People Planet Profit - Precast Concrete · 2019. 3. 21. · • Exterior HIDs LED • Emergency Exit Signs LED • LEDs are far cheaper and higher quality precast.org ... been measured

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 1

precast.org/education

INCREASE PROFITS AND COMPETITIVENESS

BY REDUCING ENERGY COSTS

Kelly Weger, RA, LEED AP, CEA


SUSTAINABILITY

“Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” - UN

General Assembly, Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development

“In every deliberation, we must consider the impact on the seventh generation.” – The Constitution

of the Iroqouis Nations

“Able to last or continue for a long time" – Merriam Webster


Pla

ne

t

Profit (Economic)

▪ Improves efficiency & lowers costs

▪Reduces regulatory compliance costs

▪Creates revenue enhancement opportunities

Planet (Environmental)

▪Reduces demand for resources and energy from nature

▪Reduces waste to nature

People (Social)

▪More resources & energy become available for others

▪Closing the loop generates new jobs

TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE


ACTUAL SUSTAINABILITY

People

ProfitPlanet

Sustainability =

delicate balance

of all three

factors in the

Triple Bottom

Line


BIG HITTERS

• In 2017, 94% of Fortune 200 companies have sustainability goals

• Sustainability is becoming more critical for all companies to remain competitive


WHY ARE COMPANIES BECOMING MORE SUSTAINABLE?

Is your company trying to cope with increasing environmental regulation?

Are your customers demanding better environmental performance and data?

Do you want to lower your energy and materials costs?

Are you interested in producing and marketing greener products?

6

1 2

3 4

5 6

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 2


MORE PROFIT

• Do companies that invest heavily in sustainability incur higher costs and become less profitable?

• No. Global 100’s cumulative return is 24 percentage points higher than the ACWI benchmark.


PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENTS

• More rigorous environmental standards = 16% higher labor productivity

• Workers with a view performed 10% better on tests of mental function and memory recall

8


HR COSTS

❑Labor is 1st or 2nd largest cost

❑Companies with sustainability goals have higher employee retention, better recruitment, & reduced turnover.

❑Reduced turnover means less time working understaffed, searching for talent, training, and bringing productivity back to 100%.

9 precast.org/education

KEY DRIVERS


ENVIRONMENTAL WASTE CATEGORIES

Solids EnergyAirWater Toxicity

(Chemicals)


COMMERCIAL BUILDING ENERGY USE

12

Source: DOE, 2011. Buildings Data Book

7 8

9 10

11 12

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 3


INDUSTRIAL ENERGY USE


PRECAST CONCRETE ENERGY

The Precast Industry spends over $200M on energy annually

14


ENERGY SAVINGS BASICS

Easy Projects with Typical

2-Year Simple Payback


LIGHTING

• Do NOT wait to replace old T12 Fluorescents

• High Bay = High Maintenance

• Exterior HIDs LED

• Emergency Exit Signs LED

• LEDs are far cheaper and higher quality


LIGHTING


AUTOMATED CONTROLS

13 14

15 16

17 18

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 4


INSTANT-FIT LED RETROFITS

• Plug 'n play solution

• No rewiring

• Leave your existing electronic ballast

• 2100 Lumens

• 4000K

• 17-Watt


WIRELESS CONTROL SYSTEMS


VFD ON MOTORS

• Variable loads

• Energy savings will vary

• Reduced speed of 50% yields energy savings of 87%


VFD ON MOTORS

• Variable loads

• Energy savings will vary

• Reduced speed of 50% yields energy savings of 87%


• At 100 psi, a 2 psig decrease can equal 1% savings

• 1 hp for 8760hr/yr at 10¢/kWh = $500/year

• A single 1/8" leak can cost more than $2,000 per year in electricity!

23Version 4.0 © 2014 Purdue Research Foundation

RULES OF THUMB

Source: U.S. Department of Energy

COMPRESSED AIR


▪ Leaks, Leaks, Leaks! (30 –50% loss)

▪ Running at higher pressure than needed

▪ Inappropriate uses of air

▪ Waste Heat recovery

© 2014 Purdue Research FoundationVersion 4.0

Even the best Air Compressor is only 12 – 15% efficient

Photo Source: www.compressedairleak.com

24

COMPRESSED AIR

19 20

21 22

23 24

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 5


COMPRESSED AIR EXAMPLE

Situation: A compressed air system needs more air.

