Energy Use Loss Opportunities Analysis

Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities
Analysis: U.S. Manufacturing & Mining
Prepared by Energetics, Incorporated and

E3M, Incorporated for the
December 2004
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Industrial Technologies Program
Energy Use, Loss and
Opportunities Analysis
U.S. Manufacturing and

Mining
December 2004
Prepared by Energetics, Incorporated

and E3M, Incorporated
For the U.S. Department of Energy
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Industrial Technologies Program
Preface
The U.S. Department of Energy’s Industrial Technologies Program (DOE/ITP) conducts R&D to accelerate the
development of energy efficient and environmentally sound industrial technology and manufacturing practices.
To help focus its R&D portfolio, the DOE/ITP commissioned this multi-phase study to identify where and how
industry is using energy, and to target opportunities for reducing energy consumption. The focus of the study is on
energy systems (steam generators, power systems, fired heaters, heat exchangers, compressors, pumps, fans) used
across the industrial sector. The results of this study were also used to help develop the Technology Roadmap for
Energy Loss Reduction and Recovery (available at www.eere.energy.gov/industry), a joint effort between industry
and government.
The principal authors of the report are shown below. Questions concerning this report should be directed to the
authors. A copy of the report may be obtained on-line at www.eere.energy.gov/industry/energy_systems
Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities Analysis

Joan L. Pellegrino (jpellegrino@energetics.com)
Nancy Margolis (nmargolis@energetics.com
Mauricio Justiniano (mjustiniano@energetics.com)
Melanie Miller (mmiller@energetics.com
Energetics, Incorporated
7164 Gateway Drive
Columbia, Maryland, 21046
410-290-0370
Opportunities Analysis (petroleum, chemicals, iron and steel)

Arvind Thedki (athekdi@e3minc.com)
E3M, Incorporated
15216 Gravenstein Way
North Potomac, MD 20878
240-715-4333
Table of Contents
1.0 Overview of Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities ............................................................. 1
1.1 Background ........................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Methodology....................................................................................................... 3
1.2.1 Energy Use and Loss Analysis ............................................................ 3
1.2.1.1 General Methodology ............................................................. 3
1.2.1.2 Energy Footprints................................................................... 3
1.2.1.3 Industry Rankings .................................................................. 5
1.2.2 Loss Reduction and Recovery Opportunities Analysis .......................... 6
1.2.3 Definition of Terms ............................................................................ 8
2.0 U.S. Manufacturing and Mining ................................................................................... 10
3.0 Chemicals Industry (NAICS 325).................................................................................. 21
4.0 Petroleum Refining (NACIS 324110)....................................................................................29
5.0 Forest Products (NACIS 321,322) ................................................................................. 36
6.0 Iron and Steel (NAICS 333111) .................................................................................... 43
7.0 Food and Beverage (NAICS 311, 312) .......................................................................... 49
8.0 Mining (NAICS 212).................................................................................................... 55
9.0 Cement (NAICS 327310) ............................................................................................. 59
10.0 Energy Systems

10.1 Fired Systems ................................................................................................. 61
10.2 Steam Systems................................................................................................ 63
10.3 Onsite Power Generation ................................................................................. 65
10.4 Motor Systems ................................................................................................ 67
10.5 Facilities and Other Systems ............................................................................ 69
11.0 Top Twenty Opportunities ........................................................................................... 71

11.1 Opportunity Selection Criteria .......................................................................... 71
11.2 Research, Development and Demonstration Opportunities ................................. 71
11.3 Energy Management and Integration ................................................................ 73
11.4 Cross-Industry Opportunities ........................................................................... 74
References........................................................................................................................... 75
Appendix A Energy Footprints and Sample Calculations ....................................................... 77

Appendix B Opportunity Analysis Data and Assumptions ....................................................121
Appendix C Additional Data for Top Twenty.......................................................................137
Appendix D NAICS Descriptions ...................................................................................... 163
1.0 Overview of Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities
1.1 Background
The industrial sector uses about one-third of the total energy consumed annually in the United States (see Figure 1-1),
most of it fossil fuels, at a cost of approximately $100 billion. Given that energy resources are limited, and demand
for industrial products continues to rise, meeting industrial energy demand and minimizing its economic impact in the
future will be a significant challenge.
The U.S. manufacturing sector depends heavily on fuels and

power for the conversion of raw materials into usable products,
Total U.S. Energy Use and also uses energy as a source of raw materials (feedstock
97.3 quads energy). How efficiently energy is used, its cost, and its
availability consequently have a substantial impact on the
competitiveness and economic health of U.S. manufacturers.
Buildings Industry More efficient use of fuels and power lowers production costs,
38.3 32.5 conserves limited energy resources, and increases productivity.
quads quads Efficient use of energy also has positive impacts on the
environment – reductions in fuel use translate directly into
Transport decreased emissions of pollutants such as sulfur oxides, nitrogen
26.5 oxides, particulates, and greenhouse gases (e.g., carbon
quads dioxide).
Improved efficiency can also reduce the use of feedstock energy

through greater yields, which translates to more product
Figure 1-1 2002 U.S. Energy Consumption manufactured for the same amount of energy. Reducing the use
[Energy Information Administration, Annual of energy feedstocks impacts directly our dependence on
Energy Review 2003]
imported oil, and alleviates pressure on increasingly scarce and
expensive natural gas supplies.
Energy efficiency can be defined as the effectiveness with which energy resources are converted into usable work.
Thermal efficiency is commonly used to measure the efficiency of energy conversion systems such as process heaters,
steam systems, engines, and power generators. Thermal efficiency is essentially the measure of the efficiency and
completeness of fuel combustion, or in more technical terms, the ratio of the net work supplied to the heat supplied by
the combusted fuel. In a gas-fired heater, for example, thermal efficiency is equal to the total heat absorbed divided
by the total heat supplied; in an automotive engine, thermal efficiency is the work done by the gases in the cylinder
divided by the heat energy of the fuel supplied.
Typical Thermal Efficiencies of Selected
Energy efficiency varies dramatically across industries and Energy Systems and Industrial Equipment
manufacturing processes, and even between plants
manufacturing the same products. Efficiency can be Power Generation 25-44%
Steam Boilers (natural gas) 80%
limited by mechanical, chemical, or other physical
Steam Boilers (coal and oil) 84-85%
parameters, or by the age and design of equipment. In some Waste Heat Boilers 60-70%
cases, operating and maintenance practices contribute to Thermal Cracking (refineries) 58-61%
lower than optimum efficiency. Regardless of the reason, EAF Steelmaking 56%
Paper Drying 48%
less than optimum energy efficiency implies that not all of Kraft Pulping 60-69%
the energy input is being converted to useful work – some is Distillation Column 25-40%
released as lost energy. In the manufacturing sector, these Cement Calciner 30-70%
energy losses amount to several quadrillion Btus Compressors 10-20%
Pumps and Fans 55-65%
(quadrillion British Thermal Units, or quads) and billions of Motors 90-95%
dollars in lost revenues every year.
Given this resource and cost perspective, it is clear that increasing the efficiency of energy use could result in
substantial benefits to both industry and the nation. Unfortunately, the sheer complexity of the thousands of
processes used in the manufacturing sector makes this a daunting task. A first step in understanding and assessing the
opportunities for improving energy efficiency is to identify where and how industry is using energy – how much is
used for various systems, how much is lost, how much goes directly to processes, and so forth. The second step is to
Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities Analysis: U.S. Manufacturing and Mining 1
then quantify the portion of lost energy that can be recovered technically and economically through improvements in
energy efficiency, advances in technology, and other means. Answering these questions for the U.S. manufacturing
and mining sectors is the focus of this report.
The U.S. Department of Energy’s Industrial Technologies Program (DOE/ITP) conducts R&D to accelerate the
development of energy efficient and environmentally sound industrial technology and manufacturing practices. To
help focus its R&D portfolio, the DOE/ITP commissioned this multi-phase study to identify where and how industry
is using energy, and to ultimately target the most significant opportunities for reducing energy consumption. The
focus of the study is on energy systems – steam generators, power systems, fired heaters, heat exchangers,
compressors, pumps, fans – that are used across the industrial sector to convert energy resources into useful work or
products. A schematic illustrating the various phases of the study is shown in Figure 1-2.
The first phase of the study involved examining the use of energy in terms of broad categories such as steam, fired
systems, motor drive, combined heat and power, and similar areas. This essentially provides a “footprint” of energy
use across 15 sectors of manufacturing, plus mining, and outlines the energy lost in energy generation, distribution,
and conversion. These energy losses represent the central targets of opportunity for more advanced and increasingly
efficient energy systems.
The second phase of the study builds upon these initial results via are in-depth look at the largest industrial users of
energy systems and subsequentially linking energy use and losses to industry-specific process operations and
equipment. In addition, it examines the potential technology options for recapturing some of the energy that is
currently lost in industrial processes and identifies technology R&D areas that could have potentially large impacts
across more than one industry. The results of the first and second phases of the study were then used as the basis for
developing a quantified list in terms of energy savings potential of the top opportunities for improving the efficiency
of industrial energy systems.
The remainder of the report is organized by the results obtained for the aggregated manufacturing sector, with
individual chapters on the most energy-intensive industries. A chapter is also devoted to selected functional areas
(e.g., steam systems, process heaters, motor drives). The top recommendations emerging from the opportunities
analysis are provided in a separate summary chapter. A brief description of the methodology and approach used in
conducting the analysis is provided in the following section.
Figure 1-2 Flow of the Multi-phase Study on Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities
Losses Downstream
Energy Used By Associated With Losses in
Industrial Energy Waste Heat,
Sectors and Generation, Energy Delivered Byproducts,
Functional Distribution, and to Processes Flared Gases,
Energy Systems Conversion Wastewater
Opportunities for Energy Loss Reduction and Recovery
1.2 Methodology
1.2.1 Energy Use and Loss Analysis
1.2.1.1 General Methodology
The basic objective of the study was to evaluate the energy use and loss patterns of individual industries as well as that
of the entire manufacturing sector. Industries were selected based on total energy use, contribution to the economy,
and relative importance to energy efficiency programs. Industries not selected for individual analysis include oil and
gas extraction, coal products, printing facilities, furniture, and miscellaneous unclassified manufacturing. However,
with the exception of oil and gas extraction, energy consumed in these industries is included in the overall
manufacturing energy analysis .
Table 1-1 Industry Sectors Selected for Study Using this approach, the study examined a
large subset of the mining and manufacturing
Coal, Metal Ore, and Nonmetallic Mineral Mining NAICS 212
Food and Beverage sector, with the objective of capturing the bulk
NAICS 311 Food, NAICS 312 Beverage and Tobacco Products share of energy consumption. Table 1-1 lists
Textiles the industrial sectors covered and defines the
NAICS 313 Textile Mills, NAICS 314 Textile Product Mills sixteen groupings selected for analysis,
NAICS 315 Apparel, NA ICS 316 Leather and Allied Products
Forest Products
organized by their respective North American
NAICS 321 Wood Products, NAICS 322 Paper Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
Petroleum Refining NAICS 334110 codes [NAICS 1997]. The industries shown
Chemicals NAICS 325 in Table 1-1 represent over 80% of U.S.
Plastics and Rubber Products NAICS 326 industrial energy use. For simplicity, some
Glass and Glass Products
NAICS 3272 Glass & Glass Products, NAICS 3296 Mineral Wool
related sectors were grouped (e.g., textiles).
Cement NAICS 327310 Appendix D gives an overview of the specific
Iron and Steel Mills NAICS 333111 products manufactured in each sector.
Alumina and Aluminum NAICS 3313
Foundries NAICS 3315 Energy use figure were obtained from the
Fabricated Metals NAICS 332
Heavy Machinery NAICS 333
1998 Manufacturing Energy Consumption
Computers, Electronics, Appliances, Electrical Equipment Survey (MECS) and other sources listed in the
NAICS 334 Computer and Electronic Products Reference section of this report. This
NAICS 335 Electrical Equipment, Appliances represents the most current source of energy
Transportation Equipment NAICS 336 use available by individual NAICS
codes. The Annual Survey of Manufactures also provides information on energy use by NAICS codes, but data is not
given in physical units except for electricity (e.g., fuel data is given is terms of dollars expended).
The general approach used to evaluate and compare energy use and losses across industry involved the development
of “energy footprints” for each sector using primarily MECS data, incorporating other sources as necessary. This
methodology is described in more detail in the following section.
1.2.1.2 Energy Footprints
Using the MECS data as a basis, a series of Energy Footprints was developed to map the flow of energy supply and
demand in U.S. manufacturing and mining. Identifying the sources and end-uses of energy helps to pinpoint areas of
energy-intensity and characterize the unique energy needs of individual industries. A set of industry-specific energy
footprints is provided in Appendix A along with sample calculations.
The generic energy footprint schematic is shown in Figure 1-3. On the supply side (far left of the diagram), the
footprints provide details on the energy purchased from utilities, the energy that is generated onsite (both electricity
and byproduct fuels), and excess electricity that is transported to the local grid (energy export). On the demand side
(right side of diagram, inside the plant boundary), the footprints illustrate where and how energy is used within a
typical plant, from central boilers to process heaters and motors. Most important, the footprints identify where energy
is lost due to inefficiencies in equipment and distribution systems, both inside and outside the plant boundary. Losses
are critical, as they represent immediate opportunities to improve efficiency and lower energy consumption through
best energy management practices and improved energy systems. To aid in the interpretation of these diagrams,
particularly energy losses, a comprehensive set of definitions of terms is included in Section 1.2.3.
Energy
As Figure 1-3 shows, the energy
Export supply chain begins with the
electricity, steam, natural gas,
Facilities/HVAC/ Lighting coal, and other fuels supplied to a
Fossil
Solar/Geo-
plant from off-site power plants,
Energy Energy Recycle
Supply
thermal/Wind gas companies, and fuel
Energy
Process Energy Systems
distributors. Many industries
generate byproducts and fuels
Energy Central Energy Energy Process onsite, and these are also part of
Supply Energy Energy
Generation/
Distribution Conversion
Use
the energy supply (noted as
Utilities energy recycle). Notable
Utility/ examples are the use of black
Energy Energy
Power
TBD
liquor and wood byproducts in
Plant Losses Losses
Industrial Plant Boundary
pulp and paper mills, still gas
from petroleum refining
Inside Plant Boundary Plant Operation/System processes, light gas mixes
Process Energy System produced during chemicals
manufacture, and blast oven gases
Figure 1-3 Generic Energy Footprint in iron and steel mills.
For simplicity, byproduct energy is shown on the energy footprint as contributing to the total fossil energy supply
coming into the plant, even though it is produced onsite. Renewable energy sources such as solar, geothermal, and
wind power are shown as separate energy resources, and are most often used to produce electricity.
Once energy crosses the plant boundary, it flows either to a central energy generation utility system (e.g., steam
plant, power generation, cogeneration) or goes directly to process units. Central energy generation represents the
production of electricity and steam in a centralized location, with the energy transported subsequently through
distribution systems to various process units. This is a generalization of what may be actually occurring at the plant
site, as energy producers are often situated close to where energy is required. Energy production facilities within the
plant boundary also sometimes create more energy than is needed for process use. In this situation, the excess energy
is exported off-site to the local grid or another plant within close proximity. For the energy footprint analysis, all the
energy export is assumed to be electricity although a small portion may be steam.
Fuels and power are often routed to energy conversion equipment that is generally integrated with specific processes.
For the energy footprint analysis, energy conversion represents the conversion of energy to usable work that occurs
prior to the process. This would include, for example, a motor-driven compressor or pump, or an air preheater. The
converted energy is utilized as process energy, where it drives the conversion of raw materials or intermediates into
final products.
Energy losses occur all along the energy supply Losses

