Spring 2003

ISSUE FOCUS: 

Assessments and Optimizations

Lead to Energy Improvements

Steam energy accounts for a

significant amount of the total

industrial process energy use in

U.S. industries. Because U.S.

industries represent an important national interest and a

large portion of the nation's

overall energy use, it is important not only to understand

how these industries use

energy, but especially how they

generate and use steam.

Combining data from the

Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey 1994 (MECS)

with energy use estimates for

key processes and products,

the report Steam System Opportunity Assessment for the Pulp

and Paper, Chemical Manufacturing, and Petroleum Refining

Industries (recently published

by the Industrial Technologies

Program) provides an analysis

of the steam generation and

steam improvement opportunities in the three target industries.

According to MECS data, the amounts of

fuel used to generate steam in the target

industries were:

• Pulp and paper manufacturing: 2,221 

trillion British thermal units (Btu)

• Chemical manufacturing: 1,540 trillion Btu

• Petroleum refining: 1,675 trillion Btu.

The report also estimates the amount of

steam generated by fuel, the amount of

steam purchased, and the total amount of

steam available to these industries. The

amount of steam as a percentage of total

energy used by each industry was also 

determined:

• Pulp and paper manufacturing: 84%

• Chemical manufacturing: 47%

• Petroleum refining: 51%.

Pulp and Paper Industry

Manufacturing plants in the pulp and paper

industry vary by size, level of integration,

process technology, wood type, and final

product type. The energy used by fully integrated plants can be combined with total

industry production to estimate the total

thermal energy used by the pulp and paper

industry. This method assumed that a fully

integrated pulp and paper plant uses the

same amount of energy to produce a ton of

product that an equivalent supply chain of

plants that are not integrated would use. Ideally, the energy data reported in the MECS is

consistent with the results of this bottom-up

view of the process energy use.

The estimated steam energy requirements

for these 14 major pulp and paper products

are presented in Figure 1. The product steam

energy use requirements varied between 

4 and 483 trillion Btu.

The sources of the steam in pulp and

paper manufacturing include recovery boilers (at chemical pulping facilities), power

boilers, and waste heat recovery boilers.

Steam Assessment Gauges Energy Savings Potential for Industries

T OF ENERGY

DEPARTMEN

U

E

NITED STAT S OFA

ERICA

M

(continued on page 2) 

“TURNING INFORMATION INTO ENERGY SOLUTIONS FOR INDUSTRY”

INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES PROGRAM

Energy Matters

IN THIS ISSUE

Steam Assessment Gauges

Energy Savings Potential for Industries . . . . . . . 1

Fan System Optimization Improves

Production, Saves Energy at

Cement Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

A Symptoms Approach to Identifying

Efficiency Improvement Opportunities . . . . . . . . 4

Pump System Optimization Saves Energy,

Improves Productivity at a

Paper Mill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Caraustar Industries Energy Assessment

Provides a Company-Wide Model . . . . . . . . . . . 6

New Reference Manual Available

for Compressed Air Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Compressed Air System Project

Improves Efficiency and Production

at Harland Publishing Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Texas Technology Showcase Update . . . . . . . . .9

Coming Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Building a company-wide energy

assessment. See page 6.

U.S. Department of Energy 

Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy

Bringing you a prosperous future where energy is

clean abundant, reliable, and affordable

An analysis of steam generation and steam improvement

opportunities in three target industries.
2 Energy Matters, Spring 2003

There is approximately 370,000 million Btu

per hour (MMBtu/hr) of boiler capacity in

the pulp and paper industry. Approximately

half of this boiler capacity is fired by waste

fuels. Most of the boiler capacity for pulp

and paper plants is in the pressure range of

300 to 1,000 pounds per square inch (psig).

Boilers larger than 250 MMBtu/hr account

for over half of the boiler capacity in this

industry.

Chemical Manufacturing Industry

The chemical manufacturing industry

uses a significant amount of energy to manufacture chemical products for consumer and

industrial markets. However, the processes

used by chemical manufactures to produce

these products are typically considered competitive information, making it difficult to

assess energy use in this industry from a

process perspective. Consequently, a different

Steam Assessment Gauges Energy Savings Potential continued from page 1

Figure 1. Estimated steam energy use for major pulp and paper products.

Figure 2. Estimated steam energy use for major chemical products.

Recycled Paperboard

Semichemical Paperboard

Solid Bleached Paperboard

Unbleached Kraft Paperboard

Bleached, Speciality Packaging

Unbleached Kraft

Tissue

Thin Papers

Cotton Fiber

Bleached Bristols

Uncoated Free Sheets

Coated Paper

Groundwood Printing & Converting

Newsprint

0 100 200 300

Trillion Btu

400 500

Cyclohexane

Butyl Rubber

Styrene Butadiene Rubber

Polybutadiene Rubber

Urea

Sodium Carbonate

Caprolactum

Benzene, Toluene, and Xylene

Phenol/Acetone

Ethylene Dichloride/Polyvinyl Chloride

Chlorine/Sodium Hydroxide

Polystyrene

Ethylbenzene/Styrene

Ammonia

Ethylene

0 100 200 300

Trillion Btu

400

ENERGY MATTERS

is published quarterly by the 

U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE)

Industrial Technologies Program. 

Information contained in the

newsletter can be reproduced

without permission provided due

acknowledgement is given (the

U.S. Department of Energy’s 

Energy Matters newsletter) and 

a copy of the publication is 

supplied to the editor.

■

Editorial Board

Tom Bishop

Electrical Apparatus Service 

Association

Rob Boteler, representing National

Electrical Manufacturers 

Association

Eric T. Fletty, Business 

Development Manager, TAPPI

Gary L. Goehring, Alcoa 

North American Extrusions

Glenn Hahn, Spirax Sarco

J. Bruce Medaris, Facilities 

Consulting Services and 

Executive Director, Compressed

Air Challenge®

Michael R. Muller, Center for

Advanced Energy Systems, 

Rutgers University

Arvind Thekdi, E3M, Inc.

Chuck Whelan, DuPont 

■

DOE Staff

Chris Cockrill, BestPractices,

Motors

Fred Hart, Technology Manager 

Grace Ordaz, Plant-wide 

Assessment

Peter Salmon-Cox, Lead 

Technology Manager, Technology

Delivery and BestPractices 

■

Comments? 

