Energy Efficiency andEnergy Use

Nico Beute

Energy InstituteCape Peninsula University of Technology

National Foundry Technology Network7 April 2011

Overview

• Global Energy Issues and Energy sources

• The South African Energy Situation• Why must we be Energy conscious• Who must do what• Conclusion

Yearly Solar Power from sun and human energy consumption

• Solar 3 850 000 EJ (Exa Joules = 1018 J)– solar energy per m2 = a bit more than 1 kW

• Wind 2 250 EJ• Biomass 3 000 EJ• Primary energy use (2005) 487 EJ• Electricity (2005) 57 EJ

Oil Production in non OPEC non Soviet Union Countries

Energy supply and demand : SA

5

IEA, Energy Balance 2005

Total Primary Energy Supply Total Final Energy Consumption

IEA, Energy Balance 2005Total=134.4 Mtoe

Coal

68.39%

Crude Oil

16.50%

Gas

2.70%

Nuclear

2.19%

Hydro

0.14%

Geothermal,

Solar, etc.0.07%

Combustible

Renewables and Waste

10.02%

Coal

23.44%

Petroleum

Products31.71%

Gas

2.91%

Combustible

Renewables and Waste

15.36%

Electricity

26.57%

Total=64.2 Mtoe

Energy Consumption per capita

RSA

USA

ChinaIndia

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

F.U.S.S.RChina

South AfricaIndonesia

Middle EastIndia

AfricaCanada

KoreaTaiwan

SingaporeAustralia

U.S.A.France

GermanyItalyUK

Japan

Energy intensity (Thousand Btu/USD)

Energy intensity of selected countries

7

2005

Source: EDMC, 2008

000’s BTU / US$ GDP

1993 First DUEReserve Margin

36%

25%

Maximum Demand 1988 to 2008

Average increase app. 3.5%Nearly doubles in 20 years

249.69252.25 250.86

258.63

270.31

250.42

258.58

265.44

273.17

279.75

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

254.92

258.58259.87

270.06

285.08

250.42

258.58

265.44

273.17279.75

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

99

Defining the ProblemQuantification of the Energy Gap

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014-4.3 1.3 9.6 9.5 4.4 Gap0.7 6.3 14.6 14.5 9.4 + Buffer

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014-4.5 0 5.6 3.1 -5.3

Demand: Reference

Supply:84% EAF

InitialGap

(TWh)

Demand: Reference

Supply:84% EAF Delay

MYPD2 Additional Contingencies

Additional Buffer

Present Condition in South Africa

GAPSUPPLY

►Build Plan ►Mitigation Plan• RTS - Co-generation• Medupi - Imports• Ingula - Self generation• OCGT - Standby generation• CCGT - Independent Power

Producers (IPPs)

DEMAND

► Mitigation Plan• DSM• DMP

Various Scenariosfor growth and supply capacity

DEMAND REDUCTION OPTIONS Load shedding Rolling blackouts Prioritisation of new load Intensified Demand Side Management Power rationing Dramatically increase Notified Maximum Demand penalties

If Demand + Reserve Margin > Supply(Demand includes capacity & energy)

GAPGAPSUPPLY

►Build Plan ►Mitigation Plan• RTS - Co-generation• Medupi - Imports• Ingula - Self generation• OCGT - Standby generation• CCGT - Independent Power

Producers (IPPs)

DEMAND

► Mitigation Plan• DSM• DMP

DEMAND

► Mitigation Plan• DSM• DMP

Various Scenariosfor growth and supply capacity

DEMAND REDUCTION OPTIONS Load shedding Rolling blackouts Prioritisation of new load Intensified Demand Side Management Power rationing Dramatically increase Notified Maximum Demand penalties

DEMAND REDUCTION OPTIONS Load shedding Rolling blackouts Prioritisation of new load Intensified Demand Side Management Power rationing Dramatically increase Notified Maximum Demand penalties

If Demand + Reserve Margin > Supply(Demand includes capacity & energy)If Demand + Reserve Margin > Supply(Demand includes capacity & energy)

