Systematic Approaach CF Reduction Manufacturing

A systematic approach to guide
carbon footprint reduction towards

net zero in the manufacturing
industry
Professor Ir Dr Dominic C. Y. Foo

FIChemE, FASc, FHEA, FIEM, ACPE, CEng, PEng, AAE
University of Nottingham Malaysia
About myself
 Qualifications:
 BEng and MEng & PhD (Chem Eng, UTM)
 180+ papers published in ISI-indexed journals
 ≥250 publications and h-index ≥ 43 in Scopus
 >30 keynote/plenary presentations
 Author & editors of 10 books
 Editorial activities: Editor-in-Chief for Process Integration & Optimisation for Sustainability (Springer
Nature); Subject Editor for ISI-indexed IChemE journal Process Safety and Environmental Protection
(Elsevier); Editorial Board members: Water Conservation Science and Engineering (Springer Nature);
PROCESSES (MDPI); South African Journal of Chemical Engineering (Elsevier)
 Professional involvements:
 Fellow, Academy of Science Malaysia (ASM)
 President, Asia Pacific Confederation of Chemical Engineering (APCChE)
 Fellow, Institution of Chemical Engineers (IChemE)
 Fellow, The Higher Education Academy (HEA), UK
 Chartered Engineer (Engineering Council UK)
 Professional Engineer (Board of Engineers M’sia)
 Past chairman, ChE Tech Division, Institution of Engineers Malaysia
 Important awards:
 Innovator of the Year 2009, Institution of Chemical Engineers UK
 Young Engineer Award 2010, Institution of Engineers Malaysia
 Outstanding Young Malaysian 2012, Junior Chamber International
 Outstanding Asian Researcher and Engineer 2013, Society of Chemical Engineers, Japan
 Top Research Scientist Malaysia 2016 , Academy of Science Malaysia
 Stanford list 2019-2021 – World Top 2% Research Scientists
Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 2

Outline
 Climate change issues

 Overview of process integration
 Process integration for carbon footprint
reduction
 Case studies
Sustainable planetary boundaries
Earth-system Parameters Proposed Current Pre-industrial

Process Boundary Status Value
Climate Change Atmospheric 350 387 280

CO2 concentration
(ppm by volume)
Global freshwater Consumption of 4,000 2,600 415

use freshwater by
humans
(km3 per year)
(Rockstrom et al., 2009)

Global CO2
Declines due to
1958 plant growing &
remove some
atmospheric CO2
The Keeling curve
• Continuous CO2 measurements at Hawaii since 1958.

• The curve is named for the scientist Charles David Keeling,
who started the monitoring program and supervised it until
his death in 2005.
https://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu

Australia bushfire (2019)
June 2019 – March 2020
• Australia is no stranger to bushfires. However,

the 2019-2020 season was unprecedented.
• The first major bushfires began in Sept. 2019.
• The fire situation worsened significantly at Nov
2019 with increasing temperatures & prolonged
drought.
• Bushfires burned >46 million acres (the same
area as the entire country of Syria).
• At least 3,500 homes and thousands of other
buildings were lost and 34 people are killed.
(Source: Center for Disaster Philanthropy)
Australia food (2020 & 2022)

California wildfire (2020)
Texas US (Feb 2021)

Aucland, New Zealand (2023)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (7 March 22)
Director-general, Malaysian Meteorological Department:

“Extreme hot temperatures, heat waves and heavy downpours have been
happening more frequently and this trend is expected to continue in the
coming future. The temperatures during the dry season will become hotter &
the rain during the monsoon season will be heavier, which will lead to
extreme flooding.” (Utusan, Dec 2018)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (7 March 22)
Source: KASA
Melting of iceberg
21 May 2021 - World's largest iceberg (>1,600 square miles) just broke off
an Antarctic ice shelf,
The iceberg, dubbed A-76, calved off the Ronne Ice Shelf into the Weddell
Sea. The floating mass covers >1,600 square miles largest iceberg in
the world
https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/worlds-
largest-iceberg-just-broke-antarctic-ice-shelf-rcna974