Contact: 

David Wagman, Energy Matters

Editor, at 303-275-3602, 

e-mail david_wagman@nrel.gov

or Karen Atkison, Associate 

Editor at 303-275-3730, e-mail 

karen_atkison@nrel.gov

1617 Cole Blvd., MS 1609

Golden, CO 80401

For new subscriptions, go to

www.oit.doe.gov/

bestpractices/explore_library/

energy_matters.shtml

For address/subscription changes,

please contact the editor.
approach to assessing chemical industry

steam generation and use is required.

Because a relatively small number of chemical products account for most of the industry's energy use, evaluating the processes

used to manufacture these high energy-use

chemical products can provide a reasonably

accurate assessment of how energy—specifically steam energy—is used.

The chemical industry produces over

70,000 products. In 1994, the chemical

industry used about 3,273 trillion Btu of

energy, of which steam energy accounts for

roughly 1,540 trillion Btu. Within the chemical industry, there are nine 4-digit SIC segments that account for 1,210 trillion Btu of

fuel used to generate steam, which is approximately 79% of the industry total. Within

these nine SIC segments, there are 20 chemical products whose process steam energy

requirements account for 832 trillion Btu of

steam.

The estimated steam energy requirements

for these 20 major chemicals are shown in

Figure 2. The steam energy requirements for

these 20 products varied between 0.3 and

343 trillion Btu.

The sources of steam in the chemical

manufacturing industry include boilers and

process heat recovery heat exchangers. The

estimated boiler capacity in the chemical

manufacturing industry is about 500,000

MMBtu/hr. Over half of this capacity, about

280,000 MMBtu/hr, is accounted for by boilers above 100 MMBtu/hr. However, small

boilers between 10 and 50 MMBtu/hr

account for about 120,000 MMBtu/hr of

industry capacity, illustrating the wide distribution of boiler size across the industry. 

Natural gas is the dominant fuel type,

accounting for about 205,000 MMBtu/hr of

industry boiler capacity. About 60% of the

boiler capacity lies in the pressure range

between 300 and 1,000 psig.

Petroleum Refining Industry

The petroleum refining industry uses

energy to convert crude oil into many different products, some of which are used directly

by consumers, while others are feedstock for

other industries. Production data for these

petroleum refining processes can be combined with process energy data to estimate

overall industry energy use. Additionally, the

component energy types, including directfired, electric, and steam, can be disaggregated from the energy data for each refining

process. This allocation allows the total steam

use within the industry to be estimated. This

steam use estimate can then be compared to

the amount of fuel used to generate steam as

indicated by MECS.

There are 11 major refining processes that

represent the principal end uses of steam in

the petroleum refining industry. The estimated steam energy requirements for major

petroleum refining processes are presented in

Figure 3. Process steam energy-use requirements vary between 0.5 and 246.1 trillion Btu.

Note that visbreaking and coking operations 

are net steam producers.

The major sources of steam generation in

the petroleum refining industry are boilers

and heat recovery steam generators. The estimated boiler capacity in the refining industry

is about 210,000 MMBtu/hr. Boilers that generate more than 250 MMBtu/hr account for

about 100,000 MMBtu/hr, or roughly 48% of

the industry’s total boiler capacity. Most of

the boiler capacity in the petroleum refining

industry is fired by byproduct fuels such as

refinery gas and coke. In terms of steam system

pressure, about 60% of the total industry

boiler capacity is at 300 psig or less. Most of the

remaining boiler capacity is between 300 and

1,000 psig.

Potential Savings Estimates

The report estimates the potential savings

available from implementing steam system

improvements in the pulp and paper, chemical

manufacturing, and petroleum refining

industries. To develop these savings estimates,

30 performance improvement opportunities

were identified that cover the most significant

ways to improve steam system performance

and efficiency in these target industries.

To assess the energy savings available

from implementing steam system improvements, it was determined that eliciting expert

opinion would be the most effective

approach. Expert judgment was elicited by

sending questionnaires to qualified experts.

The major types of data requested were: 

• Fuel savings

• Percentage of facility for which each

opportunity is feasible

• Payback period

• Reasons for implementing the improvement.

The results of this effort indicate that fuel

savings from individual steam system

improvements range from 0.6% to 5.2%. The

payback periods for these steam system

improvements range from 2 to 34 months;

the majority are less than 24 months. The

percentages of facilities for which these

improvements are feasible range from 3.4%

to 29.4%.

Overall industry fuel savings, which are

the combination of estimates for fuel savings

and the percentage of facilities for which an

opportunity is feasible for each of the 30

opportunities, range from 0.02% to 3.0%.

The data showing overall fuel savings for the

major areas of a steam system are shown in

Figure 4.

When combined, the total potential fuel

savings from these steam system improvement opportunities totaled over 12% for

each industry. Table 1 indicates that the total

estimated energy savings potential for these

Energy Matters, Spring 2003 3

(continued on page 10) 

Figure 3. Estimated steam energy use for major petroleum refining processes.

Isopentane/Isohexane

Isobutane

Alkylation

Catalytic Reforming

Catlaytic Hydrotreating

Catalytic Hydrocracking

Fluid Catalytic Cracking

Coking Operations

Visbreaking

Vacuum Distillation

Atmospheric Distillation

-100 0 100 200 300

Trillion Btu
In 1999, Ash Grove Cement Company

implemented an optimization project on a

fan system in its Durkee, Oregon, cement

plant. Because of a severe vibration problem,

the plant’s fan system would often fail and

required frequent repairs to the ductwork

and adjoining machinery. Working with

MagnaDrive plant personnel replaced the

fan’s belt drive with an Adjustable Speed

Drive (ASD) system to improve fan system

control and lower its energy consumption.

This change eliminated the vibration problem and improved the system’s airflow control and energy efficiency.

The project yielded annual maintenance

and energy cost savings of $16,000 and

energy savings of 175,000 kilowatt-hours

(kWh). In addition, the fan system’s

improved reliability allowed the plant to

achieve its desired production level. The total

project cost was approximately $13,500,

which gave the Durkee plant a simple payback of 10 months.

Proper optimization of a fan system can

have substantial benefits that go beyond

energy savings. In the case of the Ash

Grove plant, the design of the baghouse’s fan system led to excessive

vibration. This excessive vibration

imposed heavy maintenance costs on

the plant and seriously hindered the

plant’s productivity. Replacing the

existing belt-driven drive with an ASD

eliminated the source of the system’s

maintenance burden, which improved

the plant’s productivity and reduced

its energy consumption. The ASD

allowed for the energy savings and better performance by accurately matching the appropriate fan speed to the

system demand. The new drive also

allows the system to operate reliably because,

instead of being controlled by dampers,

which caused the original vibration problem,

airflow is now controlled by the ASD. This type

of drive can be applied in many ventilation

or fan systems that require variable output to

meet changing load patterns. In addition, an

ASD can improve the performance of other

systems such as blowers, pumps, compressors, grinders, mills, and conveyors. 

