efficient DRiVeS — drive down your costs p22

lighting pRoDuctS — source smarter goods p31

InsIde thIs Issue:

news:

Energy saving tipsHow building managers and owners can save energy usage at their facilities. p8

events:

It pays to go greenGeneral Motors unveils its Chevy Volt electric/flex-fuel vehicle at the EECO 2007 Energy and the Environment conference in Toronto, Ont. p6

case Study:

Big fans, big differenceHow an industrial plant took big steps to keep employees cool using some really big fans. p25

Neither the U.S. nor the Canadian power systems operate as efficient-ly and reliably as they should. The

status quo can’t support the growth of to-day’s digital economy, yet policymakers have long ignored industrial and electric genera-tion waste as a viable energy source.

That has to change. Manufacturers and electric utilities effectively use only part of the energy in the fuel and electricity ex-pended in their respective processes. The rest of the energy — often two-thirds of the total input — is discarded.

Recycling that wasted energy could save money and increase productivity for both industry and electric generators. Society,

moreover, would obtain electricity and ther-mal power with the use of far less fossil fuel, and the production of far fewer pollutants and greenhouse gases.

Recycling industrial waste energy, known by engineers as “bottoming cycle cogenera-tion,” converts an industrial facility’s waste-energy streams into electricity and steam. Those waste streams include waste fuels such as flared gases, hot exhaust, or high-pressure gas or steam that must be deflated.

High temperature exhaust — available from coke ovens, glass furnaces, petrochemi-cal processes, and steel reheat furnaces — can produce steam to drive turbine genera-tors and produce electricity. Presently flared flue gas — from blast furnaces, refineries, or chemical processes — can also be burned in boilers to produce steam to drive turbines and generate electricity.

Such industrial energy recycling is well proven, with nearly 10,000 megawatts cur-rently in use in the U.S. Yet a 2005 study by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory identified a potential of 96,000 megawatts, the equivalent output of almost 200 coal-fired power plants.

Recycled energy projects can be as small as 40 kilowatts to as large as several hundred megawatts. A single megawatt can power about 500 homes. Capital costs also vary, ranging from $300 per kilowatt for back pressure steam turbines, to more than $1,800 for certain steam turbine plants. Even at the highest capital costs, local generation costs

Industry can reduce usage and slash costs by reusing the energy it now uses.

www.energymanagementcanada.com

Recycled energy can power industry

innovation in energy efficiency

continued on page 20

Water cooler chat:

94.3%

mailing address

Between 2000 and 2005, manufacturers saw their energy costs increase by

September 2007 volume 1 no. 1

By Thomas R. Casten and Richard Munson

tt

More facts on p38

Honeywell's exciting new 5878 Six-Button Wireless Wall Transmitter is the best upsell opportunity out there. Sleek andsuper thin, it blends seamlessly with any décor. But it's no lightweight in the features department. It's completelyportable, arms and disarms security systems and can control lights. It can also operate garage doors with the pressof a button from absolutely anywhere in the home.

Think your customers can get anything like this from the competition? Fat chance.

get the skinny on the 5878 portable wireless wall transmitter

1-800-467-5875 or visit www.security.honeywell.com/canada © 2007 Honeywell International Inc. All rights reserved

Honeywell_banner_SPT_Jan07.indd 1 1/18/07 11:51:02 AM

management

EM_Sept2007.indd 1 8/22/07 10:07:19 AM

20 Energy management • September 2007

recycled power boost

less than a new coal-fired unit. And the local generators require no transmission wires and no additional fuel, while new central plants need both wires and fuel.

In action: Mittal SteelTo picture the potential, consider the Mittal Steel integrated steel plant on the southern shore of Lake Michigan. More than 250 indi-vidual ovens bake metallurgical coal to pro-duce blast furnace coke — expanded lumps of nearly pure carbon. The 1,800-degree-Fahr-enheit heat from those ovens in other similar coke facilities is wasted, simply vented into the air. At the Mittal facilities, the hot exhaust is recycled into 93 megawatts of electricity and 500,000 pounds of low-pressure steam for the steel complex.

The project has stunning double bottom line benefits. Mittal saves roughly $23 mil-lion per year compared to what it would pay for conventional energy procurement. Mean-while, the recycled energy project owner earns another $10 million per year, and the project displaces five million tons of CO2 per year. Contrary to public perception, CO2 emission reduction pays. Mittal and the project owner enjoy $33 million per year of profits, or about $4.60 of profit for every ton of displaced car-bon dioxide emissions.

