Did you know Energy Efficiency is tricky?

  • Not understanding pipeline losses, which makes practical benefits diverge wildly from actual operational use due to complex building controls
    • Example: not understanding the cost of high-temperature recirculation. Recirculation pipes and driving hot gas consume energy and spread heat waste. It is best to use methods that reduce piping.
  • Assuming efficiency reduces overall consumption.   Depending on the use, sometimes it just makes usage cheaper but  spurs higher consumption, leading to more emissions
  • Not realizing that net efficiencies are multiplied.
    • For example, when a burner (say, 50% efficient) is used with a heat exchanger (say, 50% efficient), the overall net efficiency is only 25%. So, improving the burner efficiency by 4% (by using waste heat recovery methods) only improves the net efficiency by a percentage or so, i.e. to 26-27%.
  • Choosing paths with poor round-trip conversion rates, such as using electricity to make gas from liquids and then combining the gas to get electricity by reforming the liquid.

 Direct conversion of a reactant to the energy objective is always more efficient.

  • Using combustion to make emissions and then using energy to reduce emissions

◦ Use direct electric heating, which has zero emissions. 

  • Not using methods where energy optimization is feasible.

◦ For example, electric systems automate much more effectively than burner systems thus leading to better controllable processes.  When an electric process is available, it is best to use it.

  • Ignoring small leaks.

◦ Small drips could add up quickly.

Solution: Avoid GHG (Green House Gases) production.