Engineering Fundamentals of Energy Efficiency

Using energy more efficiently is essential if carbon emissions are to be reduced. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), energy efficiency improvements represent the largest and least costly savings in carbon emissions, even when compared with renewables, nuclear power and carbon capture and storage. Yet, how should future priorities be directed? Should efforts be focused on light bulbs or diesel engines, insulating houses or improving coal-fired power stations? Previous attempts to assess energy efficiency options provide a useful snapshot for directing short-term responses, but are limited to only known technologies developed under current economic conditions. Tomorrow's economic drivers are not easy to forecast, and new technical solutions often present in a disruptive manner. Fortunately, the theoretical and practical efficiency limits do not vary with time, allowing the uncertainty of economic forecasts to be avoided and the potential of yet to be discovered efficient designs to be captured. This research aims to provide a rational basis for assessing all future developments in energy efficiency. The global fow of energy through technical devices is traced from fuels to final services, and presented as an energy map to convey visually the scale of energy use. An important distinction is made between conversion devices, which upgrade energy into more useable forms, and passive systems, from which energy is lost as low temperature heat, in exchange for final services. Theoretical efficiency limits are calculated for conversion devices using exergy analysis, and show a 89% potential reduction in energy use. Efforts should be focused on improving the efficiency of, in relative order: biomass burners, refrigeration systems, gas burners and petrol engines. For passive systems, practical utilisation limits are calculated based on engineering models, and demonstrate energy savings of 73% are achievable. Significant gains are found in technical solutions that increase the thermal insulation of building fabrics and reduce the mass of vehicles. The result of this work is a consistent basis for comparing efficiency options, that can enable future technical research and energy policy to be directed towards the actions that will make the most difference.

The influence of turbine stator well coolant flow rate and passage configuration on cooling effectiveness

Market competitiveness for aero engine power plant dictates that improvements in engine performance and reliability are guaranteed a priori by manufacturers. The requirement to accurately predict the life of engine components makes exacting demands of the internal air system, which must provide effective cooling over the engine duty cycle with the minimum consumption of compressor section air. Tests have been conducted at the University of Sussex using a turbine test facility which comprises a two stage turbine with an individual stage pressure ratio of 1.7:1. Main annulus air is supplied by an adapted Rolls-Royce Dart compressor at up to 440 K and 4.8 kg s-1. Cooling flow rates ranging from 0.71 to 1.46 Cw, ent, a disc entrainment parameter, have been used to allow ingress or egress dominated stator well flow conditions. The mechanical design of the test section allows internal cooling geometry to be rapidly re-configured, allowing the effect of jet momentum and coolant trajectory to be investigated. An important facet to this investigation is the use of CFD to model and analyse the flow structures associated with the cavity conditions tested, as well as to inform the design of cooling path geometry. This paper reports on the effectiveness of stator well coolant flow rate and delivery configurations using experimental data and also CFD analysis to better quantify the effect of stator well flow distribution on component temperatures. Copyright © 2011 by Rolls-Royce plc.

Optimisation of fuel usage and steam availability in the power and steam plant of a paper mill

This paper presents the results of a project aimed at minimising fuel usage while maximising steam availability in the power and steam plant of a large newsprint mill. The approach taken was to utilise the better regulation and plant wide optimisation capabilities of Advanced Process Control, especially Model Predictive Control (MPC) techniques. These have recently made their appearance in the pulp and paper industry but are better known in the oil and petrochemical industry where they have been used for nearly 30 years. The issue in the power and steam plant is to ensure that sufficient steam is available when the paper machines require it and yet not to have to waste too much steam when one or more of the machines suffers an outage. This is a problem for which MPC is well suited. It allows variables to be kept within declared constraint ranges, a feature which has been used, effectively, to increase the steam storage capacity of the existing plant. This has resulted in less steam being condensed when it is not required and in significant reductions in the need for supplementary firing. The incidence of steam being dump-condensed while also supplementary firing the Combined Heat & Power (CHP) plant has been reduced by 95% and the overall use of supplementary firing is less than 30% of what it was. In addition the plant runs more smoothly and requires less operator time. The yearly benefit provided by the control system is greater than £200,000, measured in terms of 2005 gas prices.

Full cost accounting for the life cycle of coal.

Each stage in the life cycle of coal-extraction, transport, processing, and combustion-generates a waste stream and carries multiple hazards for health and the environment. These costs are external to the coal industry and are thus often considered "externalities." We estimate that the life cycle effects of coal and the waste stream generated are costing the U.S. public a third to over one-half of a trillion dollars annually. Many of these so-called externalities are, moreover, cumulative. Accounting for the damages conservatively doubles to triples the price of electricity from coal per kWh generated, making wind, solar, and other forms of nonfossil fuel power generation, along with investments in efficiency and electricity conservation methods, economically competitive. We focus on Appalachia, though coal is mined in other regions of the United States and is burned throughout the world.