and distribution system (red arrows in Figure 1-
3). A simplified flow of losses from energy
supply through industrial processing is shown in Energy
Central Energy
Figure 1-4. Energy is lost in power generation Generation Distribution Conversion Processes
Supply
and steam systems, both off-site at the utility and
on-site within the plant boundary, due to
equipment inefficiency and mechanical and Losses
thermal limitations. Energy is lost in Losses
distribution and transmission systems carrying
energy both to the plant and within the plant
boundary. Figure 1-4 Simplified Flow of Energy Losses
Losses also occur in energy conversion systems (e.g., heat exchangers, process heaters, pumps, motors) where
efficiencies are thermally or mechanically limited by materials of construction and equipment design. In some cases,
heat-generating processes are not located optimally near heat sinks, and it may be economically impractical to recover
that excess energy. Energy is sometimes lost simply because it cannot be stored. Energy is also lost from processes
when waste heat is not recovered and when waste by-products with fuel value are not utilized.
It is difficult to distinguish between energy conversion occurring prior to the process versus during the proces s as
equipment is often closely integrated with the process unit. For the purpose of calculating energy losses, it was
assumed that a portion of losses would occur prior to the process (these are calculated) and another portion would
occur downstream (not calculated). As a result, pre -process losses may overlap somewhat with post-process
(downstream) losses. Downstream losses, which manifest typically as flue or exhaust gases, radiative and convective
heat losses, wastewater, and/or low quality steam, are process-specific and can be substantial (shown as TBD on the
energy footprint). These were not included in the scope of the energy use and loss analysis, but are dealt with to some
extent in the opportunities analysis (Section 1.2.2).
Losses were determined by applying equipment loss

Table 1-2 Loss Factors for Selected Equipment
factors to the energy used in selected functional
Energy System Percent Energy Lost categories: steam systems, fired systems (heating and
Steam systems Boilers – 20%
Steam pipes and traps - 20% cooling), refrigeration, and others. The loss factors
Steam delivery/heat exchangers – used in this study, listed in Table 1-2, were obtained
15% from literature sources and through discussions with
Power generation Combined heat and power – 24% equipment experts (see Reference section).
(4500 Btu/kWh)
Conventional power – 45% (6200 Boiler losses represent energy lost due to boiler
Btu/kWh) inefficiency. In practice, boiler efficiency can be as
Energy distribution Fuel and electricity distribution lines low as 55-60%, or as high as 90%. The age of the
and pipes (not steam) – 3% boiler, maintenance practices, and fuel type are
Energy conversion Process heaters – 15% contributing factors to boiler efficiency. As shown in
Cooling systems – 10%
Table 1-2, an average loss factor of 20% was used.
Onsite transport systems – 50%
Electrolytic cells – 15% Power generation losses vary depending on whether
Other – 10% cogeneration is employed (systems producing both
Motor systems Pumps – 40% steam and electricity). It is assumed that the greater
Fans – 40% losses are in steam pipes (20%), with small losses
Compressed air – 80% incurred in other fuel transmission lines (3%) and
Refrigeration – 5% electricity transmission lines (3%). Losses in steam
Materials handling – 5% pipes and traps have been reported to be as high as
Materials processing – 90% from 20 to 40% [PNNL 1999]. A conservative value
Motor windings – 5% of 20% was used for steam distribution losses in this
study.
As shown in Table 1-2, onsite power generation losses are assumed to be about 45%, which represents a relatively
state-of-the-art gas turbine with heat recovery. Cogeneration raises the thermal efficiency of the power generating
system by as much as 25-35%, significantly reducing power losses [ADL 2000].
Distribution losses represent steam heat lost in traps, valves, and steam pipes, and transmission losses in onsite fuel
and electricity lines. In practice, these losses are strongly site-specific and depend largely on plant size and
configuration. The loss factors shown in Table 1-2 may underestimate these losses, which have been reported to be as
high as 10-40%. For simplicity, distribution losses are spread among the largest end-use categories.
Motor losses represent losses in motor windings as well as mechanical losses in the motor-driven systems (e.g.,
compressor) that occur during the conversion of energy to useful work. Effective rewind practices can reduce these
losses.
The energy footprints represent an average picture of energy use and losses across an industry. They provide the
means to begin assessing the relative losses due to inefficiencies in addition to sources of energy-intensity. They also
provide a baseline from which to calculate the opportunities for improving energy efficiency.
1.2.1.3 Industry Rankings
Using the results of the energy footprint analysis, 16 industrial sectors were compared in a number of categories
including: primary energy use, energy use for fuel and power, use of fuel versus power, use of steam and fired
systems, onsite cogeneration, and others. Chapter 2, U.S. Manufacturing and Mining, contains the results of each
ranking exercise. The rankings provide a useful diagnostic tool for identifying the top energy consumers, the primary
functional uses of energy, and the propensity of industry to use onsite power generation rather than purchased
electricity.
These rankings also revealed a select subset of the industrial sector that warranted further study and analysis.
Consequently six industries were the chosen focus for the remainder of this report: chemicals, petroleum refining,
forest products, iron and steel, food processing, and mining. The top functional categories – steam, fired systems,
motor-driven equipment, and onsite generation – are also highlighted. Separate chapters describe the unique energy
characteristics of each industry and technology area, potential sources of energy loss, and potential opportunities for
energy loss reduction and recovery.
1.2.2 Loss Reduction and Recovery Opportunities Analysis
Using the rankings of the top energy systems users provided by the energy use and loss study as a starting point (see
Table 1-3), additional analyses were conducted to narrow down process-specific opportunities. The following criteria
were used to guide the selection of industries for further analysis: 1) energy use and losses were large, 2) waste heat
represented a significant source of energy losses, and 3) the potential for cross-industry impacts was high.
For example, the thermal processes used in

Table 1-3 Major Industrial Users of Energy Systems
Motor Energy Used chemicals, petroleum refining, forest products
Steam Fired Driven in Energy and food processing share many
Systems Systems Systems Systems characteristics, and waste heat is a substantial
Industry (Rank) (Rank) (Rank) (TBTU) potential energy source in each of these
Petroleum industries. Thus, based on their energy use
Refining 3 1 4 3401 profile, the industries ultimately selected for
Chemicals 2 3 1 3334
Forest
further study included petroleum refining,
Products 1 8 2 3082 chemicals, forest products, iron and steel, food
Iron and and beverage, and cement.
Steel 7 2 6 1593
Food and For the six industries selected, estimates of the
Beverage 4 4 5 1052
Cement 16 5 10 353
energy intensity (Btu/product unit) and
Fabricated production values associated with specific
Metals 11 10 7 332 energy systems were made for each industry.
Transport Process energy estimates were based upon
Equipment 6 13 9 324
data available currently in open literature, and
Textiles 5 15 9 297
Mining 15 13 3 290 were correlated with the 1998 MECS to
validate order of magnitude.
Average equipment efficiencies were estimated and energy losses were then calculated for each process to ascertain
quantifiable energy reduction opportunities for each major process. Average equipment efficiencies were determined
based on open literature, communication with industry experts, and equipment suppliers and energy system
consultants. In some cases, assumptions of equipment efficiency were made based on widely known best practices.
Details for each industry analysis are provided in Appendix B.
The second phase of the study differs from the first in that energy loss calculations encompass those losses occurring
at the end of the process (e.g., exit gases, flue gases, hot water). The first phase of the study concentrated entirely on
losses occurring prior to use in the process operation (e.g., central energy generation losses, losses in distribution and
conversion to work). However, because energy systems are often integrated closely into the process, energy
conversion losses are difficult isolate. Thus, there may be some overlap with end-of-process losses. The second
phase of the analysis focused on the major process level, with the primary objective of pinpointing the major loss
targets in each industry and later tying those losses to specific processes and energy systems equipment. By doing so,
conclusions can then be reached regarding high profile targets and possible technology options for reducing energy
system losses.
After assessing the potential opportunities, estimates were made concerning the percent of energy that could be likely
reduced or recovered and the various technology options that might be suitable candidates. These estimates were
based on communications with equipment and industry experts, open literature citations documenting potential
efficiency improvements, and best engineering practices. Assumption details are provided in the individual industry
chapters and in Appendix B.
Energy systems were grouped according to specific thermal processes, as defined in Table 1-4. Two major categories
are used to encompass all the thermal processes shown in Table 1-4 – steam systems (e.g., boiling or distillation) and
fired systems (all other thermal processes shown). Most of the results in this report are presented within the context
of these two categories. In some cases, where it is difficult to separate steam from other thermal systems (e.g.,
chemicals manufacture) thermal energy use was combined into one aggregate table.
Estimates of potential energy savings were distributed among categories that range from near-term best practices to
completely new technology that must be developed through R&D. Best practices opportunities, are those that may be
achieved in the relatively near term (immediately to 2-3 years), whereas revolutionary R&D might take much longer
to achieve results (7-10 years and beyond). A summary of the categories is provided in Table 1-5.
Table 1-4 Definition of Thermal Processes

