide emissions. On a recent project, Fluor developed an approach to integrate heat exchangers between units and remove a poor-performing exchanger. The design significantly improves energy efficiency and reduces carbon dioxide emissions by the equivalent of 30,000 cars per year, with an expected payback period of only three years.
In another instance, while performing the front-end engineering and design for a German industrial facility, Fluor team members applied twisted tube technology to a heat exchanger design to reduce a revamp’s capital cost by 50% and improve energy intensity.
These energy efficiency opportunities apply to both new facilities and revamps and can often be combined with electrification options to generate substantial synergies. A holistic strategic plan that considers both energy efficiency and electrification can yield additional economic returns and reduced emissions, helping facilities achieve their decarbonization goals and maximize return on investment.