Take a look at what others in your industry have done to increase their energy 

savings by reading their case studies. You can

view these documents at http://www.oit.

doe.gov/bestpractices/case_studies.shtml.

Or, order a document from the Industrial

Technologies Program Clearinghouse. You

can e-mail the Clearinghouse at Clearinghouse@ee.doe.gov, or call 800-862-2086. ●

4 Energy Matters, Spring 2003

Fan System Optimization Improves Production, Saves Energy at Cement Plant 

By Don Casada, Diagnostic Solutions, LLC,

Knoxville, TN

Previous Energy Matters

articles (1, 2) broached

the subject of the need

to focus efforts for both

reliability and energy

purposes on those systems with the greatest

potential for improvement or savings

opportunities. As an example, the fact that a

relatively small percentage of the motor

population was responsible for most of the

energy consumption in U.S. industry

implied the need to focus system–(not component–) level evaluations on large equipment that runs a lot.

But in many industrial facilities, many

big pieces of equipment run most of the

time. In this article, we'll focus on pumping

systems, and use a different approach—the

presence of certain symptoms—to further

prescreen opportunities for savings.

The goal of prescreening is to identify

and prioritize the systems where we’re most

likely to find significant opportunities for

improvement or savings. Although the

symptoms we will discuss are specific to

pumping systems, analogous conditions

exist in other fluid handling systems, such

as fan systems.

Pumping systems share a number of

common features with people, and readers

might find it helpful to consider them in an

analogous sense. For example, both people

and pumping systems:

• Are composed of a variety of components 

• Require external sources of energy and

energy conversion devices to keep them

going, and 

• Have a device that keeps fluid moving,

but at a rate and pressure controlled by

other components and factors.

It also turns out that symptoms, both in

people and in pumping systems, can be

helpful indicators of health.

Symptoms in People

While we are encouraged, particularly as

we get older, to get periodic checkups of one

form or another, we still rely on symptoms to

serve as primary indicators of physical and

mental health.

In some cases, the symptoms are acute

and obvious. I recently conducted an unplanned verification of several laws of

physics; in particular, the relationship

between potential and kinetic energy.

A 4-inch-diameter poplar limb which I

had just cut hit the ground and in a combative demonstration of its resilience, sprung

and knocked out from beneath me the unsecured ladder upon which I was perched. Up

until this arboreal rebellion, I was about 20

feet off the ground, chainsaw in hand. 

Recognizing that this situation was in reality

a once-in-a-lifetime experimental opportunity (of the variety that often culminates a

lifetime), I quickly ensured that a major

source of external thermodynamic and

kinetic energy (the chainsaw) would not confuse the experimental results (I tossed it off

to the side). Even though this was an

unplanned test, I was able to quickly develop

an experimental hypothesis (that it was

New mechanical ASD installed on the baghouse

fan system.

Performance Optimization Tips: A Symptoms Approach to Identifying Efficiency

Improvement Opportunities 
going to hurt when I hit the ground). That

my hypothesis was accurate was borne out in

short order by a sequence of verbal emissions

and mechanical gesticulations, which were

validated by an independent observer (my

wife and erstwhile ladder anchor). 

Now, before you call me stupid, just how

many physics experiments have you conceived, performed, analyzed, and had independently verified in 1.1 seconds?

On the other hand, some symptoms are

chronic in nature. Headaches, sinus congestion, and sore joints are things some of us

regularly tolerate, but persistent nagging

may ultimately spur a visit to the doctor.

The existence of symptoms isn’t proofpositive that we have a serious health problem. Even my experimental fall only

resulted in a couple of cracked ribs and a

few bruises to body and ego (although my

wife did suggest that there was ample evidence of pre-existing brain damage). Likewise, plugged sinuses can be extremely

annoying, but we can learn to live with

them. But overall, the presence of certain

physical symptoms suggest the possibility

that something is wrong, and the more

symptoms that are present, the greater the

likelihood that it is serious.

It might finally be noted that some of

our symptoms are quite obvious to ourselves and others, while other symptoms are

more subtle and require greater attention to

detect. And of course, in some cases, a serious condition can exist even though there

are no apparent symptoms.

Symptoms in Pumping Systems

Pumping systems that are ill—in the

sense they are wasting energy—often have

their own symptoms; as with people, some

are acute and obvious, while others more

closely fit the chronic category. The patterns

or symptoms discussed below have been

found useful in the prescreening process.

The existence of one of these symptoms

doesn’t guarantee a significant savings

opportunity, just that it is more likely; and

the more symptoms that are present, the

greater the likelihood. 

Throttled valves. Valves that are consistently throttled to control flow rate, pressure,

level, temperature, or some other parameter

in the system provide direct evidence that

fluid energy is being dissipated. Significant

losses from throttling are common in process

industries such as petrochemicals and paper,

although I’ve observed heavily throttled

valves even in raw water pumping 

applications. 

Open bypass lines. Open bypass or

recirculation lines are sometimes used for

control purposes. In a few cases, a combination of concurrent throttling and bypass flow

control is found. Needless to say, opportunities to achieve energy reductions in those 

situations are usually excellent.

Multiple parallel pumps with the

same number of pumps always operating. Multiple pumps are used in parallel to

provide redundancy and/or to provide flexibility in responding to changing load conditions. If two pumps are installed for

redundancy, but both normally operate,

there is a strong likelihood that the pumps

were not well-sized or that they have

degraded. Alternatively, if multiple pumps

were installed to provide flexibility in operations, but the same number always run, it is

worth asking whether the expected variability in demand really doesn't exist, or if the

number of pumps needed for the maximum

load condition are continuously run as a

matter of course.

Continuous pump operation in a

batch environment. Pumps that run continuously when the fundamental nature of

the system requirement is of a batch nature

may simply be left running even when they

aren’t needed. One example of this would be

a pump that runs 24 hours a day even

though the load that requires the pump is

only present during one or two shifts. 

Frequent cycling of pumps in a continuous process. Some pumps cycle on and

off, typically to maintain level or inventory.

If pumps in such service cycle frequently so

that they only run a relatively small amount

(for example 40% of the time), there are

likely to be energy and demand cost savings

opportunities, not to mention the likelihood

of improving pump, motor, and motor

starter life.