Temperature
Process Description Typical Applications
Regime (o F)
Heating of liquid or gas to raise its temperature Heating of water, petroleum crude,
Fluid Heating 150-800 without significant vaporization or separation of its chemical feedstocks, and other
constituents liquids
Boiling or 300-1000 Vapor generation from water or other liquid Steam generation
Distillation
Removal of physically mixed water or other liquid Drying of lumber, paper, paint, ore,
Drying 200-700
from material grain, food products, chemicals
Heating of material (to promote binding of
Curing and Heating of plastic, rubber, bricks,
300-2500 constituents or changing strength ) for further
forming ceramics
processing
Metal or non- Raising temperature of the metallic or non-metallic Heating of steel, aluminum , or
200-2500
metal heating material for further processing other materials for rolling, forging
Heating of material to change its structure and/or Heat treating of steel or aluminum
Heat treating 400-2500 composition in air or in presence of special gas to make it soft or hard
mixture (atmosphere)
Heating of metal to change from solid to liquid Melting of steel, aluminum, copper,
Metal Melting 800-3000
form and other materials in furnaces
Non-metal Heating of non-metallic material to change from Melting of glass, salts, non-metallic
1500-3000
melting solid to liquid form minerals
Heating of material (mostly non-metallic) to
Calcining 1500-2000 Lime, ore, or chemical calcining
remove chemically bound water
Heating of material-ore in presence or mixed with Iron ore, copper, and zinc ore
Smelting >2000
other material (carbon) to produce molten metal smelting
To heat material to produce material that is fused
Agglomeration
>2000 or "agglomerated" by the effect of high Powder metal, iron ore pelletizing
- sintering
temperature
To heat material for a variety of end-uses or
Other 200-500 Frying, cooking, baking
processing
Table 1-5 Improvement Potential Categories

Best Practices
Existing potential Can be attained with existing operations using tools and methodologies for
best practices
Future or new potential Will require new tools and methodologies for best practices
Technology
Commercially available Can be attained with available technology and equipment; may be currently
technology and equipment constrained by lack of proven track record in operating practice, lack of
awareness on the part of industry, capital or operating cost, or investment
clim ate
Commercially available Same as above, only technology is an alternative to conventional practice
alternative technology and and may not be proven in the particular application, which will increase risk
equipment
Future R&D for new Will require R&D to develop new technology and equipment that does not
technology and equipment currently exist or is currently not technically feasible, practical, or economic
Future R&D for alternative Same as above, only the technology will be take a completely different
technology and equipment approach to providing thermal energy (e.g., alternate - innovative heat
generation method, direct heat instead of steam)
1.2.3 Definition of Terms
Throughout this report a number of parameters are utilized to interpret the energy footprints and to describe energy
use and losses. These are defined below, in alphabetical order.
Combined heat and power (CHP) – energy system used for onsite cogeneration of steam and electricity.
Conventional power – gas or steam turbines generating onsite power, with heat recovery.
Electricity demand – the net use of electricity at the plant site, equaling purchased electricity and electricity
generated onsite minus electricity exported offsite.
Electrochemical or Electrolytic Cells – Energy used in systems that convert raw inputs to products through an
electrochemical reaction
Energy conversion systems – systems that convert energy into usable work for delivery to processes, such as
heat exchangers, fired heaters, condensers, heat pumps, machine-drive, and onsite transportation.
Energy distribution systems – pipes and transmission lines for delivering fuels, steam, and electricity to
processes and equipment.
Energy export – excess energy (mostly electricity) generated onsite that is exported offsite to the local grid or
another facility.
Energy source flexibility – feasibility of alternative energy systems, such as using direct heat rather than steam or
electricity, or systems fired with renewable fuels
.
Facilities – energy used to provide heat, cooling, and lighting for building envelopes at the plant site.
Feedstock energy – energy used as a raw material in the production of non-fuel products, such as chemicals,
materials, tar, asphalt, wax, steel, and others. The most commonly used energy feedstocks are petroleum/petroleum
derivatives and natural gas.
Fired Systems – direct- and indirect-fired process heaters such as furnaces, dryers, re-boilers, and evaporators.
Fuel and electricity use – direct use of fuels and electricity at the plant site, taken directly from the Manufacturing
Energy Consumption Survey [MECS 1998] for the manufacturing sector, and estimated for mining based on a recent
study [Mining 2002]. Electricity includes purchased electricity only, not electricity generated onsite (see electricity
demand, below). Fuels used to generate on-site electricity as well as byproduct fuels are included in the fuels
category. Offsite electricity losses are not included.
Motor systems– motor-driven systems, such as compressors, fans, pumps, materials handling and processing
equipment, and refrigeration. Materials handling equipment includes conveyors and assembly processes that are
typically motorized. Materials processing includes grinders, crushers, mixers, and other similar equip ment of this
nature. Motor energy is converted to external work (rotating, lifting, spinning, moving), and is sometimes called shaft
work.
Offsite losses – the energy losses incurred during the generation and transmission of electricity at offsite utilities,
plus the energy losses incurred during the transport of fuels to the plant boundary. The efficiency of utility power
generation and transmission is assumed to be 10,500 Btu/kWh, which is equal to an overall efficiency of about 32.5%.
This does not represent the state-of-the-art, but an average value for the national grid. Fuel transport energy losses are
assumed to be approximately 3%.
Onsite losses – losses incurred in energy distribution and conversion systems, and in the central energy plant where
steam and electricity are generated. Boiler generation losses represent energy lost due to boiler inefficiency. Onsite
power generation losses are those associated with generation or cogeneration of electricity. Distribution losses
represent steam heat lost in traps, valves, and steam pipes, and transmission losses in onsite fuel and electricity lines.
Energy conversion losses occur in heat exchangers, preheat systems, motor driven systems, or other equipment where
the transfer of energy from steam, direct heat or cooling, or electricity takes place, prior to delivery of energy to the
process. In many cases energy conversion equipment is integrated directly with the process unit, making it difficult to
estimate pre-process losses.
Onsite Transport – Energy used to fuel equipment (trucks, forklifts, etc.) that carry materials between locations at
the plant site.
Primary energy use – the total processing energy consumption associated with an industrial sector. It is the sum of
energy purchases (fuel and electricity), byproduct energy produced onsite, and the offsite losses associated with
energy purchased from utilities and fuel suppliers (see offsite losses, below). Primary energy does not include
feedstock energy, i.e., energy used as a raw materia l.
Process cooling – energy used for cryogenic and other cooling systems. This category may have some overlap
with motor-driven refrigeration.
Process energy – energy used in industry-specific processes, such as chemical reactors, steel furnaces, glass
melters, casting, welding or forging of parts, concentrators, distillation columns, and so forth.
Process heating – an aggregate of the energy used for process heating, including the use of steam, fired heaters,
and all other heating devices.
Steam systems – the complete steam system, including boilers, steam distribution lines, steam traps, and final
delivery of steam to the process (e.g., heat exchangers).
Waste heat source reduction – reducing the amount of heat required through the use of innovative energy
systems, heat integration, heating system redesign, or other means.
Waste heat recovery – recovering or recycling of high; medium; and low-temperature waste energy through means
such as energy recycling, energy cascading, absorption heat pumps, optimized condensate recovery, or other
technology.
Controls, automation, and robotics – advanced controls, automation, and robotics to improve energy system
efficiency.
2.0 U.S. Manufacturing and Mining
2.1 Background
The U.S. manufacturing and mining sector is highly diverse, using thousands of processes to manufacture literally
millions of different products. The mining and oil and gas extraction industries are the primary sources of raw
materials for the manufacturing sector. Manufacturing is a complex composite of many industries – some convert raw
materials into intermediate and final products, while others form, forge, fabricate, and assemble final products.
There are integral links between the raw material industries, heavy industries (e.g., chemicals, steel, pulp and paper)
which convert raw materials, and the industries that create finished products. For example, mining provides raw
materials for the production of intermediate steel products, which are then sent to forgers and fabricators, and supplied
finally to the transportation industry where they become automotive components. Similarly, changes in energy use
patterns in the heavy industries can ripple through the industries they supply goods to, affecting not just product costs,
but the life cycle energy embodied in the final product. Consequently, in examining energy use patterns, it is critical
to understand the inter-dependencies of industries, as well as the unique energy needs of individual industries.
This study looks at the 16 industrial sectors described in Chapter 1, representing a large subset of the mining and
manufacturing sector and capturing about 95% of energy consumption. Comparative rankings of the industries are
provided for overall energy use, energy use in specific functional systems, and energy losses.
2.2 Energy Use and Loss Analysis

Overview
Primary energy – A snapshot of primary energy use (fuels and power, plus offsite losses) for the manufacturing and
mining sector is shown in Table 2-1. Energy losses are highlighted in red. Primary energy use for manufacturing and
mining is about 26 quads (quadrillion Btus), which represents 27% of the energy consumed in the United States [EIA
2001].
Table 2-1 Snapshot of Energy Use and Losses in U.S. Fuel type – In manufacturing, natural gas
Manufacturing and Mining (Trillion Btu) accounts for the major portion of purchased
Category Manufacturing Mining TOTAL* fuel use, at about 38%, followed by smaller
amounts of purchased electricity (17%) and
Primary Energy Use 24658 1273 25931 coal, petroleum, and other fuels (13%). A
Offsite Losses 6884 520 7404 significant portion of energy is byproduct
Fuel & Electricity 17774 753 18527 fuels, which account for about 32% [MECS
Onsite Losses 5591 311 5902 1998]. Byproduct fuels are comprised mostly
Steam Generation 1233 1 1234 of fossil-based fuel gases and liquid
Power Generation 166 16 182 byproducts, and wood processing byproducts.
Energy Distribution 1330 13 1343 Major users of byproduct fuels include
Energy Conversion 2862 281 3143 petroleum refining, chemicals, forest products,
Facilities Energy 1405 neg 1405
Energy Exported 79 ~0.01 79 and iron and steel. Mining relies heavily on
Energy Delivered to 10699 442 11141 transportation fuels for both onsite transport
Processes and electricity to power drilling and other
operations. [Mining 2002].
*Excludes feedstock energy.
Feedstock energy – Energy is also used as a raw material for the production of non-fuel products such as
petrochemicals, fertilizers, asphalt, wa x, tar, steel, and other consumer products. Since process energy use (fuels and
power) is the focus of this report, feedstock energy is not included in the energy totals shown in Table 2-2 and is
mentioned only in subsequent chapters to providing a context for overall energy use. However, the quantity of energy
purchased for feedstocks is significant – 7.3 quads in 1998 (see Figure 2-1), and brings the annual energy use in
manufacturing and mining to more than 33 quads. Of this total, feedstocks account for a substantial 22%. The largest
users of feedstock energy include chemicals, petroleum refining, and iron and steel. Feedstock energy is used in small
quantities in forest products, food and beverage, and textiles, and for anode manufacture.
There are several ways in which energy use can be reported for Fuel Oils 1%
manufacturing and mining. The first, shown in Figure 2-2, (58 Tbtu)
Other* 55%
illustrates what is termed “total energy use”. Total energy use (4050 Tbtu)
includes energy used for feedstocks, fuels and power, and the Natural Gas 11%
(782 Tbtu)
losses incurred offsite at utilities and in fuel transport. This is the
most complete picture of energy associated with an industrial
sector. With this approach, the petroleum and coal products Coal/Coke 9%
(694 Tbtu)
industry ranks first in energy use.
Energy consumption is also reported in the MECS as “first use of

energy”, which includes net use of feedstocks and fuels and power
(see Figure 2-3), and does not include offsite losses. To avoid
double-counting of energy use, the fuel and power reported in first LPG/NGL** 24%
use of energy is adjusted to remove combusted fuels that produce (1746 Tbtu)
byproducts later used as feedstocks. This adjustment is only *Other includes petroleum-derived byproduct gases
significant for the chemicals, petroleum refining, and iron and steel and solids, woody materials, hydrogen, and waste
industries. materials.
**LPG/NGL are liquefied petroleum gases (mixtures
of alkanes and olefins) and natural gas liquids.
First use of energy provides an overall picture of all the energy
sources that are purchased by an industry, as well as the fuels that
are produced onsite. Since it includes feedstock energy, however, Figure 2-1 Use of Feedstock Energy in the
Manufacturing and Mining Industries
it does not illustrate the energy that is used strictly for heat, cooling
and power or for other uses within the plant boundary, which is the – 7.3 Quads
primary object of this study. For this reason, two other energy
categories are examined: Primary energy and fuels and power.
For the purposes of this report, primary energy use and fuels and electricity (or power) use are of the most interest.
Primary energy includes fuels and power as well as offsite losses; it represents all the energy associated with industrial
processes , both external and internal to the plant boundary. Fuels and power does not include offsite losses, and
represents the energy associated with industrial processes strictly inside the plant boundary.
Differentiating between inside or outside the plant boundary is important when evaluating technology options for
improving energy efficiency. Within the plant boundary, an industry has control over its energy consumption.
Outside the plant boundary, where energy is generated by or provided by utilities, an industry has little or no control
over technology efficiency. However, an industry can reduce energy losses associated with external energy supply by
adopting technologies that allow it to generate more energy onsite more efficiently than the utility (e.g., cogeneration).
Trillion Btu
8000
Top Ten
7000
6000
5000
4000 Energy Delivered a