Sea level rise
High risk for flood

https://coastal.climatecentral.org

COP21 @ Paris
COP26 @ Glasgow UK
https://ukcop26.org

The chemical industry
Chemical industry consumes 28% of the industrial energy, where
most of it is obtained from fossil resources (IEA, 2017).
Technology wedges
80
CCS industry and

60 transformation
CCS power generation
Nuclear
CO2 emissions (Mt/y)
Renewables
40 Power gen efficiency

& fuel switching
End-use fuel switching
End-use electricity
efficiency
20 End-use fuel efficiency
CO2 removal or
negative emission
technologies
0
2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Energy (TWh/y)
Some milestones
1970s Heat exchanger network (HEN)
1989 Mass exchange network (MEN)
1994 Water minimisation (water pinch)
2002 Production supply chain
2002 Hydrogen network (H2 pinch)
2005 Property integration (property pinch)
2007 Energy planning (carbon pinch)

Heat recovery system
T (ºC)
250
230
Pinch
Tmin = 10ºC
40
20
H (MW)
QCmin = 10 QREC = 51.1 QHmin = 7.5
(Smith,2016)
Mass recovery (H2O, H2)
Impurity load Impurity load
Sink Sink
composite composite
Pinch Pinch
point point
Source
composite
Source
composite Impure fresh
locus
Minimum Maximum Minimum Minimum Maximum Minimum

fresh recycle waste fresh recycle waste
Flowrate Flowrate
(El-Halwagi et al., 2003; Prakash & Shenoy, 2005)
Good references
Graphical Approach for

Carbon Footprint Reduction
Product supply chain
Electricity Steam
(external) (internal)
Products
Raw material /
Manufacturing Consumer
utility supplier
Scope of GHG
 Scope 1 emissions –
those from a
company's production
& other internal
operations.
 Scope 2 adds most
forms of power.
 Scope 3 captures the
rest of the value chain
and is more complex; it
has more overlap
between companies
and their customers.

Product carbon footprint reduction
Case 1 – external < internal CF

intensity
CO2
emission
Carbon intensity benchmark

Internal
footprint
Total CO2
Demand emission
composite
External
footprint Source
composite
Cost Value added Economic

(Tjan et al., 2010)
Case 2 – external > internal CF
intensity
CO2
emission
Carbon intensity benchmark

Internal
footprint Source
composite Increased
internal
footprint
External
footprint Reduced
external
Demand footprint
composite
Cost Value added Economic

(Tjan et al., 2010)
Case Study 1– biochemical

production
Tongkat Ali
Water extract
EXTRACTOR
Deionised
Water
HOLDING
TANK Hot air
SPRAY
Extract DRYER
+ fibre
Dehydrated water
FILTER extract (final product)
Slurry

What is Tongkat Ali?
 Common Name
 Tongkat Ali
 Scientific Name
 Eurycoma Longifolia Jack
 Traditional use
 Aphrodisiac, General tonic, Anti-
Malarial, Anti-pyretic
 Application
 Decoction of the roots taken
orally.
 Scientifically found to be Anti-
cancer, Anti-oxidant
 A male aphrodisiac
Tongkat Ali extract production


Data extraction via process simulation
Material consumption & costs
Water Chilled water Maltodexrin TA root chips Bottles Boxes

Sections
(kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (entities) (entities)
Extraction 255,142 38,000
Drying 473,416 2,205,324
Packaging 9,103 379,278 31,606
Total/year 728,558 2,205,324 9,103 38,000 379,278 31,606
Total/month 60,713 183,777 759 3,167 31,607 2,634
Unit price ($) 0.001 0.0004 1 3.2 0.10 0.13

Total cost ($) 61 74 759 10,133 3,161 342
14,529
Total raw material cost: $ __________/month

Energy consumption & costs
 Electricity:
 Consumption: 20,034 MJ/month
 Unit price: $0.0167/MJ
334.56
 Cost: $ __________/month
 Steam:
 Consumption: 7,055 kg/month
 Unit price: $0.0042/kg
 Cost: $ __________/month
29.63
 Total energy cost: $ __________/month