Option #1: Purchase additional compressor for $82,000.

Option #2: Optimize current system for $184,000.

Additional Information: The existing system consists of 1350 hp of various types of compressors. The energy usage of the existing compressors has been measured to be $399,000 per year. Direct maintenance costs on the compressors and air treatment equipment is estimated at $50,000 per year.

Story Problem #3

Version 4.0 25© 2014 Purdue Research Foundationprecast.org/education

Option #2:

Optimizing the system will reduce operating costs from $399,000 a year to $302,000 a year, for a savings of $97,000 in electrical costs. There will be additional recurring maintenance expenditures of $5000/year for leak prevention.

Story Problem #3

Version 4.0 26© 2014 Purdue Research Foundation

COMPRESSED AIR EXAMPLE

Option #1: The new 150 hp compressor will cost an additional $48,000/yearto operate. Maintaining the new compressor will cost $5,000 per year.


LIFE CYCLE COST COMPUTATION

Life Cycle Cost Analysis Option 1 Option 2

Installation Costs(occurs in Year 1) A

1. Preventative Maintenance (recurring annual cost) 1

2. Predictive Maintenance (recurring annual cost) 2

3. Energy(recurring annual cost) 3

4. Lost Production (recurring annual cost) 4

Annual Cost B = (1+2+3+4)

Cumulative Outlay end Year 1 =A+B

Cumulative Outlay end Year 2= A+B+B

$82,000

$55,000 $50,000

$184,000

$357,000$502,000

$584,000 $541,000

$1,086,000 $898,000

$447,000 $302,000

27© 2014 Purdue Research FoundationVersion 4.0

N/A $5,000

N/A N/A


ENERGY SAVINGS MINDSET

Important Guidelines to Consider

BEFORE You Retrofit


IMPORTANCE OF A SYSTEMS APPROACH

Looking beyond individual components --looking at the system as a whole

30

• Boiler vs. Steam System

• First Cost vs. Life Cycle Costs

• Pump vs. Water Pumping System


What are the system costs of an HVAC system?

SYSTEM LIFE CYCLE COST COMPONENTS

31

25 26

27 29

30 31

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 6


LIFE CYCLE COST COMPONENTS

1. Installation Costs

❑ Capital expenditure

❑ Expenses

❑ Labor

❑ Materials

❑ Engineering


2. Energy Costs

Based on:

❑ Efficiency

❑ Operating hours

❑ Electricity rates

Up to 8 times larger than installation cost

33



3. Maintenance Cost

• Typically between 5% to 10% of installation cost annually

34



4. Lost Production Cost

❑ Lost sales & opportunities

❑ Overtime

❑ Late shipping charges

❑ Domino effect on just-in-time supply chains

35



STORY PROBLEM: FOUR NEW FANS

Situation: Four fans in an HVAC system need to be replaced

Two options. Which is more cost effective?

Story Problem # 1


• Option #1: • 50 hp radial fans with flat blades• Total installation cost = $70,000• Fan efficiency = 55%• Resultant annual energy cost = $48,000• Annual Preventive Maintenance Cost = $1,000

• Option #2: • 40 hp radial fans with airfoil blades• Total installation cost = $105,000• Fan efficiency = 85%• Resultant annual energy cost = $30,000• Annual Preventive Maintenance Cost = $1,000

37

STORY PROBLEM: FOUR NEW FANS

32 33

34 35

36 37

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 7


A SIMPLE SYSTEM COST ANALYSIS

System Costs Option 1 Option 2

Installation Costs(occurs in Year 1) A

1. Preventative Maintenance (recurring annual cost) 1

2. Predictive Maintenance (recurring annual cost) 2

3. Energy(recurring annual cost) 3

4. Lost Production (recurring annual cost) 4

Annual Cost B = (1+2+3+4)

Cumulative Outlay end Year 1 =A+B

Cumulative Outlay end Year 2= A+B+B

$70,000

$1,000 $1,000

$105,000

$31,000$49,000

$119,000 $136,000

$168,000 $167,000

$48,000 $30,000


$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

$350

1 2 3 4 5

Cu

mu

lati

ve O

utl

ay (

Th

ou

san

ds)