As pumps depart from their design or best

efficiency point, both static and dynamic

loads associated with unstable flow conditions increase. Reduced seal, wear ring, or

bearing life can be a result. While other 

factors, such as poor alignment, a generally

harsh environment, or mechanical imbalance can also affect these elements, at least

an increased likelihood exists that off-design

operation is a factor.

Systems that have undergone a

change in function or demand. Although

this is not a symptom, per se, it is always useful to consider the history behind the system. In cases where system requirements

increase with time, pumps are normally

upsized to meet the growing demand. On

the other hand, if requirements drop, the

pump that was presumably properly sized

will now be oversized.

The existence of one or more of the

symptoms outlined above suggest that a system is more likely to have savings opportunities than one with none of the symptoms.

However, systems with none of these symptoms can still be sick. I have run across 

Energy Matters, Spring 2003 5

(continued on page 11) 

Prescreening helps to select the Vital Few for further review.

Moderate

priority

Filter 2

All plant

motor systems

Big loads

that run a lot

Big centrifugal

loads that run a lot

*Productivity/reliability-critical systems sent to higher priority levels

Policies and

practices bin Moderate

priority

Highest

priority

Seldom used,

small loads

Large noncentrifugal loads

* *

Filter 1 Symptom or

experience-based

segregation
In 2000, Caraustar in partnership with DOE conducted plant-wide energy assessments at two of

its recycled paperboard mills, the Chesapeake Mill in Baltimore, Maryland, and the Rittman

Mill in Rittman, Ohio. The assessments identified potential opportunities for systems and

process efficiency improvements that could result in important energy savings and improved

productivity. The projects would particularly improve the efficiency of plant steam systems and

would substantially decrease dependence on purchased electricity and fuel. Annual cost savings

were estimated at $1.2 million and $370,000 at the Rittman and Chesapeake mills, respectively.

Table 1 lists the systems and processed identified in the assessment of the Chesapeake Mill

to have the greatest opportunity for energy savings. Table 2 provides assessment results for the

Rittman Mill.

Caraustar is a major manufacturer of recycled paperboard and converted paperboard 

products. Caraustar operates over 100 facilities in the United States along with plants in Mexico

and the United Kingdom. Caraustar manufactures its products primarily from recovered fiber

derived from recycled paperstock. At its 16 paperboard mills, Caraustar produces various grades

of uncoated and clay-coated recycled paperboard both for internal consumption and for sale to

customers in four principal markets. In addition to the mills, Caraustar’s facilities include tube

and core converting plants, composite container plants, folding carton plants, and speciality 

converting plants. 

Large quantities of electricity, natural gas, coal, and oil are used in the production of recycled paperboard. Caraustar purchases electricity and natural gas for all its facilities, but also purchases significant quantities of fuel oil and coal for many of its recycled paperboard mills.

6 Energy Matters, Spring 2003

Pump System Optimization

Saves Energy, Improves

Productivity at a Paper Mill

In 2000, Daishowa America implemented a

project on the effluent pumping system at its

paper mill in Port Angeles, Washington.

Chronic maintenance issues and rising

energy costs led personnel at the mill to

review the pumping system for energy 

efficiency opportunities. This review allowed

mill personnel to devise a system-level project that decreased the pumping system’s

energy consumption. The project involved

installing Adjustable Speed Drives (ASDs) on

two of the system’s three pumps. The ASDs’

replaced the system’s control scheme, which

previously relied on bypass and throttling

valves. This upgrade allowed the system to

operate more effectively, yielding annual

energy savings of $32,000 and 700,000 

kilowatt-hours (kWh).

The project also eliminated problems that

led to excessive maintenance costs, resulting

in an annual $10,000 maintenance savings.

The total project cost was $75,000. Total

annual savings were $42,000, which yields a

simple payback of just over 21 months.

Having the proper control scheme in

place is critical for a pumping system to operate efficiently. Relying on bypass and throttling valves to control a pumping system can

lead to energy waste and excessive maintenance requirements. At the Port Angeles mill,

using bypass and throttling valves caused

mill personnel to operate the pumps at a

greater capacity than was necessary, and in

ways that placed great stress on the process

piping and internal system components.

Operating the pumps this way led to energy

waste by moving 2,200 gallons per minute in

excess of the process’s requirements.

The project on the Port Angeles mill’s

effluent pumping system reduced the system’s flow rate by 31% and allowed one

pump to operate at variable load, reducing

energy consumption.

Take a look at what others in your industry have done to increase their energy 

savings by reading their case studies. You can

view these documents at http://www.oit

.doe.gov/bestpractices/case_studies.shtml.

Or, order a document from the Industrial

Technologies Program Clearinghouse. You

can e-mail the Clearinghouse at Clearinghouse@ee.doe.gov, or call 800-862-2086.●

Caraustar Industries Energy Assessment Provides a 

Company-Wide Model

TABLE 1. SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES EVALUATED FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS AT

CARAUSTAR’S CHESAPEAKE MILL

Estimated Project Estimated Estimated

Implementation Annual Simple Payback

System/Process Cost Savings (years)

Add steam generator to existing steam boiler $300,000 $197,300 1.5

for electric power production

Change steam turbine-drive boiler feed pump $0 $11,800 0

from backup to primary pump

Install a variable speed drive (VSD) on the $15,000 $9,300 1.6

electric boiler feed pump (preferred option)

Upgrade to modern VSD on paper machine #2 $22,300 $10,330 2.2

Use boiler stack heat recovery with existing $150,000 $78,930 1.9

blowers for vapor-absorption system

Replace direct steam injection into pulpers $16,000 $55,500 0.3

with steam heat exchangers on fill water

Improve insulation on steam pipes $3,200 $6,100 0.5

TABLE 2. SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES EVALUATED FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS AT

CARAUSTAR’S RITTMAN MILL

Estimated Project Estimated Estimated

Implementation Annual Simple Payback

System/Process Cost Savings (years)

Reconstruct powerhouse steam turbine- $2,800,000 $1,130,000 2.5

generators

Benchmark mill energy use n/a n/a n/a

Replace direct steam injection into pulpers $32,200 $27,150 1.2

with fill water heat exchangers

Steam injection stock heater modifications $150,000 $70,700 2.1

(convert stock heaters to heat exchangers)

Eliminate coater oven steam requirements n/a n/a n/a

Renovate vapor-absorption systems and use n/a n/a n/a

direct stack gas heat recovery from boilers

(continues) 
Energy Matters, Spring 2003 7

Energy accounts for 15% to 25% of each

mill’s total operating expenses, and is third

only to raw material and labor in a mill’s

operating cost structure.