364.19
CFP calculation for raw material

 CFP for Tongkat Ali:
 Consumption: 3166.67 kg/month
 Distance from farm to processing site: 600 km
 CFP index based on heavy duty vehicles: 92 x 10-6 kg
CO2/kg-km
174.8
 CFP = ____________________ kg CO2/month
 CFP for other inorganic materials:
 CFP index: 2 kg of CO2 for 1 US$ (www.eiolca.net)
4395.86
 Cost for inorganics: $____________ (assume all materials
are inorganic except Tongkat Ali)
8791.7
 CFP = ____________________ kg CO2/month
 Total CFP for raw material: _____ 9.0 MT CO2/month

CFP calculation for energy
 Steam (internal):
 Steam carbon intensity: 0.17 kg CO2/kg steam
 Consumption: 7,055 kg/month
1.2
 CFP = ____________________ MT CO2/month
 Power (external):
 CFP for power generation in Malaysia:
Energy Contribution Carbon intensity Overall CFP
Source (%) (kg CO2/kWh) (kg CO2/kWh)
Natural Gas 50 0.5 0.25
Coal 35 1 0.35
Hydropower 14 0.1 0.014
Oil 1 0.8 0.008
 Consumption: 20,034 MJ 0.622
 Conversion: 1 kWh = 3.6 MJ
3.5
 CFP = ____________________ MT CO2/month
4.7 MT CO2/month
 Total CFP for energy: ______
CFP summary
Economic
Consumption CFP (MT)
value (US $)
3166.67
Material-based 14,529 9.0
kg/month TA
Energy-based
Electricity 20,034 MJ 334.6 3.5
(external)
Steam
7,055 kg 29.6 1.2
(internal)
Total 14,893 13.7
Aim: to reduce 10% of CFP, i.e. 1.4 MT!

Carbon footprint composite curves
10% reduction 14.9
14 13.7
1.4
12 Much steeper, i.e. 12.3
higher intensity 4.7
Energy-
CO2 emission (MT/month)
based
10 segment
Demand 9.0
composite
8
Source
composite
6
9.0
2
Material-based
segment
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1414.5 16
Economic value (US$ x1000)
Energy-based footprint composite

curves
10%
reduction 364.2
5
4.7
Internal
segment
4 1.4 1.2
CO2 emission (MT/month)
Source 3.5
composite 3.3
3
External Final
segment target
2
Demand 3.5
composite
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 335350 400

Economic value (US$)

Options for CFP reduction
Option 1
Option 2
Low Yield (3%)

High Residue
(Tjan et al., 2010)
Option 1 – power generation

 10% CFP reduction:
 This means 1.4 MT/month of CO2 reduction
 Result: 2.1 MT/month CO2 (= 3.5 – 1.4 MT/month)
 External electricity supply = ________
12,147 MJ (based on carbon intensity
of 0.622 kg CO2/kWh; 1 kWh = 3.6 MJ).
 Electricity to be generated by biomass = _____________________MJ
20,034 – 12,147 = 7,887
 Assumptions:
 Biomass has a calorific value of 15 MJ/kg & moisture content of 50%
 Biomass-fired electricity generation has 40% efficiency
 9,122
Total available solid residue = 3,041 kg/month, i.e. _______
MJ/month of electricity can be generated  more than
sufficient to reduce 10% of overall CFP.

CFP reduction for Option 1
Initial Final Reduction
(MT CO2) (MT CO2) (%)
Material-based 9.0 9.0 0
Energy-based
Electricity 3.5 2.1 0.4
(external)
Steam
1.2 1.2 0
(internal)
Total CFP 13.7 12.3 10.9
 Limitation: might not be feasible due to significant

investment in purchasing new power generator.
Option 2 – steam generation

Option 2 – steam generation
 Assumptions:
 Efficiency of biomass-fired boiler: 70%
 Heat content of steam: 2 MJ/kg
 Biomass has a calorific value of 15 MJ/kg & moisture
content of 50%
 Based on 3,041 kg/month of solid residue, steam
7,982
production: ________________ kg/month  the
entire internal segment can be removed (current
steam usage: 7,055 kg/month).
 The CFP reduction by removing 7,055 kg steam:
1.2
_________ MT/month (0.17 kg CO2/kg steam) 
8.8% CFP reduction (< 10%).
Case Study 2 – Chlor-alkali plant