Years

Life Cycle Costs

Option 1 Option 2

CASH FLOW - YEARS 1-5

39

Life Time Costs


$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Cu

mu

lati

ve O

utl

ay (

Th

ou

san

ds)

Years

Option 1 Option 2

CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW

Life Time Costs

40

Cumulative Savings $325K


Option 1 Radial fan

First cost

Energy

maintenance

Option 2 airfoil fan

First cost

Energy

maintenance

OVERALL SYSTEM COSTS OF OPTIONS

Option #2: Airfoil FanOption #1: Radial Fan

Lifetime Cost $725,000

Lifetime Cost $1,050,000

Energy

Initial Cost

Maintenance

41


GOOD MAINTENANCE SAVES COSTS

➢ Preventive

➢ Predictive


PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE

Strategies to keep a healthy machine in peak performance include:

• Lubricating bearings

• Replace filters

• Cleaning impellers and heat exchangers

• Aligning shaft and pulleys

• Visually inspecting machinery

• Balancing impeller

43

38 39

40 41

42 43

http://www.goodway.com/hvac-blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/goodway_ram_5sf_60.jpg

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 8


PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE

Advanced diagnostic strategies that can avoid an impending breakdown:

• Infrared thermography of fan or motor bearings

• Check strength of wiring insulation

• Dynamic analysis of the integrity of a motor

44Normal Efficiency High Efficiency


LOW-COST & NO-COST ACTIONS

• IR inspection electrical panels

• Vibration analysis of motors

• Oil analysis on compressors

45

PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE


ENERGY SAVINGS ACTION PLANSteps to take to start saving!


GROW SUPPORT

• Diverse Sustainability Team

• Demonstrate Quick Win Projects

• Gain C-Suite Support

• Share Successes!


GET EDUCATED

• Energy Savings 101

• Demand Management

• Power Factor

• Lighting – Simulation & Calculation Exercises

• Compressed air

• HVAC

• Pumps & Motors

• Process Heating

• Internal Energy Auditor

• Sustainable Manufacturing

Engaging

Workshops


APPLICATION-BASED TRAINING

Internal Energy Auditor Training

• Case studies

• Industry best practices

• Basic energy auditing tools

• Tricks of the trade

• Practice cost savings & ROI calculations

53

44 45

50 51

52 53

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 9


ENERGY ASSESSMENTS

Energy Audits• Level 1 ASHRAE

• Level 2 ASHRAE


ENERGY ASSESSMENTS

Written reports include:

• Detailed calculations

• Evaluate numerous options

• Identify best ROI

• Rebates identified

• Prioritize improvements

55


SYSTEMS APPROACH

ISO 50001- Energy Management Systems

ISO 14001-Environmental

Management Systems

Energy Star


BEYOND ENERGYSustainability Goals


SUSTAINABILITY SAVINGS

• Hidden energy costs

• PPE costs

• Labor costs

• Purchasing costs

• Waste hauling costs


APPLICATION-BASED TRAINING

W.A.S.T.E. Stream Mapping (WSM) Tool

59

Solids EnergyAirWater Toxicity (Chemicals)

54 55

56 57

58 59

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 10


W.A.S.T.E. STREAM MAPPING

Understand how things currently operate. Identify areas where there is waste. Quantify waste and determine source(s).

Apply 4Rs to the resources/wastes to design a Green approach.

Determine the Waste Stream(s) to be analyzed & improved.

Make the changes - this is the goal of mapping!

Screen the improvement options. Develop a detailed implementation plan to support improvement objectives (what, who, by when).

Waste Stream

Scope

“As Is” Waste StreamsEntire Process/

Detailed Operations

Implementation Plan

Implement Changes!