Each year, this plant generates as much clean power as was produced in 2004 by all of the grid-connected solar collectors throughout the world. The recycling facilities cost $165 million to construct compared with roughly $5 billion invested in the world’s solar photovolta-ic fleet. Put another way, each dollar invested in this energy recycling plant produced 33 times more clean energy than a dollar invested in solar collectors. Each dollar in the plant pro-duced 3.6 times more clean power than a dol-lar invested in wind generation and associated wires. These comparisons are not intended to disparage other clean energy sources, but to show the profound logic of producing clean energy by recycling waste energy.

The second way to recycle energy is to cap-ture the inevitable waste heat from electricity

generation. Combined heat and power plants (CHP) sited near thermal users easily recycle half of the waste energy and use far less fossil fuel (only 40 per cent to 50 per cent of the fossil fuel burned by the central stations) to generate the same amount of electricity. CHP units use existing technology and the same fuels used by central generation plants, but produce sig-nificantly more useful energy from each unit of fuel.

Decentralization benefitsRecycling is proven. Many manufacturers obtain both electricity and heat from their processes. The pulp and paper industry, for instance, burns its wood wastes to produce both electricity and useful steam. Dow Chemi-cal has upgraded many of its CHP systems to save 250 trillion BTUs of energy compared to a 1994 baseline. This is equal to the annual household energy consumption of New York City or Tokyo. Dow declares that cogeneration is “significantly more efficient than purchasing power from an outside utility power plant and then separately generating steam.”

Other benefits abound. By providing elec-tricity close to the users, recycled energy plants reduce transmission line losses as well as the need for additional wires. Recycling wasted energy improves industrial competitiveness by reducing energy costs and creating new rev-enue streams. The reduced pollution slashes public-sector health care and environmental protection costs. Such dispersed generation, moreover, increases power reliability and helps to stabilize the grid.

A rapid shift to decentralized generation that recycles energy is possible, as demon-strated by Denmark, which over the past two decades raised local generation’s share of to-tal electricity production from 20 per cent to more than 50 per cent. Netherlands, Finland, and Russia also have substantial cogeneration (local generation), while several other devel-oped countries — including Germany, Poland, Japan, and China — have CHP rates more than twice those in the United States.

Denmark’s transition required no new

Continued from front cover

Cover Story

The

EM_Sept2007.indd 20 8/27/07 4:01:19 PM

September 2007 • www.energymanagementcanada.com 21

technologies; it simply involved deploying smaller versions of the technologies used in central generation, and then captured and used the wasted energy. Even nuclear reac-tors can recycle waste heat, as evidenced by the fact that all nuclear-power submarines and aircraft carriers use reactor heat to warm and cool the ships.

Grid supportNew large remote gas-fired plants benefit from economies of scale, and cost less to build per kilowatt than smaller local gas plants, but generation capital costs are only part of the equation. Since transmission and distribution lines are in short supply, all new centralized power requires new wires, which cost, on average, about $1,400 per kilowatt of capacity (often more than power genera-tor itself). New local generation, in contrast, avoids most transmission and distribution costs by delivering power directly to local customers.

Local projects also avoid most of the central system line losses, which average nine per cent but can reach 20 per cent dur-

ing peak periods. Power from large remote plants is first transformed to high voltages (requiring capital and losses) to allow the use of smaller copper wires for the tall transmis-sion lines that cross the landscape. When the power reaches a city, it is transformed again, this time to medium voltages (requiring more capital and losses). Distribution wires carry the power up every street and feed smaller transformers, often mounted on the electricity line poles, which transform the power (again causing more losses) to user voltages that can run hair dryers and other appliances.

By contrast, local generation delivers power directly to the industrial user, often at user voltages, avoiding all of the trans-formation and transmission losses. Local generation also can feed excess power into the distribution system, still avoiding two transformer steps and associated capital and losses. Excess locally-generated power, in fact, can be transformed backwards in exist-ing transformers and fed into the larger grid. Since all power flows to the nearest user, re-gardless of contract, local power generation cuts line losses.

Policy plays catch-upThe U.S. and Canadian power systems are all far from optimal. The status quo just won’t cut it anymore. The digital economy is requiring more power, not less. But we continue to overlook industrial and electric generation waste as alternatives.

Conservatives wrongly assume that free markets fix all inefficiencies, even though countless rules block competition with electric utility monopolies. Most environ-mentalists, meanwhile, ignore industrial ef-ficiency, distracted by the shining promises of solar and wind technologies. No doubt these and other renewable energy sources are carbon neutral and reduce dependence on fossil fuels. Yet since it’s obviously bad for the environment to waste two-thirds of ev-ery coal mine, the terms of the policy debate need to broaden.

Faced with rising electricity costs, manufacturers increasingly see their wasted energy as a revenue stream. Global warm-ing, per Al Gore, is an inconvenient truth society would rather not face. But there is a convenient truth we need to recognize:

energy recycling profitably mitigates cli-mate change. Companies like Mittal and DuPont save money and CO2. Everyone wins. Waste energy recycling already pro-vides substantial power and can generate a substantial share of North American elec-tricity without burning any additional fuel or emitting any additional pollutants or greenhouse gases.