StrategiesLong Term

• Energy Efficiency– Demand Side Management

• Renewable Energy– Biofuel

BiomassGeothermalHydroelectricityTidal powerWave powerWind power

Short Term• Energy Efficiency

– Demand-side Management• Power Conservation• Co-generation• Outages

Medium Term• Build Conventional

Power Plants

12

The 3 E`s

Environment and Natural Resources

Energy and Technology

Economics

Energy andEnvironment

Energy andEconomics

Environment and Economics

3E`s

ANOTHER E

ENERGY SECURITY

System Saving Opportunity• Both markets and policymakers tend to

focus on equipment within systems, which typically offer 2-10% efficiency improvement potential

• The optimal design integration of systems as a whole offers 20-50% efficiency improvement potential

• Large savings opportunities exist for motor driven and steam systems

Demand Side Management

• DSM is a process whereby the supplier attempts to influence the consumer in their level and pattern of use of energy.

Types of DSM include:– Load shift– Energy Efficiency– Strategic Energy Conservation

Objectives of DSM

• To provide cost effective energy and generating capacity resources

• Enhance Customer Service• Environmental issues

– Energy Efficiency• Reduction of Carbon emission• Depletion of energy resources

– Use renewable energy

COST OF POWER CAPACITYPower source

Open Cycle Gas TurbineCoal-fired (Medupi)Nuclear

DSM subsidies :

Cost in R/kW to build/subsidise

5 00017 33333 3333 500

Are we successful in our efforts to Reduce Energy Consumption?

Some statistics from an IEA report:Worldwide Trends in

Energy Use and EfficiencyKey Insights from IEA Indicator Analysis

2008

Long term Energy Efficiency Improvements

TOWARDS ENERGY MANAGEMENT STANDARDS

MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AND STANDARDS

FOR ENERGY (MSSE) WILL SUPPORT GLOBAL

AND NATIONAL COMMITMENT TO ENERGY

EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY?

WORLD ENERGY OUTLOOK (IEA)

2004 2030 2050

100%

CARBON EMISSIONS

(ENERGY RELATED)

150%

ALTERNATIVE POLICY SCENARIO

REFERENCE SCENARIO

23

LESS THAN 40% OF PRIMARY ENERGY ENDS UP DOING USEFUL WORK

Quelle: BWK Bd. 58 (2006) Nr. 1/2

Visualize the Big Picture

Pump losses 25%Throttle losses

30%

Fuel

Inpu

t = 10

0

Power plant losses70%

Transmission and Distribution losses

9%

Motor losses

10%Drivetrainlosses2%

Pipe losses 20%

9.5 units ofenergyoutput.

Pump losses 25%Throttle losses

30%

Fuel

Inpu

t = 10

0

Power plant losses70%

Transmission and Distribution losses

9%

Motor losses

10%Drivetrainlosses2%

Pipe losses 20%

Pump losses 25%Throttle losses

30%

Fuel

Inpu

t = 10

0

Power plant losses70%

Transmission and Distribution losses

9%

Motor losses

10%Drivetrainlosses2%

Pipe losses 20%

9.5 units ofenergyoutput.

25

Example: Throttle-/speed control of a pump system

Controlled by a throttle valve Speed controlled

Quelle: „Energiesparen mit elektrischen Antrieben“, ZVEI, 1999

Savings potential: 44%

MANAGEMENT BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY

• lack of management commitment to provide resources for energy efficiency,

• lack of awareness and workforce engagement in achievement of the cost- effective savings potential,

• lack of skills and competence to continuously improve energy performance,

• split incentives and lack of life cycle cost optimization e.g. those who procure energy using systems have different incentives to those who pay for the energy,

• the fact that energy efficiency is often a minor determinant of capital-acquisition decisions and is bundled-in with more important decision factors.

TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY

• lack of user-friendly information on best practices for energy efficiency,

• missing or partial information on energy efficiency performance,

• lack of common metrics (key performance indicators),

• lack of consideration of system and process energy efficiency optimizationissues,

• lack of harmonized calculation methods

Energy Consuming System

Mea

sure

Actio

nData

Collection &Analysis

Operator &Maintenance

Management

Supervisors

Summary Information

Exception Reports & Budget

ControlInformation

THE CONTINUOUS ENERGY IMPROVEMENT CYCLE

“People in the (feedback) loop”

PLANACT

DO

CHECK

Assessing the Organisation

Six energy management

functions

Five Levels ofdevelopment

An organisationalprofile

CONCLUSION TECHNOLOGY ALONE WILL NOT CUT IT!