Improvement Areas & “To Be” Ideas


Inp

uts

Raw MetalMachine FluidProcess H2OElectricityCompressed

Air

Welding RodsProcess H2OElectricity

AcidsDetergentProcess H2OElectricityAir

PaintThinnerNatural Gas

CompressedAir

FastenersElectricityCompressed

Air

Corrugated CardboardMetal BandsPlastic WrapSkidsTape

Pro

cess

Milling Welding Washing Painting Assembly Packaging

Ou

tpu

t W

aste

s Metal ScrapBroken ToolsWaste H2OExcessive Noise

ProductRejects

Spent RodsSlagHeatGreywaterFumesWeld Dust

Acid DetergentGreywater

Product Rejects

Acid DetergentHeatFumes

Product Rejects

Fastener Scrap

Metal Band Scraps

Plastic WrapDamaged

Skids

Water Air Solids Toxicity/Chemicals Energy



Waste Stream Map

Suppliers

Injection Molding

Metal Forming

DryingPainting

Metal Plating Drying

Assembly

Packaging

Warehouse

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Electricity kWh/yr

Water Waste Gal/yr

Air Emissions lbs/yr

Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Raw Materials lbs/yr

Plant Utilities

Comp Air/Chillers kWh/yr

Lighting kWh/yr

Boiler CuFt/Yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Water Gal/yr

Natural Gas CuFt/Yr


Electricity kWh/yr Electricity kWh/yr Natural Gas CuFt/Yr

Electricity kWh/yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Shipping

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

End User

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Electricity kWh/yr

Raw Materials lbs/yr Chemicals lbs/yr

Electricity kWh/yr



Electricity kWh/yrElectricity kWh/yr

Diesel Fuel Gal/yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Input

Process

Output


Natural Gas CuFt/Yr

Natural Gas CuFt/Yr

Energy WasteMMBtu/

yr

Water Waste Gal/yr


Solid Waste lbs/yr

Toxic Waste lbs/yr

Water Gal/yr

Electricity kWh/yr

Diesel Fuel Gal/yr

Chemicals lbs/yr

Chemicals lbs/yr

HVAC kWh/yr

Summary

Toy Stores

Electricity kWh/yr

Electricity kWh/yr



EXAMPLE

• Can you create a WASTE Stream Map for simple activities in your daily life?

• Stopping at a gas station?


Pu

ll u

p t

o p

um

p Verify fuel side, Stop car, Step out

Pre

p t

o p

um

p Swipe card, Select grade, Lift nozzle

Fuel Insert into gas

fill neck & squeeze trigger

Fin

ish

fu

elin

g Top off, Remove nozzle, Return to cradle, Install gas cap, Print receipt

Was

h w

ind

shie

ld Grab squeegee, Apply water to windshield, scrape off excess, Return to bucket

EXAMPLE

What are the steps in the process?


Pu

ll u

p t

o p

um

p Verify fuel side, Stop car, Step out

Pre

p t

o p

um

p Swipe card, Select grade, Lift nozzle

Fuel Insert into gas

fill neck & squeeze trigger

Fin

ish

fuel

ing Top off,

Remove nozzle, Return to cradle, Install gas cap, Print receipt

Was

h w

ind

shie

ld Grab squeegee, Apply water to windshield, scrape off excess, Return to bucket

EXAMPLE

What are the Inputs & Outputs for each step?

Ou

tpu

ts Brake dust

Tailpipe emissions

Ou

tpu

ts Sweat?

Ou

tpu

ts Vapor emissions

Gasoline drips

Ou

tpu

ts Vapor emissions

Gasoline drips

Paper

Ou

tpu

ts Water drips

Water vapor

Solvent drips

End of life squeegee

Inp

uts Brake pads

Brake fluid

Gas in combustion

Inp

uts Labor

Inp

uts Gas

Inp

uts Paper

Inp

uts Water

Solvent

Rubber/Plastic

61 62

63 64

65 66

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 11


EXERCISE

(10 min.) Break into groups of 4-6

Pick an activity & create an Overall WASTE Stream Map within your group

• Showering• Brewing coffee• Making dinner• Driving to work• Playing golf• Helping with homework• Other???


CASE STUDIES

• Cumulative W.S.M. Actual Impacts:

•

Energy

Audit

W.A.S.T.E.