Feedstock Energy b
3000 Offsite Losses c
2000
1000
0
sp lum ing
ies
r
ac nt
les
l
ee
be
y
ls
tro ls
ge
s
er
/A Min
ica
dr
t
qu m
av Cem
ta
xti
St
uc
ub
t
ra
hin
en
un
s
em
s/E Me
inu
cts
Te
ve
&
nic
od
s/R
ipm
ts
Fo
du
Ch
Be
n
uc
Pr
pu ated
Iro
M
tic
ro
od
lec
&
st
sP
y
as
tE
Pr
od
ic
re
ina
Pl
as
br
or
Fo
al
He
Fo
ter
Co
Gl
Fa
Alu
an
s&
&
m
Tr
m
as
Co
leu
Gl
tro
Pe
a Includes energy (fuels, power) delivered from utilities and energy generated onsite from byproducts.
b Energy (mostly petroleum and natural gas) used to produce non-fuel products (e.g., chemicals, asphalt, tar); not included for iron and steel to avoid
double -counting of energy inputs.
c Includes offsite losses incurred during the generation and transmission of electricity, and during transport of fuels through pipelines or other systems.
Figure 2-2 Total Energy Use in Manufacturing and Mining
Trillion Btu
8000
7000
TOP TEN
Energy Delivered a
6000 Feedstock Energy b
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
lum ning
s
ls
t
l
ies
s & y M men
ee
ile
ica
r
e
ts
lec als
be
ry
s
rag
t E num
dr
xt
St
i
uc
ct
M
en
as hine
em
Ce
Te
un
nic
ub
et
ts
du
&
ve
od
ipm
uc
dM
Fo
i
Ch
s/R
tro
ac
n
Be
ro
Pr
od
Iro
qu
sP
te
tic
/A
&
st
Pr
ica
as
re
ina
s/E
av
od
al
Fo
Co abr
Pl
or
He
Co
Gl
um
Fo
ter
sp
pu
&
Al
an
m
m
Tr
as
leu
Gl
tro
Pe
a Includes energy (fuels, power) delivered from utilities and e nergy generated onsite from byproducts; chemicals and petroleum adjusted to avoid
double -counting of fuels used on-site to produce feedstocks.
b Energy (mostly petroleum and natural gas) used to produce non -fuel products (e.g., chemicals, asphalt, tar); not included for iron and steel to avoid
double -counting of energy inputs.
Figure 2-3 First Use of Energy in Manufacturing and Mining
Primary Energy Use
Primary energy, which includes the energy losses associated with offsite utilities and fuel transport, presents an overall
view of fuel and electricity use associated with manufacturing and mining (excluding feedstock energy).
Primary energy use and offsite energy

Trillion Btu
losses are shown for each sector in Figure 6000
2-4, ranked from left to right by U.S. Manufacturing & Mining Total Primary Energy Use a
magnitude of energy use. The combined
5000
total primary energy use for
manufacturing and mining is about 26
Energy Delivered b
quads annually, or approximately 30% of 4000
Offsite Losses a
all U. S. energy use. As Figure 2-4
illustrates, energy use ranges widely 3000
across industrial sectors, with the heavy
industries (chemicals, forest products,
2000
petroleum, iron and steel) emerging as the
most energy-intensive.
1000
0
g
t
um
in
en
l
ile
ies
ls
ee
y
er
ge
in
m
ica
r
ts
m
xt
als
ne
le
dr
St
bb
M
ra
nu
uc
Ce
cs
Te
t
em
tro
un
cts
en
hi
ve
&
et
Ru
od
ni
um
ac
M
Fo
m
n
Ch
du
Pe
Be
ro
s/
Pr
Iro
ip
M
d
ro
Al
tic
ct
te
qu
&
st
sP
le
a/
ica
as
av
re
tE
od
/E
in
as
Fo
Pl
br
He
or
rs
um
Fo
Gl
Fa
sp
te
Al
pu
s&
an
m
Tr
as
Co
Gl
a Includes offsite losses incurred during the generation and transmission of electricity, and during
the transport of fuels through pipelines or other systems.
b Includes energy delivered from utilities and energy generated onsite from byproducts and
renewable resources. Does not include feedstock energy used to produce non-fuel products.
Figure 2-4 U.S. Manufacturing and Mining Total Primary Energy
Table 2-2 ranks industry by primary energy use and
identifies the largest consumers. As Table 2-2 illustrates, Table 2-2 Industry Rank by Primary Energy Use
the chemical industry is clearly the greatest user of primary Sector TBtu Rank
energy, followed by forest products and petroleum refining. Chemicals 5074 1
Other principal large consumers, with primary energy use of Forest Products 4039 2
nearly one quad per year or more, include iron and steel Petroleum Refining 3835 3
mills, food and beverage, mining, aluminum, and
Iron & Steel Mills 2056 4
transportation equipment manufacture.
Food & Beverage 1685 5
The top three industries share several characteristics that Mining 1273 6
contribute to their high energy consumption. First, the core Alumina and Aluminum 958 7
processes used to convert raw materials in these industries Transportation 902 8
are characterized by operation at high temperatures and Equipment
pressures. Second, each consumes vast amounts of steam Fabricated Metals 815 9
energy. Third, the energy efficiency of some core processes Computers, Electronics 728 10
is far below optima l, for a variety of reasons. In the Plastics & Rubber 711 11
chemical and petroleum refining industries, for example, Textiles 659 12
over 40,000 energy-intensive distillation columns play a key
Cement 446 13
role in producing chemicals and fuels. The energy
efficiency of these energy-intensive columns is typically Heavy Machinery 416 14
low (20-40%). To some degree, these same characteristics – Glass & Glass Products 372 15
high temperatures and pressures, steam intensity, and Foundries 369 16
“thermal inefficiency” – elevate energy use in all other
large, energy-intensive industries.
Fuel and Electricity Use

Fuel and electricity users are shown in Figure 2-5, ranked by order of magnitude from left to right. This figure
illustrates the direct use of purchased energy and byproduct fuels, and does not include losses incurred at offsite
utilities. It provides a practical measure of the actual use of fuels and electricity at industrial facilities. The fuel
category includes byproduct fuels generated at the plant site, as well as the onsite use of renewable sources such as
solar energy. The top six energy consumers of fuel and electricity by industrial sector are : chemicals, petroleum
refining, forest products, iron and steel, food and beverage, and mining.
Trillion Btu
4000
3500
3000
2500
Fuel
2000
Electricity
1500
1000
500
0
g
t
in
en
ls
ies
ile
l
ee
in
ge
ica
y
um
be
xt
ts
g
dr
ls
er
St
t
ra
en
in
Ce
uc
em
Te
eta
hin
un
ub
ts
in
s
ve
&
fin
m
od
nic
uc
Fo
M
um
s/R
Ch
ac
n
Be
ip
Re
Pr
od
Iro
tro
ted
M
qu
tic
Al
&
Pr
um
st
lec
y
tE
ica
a/
as
od
av
re
s
in
,E
le
Pl
as
Fo
br
or
He
Fo
um
tro
s
Fa
Gl
sp
ter
Pe
Al
&
an
pu
s
Tr
as
Co
Gl
Figure 2-5 U.S. Manufacturing and Mining Direct Use of

Fuel and Electricity
Table 2-3 Comparison of Fuel and Electricity Use by
Industrial Sector Table 2-3 compares and ranks the total use of
Total Fuel Use Electricity electricity and fuels among different industrial
Sector TBtu Rank TBtu Rank TBtu Rank sectors. This comparison provides a means
of identifying those industries that are highly
Chemicals 3729 1 3127 2 602 1
electricity or fuel-intensive. It also helps to
Petroleum Refining 3478 2 3355 1 123 12
identify those industries that could benefit
Forest Products 3263 3 2936 3 327 2 from the use (or increased use) of efficient
Iron & Steel Mills 1672 4 1509 4 163 10 onsite cogeneration technology.
Food & Beverage 1156 5 915 5 241 5
Mining 753 6 510 6 243 4 As Table 2-3 illustrates, the top users of fuel
Transportation 488 7 293 8 195 6
and electricity are some of the most energy-
Equipment intensive heavy industries (chemicals, forest
Alumina & Aluminum 441 8 195 12 246 3 products, iron and steel mills), metal
Fabricated Metals 441 9 265 9 176 9 fabricators, and end-users who rely on these
Textiles 359 10 218 10 141 11 industries (transportation equipment, food and
beverage). Table 2-4 shows the relative
Cement 355 11 316 7 39 16
importance of electricity and fuels for each
Plastics & Rubber 327 12 144 14 183 8 sector, which is important when assessing the
Computers, 321 13 127 15 194 7 vulnerability of individual industries to energy
Electronics price or energy supply volatility.
Glass & Glass 254 14 200 11 54 15
Products
Foundries 233 15 170 13 63 14 Table 2-4 identifies seven industries that may
Heavy Machinery 213 16 117 16 96 13 be particularly susceptible to the availability,
quality, and price of electricity: alumina and
Note: Shading indicates top ten ranking for total fuel and electricity use.
aluminum, mining, computers and electronics,
plastics and rubber, transportation equipment, fabricated metals, Table 2-4 % Fuel and Electricity Use
and heavy machinery. Electricity accounts for 40% or more of Sector %Fuel %Electric
energy requirements in these industries. Chemicals 84 16
Forest Products 90 10
From a fuel perspective, five industries would be most Alumina/Aluminum 44 56
Mining 68 32
vulnerable to fuel availability: chemicals, forest products, iron
and steel, petroleum refining, and cement. Fuel use accounts
Transportation 60 40
for about 90% or more of energy use in these industries. Natural Equipment
gas is of particular concern, since it comprises the largest share Computers, 40 60
of purchased fuel use. However, all but one industry also rely Electronics
heavily on byproduct fuels. Other relatively heavy fuel users Plastics and 44 56
include mining, food and beverage, fabricated metals, foundries, Rubber
and glass making. Fabricated Metals 60 40
Iron and Steel 90 10
Mills
Onsite Generation and Electricity Demand Textiles 61 39
Petroleum 96 4
Electricity demand provides a more complete picture of Refining
electricity use in individual industries. Electricity demand is a Heavy Machinery 55 45
composite of purchased electricity, plus electricity generated Foundries 73 27
onsite by cogeneration or conventional power generation, Glass and Glass 79 21
minus excess electricity exported offsite. Products
Cement 89 11
Electricity demand for individual industries is shown in Table 2-5, along with the percent of electricity that is
generated and used onsite. Significant onsite power generators include chemicals, forest products, petroleum refining,
iron and steel mills, food processors, and cement. Notably, some of the industries that are most dependent on
electricity (i.e., greater than 40% of total energy use) rely almost entirely on purchased electricity. These industries
include: aluminum, computers and electronics, plastics and rubber, heavy machinery.
Figure 2-6 illustrates the use of onsite power systems to meet demand for energy in manufacturing and mining. About
13% of electricity demand in manufacturing and mining is met through onsite power generation. Most electricity
(over 95%) is generated using cogeneration systems which also provide high-temperature steam.
Cogeneration is the optimal choice for onsite generation, as it
provides power and steam with thermal efficiencies 20-30% Table 2-5 Industries Ranked by Electricity
higher than non-cogenerated power. Despite its advantages, Demand
cogenerated steam currently only accounts for approximately Electricity Demand
8% of total steam demand. The adoption of cogeneration is Sector Tbtu Rank % Onsite
limited by large capital investments for power systems and the Chemicals 733 1 18
capacity to utilize additional steam onsite. As large steam and Forest Products 491 2 33
electricity users, chemicals, forest products, and petroleum
Mining 262 3 7
refining are logically large cogenerators (see Table 2-5).
Food & Beverage 258 4 7
Solar, Alumina & Aluminum 249 5 1
CHP Steam
Losses Geothermal Transportation 198 6 2
103 TBtu 12TBtu
Equipment
Computers, 194 7 0
Power Electronics
CHP
Losses
Electricity Plastics & Rubber 184 8 <1
182 TBtu
428 TBtu Iron & Steel Mills 181 9 10
Fabricated Metals 176 10 0
CHP Steam Petroleum Refining 174 11 29
410 TBtu
Conventional
Textiles 142 12 1
Electricity* Heavy Machinery 97 13 1
54 TBtu
Foundries 63 14 0
*Onsite power systems producing only electricity. Glass & Glass 54 15 0
Figure 2-6 Onsite Power Generation and Loss Products
Profile for Manufacturing and Mining Cement 41 16 5
End-Use Profile
Energy is consumed throughout industry to generate steam, to provide direct process heating and cooling, to power
machine drives and electrolytic systems, to generate power, and to heat, cool and light facilities. A breakdown of
energy end-use for the manufacturing and mining sector is shown in Figure 2-7.
Total fuel and electricity delivered to manufacturing and

