Illustration of Top DownEnergy Efficiency BACTMay 26, 2010NESCAUM/EDFGoals and Cautions•Goal–Provide a simplified version of a concreteexample to demonstrate concept of Top-DownEnergy Efficiency BACT•Cautions–NOT a regulatory proposal–Illustration does not imply judgment aboutBACT for pulp and paper industryTop Down Energy Efficiency BACT•Identify benchmarks–EPA EnergyStar, DOE Industrial TechnologiesProgram, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory reports•Step 0: Frame use of benchmark–Level A: Consider full facility–Level B: Consider source and those portions ofproduction that create a load for that source–Level C: Consider only source and energy distributionsystem–All levels should include consideration of efficiencymanagement systemsTop Down Energy Efficiency BACT•Step 1: Identify all energy efficiency options–Conduct audit of facility for comparison to benchmark–Consider CHP and water efficiency improvements where notincluded in benchmark•Step 2: Eliminate technically infeasible options–Benchmarks are generally based on available technology•Step 3: Rank efficiency options–Include consideration of pollutantemissions reductions, waterusage, etc.–Efficiency gains are likely to be additive, and ranking shouldaddress grouping of compatible technologies•Step 4: Eliminate control options–Look to impact on other pollutants, cost-effectiveness, etc.Some Observations•Appropriate level of analysis may vary by industry–Pulp plant: Steam generated is used throughout plant, soLevel C may be appropriate.–Chemical Industry: Multiple, widely varying productionlines per plant could make Level B appropriate startingpoint.–EGU’s: Where most efficiency gains are available fromsource itself, Level C might be appropriate.•But consider demand-side management if available.•When addressing multiple pollutants, efficiencygains from GHG BACT may influence emissionsrates for other pollutants.Some Observations (2)•Cost-efficiency–Lack of prior PSD determinations requiresalternative comparisons•Consider payback periods for efficiency gains–Do payback periods below (2, 5, 10) years create apresumption of cost-effectiveness?–Improvements without an available payback period shouldstill be considered.•Avoid strict comparisons with early GHG BACTpermits to avoid path-dependent lock-in.–Allow time for a broad array ofexamples to be developed.Illustration: Pulp and Paper Industry•Based on 2006 DOE Energy Bandwidthstudy•Baseline is based on average industry energyusage in 2002•Efficiency gains are based on new or modelplant designs from 2006 for a bleachedhardwood Kraft pulp and printing andwriting paper plantWoodHandlingLime Kiln /SlackerPulpingWashing &ScreeningBleachingEvaporators/ RecoveryBoilerTotal PulpDemandStock Prep &PM Wet EndPressingPM DryersDry End /CalenderingTotal PaperDemandPulp and Paper MillProcessFrom figure 4.6 of Jacobs & IPST, Pulp and Paper Industry EnergyBandwidth Study (2006),http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/forest/bandwidth.htmlBased on production figures from Sappi Cloquet Mill (455,000 mt pulp/yr.; 330,000 mt paper/yr),http://www.na.sappi.com/aboutus/millsHVAC/LightingPulpingPaper MachineFacilityRaw Material PrepAnnual Energy Usage:5.7 trillion BTU steam410 Gwh net electricity910 billion BTU direct fuelLime Kiln /SlackerWoodHandlingPulpingWashing &ScreeningBleachingEvaporators/ RecoveryBoilerLime Kiln /SlackerTotal PulpDemandStock Prep &PM Wet EndPressingPM DryersDry End /CalenderingTotal PaperDemandLevel A Energy UseReductionsFrom figures 4.6 and 6.7 of Jacobs & IPST, Pulp and Paper Industry Energy Bandwidth Study (2006),http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/forest/bandwidth.htmlBased on production figures from Sappi Cloquet Mill (455,000 mt pulp/yr.; 330,000 mt paper/yr),http://www.na.sappi.com/aboutus/millsHVAC/LightingPulpingPaper MachineFacilityRaw Material PrepSteam Demand: 2 trillionBtu/yr (35%)Electricity: 101 Gwh/yr(25%)Direct Fuel: 350 billionBtu/yr (38%)Level A includes woodhandling, pulp, andpaper processes.Note: HVAC/lightingdata unavailable.WoodHandlingPulpingWashing &ScreeningBleachingEvaporators/ RecoveryBoilerLime Kiln /SlackerTotal PulpDemandStock Prep &PM Wet EndPressingPM DryersDry End /CalenderingTotal PaperDemandLevel B Reductions:All Pulp StagesFrom figures 4.6 and 6.7 of Jacobs & IPST, Pulp and Paper Industry Energy Bandwidth Study (2006),http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/forest/bandwidth.htmlBased on production figures from Sappi Cloquet Mill (455,000 mt pulp/yr.; 330,000 mt paper/yr),http://www.na.sappi.com/aboutus/millsHVAC/LightingPulpingPaper MachineFacilityRaw Material PrepSteam Demand: 1.5trillion Btu/yr (26%)Electricity: 44 Gwh/yr(11%)Direct Fuel: 350 billionBtu/yr (38%)Level B includes woodhandling, and pulpprocesses.WoodHandlingPulpingWashing &ScreeningBleachingEvaporators/ RecoveryBoilerLime Kiln /SlackerTotal PulpDemandStock Prep &PM Wet EndPressingPM DryersDry End /CalenderingTotal PaperDemandLevel C+ Reductions:Pulping Process OnlyFrom figures 4.6 and 6.7 of Jacobs & IPST, Pulp and Paper Industry Energy Bandwidth Study (2006),http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/forest/bandwidth.htmlBased on production figures from Sappi Cloquet Mill (455,000 mt pulp/yr.; 330,000 mt paper/yr),http://www.na.sappi.com/aboutus/millsHVAC/LightingPulpingPaper MachineFacilityRaw Material PrepSteam Demand: 450billion Btu/yr (8%)Electricity: increased useby 2.5 Gwh/yr (+1%)Direct Fuel: no changeLevel C+ includes pulpdigestion/cooking only.Gains from digestercontrols and modificationsand pulping aids areincluded, and thusoverstate gainsfrom boilerand steam improvements.