Energy use and implications for efficiency strategies in global fluid-milk processing industry

Xu, Tengfang; Flapper, Joris

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2009.07.056

Cited by 42 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But, energy efficient food production is not yet really achieved and dairy products are not an exception. For this reason, the production with the efficient use of energy has been the subject of many academic fields, especially in industry especially in recent years [2,3,4]. Yoghurt producing facilities that are running in Turkey are usually using conventional methods that are consuming much more energy than the process would consume.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Energy Efficient System Design for Incubation Process and Cooling of Yoghurt

Karaca

Dolgun²,

Mavuş³

et al. 2020

Politeknik Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Energy Efficient System Design for Incubation Process and Cooling of Yoghurt

Karaca

Dolgun²,

Mavuş³

et al. 2020

Politeknik Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Use of best practices have helped processing plants reduce energy use in the form of steam, electricity, compressed air, and refrigeration by 5 to 30% (Doty and Turner, 2009;Tomasula and Nutter, 2011). To compare benchmarked individual plants to the average industry performance, Xu and Flapper (2009) reported energy information data for fluid milk plants throughout the United States and other dairying countries. The energy performance in the United States, reported in terms of the specific energy consumption (SEC), the energy usage of the entire plant divided by the total fluid milk production, ranged from 0.2 to 6.0 MJ/kg of fluid milk.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer simulation of energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and process economics of the fluid milk process

Tomasula¹,

Yee

McAloon

et al. 2013

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy-savings measures have been implemented in fluid milk plants to lower energy costs and the energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Although these measures have resulted in reductions in steam, electricity, compressed air, and refrigeration use of up to 30%, a benchmarking framework is necessary to examine the implementation of process-specific measures that would lower energy use, costs, and CO2 emissions even further. In this study, using information provided by the dairy industry and equipment vendors, a customizable model of the fluid milk process was developed for use in process design software to benchmark the electrical and fuel energy consumption and CO2 emissions of current processes. It may also be used to test the feasibility of new processing concepts to lower energy and CO2 emissions with calculation of new capital and operating costs. The accuracy of the model in predicting total energy usage of the entire fluid milk process and the pasteurization step was validated using available literature and industry energy data. Computer simulation of small (40.0 million L/yr), medium (113.6 million L/yr), and large (227.1 million L/yr) processing plants predicted the carbon footprint of milk, defined as grams of CO2 equivalents (CO2e) per kilogram of packaged milk, to within 5% of the value of 96 g of CO 2e/kg of packaged milk obtained in an industry-conducted life cycle assessment and also showed, in agreement with the same study, that plant size had no effect on the carbon footprint of milk but that larger plants were more cost effective in producing milk. Analysis of the pasteurization step showed that increasing the percentage regeneration of the pasteurizer from 90 to 96% would lower its thermal energy use by almost 60% and that implementation of partial homogenization would lower electrical energy use and CO2e emissions of homogenization by 82 and 5.4%, respectively. It was also demonstrated that implementation of steps to lower non-process-related electrical energy in the plant would be more effective in lowering energy use and CO2e emissions than fuel-related energy reductions. The model also predicts process-related water usage, but this portion of the model was not validated due to a lack of data. The simulator model can serve as a benchmarking framework for current plant operations and a tool to test cost-effective process upgrades or evaluate new technologies that improve the energy efficiency and lower the carbon footprint of milk processing plants.

show abstract

“…The energy use and percentage contribution to the total energy use of each of the unit operations in the processes, extending from milk reception and storage in silos to cold storage of the packaged product, are shown in Table 2. Specific energy consumption, which is useful for comparing the efficiencies across different fluid milk processing plants (Xu and Flapper, 2009), is also reported. The FMPM was verified by comparison to actual plant data and data from the literature (Tomasula et al, 2013).…”

Section: Energy Use Of Simulated Plantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Energy information data for fluid milk plants throughout the United States and other dairying countries have been provided by Xu and Flapper (2009) so that individual plants may benchmark their performance. This information was provided in terms of the specific energy consumption (SEC), which is the energy use of the entire plant divided by the total milk production of the plant, with values ranging from 0.2 to 6.0 MJ/kg of fluid milk product.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer simulation of energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and costs for alternative methods of processing fluid milk

Tomasula

Datta

Yee

et al. 2014

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer simulation is a useful tool for benchmarking electrical and fuel energy consumption and water use in a fluid milk plant. In this study, a computer simulation model of the fluid milk process based on high temperature, short time (HTST) pasteurization was extended to include models for processes for shelfstable milk and extended shelf-life milk that may help prevent the loss or waste of milk that leads to increases in the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for fluid milk. The models were for UHT processing, crossflow microfiltration (MF) without HTST pasteurization, crossflow MF followed by HTST pasteurization (MF/HTST), crossflow MF/HTST with partial homogenization, and pulsed electric field (PEF) processing, and were incorporated into the existing model for the fluid milk process. Simulation trials were conducted assuming a production rate for the plants of 113.6 million liters of milk per year to produce only whole milk (3.25%) and 40% cream. Results showed that GHG emissions in the form of process-related CO 2 emissions, defined as CO 2 equivalents (e)/kg of raw milk processed (RMP), and specific energy consumptions (SEC) for electricity and natural gas use for the HTST process alone were 37.6 g of CO 2 e/kg of RMP, 0.14 MJ/kg of RMP, and 0.13 MJ/kg of RMP, respectively. Emissions of CO 2 and SEC for electricity and natural gas use were highest for the PEF process, with values of 99.1 g of CO 2 e/kg of RMP, 0.44 MJ/kg of RMP, and 0.10 MJ/kg of RMP, respectively, and lowest for the UHT process at 31.4 g of CO 2 e/kg of RMP, 0.10 MJ/kg of RMP, and 0.17 MJ/ kg of RMP. Estimated unit production costs associated with the various processes were lowest for the HTST process and MF/HTST with partial homogenization at $0.507/L and highest for the UHT process at $0.60/L. The increase in shelf life associated with the UHT and MF processes may eliminate some of the supply chain product and consumer losses and waste of milk and compensate for the small increases in GHG emissions or total SEC noted for these processes compared with HTST pasteurization alone. The water use calculated for the HTST and PEF processes were both 0.245 kg of water/kg of RMP. The highest water use was associated with the MF/HTST process, which required 0.333 kg of water/kg of RMP, with the additional water required for membrane cleaning. The simulation model is a benchmarking framework for current plant operations and a tool for evaluating the costs of process upgrades and new technologies that improve energy efficiency and water savings.

show abstract

Energy use and implications for efficiency strategies in global fluid-milk processing industry

Cited by 42 publications

References 7 publications

High Energy Efficient System Design for Incubation Process and Cooling of Yoghurt

High Energy Efficient System Design for Incubation Process and Cooling of Yoghurt

Computer simulation of energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and process economics of the fluid milk process

Computer simulation of energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and costs for alternative methods of processing fluid milk

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About