Other Facilities mining (excluding any offsite energy losses) totals more
Electro- 4% 8%
chemical than 18.5 quads. Steam, fired systems and cooling
2% systems dominate industrial energy use at 74% of the total.
Process
Cooling 1% These include energy systems that are commonly used
Steam
throughout many industries, such as boilers and steam-
Motor 35% driven equipment, as well as direct or indirect-fired
Systems
12% systems such as furnaces, dryers, calciners, evaporators,
Total Delivered
Fuel and condensers, and other direct-fueled heating systems.
Electricity: Fired Motor-driven systems account for the next substantial
18,527 TBtu Systems share of energy use at 12%.
38%
The distribution shown in Figure 2-7 represents an average

across industry, and may vary significantly for an
Figure 2-7 Energy End-Use in Manufacturing individual industry. Foundries, glass, and cement, for
and Mining example, use virtually no steam. In aluminum, electrolysis
accounts for about 40% of energy use.
Other energy uses include mostly onsite transportation systems for conveying products within the plant boundary, and
for the heating, cooling, and lighting of facilities. Energy for facilities conditioning averages about 8% industry-wide,
but can be as little as 1% or less in some industries where operations are conducted mostly outdoors (e.g. mining) or
more than 10-15% in highly conditioned facilities (e.g., cold or clean room operations).
Use of steam by industrial sector is shown in Table 2-6, ranked
Table 2-6 Industry Ranked by Steam Use by magnitude. Four industries – forest products, chemicals,
Steam Use petroleum refining, and food and beverage – account for 87% of
Sector Tbtu Rank steam use in industry. Textiles, transportation equipment, iron
and steel mills, and plastics and rubber products are also
Forest Products 2442 1
significant steam users.
Chemicals 1645 2
Petroleum Refining 1061 3 The energy conversion component of steam systems (e.g., heat
Food & Beverage 610 4 exchangers, injectors, mechanical drives) varies substantially
Textiles 132 5 among industries and is generally process- and site-specific.
Transportation 112 6 The chemical industry, for example, uses steam mostly for fluid
Equipment heating (steam stripping, steam reforming). Other industries
Iron & Steel Mills 96 7 may use steam for direct heating of parts or components, for
Plastics & Rubber 81 8 cleaning, or for other process heating (e.g., sterilization). The
specific uses of steam within particular sectors are discussed in
Computers, 53 9
Electronics the opportunities analyses of individual industries.
Alumina & Aluminum 41 10
Fired systems account for a substantial share of energy use and
Fabricated Metals 35 11
losses. These systems are used widely across many industries
Heavy Machinery 25 12 for the direct and indirect heating of gases, fluids and solids
Foundries 22 13 (e.g., metals). As Table 2-7 illustrates, energy use attributed to
Glass & Glass 5 14 fired systems is significant (more than a quad) in three
Products industries (petroleum refining, iron and steel mills, and
Mining 4 15 chemicals) and is prominent (above 200 TBtus) in another five
Cement 1 16 industries. The primary fuel used for fired systems is natural
Note: Steam use includes small amount of electrically- gas, with smaller amounts of petroleum, propane, and coal. The
generated steam (e.g., coils, rods). energy efficiency of fired heating systems varies widely
depending upon the application and the material being heated.
Table 2-8 shows the primary users of motor-driven equipment. Chemicals and forest products are the leading users,
followed by mining and petroleum refining.
Table 2-7 Industries Ranked by Use Table 2-8 Industry Ranked by Motor
of Fired Systems Systems Use
Fired Heaters Motor Use
Sector TBtu Rank Sector Tbtu Rank
Petroleum Refining 2156 1 Chemicals 482 1
Iron & Steel Mills 1372 2 Forest Products 429 2
Chemicals 1207 3 Mining 185 3
Petroleum Refining 183 4
Cement 296 5
Mining 204 6
Iron & Steel Mills 121 6
Glass & Glass 204 7
Products Fabricated Metals 104 7
Forest Products 196 8 Heavy Machinery 99 8
Heavy Machinery 182 9 Transportation 99 9
Fabricated Metals 182 10 Equipment
Alumina & Aluminum 164 11 Plastics & Rubber 98 10
Foundries 147 12 Textiles 85 11
Transportation 94 13 Computers, Electronics 56 12
Equipment
Cement 40 13
Computers, 65 14
Electronics Alumina & Aluminum 33 14
Textiles 62 15 Glass & Glass Products 22 15
Plastics & Rubber 60 16 Foundries 19 16
Loss Profile
As discussed in Sections 1.2 and 1.3, energy losses associated with industrial energy use take two forms: offsite and
onsite losses. Offsite losses are comprised mostly of losses associated with electricity purchased from utilities, with a
much smaller share attributed to fuel losses in pipes and other transport and storage systems. Electricity losses are the
result of turbine and power system efficiencies from (as low as 25% for older steam-based systems, up to 40% or
more for state-of-the-art gas turbines). On average, this means every kilowatt hour of power generated by a utility
requires three kilowatt hour equivalents of fuel. Even though the industrial facility does not incur these losses,
including them in the loss analysis provides a total picture of the energy associated with an individual industry’s use
of electricity. When viewed in this context, offsite losses account for over 57 percent of the total energy losses
associated with manufacturing and mining, and nearly 30 percent of energy inputs.
As stated earlier, industrial facilities have no control over the efficiency of power generation at utilities. However,
reducing use of purchased electricity by improving energy efficiency or by switching to more efficient onsite power
generation systems can decrease offsite losses and improve the availability and reliability of energy supply to the
plant. For this reason, offsite losses are an important aspect of this study.
Onsite losses are the losses incurred within a plant boundary, and take various forms (see Sections 1.2.1 and 1.2.3).
Overall, about 32 percent of the energy input to plants is lost inside the plant boundary, prior to use in the intended
process. Many onsite losses are typical across industries, such as those incurred in steam systems, cogeneration and
conventional power units, energy distribution lines, heat exchangers, motors, pumps, compressors, and other
commonly used equipment. In other cases, onsite losses are highly specific to the industrial processes employed.
This study estimates the onsite prior-to-process energy losses common to many industries, using standard loss factors
obtained from literature and experts in their respective fields. The reference section provides details on the sources
used for loss analysis.
Figure 2-8 depicts total onsite and offsite losses Trillion Btu
for individual industries, ranked from left to 2500
right. This figure illustrates clearly that offsite

losses are substantial, and in most cases much
2000
larger than those experienced onsite.
Industries that are proportionately large users of 1500

Onsite Losses
electricity will also exhibit large offsite losses.
Offsite Losses
This occurs because electricity generation and
1000
transmission losses comprise the largest share of
offsite losses. The alternate is true for limited
users of electricity, and for industries that 500
cogenerate large amounts of their electricity

demand. Petroleum refining, for example, only 0
relies on electricity for about 4% of its energy use,
g
t
s
l
s
en
in
ies
and cogenerates a considerable amount onsite.

ee
ile
al
in
ry
um
ts
r
ge
m
xt
St
ic
dr
al
be
M
ts
g
ne
c
cs
Ce
em
Te
et
ra
un
in
du
in
uc
ub
&
hi
en
ni
ve
fin
um
Fo
Ch
ro
um ron
ac
od
s/R
ro
pm
Be
This is reflected in a lower percent of total losses

Re
ed
P
M
Al
Pr
ct
tic
I
st
at
ui
&
m
le
a/
ss
as
re
ic
Eq
av
leu
,E
od
in
br
Fo
la
Pl
He
rs
Fo
tro
G
Fa
being offsite losses, as illustrated in Figure 2-8.

tio
te
Al
&
Pe
pu
ta
ss
or
la
sp
Co
G
an
The same is true to a lesser extent for forest

Tr
products. Figure 2-8 U.S. Manufacturing and Mining Offsite and

Onsite Energy Losses
In targeting efficiency improvements for energy systems in industrial plants, it is important to define preliminarily the
sources of onsite losses. This provides a first pass identification of energy-saving opportunities and energy sinks. An
overall breakdown of onsite losses in the manufacturing and mining sectors is shown in Figure 2-9. These include
only losses incurred prior to use in processes. In addition, another 20–50% or more of energy inputs is possibly lost at
the end of the process through exit gases, evaporative or radioactive heat losses, and in waste steam and hot water.
This study does not attempt to determine these losses, but they can be considerable, as illustrated in Figure 2-9.
As noted previously, onsite losses are substantial and account for 32% of energy inputs to industrial plants.
Translated, that means about one-third of energy input is lost due to inefficiencies in plant energy systems prior to use
in process-specific operations (e.g., chemical reactors, glass furnaces, wood pulping units). Lost energy coupled with
energy used to condition and light facilities, means only about 60% of the energy input is actually used to drive
industrial processes. Thus of the 17.8 quads that arrive at industrial facilities, about 5.7 quads are lost prior to process
units and never recovered.
Energy conversion systems (heat exchangers, preheaters, heat

