5 Matching Results

Search Results

Advanced search parameters have been applied.

Emerging energy-efficient industrial technologies

Description: U.S. industry consumes approximately 37 percent of the nation's energy to produce 24 percent of the nation's GDP. Increasingly, industry is confronted with the challenge of moving toward a cleaner, more sustainable path of production and consumption, while increasing global competitiveness. Technology will be essential for meeting these challenges. At some point, businesses are faced with investment in new capital stock. At this decision point, new and emerging technologies compete for capital investment alongside more established or mature technologies. Understanding the dynamics of the decision-making process is important to perceive what drives technology change and the overall effect on industrial energy use. The assessment of emerging energy-efficient industrial technologies can be useful for: (1) identifying R&D projects; (2) identifying potential technologies for market transformation activities; (3) providing common information on technologies to a broad audience of policy-makers; and (4) offering new insights into technology development and energy efficiency potentials. With the support of PG&E Co., NYSERDA, DOE, EPA, NEEA, and the Iowa Energy Center, staff from LBNL and ACEEE produced this assessment of emerging energy-efficient industrial technologies. The goal was to collect information on a broad array of potentially significant emerging energy-efficient industrial technologies and carefully characterize a sub-group of approximately 50 key technologies. Our use of the term ''emerging'' denotes technologies that are both pre-commercial but near commercialization, and technologies that have already entered the market but have less than 5 percent of current market share. We also have chosen technologies that are energy-efficient (i.e., use less energy than existing technologies and practices to produce the same product), and may have additional ''non-energy benefits.'' These benefits are as important (if not more important in many cases) in influencing the decision on whether to adopt an emerging technology. The technologies were characterized with respect to energy efficiency, economics, and environmental ...
Date: October 1, 2000
Creator: Martin, N.; Worrell, E.; Ruth, M.; Price, L.; Elliott, R.N.; Shipley, A.M. et al.
Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department

Opportunities to improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the US pulp and paper industry

Description: The pulp and paper industry accounts for over 12% of total manufacturing energy use in the US (US EIA 1997a), contributing 9% to total manufacturing carbon dioxide emissions. In the last twenty-five years primary energy intensity in the pulp and paper industry has declined by an average of 1% per year. However, opportunities still exist to reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in the manufacture of paper in the US This report analyzes the pulp and paper industry (Standard Industrial Code (SIC) 26) and includes a detailed description of the processes involved in the production of paper, providing typical energy use in each process step. We identify over 45 commercially available state-of-the-art technologies and measures to reduce energy use and calculate potential energy savings and carbon dioxide emissions reductions. Given the importance of paper recycling, our analysis examines two cases. Case A identifies potential primary energy savings without accounting for an increase in recycling, while Case B includes increasing paper recycling. In Case B the production volume of pulp is reduced to account for additional pulp recovered from recycling. We use a discount rate of 30% throughout our analysis to reflect the investment decisions taken in a business context. Our Case A results indicate that a total technical potential primary energy savings of 31% (1013 PJ) exists. For case A we identified a cost-effective savings potential of 16% (533 PJ). Carbon dioxide emission reductions from the energy savings in Case A are 25% (7.6 MtC) and 14% (4.4 MtC) for technical and cost-effective potential, respectively. When recycling is included in Case B, overall technical potential energy savings increase to 37% (1215 PJ) while cost-effective energy savings potential is 16%. Increasing paper recycling to high levels (Case B) is nearly cost-effective assuming a cut-off for cost-effectiveness of a simple payback ...
Date: July 1, 2000
Creator: Martin, Nathan; Anglani, N.; Einstein, D.; Khrushch, M.; Worrell, E. & Price, L.K.
Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department

Opportunities to improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. pulp and paper industry