Caraustar has made a commitment to

continually maintain and improve its paperboard mills. During the past 5 years, Caraustar has spent over $30 million annually in

capital expenditures, primarily to expand

and upgrade its paperboard production, and

to convert capacity by acquiring and maintaining state-of-the-art machinery and 

technology. 

Assessment Overview

Caraustar has historically monitored the

cost per ton of paper produced in its Mill

Group. As a result of this study, the company

has also begun to document energy costs for

the Industrial and Consumer Products and

Packaging divisions. 

Caraustar conducted the plant-wide

energy assessment in association with Sterling Energy Services, LLC. The project was

partially funded by the Department of

Energy’s (DOE) Industrial Technologies Program. The assessment team conducted comprehensive plant energy efficiency reviews

using a systems approach combined with

industry standard practices. Opportunities

for energy savings were identified and documented, then evaluated and prioritized based

on potential for energy savings. Maintenance

practices and operating procedures were 

also reviewed for their impact on energy 

efficiency.

Assessment Implementation

The assessment team first developed complete lists of the energy-consuming production and mill utility processes (steam,

compressed air, and on-site power production). The team conducted detailed audits of

the processed believed to have the greatest

energy savings potential.

The areas investigated included:

• Steam systems

• Cogeneration assessment

• Waste heat recovery

• Motor analysis

• Compressed air systems

• Lighting systems

• Electric variable speed drive analysis.

Seven specific systems and processes were

evaluated in detail for efficiency improvement or cost reductions for the Chesapeake

mill.

(Caraustar closed the Chesapeake mill in

the spring of 2000 because of overcapacity in

the industry and other

issues. In spite of this closure, Caraustar realized that

the assessment’s findings

were valid for similar 

facilities.)

The systems and processes

evaluated at the Chesapeake

mill included:

• Backpressure steam 

turbine generator

• Boiler feed pump 

variable speed electric

drive

• Boiler feed pump 

steam turbine drive

• Paper machine #2 

variable speed electric

drive retrofit

• Vapor-absorption 

system boiler stack 

heat recovery

• Stock pulper fill water 

heat exchangers

• Improved insulation of steam pipes.

Six systems and processes were also evaluated for efficiency improvements at the

Rittman mill. These included:

• Project requirements analysis for mill 

cogeneration (replacement or retrofit of 

existing operations)

• Benchmarking mill operations’ energy 

use

• Pulper fill water heat exchangers

• Modifications to steam injection stock 

heater

• Coater oven steam requirement efficiency or elimination

• Heat recovery for vapor-absorption system.

Actions Identified in the Assessment

The plant-wide studies concentrated on

identification of energy efficiency improvements for Caraustar’s Chesapeake and

Rittman mills, with an extended focus on the

development of efficiency concepts that

could be transferred to other Caraustar facilities. Many of the efficiency measures identified and evaluated in this assessment will

benefit other Caraustar mills as well as those

of other recycled paperboard manufacturers.

These include:

• Motor procurement and efficiency 

improvements

• Backpressure steam turbine generators

• Boiler feed pump variable speed drives

• Stack heat recovery to vapor-absorption 

systems

• Pulper fill water heat exchangers

• Steam pipe insulation.

The application of these energy efficiency

measures is being reviewed for other Caraustar mills. In addition to the energy efficiency

measures identified, other measures were

found that did not offer immediate benefits

for either Chesapeake or Rittman, but should

offer some benefits to other Caraustar locations. These measures include:

• Boiler forced draft fan variable speed 

drives

• Paper machine dryer section drive 

retrofits.

Before initiating the two mill energy

assessments, Caraustar had already undertaken a project to inventory electric motors

at selected mills to identify savings opportunities that could be realized from implementation of a formal motor management

program. The plant-wide energy assessment

permitted the project team to accelerate the

motor management effort. As a result,

Caraustar has implemented a corporate 

procurement program for electric motors,

power transmission, and related industrial

equipment that has reduced the cost of 

purchasing these items, and boosted the

opportunities to improve the overall efficiency of each plant’s motor inventory. The

plant-wide energy assessment project has

been an important component in extending

Caraustar’s focus on energy efficiency and

cost reduction measures in all divisions.

(continued on page 11) 

Paperboard production may be significantly improved

with energy saving measures initiated through a detailed 

evaluation process.
8 Energy Matters, Spring 2003

New Reference Manual Available for Compressed Air Systems

The Compressed Air Challenge® (CAC), an

Industrial Technologies Program Allied 

Partner, has published a new manual, Best

Practices Manual for Compressed Air Systems.

The 350-page manual provides “how to”

information and reference data, and will

help you implement recommendations that

will achieve peak performance and reliability

from your compressed air system at the lowest operating cost. 

The CAC is an educational organization

that promotes the efficient generation and

use of compressed air. It is a not-for-profit

voluntary collaboration of industrial users;

manufacturers, distributors and their associations; facility operation personnel and their

associations; energy efficiency organizations;

and utilities. The CAC has been an Allied

Partner since August 2002.

As an Allied Partner, the CAC’s activities

include working with DOE and other sponsors to promote Compressed Air Challenge

training workshops; supporting AIRMaster+

software enhancements; developing operator-level training and certification; and

encouraging participants and sponsors to

identify case study candidates.

The CAC’s newly published best-practices

manual, which includes more than 150

pages of original text and 200 pages of reference data appendices, will help you:

• Reduce your company’s energy and

repair costs

• Improve system reliability

• Increase productivity

• Reduce unscheduled downtime.

In addition, the manual will help you

know what is essential when analyzing 

existing systems, or designing new ones. You

will learn what is important in the compressor room, the auxiliary equipment, and distribution system to satisfy the variety of end

uses in any manufacturing plant. And the

manual provides guidance in determining

how to compile and use measurements to

audit your own system, calculate the cost of

compressed air, and even how to interpret

electric utility bills. 

The manual also offers easy-to-find best

practice recommendations for selecting,

installing, maintaining and operating all the

equipment and components within your

entire compressed air system.