Total Fuel and Electricity Use: 18,527 TBtu pumps, reboilers, condensers, and others) account for about one-
Total Onsite Losses: 5,902 TBtu third of onsite losses, and represent large targets for
improvement. The remainder of onsite losses is distributed
relatively evenly among steam and power systems, energy
Energy To
Boilers/ distribution, and motor-drives.
Power 24%
Processes
60% Distribution
Onsite 23% Table 2-9 provides industry rank for onsite losses, and the
Losses
Possible 32% Conversion percent of energy inputs these losses represent for each industry.
33%
End-of-
Process
Percents are calculated by dividing the onsite losses by the
Losses Motors amount of fuel and electricity inputs to the industry (not primary
Systems 20%
energy, which includes offsite losses). In 10 out of 16
industries, offsite losses account for more than 25% of energy
Facilities
8% use (i.e., 25% of energy entering the plant is lost due to
equipment and distribution system inefficiencies). In seven of
Figure 2-9 Onsite Energy Loss Profile for U.S. these industries, onsite losses are more than one-third of fuel
Manufacturing and Mining Sector and electricity inputs.
Table 2-9 Industry Rank by Onsite Losses Large users of high-temperature and high-pressure processes
and Percent of Energy Use (fuels, electricity) will have large onsite losses due to equipment and thermal
Onsite Losses efficiency limitations. In most industries, onsite losses are
Sector TBtu Rank % Use related directly to process equipment and plant configuration.
Forest Products 1474 1 45
Chemicals 1363 2 37 System-Specific Losses
Petroleum Refining 978 3 28
Examining the components of energy losses for specific energy
Food & Beverage 407 4 35 end-uses helps to identify energy saving opportunities. The
Iron & Steel Mills 378 5 23 components of onsite energy losses are illustrated in Figure 2-
Mining 311 6 41 10, and summarized in Table 2-10. The bulk of energy losses
Alumina & Aluminum 153 7 55 occur in process heating, which is comprised of steam systems,
Transportation 142 8 29 fired systems and cooling systems. Steam system losses
Equipment account for the largest share of losses in this category, at 2.8
Textiles 128 9 36 quads, or about 45% of total energy input to steam systems.
Fabricated Metals 117 10 27 Fired heating and cooling systems account for another 1.3
Plastics & Rubber 113 11 35 quads, or about 18% of energy inputs to those systems . Motor
system losses, which include losses in motor windings as well as
Computers & 75 12 23
Electronics mechanical components in pumps, compressors, and so forth,
Glass & Glass 54 13 21 amount to 1.3 quads or 55% of motor system energy inputs,
Products which represents the largest proportional loss of any end-use
Cement 52 14 15 category.
Heavy Machinery 52 15 24
It is important to note that the losses shown in Figure 2-10 and
Foundries 47 16 20
Table 2-10 represent losses incurred prior to use in the process,
and does not include losses that occur at the end of the process.
As discussed earlier, these losses, which include energy embodied in waste heat, exit gases (stack, flue, flare , etc.),
waste steam or hot water, and other sources, can be as much or more than those incurred prior to the process. Looking
at fired systems, for example (if just the distribution and conversion losses are taken into consideration), the
assumption could be made that these systems are roughly 80% efficient. When considered from when energy enters
the plant gate to the end of the process, as much as 50% of the energy to fired systems could potentially be lost.
The important point is that the losses estimated prior to the process underestimate the total losses associated with a
particular process overall, since they do not consider exhaust and other downstream waste heat sources. Estimation of
end-of-process losses is generally outside the scope of the study, although they are examined to some extent in the
opportunities analysis from the perspective of recoverable energy.
683 To Processes
TBtu
Other Generation Losses
Distribution Losses
362 Conversion Losses
Electrochemical TBtu
2336
TBtu 7279
Motor Systems
TBtu
Fired Heaters &

Cooling Potential Process Losses
Steam Systems
6201 TBtu
1405
Facilities TBtu
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Trillion Btu
*Onsite generated power has been distributed among end -uses and is not included in the total.
Figure 2-10 Energy End-Use and Loss Distributions in Manufacturing and Mining
Table 2-10 Manufacturing Energy Use and Losses (Trillion Btus)

To Total Associated
Process/ Generation Distribution Conversion Onsite Carbon Total
End-use Losses Losses Losses Losses (MMTCE)** Energy
Facilities 1405 na na na na Na 1405
Steam Systems 3382 1234 987 598 2819 49.3 6201
Fired Systems
and Cooling 5983 na 256 1040 1296 20.9 7279
Motor Systems 1047 na 85 1204 1289 24.2 2336
Electrochemical 295 na 15 52 67 1.3 362
Other Uses 434 na Na 249 249 1.2 683
Onsite Power *(482) 182 Na na 182 3.6 182
Export of Power 79 na Na na na 0 79
TOTALS 12625 1416 1343 3143 5902 103.9 18527
*Onsite-generated power has been distributed among end-uses and is not included in the totals.
**Carbon emissions associated with energy losses, in million metric tons of carbon equivalents (MMTCE).
The carbon emissions (in million metric tons of carbon equivalent – MMTCE) associated with energy losses in the
U.S. manufacturing and mining sectors are also shown in Table 2-10. These total nearly 104 MMTCE, which
represents about 7% of carbon emissions in the United States from anthropogenic (manmade) sources. The carbon
emissions shown in Table 2-10 are those generated by the combustion of fuels. Smaller amounts not shown here are
also generated through fugitive emis sions, and as byproducts of ammonia, lime and soda ash manufacture.
Figure 2-11 breaks out components of onsite losses for steam systems (excluding boiler fuel used for power
generation, but including steam generated from cogenerators). According to Figure 2-11, boiler inefficiencies, which
range from 50-85%, account for the largest share, and are reported as boiler losses. The remaining losses occur in
distribution and conversion. Distribution losses (including pipes and valves) were estimated to be approximately 15%
of steam systems energy inputs.
Energy conversion systems are closely connected with Energy
process units, resulting in some overlap of steam Conversion
Losses 10%
conversion losses and those that occur both in process (597 Tbtu)
units and at the end of the process. These end-of-process
losses have not been studied fully, but are estimated to
some degree in the opportunities analysis. Distribution
Losses 15%
(987 Tbtu) Steam to
Boiler capacity and size varies by industry. Overall, the Processes 55%
largest share of boilers are in the 100-250 MMBtu/hr (3380 Tbtu*)
capacity range (35%), followed by boilers in the 250-500

MMBtu/hr range (23%), and 50-100 MMBtu/hr range Boiler Losses
(18%). Chemicals, petroleum refining, food processing, 20% (1233 Tbtu)
and forest products dominate the industrial boiler
population, with more than 70% of package boiler
Energy to Steam Systems: 6201 Tbtu
capacity [ADL 2000].
Figure 2-11 Steam Use and Losses in Manufacturing and
Mining
A profile of energy used in fired systems is shown in

Energy Figure 2-12. Most energy losses occur in the
Conversion
Losses 15%
conversion of fuels to useful work (i.e., energy
(1040 Tbtu) conversion). Distribution losses in pipes and electricity
transmission lines account for only about 3% of energy
Distribution losses.
Losses 3%
(256 Tbtu) Heating and
Cooling of
Again, these systems are often connected integrally
Processes with process units, and pre-process losses were
Potential 82% (5983 separated using the assumption that approximately half
End-of- Tbtu*) of energy conversion losses would occur upstream, and
Process the remainder downstream. While significant energy
Losses losses may also occur in the actual process units,
estimation of these losses is outside the scope of this
study. They are addressed in part in subsequent
opportunities analyses of several industries notably
Energy to Fired Heating and Cooling chemicals, petroleum refining, forest products, cement,
Systems 7279 TBtu and food processing.
Figure 2-12 Profile of Energy Use and Losses in

Fired Systems Other 228 TBtu
Materials Processing 567 TBtu
A profile of motor use and losses is shown in Figure Materials Handling 311 TBtu
2-13. This figure portrays the significant losses that
are attributed to the low efficiency of some motor- Compressed Air 328 TBtu
driven equipment. While motor efficiency itself is
relatively high (90-95%), system inefficiencies in the Fans 284 TBtu
conversion of motor energy to usable work lead to
substantial energy losses. In materials processing, for Pumps 574 TBtu
example, which includes motor-driven grinders,
Motor Windings 89 TBtu Usable Work
crushers, and mixers, as much as 80-90% of energy
Losses
input is not converted to useful work. Compressed 85 TBtu
Distribution
air systems are also extremely inefficient, converting
typically only about 10-15% of energy inputs to 0 200 400 600 800
useful work. Total losses in motors and motor-driven
Trillion Btu
systems amount to 1.2 quads.
Figure 2-13 Motor System Energy Use and Loss Profile
for Manufacturing and Mining
3.0 Chemicals Industry (NAICS 325)
3.1 Overview of the Chemicals Industry

The chemical industry is an integral component of the U.S. economy, converting various raw materials (e.g.,
petroleum, natural gas, minerals, coal, air and water) into more than 70,000 diverse products. Chemical products are
critical components of consumer goods and are found in everything from automobiles to plastics and electronics.
Chemical Industry Sectors The industry creates its diverse product slate using materials in two
Organic Chemicals forms: organic (o il, natural gas) and inorganic (minerals, ores or
Petrochemicals elements taken from the earth, air). The industry is divided into
Cyclic Crudes and Intermediates industrial sectors that reflect these raw materials.
Other Basic Organic Chemicals
Inorganics
Industrial Gases The chemical industry is the largest consumer of fuels and power in the
Alkalies and Chlorine U.S. industrial sector. The manufacture of chemicals is complex and
Other Basic Inorganic Chemicals energy-intensive, often requiring large quantities of thermal energy to
Plastics, Fibers and Resins convert raw materials to useful products. The efficiency of the processes
Plastics Materials and Resins and equipment used to produce chemicals is constrained by
Synthetic Rubber
Noncellulosic Fibers thermodynamic, kinetic, or transport limitations, and operating
Fertilizers conditions may be severe (high temperatures, high pressures, corrosive
Nitrogenous Fertilizers environments). All these factors contribute to proportionally high energy
Phosphatic Fertilizers use per pound of product.
3.2 Energy Use and Loss Analysis for Chemicals

Overview
A snapshot of how the chemical industry ranks in terms of energy use and losses within manufacturing and mining is
shown in Table 3-1. The chemical industry ranks in the top two in every energy end-use category. The industry is a
large user of steam and fired systems, and ranks number one in energy used for motor-driven systems. Natural gas is
the primary fuel used by the chemical industry (63%), followed by byproduct fuels produced onsite (24%). Small
amounts of coal, petroleum products, natural gas liquids (NGL), and liquefied petroleum gases (LPG) make up the
remainder of process energy use [MECS 1998].
Although not the focus of this report, the chemical industry also uses a significant amount of feedstock energy
(petroleum derivatives and natural gas) as a raw material primarily for the production of organic chemicals and
ammonia. As shown in Figure 3-1, the total feedstock energy consumed by the industry is 2.8 quads [MECS 1998].
When feedstock energy is combined with fuels and electricity, total energy use amounts to about 6.2 quads.
Fuel Oils 1%
Table 3-1 Snapshot of the Chemical (58 Tbtu)
Other* 55%
Industry: Energy Use and Rank Within (4050 Tbtu )
Natural Gas 11%
U.S. Manufacturing and Mining (782 Tbtu)
Energy*
Category Rank (TBtu) Coal/Coke 9%
(694 Tbtu)
Primary Energy Use 1 5074
Offsite Losses 1 1345
Fuel and Electricity 1 3729
Onsite Losses 2 1363
Steam Generation 2 328
LPG/NGL** 24%
Power Generation 2 54 (1746 Tbtu)
Energy Distribution 2 322 *Other includes petroleum -derived byproduct gases
Energy Conversion 1 659 and solids, woody materials, hydrogen, and waste
materials.
Facilities 2 123
**LPG/NGL are liquefied petroleum gases (mixtures
Energy Export 1 25 of alkanes and olefins) and natural gas liquids.
Energy Delivered to 2 2218
Processes Figure 3-1 Feedstock Energy Use in the
*Does not include feedstock energy Chemicals Industry – 2.8 Quads
Fuel Primary Energy Use
Transport Purchased
Power
Losses 2% Net
12%
Onsite
Primary energy, which includes purchased fuels and electricity,
Power* byproduct fuels, and the energy losses associated with offsite power
3% generation and energy supply systems, provides a perspective on the total
Direct Fuel energy use associated with chemicals manufacture. Primary energy
Use 25%
inputs to the industry are shown in Figure 3-2. Fuels for boilers and
Electricity direct-fired systems comprise nearly 60% of total primary energy; power
Losses** demand (purchased plus self-generated electricity) is about 15%.
26%
Boiler Fuel
32% A considerable 28% of the primary energy associated with chemicals
manufacture is lost during energy generation and transport. The bulk of
these energy losses occur during the generation of electricity at offsite
* Includes 25 TBtu electricity export. utilities, where the efficiency of generating systems can be as low as 28-
** Includes offsite and onsite 30%. Losses also occur in onsite power generating systems, but thermal
electricity generation losses. efficiency is improved greatly through the use of cogeneration. About
Figure 3-2 Primary Energy Use in U.S. 20% of chemical industry electricity demand is met by onsite power
Chemical Industry - 5074 Trillion Btu systems, and the industry is the second largest industrial cogenerator,
topped only by pulp and paper mills.
Fuel and Electricity Use Trillion Btu
1200
About 3.7 quads of fuels and electricity were consumed by the
chemical industry in 1998. On average, about 84% of energy 1000 Fuels
use is fuels. The chemical industry relies on hundreds of
Electricity
different chemical processes, and as a result, energy use 800
patterns vary dramatically across sectors. Processes used to
produce petrochemicals, for example, are distillation- and 600
steam-intensive, resulting in substantial fuel consumption,