Stream

Mapping

MTCO2e

Reduced

Company #1 $84,000 $44,035 2,869

Company #2 $20,827 $74,577 TBD

Company #3 $0 $1,214,814 41.2

Company #4 $10,756 0 0

TOTAL $115,583 $1,312,599 2,910.2


CASE STUDY RESULTS

Cumulative W.S.M. Estimated Summary:

➢Energy Savings Opportunities: $332,000 Savings

➢W.A.S.T.E. Stream Opportunities: $514,300 Savings

➢Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions: 18,216 Tons CO2-Eq

•


CASE STUDY #2

Automotive Seal Manufacturer


CASE STUDY #2

• W.A.S.T.E. Stream Savings

• Issue with parts requiring rework after sitting, due to oil

• Changed from chlorinated paraffin drawing oil to water based oil to eliminate rework of parts that sit 2 weeks.

• Reduced oil usage by 10 barrels per day. Saving 90,000 gallons per year due to thinner viscosity.


CASE STUDY #2

W.A.S.T.E. Stream Savings - MOP WATER

• High cost to ship oil-contaminated water from mopping

• In process of modifying process for mop waste water

• Explored switching soap to enable better oil separation

67 68

69 70

71 72

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 12


CASE STUDY #2

W.A.S.T.E. Stream SAVINGS- MOP WATER

• Cost savings = $31,750 annually (plus $20,827 in energy savings).

• Recycling greywater reduces 87,000 gal. of water annually.

• Additional $15,000 in cost savings potential with greater dilution of wastewater treatment chemicals


CASE STUDY #2

W.A.S.T.E. Stream Savings- FUTURE

• FUTURE- planning to implement Reverse Osmosis Reject Water recycling project.


CASE STUDY #2

Assessment Summary:

W.A.S.T.E. Stream Opportunities


CASE STUDY #3

Fabricator of Reusable Steel Racks for Automotive Parts


CASE STUDY #3

Assessment Summary:

• Energy Savings Opportunities• Lighting

• Compressed Air

• HVAC

• Other – manufacturing tax incentive

• $6,200+ Annual Savings- 12% Reduction!

• GHG reduction of 42 MTCO2-eq per year


CASE STUDY #3


• Paid to send recyclable items to landfill

• Reduced tipping fees by starting to

recycle cardboard, plastic, etc.

• HDPE recycling generating

$3-5k in new revenue!

• Better policies reduced metal scrap by

20%• 7,000 lbs less metal purchased =

• Cost savings of $2,800 annually

73 74

75 76

77 78

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 13


CASE STUDY #3


• Significant hazardous waste generated by oil based paint

• Switching to water based paint

• Reduction in time required to comply with SQG regulations: 62 hours ($930)

• Eliminated VOC emissions from 14,400 gallons of oil based paint: 9,216 pounds

• Eliminated purchase and use of: 156 gallons of acetone & 70 gallons of xylene ($4,165)

• Reduction in hazardous waste generation: 5,400 pounds annually ($6,437)

• Cost savings: $27,500 annually


CASE STUDY #3


• 4 fork truck drivers moving pieces

constantly

• Owner sometimes operating fork

truck to help

• Changed plant layout to eliminate

fork trucks • Reduced combustion of Propane in

fork trucks: 12,173 lbs annually

• GHG emissions reduced by 16.2

Metric Tons of CO2eq every year!

• Improved safety with fewer lift trucks

operating, and less hazardous

materials and waste generation.


CASE STUDY #3


• Cost savings from propane,

fees, waiting time, &

repurposed labor = $106,797

Annually

• More efficient plant layout led

to increasing production and

$1Million in New Sales


SUMMARY

• Cumulative ACTUAL Assessment Summary:

➢Energy Savings Opportunities: $104,827Savings

➢W.A.S.T.E. Stream Opportunities: $1,212,687 Savings

➢Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions: 2,910 Tons CO2e

•


GOOD INVESTMENT

Sustainability Savings

=

Bottom Line Profits


CONCLUSION

For more information, please contact:

Kelly Weger, RA, LEED AP Lead Project Manager - Sustainability

[email protected]

84

79 80

81 82

83 84

Precast Show 2019

NPCA 14


INCREASE PROFITS AND COMPETITIVENESS

BY REDUCING ENERGY COSTS

Kelly Weger, RA, LEED AP, CEA

85

Documents

People Planet Profit - Precast Concrete · 2019. 3. 21. · • Exterior HIDs LED • Emergency Exit Signs LED • LEDs are far cheaper and higher quality precast.org ... been measured