To find out more about reserving a copy,

visit the Compressed Air Challenge website

at www.compressedairchallenge.org, or call

Patricia Vazquez at 301-888-2358. To learn

more about the Allied Partner program, contact the OIT Clearinghouse at 800-862-2086

or via e-mail, Clearinghouse@ee.doe.gov.●

Steel Industry of the Future CD Now Available

U.S. steel manufacturers seeking to gain a

competitive edge now have a new resource

to help them become more energy and

process efficient. Steel Industry of the

Future: Resources and Tools for Energy 

Efficiency and Cost Reduction Now, a new

CD published by DOE, provides a wealth of

information and tools on technical R&D

and best energy management practices. 

This new CD contains details on innovative energy efficiency technologies, energy

analysis software tools, hands-on tips, plant

energy assessment information, training

opportunities, financial assistance, and

much more. In addition, helpful links to

Internet sites provide expanded access to

even more resources.

The information, resources, and tools on

the CD are organized and presented to help

steel manufacturers and plant personnel

make decisions to cut costs and emissions,

increase productivity, and form competitive

partnerships.

Plant personnel serve different roles in

running plant operations and production.

To help meet the varying needs of plant

staff, the CD content is organized to address

the specific needs of a variety of audiences.

Whether you are a CEO, CFO, Plant Manager, Technical Officer, R&D Manager, Operations and Engineering staff, or Service

Provider, the Steel CD offers content tailored to answer your needs.

The CD also offers a quick-access quiz.

Plant personnel taking the quiz can keep

track of their answers and rate their plant

against industry best practices. After each

answer, the user obtains a response with

specific ideas for plant improvements, as

well as which BestPractices resources will be

most helpful.

To order your copy of Steel Industry 

of the Future: Resources and Tools for

Energy Efficiency and Cost Reduction Now,

contact the DOE’s Industrial Technologies

Clearinghouse at 800-862-2086 or via 

e-mail, Clearinghouse@ee.doe.gov.●

In the Spring issue of Energy Matters Extra

we offer additional information on how

energy assessments can reveal cost- and

energy-saving opportunities. From the

Energy Matters Extra Web page you can

access our Plant-Wide Assessment Case

Study page. There you’ll find how various

companies have assessed their industrial

plants and how they have saved money,

improved production and efficiency, and

reduced environmental impact. Frequently,

projects can be replicated across many

industries. Find out which projects could

help your company

We’ve also included extra information

and links to the Process Heating Assessment

and Survey Tool (PHAST), the BestPractices

Steam Resources CD, the Steel Industry of the

Future CD, Compressed Air system improvement training, and the new Fan Sourcebook.

Log on to Energy Matters Extra at

http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/

energymatters/emextra/●

EXTRA ENERGY MATTERS
Energy Matters, Spring 2003 9

More than 470 energy professionals, government officials and researchers from across the

country convened in Houston in March for

the 2003 Texas Technology Showcase. The

three-day event provided an opportunity to

see energy-efficient process technologies and

best energy management practices that are

now emerging in the chemical and refining

industries. 

The U.S. Department of Energy and the

Texas Industries of the Future sponsored the

event, and showcased 7 chemical producers

and refiners in the Houston area. Some

companies presented energy reduction 

technologies via educational sessions while

others hosted tours of their Houston-area

facilities. Showcase companies profiled during the event included: Calpine, Chevron

Phillips Chemical Company, Dow Chemical, ExxonMobil, Merisol, Rohm and Haas

Texas Inc., and Valero Energy Corporation.

There was also a powerful roster of

speakers at the event. Jim Gallogly, president and CEO, Chevron Phillips Chemical

Company LP, was the keynote speaker. In

his presentation, “From Smokestacks to

Emerald Cities,” Gallogly focused on telling

the chemical industry’s story better and on the

importance of having a better story to tell.

Other speakers included David Garman,

assistant secretary, Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of

Energy; Chairman Robert J. Huston, Texas

Commission on Environmental Quality, and

Commissioner Victor Carrillo, Texas Railroad

Commission. Garman, Huston, and Carrillo

discussed legislative and related issues,

detailing national and Texas developments.

Other highlights from the 2003 Texas

Technology Showcase included:

• It provided a forum for industry, political

and governmental leaders to work

together, showcase industry best practices, new technologies, and partnerships

that will change the way the chemical

and refining industries tackle emissions

reduction and improve efficiency

• Government, industry and researchers

had the chance to tour Houston-area

petrochemical facilities and see firsthand how the Showcase companies are

working to improve energy efficiency

and address environmental concerns

• It facilitated communication between

petrochemical companies to discuss

Compressed Air System Project Improves Efficiency and Production at Harland Publishing Facility

In 1999, a project was implemented on a

compressed air application at the testing

facility of the John H. Harland Corporation

printing plant in Atlanta, Georgia. Inspired

by a review conducted by DOE Allied 

Partner, Air System Management, the project reconfigured a new type of printing

machine to consume less compressed 

air and require lower pressure to operate

effectively. 

The project’s implementation allowed

the site to significantly reduce the amount

of compressed air the new printing

machines required, and to discontinue use

of the machines’ onboard compressors. The

project was replicated throughout the company the following year. The total cost of

the project was $300,000 and its success

allowed Harland to avoid buying additional

compressors at a cost of over $500,000. By

not buying additional compressors, Harland

avoided spending $200,000 annually on

energy and maintenance and avoided consuming 2.9 million kilowatt-hours (kWh) of

electricity. In addition, the project’s 

implementation improved the new printing

machine’s performance, resulting in better

product quality and reduced production

cycle time.

Configuring end-use applications so that

they use the minimum amount of compressed air at the lowest

necessary pressure is an

effective way to control

compressed air energy costs.

In the case of Harland’s

check printing facility, a

new printing machine’s

initial configuration more

than doubled the entire

site’s compressed air

demand. After a review,

Harland personnel realized that redesigning the

new machines to consume

less air at lower pressures

would be more cost-effective

than increasing compressor

capacity company-wide.

Adding compressor

capacity should be done when truly necessary. In Harland’s case, assumptions regarding the minimum pressure level and volume

needed for an application could have doubled compressor capacity throughout the

company. Instead, the review indicated that

the printing machine could operate satisfactorily with the company’s existing compressed air capacity if it was redesigned.

Optimal configuration of compressed air 

end-use equipment saves energy and

improves productivity.

The BestPractices team supports plant

assessments and demonstration projects.

Take a look at what others in your industry

have done to increase their energy savings

by reading their case studies. You can view

these documents at http://www.oit.doe.gov/

bestpractices/case_studies.shtml. Or, order

a document from the Industrial Technologies

Program Clearinghouse. You can e-mail the

Clearinghouse at Clearinghouse@ee.doe.gov,

or call 800-862-2086.●

Printing machine redesign and measures to reduce end-use

requirements allowed Harland Publishing to achieve greater

efficiency through reduced compressed air demand.