400
while chlorine production depends heavily on electricity and
electrolytic cells. 200
Figure 3-3 illustrates the energy use patterns across major 0

sectors. Overall, the production of organic chemicals
ls ics ics rs
ins
(petrochemicals plus other organics), which are derived from ica an ize
em rg
an org ertil /R
es
petroleum or natural gas, is responsible for nearly 50% of fuel ch O In F cs
tro he
r sti
Pe Ot Pla
and electricity consumption in the industry. Inorganic
chemicals production is the most electricity-intensive. Figure 3-3 Fuel and Electricity Use in
Selected Chemical Industry Sectors
Onsite Generation and Electricity Demand
The chemical industry is ranked first in demand for electricity, at Boiler
733 TBtu per year. Electricity demand is equal to purchases of Losses
electricity, plus electricity generated onsite, minus electricity 37 TBtu
exported offsite, and provides the most complete picture of

Power
actual electricity use. On average, electricity use accounts for Losses
CHP
Electricity
about 16% of energy consumption across the industry. 54 TBtu
148 TBtu
However, several sectors are electric ity-intensive, such as alkali
and chlorine (34% of energy), industrial gases (61% of energy),
and other inorganic chemicals (39% of energy) [MECS 1998]. CHP Steam
148 TBtu
Conventional
As noted earlier, the chemical industry meets a significant Electricity*
amount of electricity demand through onsite generation (see 8 TBtu
Figure 3-4). About 95% of electricity produced onsite in the
* Steam or gas turbines not producing steam
chemicals industry comes from cogenerating units, which also for process use
produce almost 150 trillion Btu in steam. A small amount of
electricity is produced in conventional steam and gas turbines or Figure 3-4 Onsite Power Generation
other systems that are not producing steam for process use. Profile for Chemicals
End-Use Profile
Energy is consumed in chemicals manufacture to provide process heating and cooling, to power motor-driven systems
and electrochemical reactors, and for other purposes. A breakdown of energy end-use is shown in Figure 3-5. It
should be noted that the energy trends shown are an average for the industry and may not reflect sector differences.
Other Facilities
Electro- 4% 3% Process heating and cooling systems, particularly those
chemical used for fluid heating, represent the bulk of energy use
4% in chemicals manufacture (76%). These include steam
systems, fired systems such as furnaces and reboilers,
Motor and cryogenic or other cooling units. Motor systems,
Systems Steam which include motor-driven units such as pumps,
13% 44% conveyors, compressors, fans, mixers, grinders, and
other materials handling or processing equipment, rank
Fired
Heaters & second with 13% of energy use. Heating, cooling and
Cooling lighting of facilities only accounts for approximately
Systems 3% of energy use.
32%
The industry ranks second in steam use within

Figure 3-5 Energy End-Use in the Chemicals manufacturing and mining, and ranks third in the use of
Industry: Total Delivered Fuel and Electricity - fired systems . Chemicals manufacture is also the
3729 Trillion Btu largest user of motor-driven systems in the industrial
sector.
Loss Profile
Boilers/ Power
28%
Energy To The energy footprint for the chemical industry (see
Processes Onsite Distribution
60% Losses 37% 22%
Appendix A) evaluates end-use and loss patterns to
Energy better understand the opportunities for energy
Conversion
27% efficiency improvements. Figure 3-6, which is based
Motors
23%
on the energy footprint, illustrates the general flow of
energy and losses within the average chemical plant.
Facilities As Figure 3-6 shows, a substantial 37% of the energy
3% that enters the plant is lost prior to use in process units.
These losses occur in equipment and distribution
systems supplying energy to process operations or
converting energy to usable work (see Chapter 1.0 for
Figure 3-6 Onsite Energy Loss Profile for an explanation of loss categories). Onsite losses are
the Chemical Industry (NAICS 325) Total
nearly evenly distributed among boilers and power
Onsite Losses – 1363 Trillion Btu
generation, energy distribution, and energy conversion
systems.
As noted earlier, the “energy to processes” in Figure 3-

To Processes
6 includes a significant amount of energy that is lost at
52
Other TBtu Generation Losses the end of the process in exhaust gases, waste steam,
141 Distribution Losses hot water, and other waste sources. These potential
Electrochemical TBtu Conversion Losses losses are approximated in Figure 3-7.
482 Potential End-of-
Motor Systems TBtu Process Losses
1207 System-Specific Losses
Fired Heaters & TBtu
Cooling
1645
TBtu
Detailed energy use and losses for component systems
Steam Systems
123
are summarized in Figure 3-7 and Table 3-2. Total
Facilities
TBtu onsite losses are nearly 1.4 quads; associated carbon
emissions are 23 million metric tons of carbon
-100 400 900 1400 1900 equivalent (MMTCE).
Trillion Btu
Figure 3-7 Energy End-Use and Loss
Distributions in Chemicals (NAICS 325)
As shown in Figure 3-7, the bulk of energy losses occur in process heating and cooling, which includes steam systems
as well as fired systems and cooling or refrigeration units. In terms of trillion Btus, steam system losses are the highest
and represent about 45% of the total energy input to steam systems. Proportionally, however, motor system losses are
the greatest. About 66% of the energy input to motor-driven systems is lost due to system inefficiencies.
Table 3-2 Chemicals Energy Use and Losses (Trillion Btus)

To TOTAL Associated Total
Process/ Generation Distribution Conversion Onsite Carbon Energy
End-use Losses Losses Losses Losses (MMTCE)**
Facilities 123 na na na na 0 123
Steam Systems 897 328 262 158 748 12.8 1645
Fired Systems
& Cooling 997 na 38 172 210 3.0 1207
Motor Systems 163 na 18 301 319 5.9 482
Other Uses 44 na na 28 28 0.1 52
Onsite Power (156)* 54 na na 54 0.8 54
Export of Power 25 na na na - 25
TOTALS 2366 382 322 659 1363 23.0 3729
*Onsite-generated power has been distributed among end-uses and is not included in the totals.
**Carbon emissions associated with total energy losses, in million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCE).
A motor use profile for chemicals is shown in Figure

Other 50 TBtu
3-8. The losses, indicated in gray, illustrate the
substantial amount of energy that is wasted due to the
inefficiency of some motor-driven equipment.
Compressed Air 129 TBtu
Compressed air and materials processing (e.g.,
grinding, mixing, crushing) exhibit the greatest
Fans 55 TBtu proportion of losses. Some of these systems have
efficiencies as low as 10-20%.
Pumps 120 TBtu
Motor system energy conversion losses total 275
Motor Windings 26 TBtu Usable Work trillion Btu; conversion losses in motor windings
Losses
comprise another 26 trillion Btu. The associated
Distribution 18 TBtu energy distribution losses are 18 trillion Btu.
Combined losses attributed to motor systems total
0 50 100 150 about 319 trillion Btu. Most motor systems are
Trillion Btu powered by electricity (over 90%), although small
Figure 3-8 Chemical Industry Motor System amounts of fuel are also employed.
Energy Use and Loss Profile
A profile of chemical industry steam use and
Energy associated losses is shown in Figure 3-9. About 45%
Conversion
Losses 10% of energy inputs are lost due to system inefficiencies.
(158 Tbtu) A large percentage of losses occur in the boiler, where
thermal efficiencies range between 55-85%, depending
Distribution upon the age of the boiler and type of fuel burned.
Losses 15%
(262 Tbtu) Steam to Waste heat boilers, for example, have lower overall
Processes 55% thermal efficiency than natural gas-fired boilers. A
(897 Tbtu*)
little less than half of the package boiler population in
the chemical industry is larger capacity (250->1500
Boiler Losses
20% (328 Tbtu) MMBtu/hr). Waste heat boilers comprise a significant
share of the population – about one-third [ADL 2000].
Energy to Steam Systems 1645 TBTU In fired systems , the bulk of losses occur in energy
conversion prior to the process. As noted earlier,
Figure 3-9 Steam System Use and Loss Profile additional downstream losses could be substantial, but
for the Chemical Industry are not estimated here.
3.3 Opportunities Analysis
Energy losses in steam and fired systems in chemicals manufacture total nearly one quad and are a prime target for
efficiency improvements. However, steam and fired systems are often linked integrally in many chemical processes,
making it difficult to separate thermal requirements and efficiencies. The opportunities presented here are therefore
shown as a combination of both steam and fired systems. The chemical chains chosen for study are shown in Table 3-
3, and all rank among the top 100 chemicals (ranked by annual production volume). Table 3-4 illustrates the total use
of thermal energy and associated end-of-process losses for the selected chemicals, by chemical chain. Tables C-1 and
C-2 in Appendix C provide details on equipment, assumed efficiencies, sources of energy losses, references, and other
data relative to the opportunities analysis.
Table 3-3 Chemical Organic chemicals production is the largest consumer of thermal energy. The
Chains Selected for Study most energy-intensive chemicals include ethylene, polyethylene, propylene,
Ethylene polypropylene, propylene oxide, BTX (benzene-toluene-xylene), ethylbenzene/
Polyethylene
Ethylene Dichloride styrene, and polystyrene. Steam energy is used in preheaters, reactors,
Poly Vinyl Chloride superheaters, evaporators, vacuum and distillation columns, and various other
Ethylene Oxide types of equipment. It is also charged directly with feeds or products for dilution
Ethylene Glycol or stripping. In these cases the steam may be contaminated and more difficult to
Polystyrene
Propylene recycle. The bulk of the steam use in ethylene production, for example, occurs in
Polypropylene dilution processes, followed by fractionation, and acetylene removal. Fired
Propylene Oxide systems for organics include reboilers, furnaces, dryers, evaporators, reformers,
Acrylonitrile and other equipment. The ethylene direct-fired pyrolysis furnace is one of the
Acrylic Fiber
Benzene-Toluene-Xylene
most energy-intensive fired systems used in chemicals production.
Ethylbenzene
Styrene The largest sources of energy losses are exit gases (flared gases, waste gases, vent
Cumene gases, flue gases) and waste steam or water. Waste heat reduction and recovery
Phenol/Acetone
Terephthalic Acid thus represents the greatest opportunity for reducing losses in the chemical
Cyclohexene industry, including the use of waste energy streams for cogeneration. In organic
Adipic Acid chemicals, the manufacture of olefins (ethylene, polyethylene) and their polymers
Caprolactam] and derivatives (such as ethylbenzene and styrene) represent significant sources of
Nylon 6.6, Nylon 6
Agricultural Chemicals
waste gases and flared gases with potential for heat recovery. Successful
Ammonia technology options would require the capability for recovery of waste energy
Urea streams with a wide temperature range and quality, as well as that for potential
Nitric Acid contaminants and corrosive agents.
Ammonia Nitrate
Ammonia Sulfate
Sulfuric Acid The production of inorganic chemicals is relatively low in energy-intensity
Ammonia Phosphate compared to that of organic chemicals, with the exception of ammonia and
Superphosphates chlorine/sodium hydroxide (chlor-alkali) production. Ammonia is produced by
Chlor-Alkali
Caustic Soda
steam reforming of methane, and consumes large quantities of steam for both
Soda Ash reforming and stripping. Chlor-alkali production consumes steam energy in
multiple evaporators, brine heaters, and strippers. Many inorganic chemical
production processes also use fired systems for drying and calcining operations. Within inorganic chemicals, the
steam reformer is a significant source of waste heat with increased recovery potential. There are also opportunities for
recovering heat from dryers and kilns used in the manufacture of fertilizers, many of which are relatively inefficient.
The chemicals studied represent about 40% of the process energy used in the chemical industry, and in most cases
highly conservative estimates of energy recovery were applied (5-10% of waste heat). As a result, the estimated loss
reduction of 114 TBtu shown in Table 3-3 significantly under-reports the potential for energy recovery in chemicals
manufacture. To make a preliminary evaluation of the remaining energy use in the industry, the end result for heat
recovery for the selected chemicals was extrapolated to the remaining energy used for boilers and fired systems in the
industry to obtain an order of magnitude estimate of additional possible energy savings. The assumption is that an
average of 10% of total fuel inputs can be recovered in waste heat throughout the industry. This brings total
potentially recoverable energy up to 294 TBtu, which is still a strongly conservative result. A recent study looking at
recoverable “exergy” in 18 major chemical products estimated that as much as 900 TBtu could be recoverable,
primarily as waste heat [Bandwidth 2004].
The estimated energy savings shown in Table 3-4 were applied to the development of the Top Twenty Opportunities.
These are outlined in more detail in Chapter 11 and Appendix C.
Table 3-4 CHEMICALS: COMBINED STEAM AND FIRED SYSTEMS Roll-Up Opportunities Analysis
Energy Loss Recovery or Reduction
Category
Controls, Automation,
CHP (fired and other)

