heavy industries: advancing american manufacturing, raymond monroe, steel founders’ society of...
DESCRIPTION
Nov 17, 2009: Alliance to Save Energy Congressional briefing, "Heavy Industries: Advancing American Manufacturing," - A discussion by industry experts centering on the current and future prospects for energy efficiency in their four respective industries. All agreed on the great potential for energy efficiency projects but acknowledged the formidable barriers that inhibit investment.TRANSCRIPT
Heavy Industries: Advancing American Manufacturing
Current Situation
• U.S. manufacturers face intense global competition
• Energy-intensive industries – low profit margins
• Large capital investments required for new technology development & commercialization
• Capital stock turnover is slow
• Severe private under-investment in efficiency R&D
• Changing workforce must be flexible and information nimble
• High technical and financial risk inhibit investment in efficient process technology
Energy-IntensiveIndustries0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16Computers
Pharmaceuticals
Communication Equipment
Scientific Equipment
Manufacturing Avg.
Electronics
R&D Funding as a % of Net SalesP
erce
nt
Source: NSF 2002, Research and Development in Industry
]
R&D Intensity in Manufacturing 1986-1998
Stone, Clay, & Glass
Paper & Products
Petroleum Refining
Primary Metals
United States Steel Production
0
20,000,000
40,000,000
60,000,000
80,000,000
100,000,000
120,000,000
140,000,000
160,000,000
1900
1908
1916
1924
1932
1940
1948
1956
1964
1972
1980
1988
1996
2004
Tons
Federal Role in Energy Efficiencyin Energy Intensive Industries
• Department on Energy shows energy is a public policy priority.
• Federal Role includes– Developing technology for efficiency goals– Supporting the energy technology infrastructure– Encouraging the training of an energy efficient
workforce– Convening energy intensive industries to adopt
efficient technologies– Security-energy and military
Energy-Intensive Industries• In 1994, ITP implemented an innovative, customer-driven research
strategy known as Industries of the Future (IOF).
• Each industry team develops a vision of its desired future and an associated “technology roadmap” which serves as a framework for guiding collaborative partnerships between ITP and industry.
• Industry teams: Aluminum Chemicals Forest Products
Glass Metal Casting Mining
Steel
8
Sources: EIA 2001, 1998 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey; U.S. DOE 2002, Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Mining Industry
Our Focus: Major Energy-IntensiveIndustries
Energy Consumption (Trillion Btu)
Petroleum
Chemicals
PaperPrimaryMetals
Food Processing
NONMETALLIC MINERALS
Tobacco/Beverages
Furniture
Leather Machinery and Computers
Wood
Transportation
Fabricated Metals
Textiles/Apparel
Plastics/Rubber
Electrical
Printing
Miscellaneous1
10
100
1000
10 100 1000 10000
En
erg
y In
ten
sity
(T
ho
usa
nd
Btu
/$ G
DP
)
Energy-Intensive Industries
Industrial Energy Intensity vs. Energy Consumption
Mining
AMMEX is a partner in a federally funded initiative administered by the U.S. Department of Energy that maximizes technology investment through partnerships in 6 vital high energy-use industries:
1. Aluminum2. Chemicals
3. Forest Products
4. Glass5. Metal Casting
6. Steel
AMMEX includes other energy partners like ACEEE, State and regional Groups.
AMMEX industries collectively:
• Consume 75% of energy used by Industry.
(or 25% of total energy)
• Supply 90% of materials vital to our economy
• Produce $1 trillion in annual shipments
• Directly employ 3 million people
• Indirectly provide additional 12 million jobs
ITP Funding Shifts Industry R&D Focus to Energy
Approval cutoff; approved projects to the rightDistribution of possible company
R&D projects
Distribution of possible company energy R&D projects
Cross-cutting projects
Process-specificprojects
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Energy use with new R&D
investments
Actual energy use
Business-as-usual 1980 (no R&D)
Indu
stry
Ene
rgy
Inte
nsity
Practical minimum energy use (with
future R&D)
Practical minimum energy use (today)
Business-as-usual 2010 (no new R&D)
ITP is a Model Federal Program• Represents a modest investment
($80.2 million in FY 2004)• Produces measurable benefits addressing
key national energy, economic, and security policy goals
• Utilizes industry sectors to identify technology priorities and compete for demonstration opportunities
• Encourages significant private and state investment (economically justifiable, environmentally sound), including job creation
ITP Funding YieldsEvery federal $1 spent on ITP:
• Saves $7.06 in annual energy costs
• Saves1.3 million in annual source BTUs
Emissions Reductions are Equally Significant
Total Cumulative Emission Reductions
Carbon 22,293,044 metric tons
VOCs 14,847,884 metric tons
NOx 162,026 metric tons
PM 7,561 metric tons
SOx 570,591 metric tons
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
$140,000
$160,000
$180,000
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Req
uest
AMM
EX 201
0 Rec
.
Fiscal Year
Ap
pro
pri
ated
Fu
nd
ing
in t
ho
usa
nd
$ (
no
min
al)
Other FundingDistributed GenerationIACCross Cutting RD&DIndustry Specific R&D