(continued on page 11) 

Chemical and Refining Industries a Focus of Texas Technology Showcase
10 Energy Matters, Spring 2003

30 steam system improvement opportunities

is 674 trillion Btu.

This data illustrates two key results.

• Individual fuel saving opportunities can 

be significant, especially because facilities can often implement several steam 

system improvements. Because most 

payback periods are less than 2 years, 

these improvements are generally 

worth considering.

• Total potential energy savings associated

with steam improvements are significant,

amounting to over 12% for each target 

industry.

The BestPractices Steam program has

developed a number of software tools and

resources that can be used to identify the

types of steam improvement opportunities

illustrated in the Steam Assessment. These

tools include:

• The Steam System Scoping Tool (SSST), 

a simple self-assessment tool that can 

be used to assess the major steam system

best practice areas

• The Steam System Survey Guide, a 

technical reference document that provides details on how to calculate the 

magnitude of potential steam savings 

for key improvement areas

• The new Steam System Assessment 

Tool (SSAT), a spreadsheet-based steam 

system opportunity assessment tool 

that can be used to demonstrate the 

magnitude—energy, cost, and emission 

savings—for major steam system 

improvment opportunities

• The 3E-Plus Insulation Appraisal software, that can be used to determine 

energy, cost, and emissions savings 

associated with improving insulation 

on steam piping systems.

The BestPractices Steam program also

offers a 1-day Steam System Training course

on a regional basis, and will be developing a

Steam Tool Certification Training program in

the near future.

To download a complete copy of the

Steam Assessment, visit http://www.oit.

doe.gov/cfm/fullarticle.cfm/id=691.●

Steam Assesment Gauges Energy Savings continued from page 3

Figure 4. Total industry fuel savings for each part of the steam system.

0 0.50 1.00 1.50

Industry Fuel Savings (%)

Note that the Recovery, all the End-Use Opportunities, the Distribution, and the Generation categories include multiple opportunities.

2.00 2.50 3.00

SO—Plant-Wide Testing/Maintenance

SO—Insulation

SO—Steam Trap Management

SO—Water Treatment

Combined Heat and Power

Recovery

EU—Petroleum Refining

EU—Chemical Manufacturing

EU—Pulp and Paper

Distribution

Generation

Legend:

SO = Special Opportunities

EU = End Use

TABLE 1. TOTAL POTENTIAL STEAM SYSTEM ENERGY SAVINGS BY INDUSTRY

Industry Fuel Fuel Used to Generate Savings Potential

Industry Savings (%) Steam (Trillion Btu) (Trillion Btu)

Pulp and Paper 12.5 2,221 278

Chemical Manufacturing 12.4 1,540 191

Petroleum Refining 12.2 1,675 205

Total 674

Updates Energize Decision Tools

for Industry CD

A newly updated version of the Decision

Tools for Industry CD is now available, 

featuring an even more robust portfolio of

assessment tools. The CD includes updates to

the highly useful MotorMaster+ software

(version 4.0) and AirMaster+ software 

programs (version 1.0.9), and two new tools:

the Steam System Assessment Tool (SSAT)

and the Process Heating Assessment and 

Survey Tool (PHAST).

The SSAT software can be applied to your

steam system to demonstrate the energy,

cost, and emissions savings of key potential

improvement opportunities. The SSAT is a

reliable screening tool that contains the key

features of typical steam systems, including

boilers, steam turbines, condensate systems,

and deaerators.

SSAT offers a graphical model of a generic

steam system for up to 3 steam pressure

headers (high, medium, and low). You can

enter data for your own plant conditions,

including fuel type and cost, electricity, water

costs, initial boiler efficiency, header pressures, and turbine efficiencies. The tool

allows you to evaluate “what if?” scenarios

for a wide range of key improvement 

opportunities.

PHAST provides an introduction to

process heating methods and tools to

improve thermal efficiency of heating equipment. Use the tool to survey process heating

equipment that uses fuel, steam, or electricity, and identify the most energy-intensive

equipment. You can also perform an energy

(heat) balance on selected equipment 

(furnaces) to identify and reduce nonproductive energy use. Compare performance

of the furnace under various operating conditions and test “what-if” scenarios. 

Also updated on the same CD is the

Steam System Scoping Tool (version 1.0d) to

include Visual Basic as well as Excel user

options.

The software suite offered on the Decision

Tools for Industry CD also includes 3E Plus,

designed to help determine whether boiler

systems can be optimized by insulating boiler

steam lines. The software allows you to calculate the most economical thickness of industrial insulation for a variety of operating

conditions.

To obtain your copy of the Decision Tools

for Industry CD, contact the DOE’s Industrial

Technologies Clearinghouse at 800-862-2086

or clearinghouse@ee.doe.gov.●
Energy Matters, Spring 2003 11

A Symptoms Approach

continued from page 5

Texas Showcase continued from page 9

Caraustar continued from page 7 About the Office of Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy

A Strong Energy Portfolio for a Strong 

America

Energy efficiency and clean, renewable energy

will mean a stronger economy, a cleaner environment, and greater energy independence for

America. By investing in technology breakthroughs today, our nation can look forward

to a more resilient economy and secure future.

Far-reaching technology changes will be essential to America's energy future. Working with a

wide array of state, community, industry, and

university partners, the U.S. Department of

Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy invests in a portfolio of

energy technologies that will:

• Conserve energy in the residential, commercial, industrial, government, and transportation sectors 

• Increase and diversify energy supply, with a 

focus on renewable domestic sources 

• Upgrade our national energy infrastructure 

• Facilitate the emergence of hydrogen 

technologies as a vital new “energy carrier.” 

The Opportunities

Biomass Program

Using domestic, plant-derived resources to meet

our fuel, power, and chemical needs

Building Technologies Program

Homes, schools, and businesses that use less

energy, cost less to operate, and ultimately, generate as much power as they use

Distributed Energy & Electric Reliability Program

A more reliable energy infrastructure and reduced

need for new power plants

Federal Energy Management Program

Leading by example, saving energy and taxpayer

dollars in federal facilities 

FreedomCAR & Vehicle Technologies Program

Less dependence on foreign oil, and eventual

transition to an emissions-free, petroleum-free

vehicle

Geothermal Technologies Program

Tapping the earth’s energy to meet our heat and

power needs

Hydrogen, Fuel Cells & Infrastructure Technologies 

Program

Paving the way toward a hydrogen economy and

net-zero carbon energy future

Industrial Technologies Program

Boosting the productivity and competitiveness of

U.S. industry through improvements in energy

and environmental performance

Solar Energy Technology Program

Utilizing the sun’s natural energy to generate

electricity and provide water and space heating 

Weatherization & Intergovernmental Program

Accelerating the use of today's best energyefficient and renewable technologies in homes,

communities, and businesses 

Wind & Hydropower Technologies Program

Harnessing America's abundant natural resources

for clean power generation

To learn more, visit www.eere.energy.gov

systems with savings potential of 40% or

more even when none of these symptoms

was present.