Demineralised Water
Salt (NaCl)
Primary Secondary
Saturator
Purification Purification
Depleted Brine
NaOH
Product NaOH Membrane
Evaporator
Electrolyser
Demineralised Water
NaOH Cl2 Cl2 H2

~90% of total
Hypo HCl electricity
Tower Burner consumption
NaOCl HCl

Case Study 2 – Chlor-alkali plant
 The raw material of sodium chloride (NaCl) is mixed with
water to form brine solution.
 The brine solution then passes through a series of
purification processes before the main operation –
membrane electrolysers to form its main product, i.e. caustic
soda (NaOH), which is sent for water evaporation to
produce concentrated NaOH product.
 Other effluents of electrolysers:
 HCl burner: Cl2 & H2 gases are burned to produce hydrochloric acid
(HCl) in a highly exothermic process:
Cl2 & H2  2 HCl
 Hypo tower: Some NaOH is used to produce sodium hypochlorite
(NaClO), by reacting with Cl2 gas:
2 NaOH + Cl2  NaCl + NaClO + H2O
A membrane electrolyser
 A electrolysis cell is divided into anode & cathode compartments by a

cation permeable membrane, that acts as an ion exchanger.
 Anode compartment: saturated NaCl solution passes through & leaves
at lower concentration.
 Cathode compartment: NaOH solution is circulated & exits at higher
concentration.
 A portion of the concentrated NaOH solution leaves the cell as product;
while the other is diluted with deionized water & is recycled to the
electrolysis again.
Material costs & CFP
 Total raw material cost: $ 499,182
 CFP for raw material:
 Assumption: inorganic (CFP index: 2 kg CO2/US$) 
CFP = __________
998.36 t/month
 Transportation footprint:
NaCl from Australia: 3500 t/month
Distance from farm to processing site: 5000 km
CFP index based on heavy duty vehicles: 0.0139 kg CO2/tonne-km
243.25 t/month
CFP = __________
1241.6 t CO2/month
 Total CFP for raw material: ______
Energy consumption & costs

 Electricity:
 Consumption: 5,900,000 kWh/month
 Unit price: $0.072/kWh
424,800
 Cost: $ __________/month
 Steam:
 Consumption: 2,609,075 kg/month
 Unit price: $0.032/kg
83,490
 Cost: $ __________/month
508,290
 Total energy cost: $ __________/month

CFP calculation for energy
 Steam (internal):
 Steam carbon intensity: 0.17 kg CO2/kg steam
 Consumption: 2,609,075 kg/month
443.54
 CFP = ____________________ t CO2/month
 Power (external):
 CFP for power generation in Malaysia:
Energy Contribution* Carbon intensity** Overall CFP
Source (%) (kg CO2/kWh) (kg CO2/kWh)
Natural Gas 50 0.5 0.25
Coal 35 1 0.35
Hydropower 14 0.1 0.014
Oil 1 0.8 0.008
 Consumption: 5,900,000 kWh/month 0.622
3669.8
 CFP = ____________________ t CO2/month
 4113.34 t CO2/month
Total CFP for energy: __________
CFP summary
Economic
Consumption CFP (t)
value (US $)
Material-based 499,182 1241.6
Energy-based
5,900,000
Electricity 424,800 3669.8
kWh/month
(external)
Steam 2,609,075
83,490 443.54
(internal) kg/month
Total 1,007,472 5,355
Aim: to reduce 10% of CFP, i.e. 536 MT!

Carbon footprint composite curves
1007
6,000 10%
reduction
5,355
536
5,000
12.3
CO2 emission (t/month)
4,000
Demand Energy-based
composite segment
4,113
3,000
Much steeper,
2,000 i.e. higher
Source intensity
composite
1,241
1,000
Material-based
segment
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
Economic value (x 1000 US$)
Energy-based footprint composite

curves
10% reduction:
536 MT
508
5,000
Internal
Source segment 4,113

4,000 composite 3,670
3,577
3,000
External
segment
Final target – but it
2,000 is even lower than
Demand internal segment
composite
1,000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 425 450 500 550

Dual approach for CFP reduction
 Reduced slope of internal segment :
 Utilise cleaner energy sources in the steam generation section
 Produce steam in HCl burner due to its excess heat (note: requires
existing equipment to be retrofitted or replaced in order to increase
thermal efficiency. Not possible with the current equipment
design).

