A general methodology for energy efficiency of industrial chemical processes

Pouransari, Nasibeh; Mercier, Mathilde; Sauvion, Guy-Noel; Maréchal, François

doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-63433-7.50053-5

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The effectiveness of the Pinch Analysis methodology in analysing production processes and identifying possible actions for their improvement is broadly recognised. Reported case studies range from the petrochemical industry (detected savings ranged from 10 % [44], to 23 % [45,46], up to 33 % [47]), to the biochemical industry (39 % [48]) and other processes proper to the chemical industry (53 % [49] and 75 % [50]), to food industry (24% [51] and 25 % [52]), pulp and paper (66 % [53]), and textile industry (51 % [54]), to cite a few. As to whether it should be used for analysing industrial processes in general terms, this is a choice of the analyst.…”

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of optimal measurement points for energy monitoring of industrial processes: The case of milk powder production

Bergamini

Nguyen

Bellemo³

et al. 2021

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of optimal measurement points for energy monitoring of industrial processes: The case of milk powder production

Bergamini

Nguyen

Bellemo³

et al. 2021

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…centrifuge, filtering and heating), the energy consumption can be reduced by 16-20% by adopting best available technologies (BAT). 59,60 The heat demand from upstream sources can be reduced by utilizing low grade waste heat (energy pinching), which is estimated to increase energy efficiency by circa a factor 1.2, [61][62][63][64] while electricity efficiency may be increased by use of kinetic energy recovery systems or improving the efficiency of electricity using systems, this can yield electricity savings between 5-40%. 64,65 Methanol is produced from natural gas, through synthesis gas, which is then converted to methanol using metal oxide catalysts.…”

Section: Energy and Environmental Science Papermentioning

confidence: 99%

Power generation from chemically cleaned coals: do environmental benefits of firing cleaner coal outweigh environmental burden of cleaning?

Ryberg

Owsianiak

Laurent

2015

Energy Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Power generation from high-ash coals is a niche technology for power generation, but coal cleaning is deemed necessary to avoid problems associated with low combustion efficiencies and to minimize environmental burdens associated with emissions of pollutants originating from ash. Here, chemical beneficiation of coals using acid and alkali-acid leaching procedures is evaluated as a potential coal cleaning technology employing life cycle assessment (LCA). Taking into account the environmental benefits from firing cleaner coal in pulverized coal power plants and the environmental burden of the cleaning itself, it is demonstrated that for a wide range of cleaning procedures and types of coal, chemical cleaning generally performs worse than combustion of the raw coals and physical cleaning using dense medium separation. These findings apply for many relevant impact categories, including climate change. Chemical cleaning can be optimized with regard to electricity, heat and methanol use for the hydrothermal washing step, and could have environmental impact comparable to that of physical cleaning if the overall resource intensiveness of chemical cleaning is reduced by a factor 5 to 10, depending on the impact category. The largest potential of the technology is observed for high-ash lignites, with initial ash content above 30%, for which the environmental benefits from firing cleaner coal can outweigh the environmental burden of cleaning for some impact categories. Overall, we recommend to policy makers that coal cleaning using acid or alkali-acid leaching procedures should not be considered for direct implementation as a coal beneficiation technology. We encourage further research on chemical cleaning and its optimization, however, as chemical cleaning has advantages that might make it attractive for cleaning of difficult to treat coals when compared to the less efficient option of physical cleaning. Broader contextThe use of fossil coal for generation of electricity is a major cause of many environmental problems globally. Pulverized coal-fired power plants currently account for 97% of total coal-based electricity generation globally, and are expected to constitute a significant proportion of the environmental burden attributable to power generation also in the future. Chemical cleaning of high-ash coals can potentially mitigate some environmental impacts from firing coal in pulverized power plants, as it allows reaching higher ash removal efficiencies as compared to physical cleaning, but virtually nothing is known about whether environmental benefits from firing cleaner coal outweigh environmental burdens of cleaning. Here, life cycle assessment (LCA) is employed to evaluate chemical beneficiation of coals using acid and alkali-acid leaching procedures. The results showed that demineralization is generally not a feasible option for mitigating environmental impacts, including impacts from climate change, except in few cases where regional and local impacts were improved for high-ash coal systems. This work highlights...

show abstract