Policy needs to catch up with technol-ogy and prices. Lawmakers and regulators must recognize that today’s energy system is grossly inefficient and forces consumers to pay to warm the planet. Governance must recognize the enormous opportunities for efficiency gains. By eliminating barriers to efficiency and enabling recycled energy plants to capture more of the benefits those plants create, government can help manu-facturers and entrepreneurs to “mine” to-day’s wasted energy.

Thomas R. Casten is chairman, and Richard Munson is senior vice president of Recycled Energy Development. Information on the company can be found at www.recycled-en-ergy.com

ENERGY MANAGEMENT magazine is Canada’s only magazine dedicated to energy issues affecting the industrial, commercial and institutional marketplaces.

ENERGY MANAGEMENT magazine provides marketers with a unique marketing opportunity in Canada by reaching more than 17,000 industrial, manufacturing, building management, utilities, operations and engineering decision makers in a compelling editorial environment sure to grab readers’ attention!

As the need for energy management strategies and technologies continues to intensify, ENERGY MANAGEMENT magazine provides our readership with timely in-depth information to help them make decisions that will shape the long-term effi ciency of their facilities.

For a media kit and more information contact publisherNiel Hiscox at 905-713-4396 or email at nhiscox@clbmedia.ca. FN

management

EFFICIENT DRIVES

— drive down your costs p22

LIGHTING PRODUCTS — source smarter goods p28

INSIDE THIS ISSUE:

News:

Energy saving tipsHow building managers and owners can

save energy usage at their facilities.

p8

Events:

It pays to go greenGeneral Motors unveils its Chevy Volt

electric/flex-fuel vehicle at the EECO

2007 Energy and the Environment

conference in Toronto, Ont. p6

Case Study:

Big fans, big differenceHow an industrial plant took big steps

to keep employees cool using some

really big fans. p25

Neither the U.S. nor the Canadian

power systems operate as efficient-

ly and reliably as they should. The

status quo can’t support the growth of to-

day’s digital economy, yet policymakers have

long ignored industrial and electric genera-

tion waste as a viable energy source.

That has to change. Manufacturers

and electric utilities effectively use only part

of the energy in the fuel and electricity ex-

pended in their respective processes. The rest

of the energy — often two-thirds of the total

input — is discarded.

Recycling that wasted energy could save

money and increase productivity for both

industry and electric generators. Society,

moreover, would obtain electricity and ther-

mal power with the use of far less fossil fuel,

and the production of far fewer pollutants

and greenhouse gases.

Recycling industrial waste energy, known

by engineers as “bottoming cycle cogenera-

tion,” converts an industrial facility’s waste-

energy streams into electricity and steam.

Those waste streams include waste fuels such

as flared gases, hot exhaust, or high-pressure

gas or steam that must be deflated.

High temperature exhaust — available

from coke ovens, glass furnaces, petrochemi-

cal processes, and steel reheat furnaces —

can produce steam to drive turbine genera-

tors and produce electricity. Presently flared

flue gas — from blast furnaces, refineries, or

chemical processes — can also be burned in

boilers to produce steam to drive turbines

and generate electricity.

Such industrial energy recycling is well

proven, with nearly 10,000 megawatts cur-

rently in use in the U.S. Yet a 2005 study by

the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

identified a potential of 96,000 megawatts,

the equivalent output of almost 200 coal-

fired power plants.

Recycled energy projects can be as small

as 40 kilowatts to as large as several hundred

megawatts. A single megawatt can power

about 500 homes. Capital costs also vary,

ranging from $300 per kilowatt for back

pressure steam turbines, to more than $1,800

for certain steam turbine plants. Even at the

highest capital costs, local generation costs

Industry can reduce usage and slash costs by reusing the energy it now uses.

www.energymanagementcanada.com

Recycled energy can power industry

Innovation in energy efficiency

Continued on page 20

Water Cooler Chat:

94.3%

mailing address

Between 2000 and 2005,

manufacturers saw their

energy costs increase by

September 2007 volume 1 no. 1

By Thomas R. Casten and Richard Munson

More facts on p38

get the skinny on the 5878 portable wireless wall transmitter

tENde

Introducing...

emc house sept 07.indd 1 8/27/07 4:02:21 PM

“The U.S. and Canadian power systems are all far from optimal. The status quo, in fact, is not sufficient for today’s digital economy, which demands efficiency

and reliability. Yet policymakers long have ignored industrial and electric generation waste as an energy source.”

EM_Sept2007.indd 21 8/27/07 4:03:59 PM