Ratings of Energy Efficiency
Financial Rating
Most important criteria for a successful implementation for industrial projects
In €
Example: CO2 pricing / Carbon pricing —> Costs applied to GHG emissions
Example: Payback time
Energetic Rating
It isn’t sufficient to improve energy consumption
In kWh
Example: Energy Performance Indicators (EnPI), Benchmarking
Ecologic Rating
More importance to reduce the GHG due to the Paris agreement
Driving factor for energy efficiency
In CO2
Economic rating: Payback time
Projects with < 2 years —> usually realized
< 5 years for projects with environmental impact
For energy efficiency projects —> not sufficient to calculate the payback time only by energy savings, also consider maintenance costs and production efficiency
Energetic rating: Industrial energy demands for industrialized countries
Industrial energy demands
1/3 industry
1/3 transportation
1/3 commercial and residential
Energetic rating: Energy Performance Indicators (EnPI)
= Measure of energy intensity to evaluate the effectiveness of the energy management efforts
Method to rate different energy consumptions in the industry (Process unit 1, process unit 2, overall plant)
Efficiency = Amount of output per unit of energy
Intensity = Amount of energy per unit output
Usually more than one Indicator needed
Have to fit operational circumstances of the company
EnPI needs a Energy Baseline (EnB) for comparison of the development
EnBs have to be determined appropriately
—> Examples: kWh/produced product or annual energycosts/m2
Energetic rating: Benchmarking
Ecological Rating: Emissions via GWP-Factor
Energy Demand
Process: GWP (Global Warming Factor) depends on the type of process
GHG emissions in CO2-equivalent
Implementation of System Efficiency (SE) in the industry
Regarding to the Onion Layer Model:
Is the highest energy efficiency always the best solution?
Consider interactions between efficiency and flexibility in energy provision for the process
Find the best trade-off
Example System Efficiency (SE)
—> Sectoral coupling of the energy provision
Example
CHP plant replacing furnace, internal provision usually baseload design method
Flexible CHP plant and intelligent operating supporting technologies
CHP replace furnace
Flexible CHP
Energetic
+ Higher efficiency in combined heat and power
- Peak loads differs
+ High efficiency in heat pumps
- Efficiency losses in storages
Ecologic
+ Higher efficiency
- Usually not the best SE solution
+ Help integrate further renewables
+ Lowering system emissions (depends on used fuel)
Economic
+ Lower energy costs
- High investment costs
+ High priced energy selling and low priced energy purchase
- High operational costs
—> Flexible plant is the best solution for a trade-off between energy efficiency and flexibility, but often not the most profitable one
Flexibilization as an ecological incentive
Pros of Flexibilization
Additional revenue due to intelligent operation planning
Reduction of plant emissions
Smoothen volatility of VRE (variable renewable energy?)
Enable additional RE integration
Rating of Energy Efficiency - Pro and Cons
Pro
Con
Energy ratings
Measures are best comparable of processes of the same type
Hard to compare between different energy carriers (Unit is the same, but not the exergy e. g. heat and electricity)
GHG emissions
Calculated from every energy conversion —> comparison of every process
Numbers are hard to interpret
Economics
Powerful because of business decisions after this key figure
Interfere with national economics and political targets
Last changed3 months ago