Description: The pulp and paper industry accounts for over 12% of total manufacturing energy use in the U.S. (U.S. EIA 1997a), contributing 9% to total manufacturing carbon dioxide emissions. In the last twenty-five years primary energy intensity in the pulp and paper industry has declined by an average of 1% per year. However, opportunities still exist to reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in the manufacture of paper in the U.S. This report analyzes the pulp and paper industry (Standard Industrial Code (SIC) 26) and includes a detailed description of the processes involved in the production of paper, providing typical energy use in each process step. We identify over 45 commercially available state-of-the-art technologies and measures to reduce energy use and calculate potential energy savings and carbon dioxide emissions reductions. Given the importance of paper recycling, our analysis examines two cases. Case A identifies potential primary energy savings without accounting for an increase in recycling, while Case B includes increasing paper recycling. In Case B the production volume of pulp is reduced to account for additional pulp recovered from recycling. We use a discount rate of 30% throughout our analysis to reflect the investment decisions taken in a business context. Our Case A results indicate that a total technical potential primary energy savings of 31% (1013 PJ) exists. For case A we identified a cost-effective savings potential of 16% (533 PJ). Carbon dioxide emission reductions from the energy savings in Case A are 25% (7.6 MtC) and 14% (4.4 MtC) for technical and cost-effective potential, respectively. When recycling is included in Case B, overall technical potential energy savings increase to 37% (1215 PJ) while cost-effective energy savings potential is 16%. Increasing paper recycling to high levels (Case B) is nearly cost-effective assuming a cut-off for cost-effectiveness of a simple payback ...
Date: July 1, 2000
Creator: Martin, Nathan; Anglani, N.; Einstein, D.; Khrushch, M.; Worrell, E. & Price, L.K.
Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department

Energy use and carbon dioxide emissions in the steel sector in key developing countries

Description: Iron and steel production consumes enormous quantities of energy, especially in developing countries where outdated, inefficient technologies are still used to produce iron and steel. Carbon dioxide emissions from steel production, which range between 5 and 15% of total country emissions in key developing countries (Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa), will continue to grow as these countries develop and as demand for steel products such as materials, automobiles, and appliances increases. In this report, we describe the key steel processes, discuss typical energy-intensity values for these processes, review historical trends in iron and steel production by process in five key developing countries, describe the steel industry in each of the five key developing countries, present international comparisons of energy use and carbon dioxide emissions among these countries, and provide our assessment of the technical potential to reduce these emissions based on best-practice benchmarking. Using a best practice benchmark, we find that significant savings, in the range of 33% to 49% of total primary energy used to produce steel, are technically possible in these countries. Similarly, we find that the technical potential for reducing intensities of carbon dioxide emissions ranges between 26% and 49% of total carbon dioxide emissions from steel production in these countries.
Date: April 1, 2001
Creator: Price, L. K.; Phylipsen, G. J. M. & Worrell, E.
Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department

Energy use and energy intensity of the U.S. chemical industry

Description: The U.S. chemical industry is the largest in the world, and responsible for about 11% of the U.S. industrial production measured as value added. It consumes approximately 20% of total industrial energy consumption in the U.S. (1994), and contributes in similar proportions to U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Surprisingly, there is not much information on energy use and energy intensity in the chemical industry available in the public domain. This report provides detailed information on energy use and energy intensity for the major groups of energy-intensive chemical products. Ethylene production is the major product in terms of production volume of the petrochemical industry. The petrochemical industry (SIC 2869) produces a wide variety of products. However, most energy is used for a small number of intermediate compounds, of which ethylene is the most important one. Based on a detailed assessment we estimate fuel use for ethylene manufacture at 520 PJ (LHV), excluding feedstock use. Energy intensity is estimated at 26 GJ/tonne ethylene (LHV), excluding feedstocks.The nitrogenous fertilizer production is a very energy intensive industry, producing a variety of fertilizers and other nitrogen-compounds. Ammonia is the most important intermediate chemical compound, used as basis for almost all products. Fuel use is estimated at 268 PJ (excluding feedstocks) while 368 PJ natural gas is used as feedstock. Electricity consumption is estimated at 14 PJ. We estimate the energy intensity of ammonia manufacture at 39.3 GJ/tonne (including feedstocks, HHV) and 140 kWh/tonne, resulting in a specific primary energy consumption of 40.9 GJ/tonne (HHV), equivalent to 37.1 GJ/tonne (LHV). Excluding natural gas use for feedstocks the primary energy consumption is estimated at 16.7 GJ/tonne (LHV). The third most important product from an energy perspective is the production of chlorine and caustic soda. Chlorine is produced through electrolysis of a salt-solution. Chlorine production is the main electricity ...
Date: April 1, 2000
Creator: Worrell, E.; Phylipsen, D.; Einstein, D. & Martin, N.
Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department