 Internal segment is shifted down along the external segment
simultaneously:
 Achieved by more efficient use of electricity, through retrofit or
replacement of electrolytic cells (largest power consumer).
 Utilise more renewable energy with lower CFP, e.g. biomass, hydro
power, etc., in countries where companies have the option to
selectively purchase “green electricity”.

 Use excess heat in HCl burner to generate high pressure
steam
 Replace the electrolytic cells
Initial Final Reduction

(t CO2) (t CO2) (%)
Material-based 1241.6 1241.6 0
Energy-based
Electricity 3669.8 3251 11.4
(external)
Steam
443.54 328 26.0
(internal)
Total CFP 5,355 4820.6 10.0
508
5,000
Internal
segment 4,113
4,000
Source
composite 3,577
328
3,229
3,000
External
segment
2,000
Demand
composite
1,000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Extension to multi-product facilities
Power, P1 Steam, S1 Power, P2
Raw material 1 Process Process Process Product X

A B C
Raw material 2
Process Product Y
D
Steam, S2
Shared facilities Dedicated facilities

(process units of which output (process units unique to 1
contains >1 final products final product only)
• Process A • Process C
• Process B • Process D
Overall strategies
Overall Overall
production production
CO2 emissions
CO2 emissions
Dedicated
Dedicated
facilities
facilities
Shared
Shared
facilities
facilities
Economic
Economic
Product X Product Y Product X Product Y

CO2 emissions
CO2 emissions
CO2 emissions
CO2 emissions
Process C Process D Process C Process D
Shared Shared
facilities facilities
Shared Shared
facilities facilities
Economic Economic Economic Economic

Extension for multiple products
Start
More than No
one end
product?
Yes
Plot CECC
Shared facilities Yes Reduce CF of the

has steepest shared facilities
slope?
No
Breakdown CECC of
dedicated facilities for each
product
Updated
CFCC
Reduce CF of the dedicated

facilities of the product with
the steepest slope
No CF reduction
target fulfilled?
Yes
End
Concluding remark
 Systematic technique is needed to address
sustainability issues.
 Always remember the important motto:

Dominic C. Y. FOO, PhD, PEng
University of Nottingham Malaysia
Dominic.Foo@nottingham.edu.my

Systematic Approaach CF Reduction Manufacturing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Systematic Approaach CF Reduction Manufacturing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Systematic Approaach CF Reduction Manufacturing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A systematic approach to guide

carbon footprint reduction towards

Professor Ir Dr Dominic C. Y. Foo

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 2

 Climate change issues

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 3

Sustainable planetary boundaries

Earth-system Parameters Proposed Current Pre-industrial

Climate Change Atmospheric 350 387 280

Global freshwater Consumption of 4,000 2,600 415

(Rockstrom et al., 2009)

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 4

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 5

The Keeling curve

• Continuous CO2 measurements at Hawaii since 1958.

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 6

• Australia is no stranger to bushfires. However,

Australia food (2020 & 2022)

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 8

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 9

Texas US (Feb 2021)

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 10

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 11

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (7 March 22)

Director-general, Malaysian Meteorological Department:

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 13

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 14

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 15

High risk for flood

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 16

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 17

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 18

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 19

CCS industry and

40 Power gen efficiency

20 End-use fuel efficiency

1970s Heat exchanger network (HEN)

1989 Mass exchange network (MEN)

1994 Water minimisation (water pinch)

2002 Production supply chain

2002 Hydrogen network (H2 pinch)

2005 Property integration (property pinch)

2007 Energy planning (carbon pinch)

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 22

Mass recovery (H2O, H2)

Impurity load Impurity load

Minimum Maximum Minimum Minimum Maximum Minimum

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 25

Graphical Approach for

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 28

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 29

Case 1 – external < internal CF

Carbon intensity benchmark

Cost Value added Economic

Carbon intensity benchmark

Cost Value added Economic

Case Study 1– biochemical

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 32

Copyright@Dominic Foo Carbon Footprint Reduction towards Net Zero 33

Tongkat Ali extract production