But since all of us have a finite amount

of time, and hopefully our time is worth

something to someone, it is incumbent

upon us to use it wisely. I’ve personally

found the symptom-based prescreening to

be very helpful, and hope you might find it

beneficial as well. 

Diagnosis and Prescription

When the symptoms of health problems

or energy opportunities appear to warrant

it, measurements and analyses are often performed to establish the magnitude of the

problem. If the magnitude is significant

enough, the evaluation of possible treatments may be pursued. 

But it is important to recognize that

there is no panacea in either the human or

the energy system domains. The best treatment for an ailment in humans may

depend on multiple factors such as age,

other health problems, and our ability to

pay the costs. Likewise, external factors such

as the electric rate structure, implementation costs of alternatives, current and 

anticipated company financial health must

be considered.

So how do we quantify the potential 

savings opportunities in systems that appear

to be worth exploring? And even more fundamentally, what do we do with all the 

systems that don’t fit our prescreening 

criteria—either because they're small, don’t

operate a lot, or don’t exhibit any of these

symptoms? 

We’ll try to address those questions in

future articles.

References

1. RCM—Gateway to a World Class

Maintenance Program, Anthony M. (Mac)

Smith, Energy Matters, January/February,

2000.

2. Performance Optimization Tips—The

Vital Few, Don Casada, Energy Matters, 

September/October, 2000.●

BESTPRACTICES STEAM RESOURCES

CD AVAILABLE

The BestPractices Steam Resources CD offers

steam-savvy users all the latest BestPractices

steam information on one pocket-sized CD. 

If it has to do with steam, it’s on this new

CD: market assessments and tip sheets, standalone software tools, information on BestPractices services, even contacts and ideas for

networking and training.

If you are looking for ways to increase your

plant’s productivity, reduce energy costs, 

and decrease emissions through steam 

efficiency, this CD is a good source to get you

started.

To order your copy of the BestPractices

Steam Resources CD, contact DOE’s 

Industrial Technologies Clearinghouse at 800-

862-2086 or clearinghouse@ee.doe.gov.

For plant-wide assessment program 

information, contact Grace Ordaz of the

Department of Energy’s Industrial Technologies Program by phone at 202-586-8350 or

by e-mail at grace.ordaz@ee.doe.gov. For

technical details about the assessments, visit

www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/amcast.pdf, or contact Bob Leach 

of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory by

phone at 865-946-1352 or by e-mail at

leachre@ornl.gov.●

strategies for joint projects and partnerships

that would help reduce emissions, waste,

and costs while improving energy efficiency.

Sponsors of the 2003 Texas Technology

Showcase who promoted the event to their

membership, mailing lists, customers, and

others included: American Institute of

Chemical Engineers; American Petroleum

Institute; Center for Energy and Environmental Resources at the University of Texas;

Council of Industrial Boiler Owners; East

Harris County Manufacturers Association;

Greater Houston Partnership; National

Petrochemical & Refiners Association; South

Texas Section of the American Institute of

Chemical Engineers; State Energy Conservation Office of the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts; Texas A&M University

Industrial Assessment Center; Texas Chemical Council; Texas Commission on Environmental Quality; and the Texas Council on

Environmental Technology.

More information on the Texas Technology Showcase is available at www.showcasetexas.org ●
This document was produced for the Office of

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy at the 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) by the 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 

a DOE national laboratory.

DOE/GO-102003-1720 • Spring 2003

T OF ENERGY

DEPARTMEN

U

E

NITED STAT S OFA ERICA

M

Printed with a renewable-source ink on paper containing

at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer

waste

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

1617 Cole Boulevard

Golden, CO 80401-3393

PRSRT STD

U.S. Postage

PAID

Permit No. 258

Golden, Colorado

BestPractices

The Industrial Technologies Program’s 

BestPractices initiative and its Energy 

Matters newsletter introduce industrial end

users to emerging technologies and wellproven, cost-saving opportunities in motor,

steam, compressed air, and other plant-wide

systems. 

FUNDAMENTALS OF COMPRESSED AIR WORKSHOP, DENVER, CO

■ Aug 19, 2003 

For more information, contact Roy Tiley, (410) 997-7778 

NEVADA ENERGY FAIR , ELKO, NV

■ Aug 25 - Aug 29, 2003 

For more information, contact Michael Canty, Mining Team Lead, (202) 586-8119 

NORTH AMERICAN DIE CASTING ASSOCIATION (NADCA) 

■ Sep 15 - Sep 18, 2003 

For more information, contact Harvey Wong, Metal Casting Team Lead, (202) 586-9235 

MOTOR SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT END USER TRAINING, CHARLESTON, WV

■ Sep 24, 2003 

For more information, contact Roy Tiley, (410) 997-7778 

PUMP, STEAM AND COMPRESSED AIR TRAINING, HOUSTON, TX 

■ Oct 27 - Oct 29, 2003 

For more information, contact David Salem, Chemical and Petroleum Team, (202) 586-8710 

Coming Events

DOE Regional Office Representatives

■ David Godfrey, Atlanta, GA, 

404-562-0568

■ Scott Hutchins, Boston, MA, 

617-565-9765

■ Brian Olsen, Chicago, IL, 

312-886-8479

■ Jack Jenkins, Denver, CO, 

303-275-4824

■ Chris Cockrill, Seattle, WA, 

816-873-3299

■ Joseph Barrett, Philadelphia, PA, 

215-656-6957

INFORMATION

CLEARINGHOUSE

Do you have questions about 

using energy-efficient process and 

utility systems in your industrial facility?

Call the Industrial Technologies Program’s

Information Clearinghouse for answers, 

Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 

8:00 p.m. (EST).

Fax: 360-586-8303, or access our 

homepage at www.oit.doe.gov/

clearinghouse.

HOTLINE: 800-862-2086

Energy Matters