Waste heat reduction
Waste heat recovery
Savings Tbtu/year
Motors & Drives
Energy Source
Flexibility
Robotics
Total
Energy
Fired From Average %
Heaters/ Fuels Waste Heat
Boilers 10^12 To Be
Chemical Process Used Btu/yr Recovered Nature of Waste Heat
The Ethylene Chain
Ethylene Yes 186.3 10.00 Waste gases X X X 18.63
Polyethlene Yes 8.2 5.00 Waste gases X X X 0.41
Ethylene Dichloride 56 Waste gases X X X 0.00
Poly Vinyl Chloride Yes 14 5.00 Waste gases X X X 0.70
Ethylene Oxide Yes 8.8 5.00 Waste gases X X X 0.44
Ethylene Glycol Yes 8.6 5.00 Waste gases X X X 0.43
Polystyrene Yes 65 7.50 Waste gases X X X 4.88
TOTAL 346.9 25.49
The Propylene Chain
Propylene Yes 31.9 10.00 3.19
Polypropylene - 1997 4.2 3.00 Flared gases X X 0.13
Propylene Oxide - 1997 Yes 8.1 5.00 0.41

Flared waste gases -
Acrylonitrile Yes 3 10.00 Hydrogen Cyanide X X 0.27
Acrylic Acid Yes 8.4 10.00 Waste Gases X 0.84
Gases from polymerization

Acrylic Fiber 9 5.00 reactor, solvent vapors X 0.43
TOTAL 56 5.27
Table 3-4 CHEMICALS: COMBINED STEAM AND FIRED SYSTEMS Roll-Up Opportunities Analysis (continued)
Energy Loss Recovery or Reduction
Category

Waste heat recovery
Savings Tbtu/year
Motors & Drives
Energy Source
Flexibility
Robotics
Total
Energy Average %
From Fuels Waste Heat
Fired Heaters/ 10^12 To Be Nature of
Chemical Process Boilers Used Btu/yr Recovered Waste Heat
The BTX Chain (Benzene, Toluene,
Xylene)
BTX Yes 34.2 10.00 X X 3.42
Benzene Yes 3.1 10.00 X X 0.31
Vent gases,
boiler waste
Ethylbenzene 5.00
heat
19 recovery X X 0.95
Heater flue
Styrene Yes 7.50
109.8 gases X X 8.24
Polystyrene Yes 13.7 7.50 X X 1.03
Cumene 4 5.00 X X 0.20
Phenol/Acetone 54.3 - 0.00
Oxidation
Terephthalic Acid Yes 5.00
11.7 process X 0.59
Cyclohexene 3.6 0.00
Adipic Acid 31.7 0.00
Caprolactam 20.8 0.00
Nylon 6.6 Yes 11.1 5.00 X 0.56
Nylon 6 Yes 4 5.00 0.20
TOTAL 521 15.3
Table 3-4 CHEMICALS: COMBINED STEAM AND FIRED SYSTEMS Roll-Up Opportunities Analysis (continued)
Energy Loss Recovery or Reduction Category
Motors & Drives

Energy Source
CHP (fired and

Automation,
Waste heat
Waste heat
Total
Flexibility
reduction
Tbtu/year
Controls,
Robotics
recovery
Savings
other)
Energy
Fired From Average
systems/ Fuels % Waste
Boilers 10^12 Heat To Be Nature of Waste
Chemical Process Used Btu/yr Recovered Heat
Agricultural Chemicals - Fertilizers
Ammonia Yes 319 Reformer waste heat X X X 31.90

10.00
Urea 8.8 X X X 0.22
2.50
Process modification
Nitric Acid Yes 3.6 X X X X 0.18
5.00 using CHP system
Ammonia Nitrate 2.8 X X X 0.00
-
Ammonia Sulfate 13.4 Steam replacement X X X X 0.34
2.50
Sulfuric Acid 2.2 X X X 0.00
-
Phosphoric Acid (Furnace Process) Yes 9.6 Waste heat X X X 0.48
5.00
Ammonia Phosphate Yes 4.6 Drying system heat X X X X 0.23
5.00
Superphosphates Yes 1.2 Drying system heat X X X X 0.06
5.00
TOTAL 379.3 33.41
The Chlor-Alkali Industry
Use of CHP, heater
Caustics (Chlorine/Sodium Hydroxide) Yes 75.8 X X X X 7.58
10.00 flue gases
Use of CHP, heater
Soda Ash (Sodium Carbonate) Yes 77.3 X X X X 7.73
10.00 flue gases
TOTAL 153.1 15.31
INDUSTRY SUBTOTAL 1456 94
Industry Remaining 1995* 200
INDUSTRY TOTAL 3451 294
* The end result for waste heat recovery for the top chemicals was extrapolated to the remaining energy used for boilers and fired systems in the industry to obtain an order of
magnitude estimate of additional possible energy savings. The assumption is that an average of 10% of total fuel inputs can be recovered in waste heat.
4.0 Petroleum Refining Industry (NAICS 324110)
4.1 Overview of the Petroleum Refining Industry

Petroleum is the largest energy resource used in the United States. Petroleum consumption is four times higher than
that of nuclear power or renewable energy, and even two times higher than that of coal or natural gas. In the United
States, 155 refineries transform petroleum into usable products, such as fuels, gasoline, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG),
residual oil, coke, and kerosene. Refineries also produce raw materials for the petrochemical industry, such as plastics,
agrochemicals, and pharmaceuticals. The United States is the largest producer of petroleum products, with almost 30%
of the global market and an annual production of six billion barrels of refined products [EIA 2003].
Petroleum and Coal Products Petroleum refineries are the second largest process energy consumers in
Manufacturing Sub-sectors the manufacturing sector. Today’s refineries are highly sophisticated
Petroleum Refineries (NAICS 324110) facilit ies, consisting of a complex configuration of energy-intensive
distillation columns, cracking and coking units, chemical reactors, and
Asphalt Paving, Roofing, and Saturated
Materials blending and upgrading equipment. The industry spends between $5 and
Asphalt Paving Mixture and Block $6 billion annually in pollution abatement practices, and must also
Other Petroleum and Coal Products
manufacture its products to meet strict environmental regulations.
Petroleum Lubricating Oil and Grease
The petroleum and coal products manufacturing sector (NAICS 324),
All Other Petroleum and Coal Products includes various sub-sectors other than petroleum refining products. The
Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas following discussion refers only to petroleum refining (NAICS 324110),
Extraction
which accounts for 90% of the petroleum and coal products industry
Natural Gas Liquid Extraction
shipments. NAICS descriptions are provided in Appendix D.
4.2 Energy Use and Loss Analysis for Petroleum Refining

Overview
A snapshot of how the petroleum refining industry ranks in terms of process energy use and losses within
manufacturing and mining is shown in Table 4-1. Petroleum refining ranks among the top third in a number of
categories, and is the largest user of fired systems and fuels. The industry’s main source of fuels consists of byproducts
from petroleum refining (66%) which consist mostly of refinery or still gas. The industry also uses significant amounts
of natural gas (27%) and small amounts of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), coal, and coke.
The industry also consumes feedstock energy to produce non-energy products such as ethane, propane, naphtha,
ethylene, butane, butylene, propylene, toluene, and xylene. Energy feedstocks used to produce energy products (e.g.,
gasoline) are not considered in this report.
Table 4-1 Snapshot of the Petroleum Refining Total feedstock use for petroleum and coal products
Industry: Energy Use and Rank Within U.S. (NAICS 324) is 3.7 quads [MECS 1998]. When
Manufacturing and Mining feedstock is combined with fuels and electricity, total
Energy energy use is 7.2 quads. Feedstocks are mainly
Category Rank (TBtu) petroleum-based, and contribute directly to our use of
Primary Energy Use 3 3835 imported oil. LPG, a primary feedstock, is comprised of
Offsite Losses 11 357 gases derived from refinery processes or natural gas
Fuel and Electricity 2 3478
processing plants that fractionate new natural gas plant
Onsite Losses 3 985
Steam Generation 3 212 liquids. LPG consists of a mixture of gases such as
Power Generation 3 17 ethane, ethylene, propane, propylene, normal butane,
Energy Distribution 3 242 butylenes, and isobutene. Heavy liquids and tars from
Energy Conversion 2 514 distillation towers, thermal cracking, and other
Facilities 11 50 operations are also used to produce products such as
Energy Export 4 1 wax, asphalt, and roofing tar.
Energy Delivered to 1 2442
Processes
Primary Energy Use
Figure 4-1 shows the primary energy inputs for the petroleum refining industry. Fuels for boilers and direct-fired
systems comprise 86% of total primary energy; power demand is only 4%. Primary energy provides a more complete
perspective on the total energy use associated with the industry, and includes purchased fuels, electricity, byproduct
fuels, and the energy losses associated with offsite power generation.
Purchased
Net Onsite
As shown in Figure 4-1, offsite energy losses occurring during Fuel Power 3%
Power* 1%
Transport
electricity generation and transport constitute about 10% of primary Losses 3% Electricity
energy. Most of these energy losses (7%) occur during the generation Losses**
of electricity at offsite utilities, where the efficiency of generating 7%
systems can be as low as 28-30%. Direct Boiler

Fuel Use Fuel
Direct fuel use constitutes a major source of energy consumption in 58% 28%
refining. Direct fuel is used to fire furnaces, reboilers in distillation
columns, thermal and catalytic crackers and cokers, reactors and other
equipment. Steam is the second largest use of fuels, and is used for
steam stripping and other purposes, with the steam often in direct *Excludes losses
contact with products. **Includes both offsite and onsite
losses.
Figure 4-1 Primary Energy Use in the U.S.

Petroleum Refining Industry – 3838 Trillion
Btu
Fuel and Electricity Use

Trillion Btu
In 1998, the petroleum refining industry’s total electricity and fuel

consumption was almost 3.5 quads. On average, about 96% of 3500
Fuels
energy use in refineries is fuels. Petroleum refineries supply a 3000 Electricity
variety of fuel and non-fuel products, and energy use patterns 2500
depend on product slate, which can change regularly along with
2000
market demand. Figure 4-2 compares fuel and electricity
1500
consumption patterns for the petroleum refining and coal products
industry sectors. 1000
500
Fuels production dominates the energy use, with gasoline, jet fuel, 0
and fuel oils representing 90% of product output from refineries. Petroleum Refineries Coal Products
The remaining 10% of products include road oil, asphalt,

lubricants, non-fuel coke, waxes, and petrochemicals [EIA 2002]. Figure 4-2 Fuel and Electricity Use in Petroleum
and Coal Products (NAICS 324)
Boiler
Losses
The petroleum refining industry is a relatively low user of power 10 TBtu
and ranks eleventh in demand for electricity, at 174 TBtu in 1998.
Electricity use accounts for only 4% of the total energy Power
CHP
consumption in refineries. Losses
Electricity
17 TBtu
39 TBtu
Petroleum refineries, however, are the third largest cogenerators
in the manufacturing sector. Although electricity represents a small CHP Steam
portion of the industry’s energy use, 30% of its electricity demand 39 TBtu
is met through onsite generation, primarily through cogeneration. Conventional
The industry has significant demand for steam, and produces enough Electricity*
13 TBtu
waste heat and byproduct fuels to make cogeneration an attractive and
economic option. Since 1985, cogeneration in the industry has more *Onsite power systems producing only electricity.
than tripled. About 108 trillion Btu of its energy use is associated
Figure 4-3 Onsite Power Generation
with the production of onsite electricity, as shown in Figure 4-3.
Profile for Petroleum Refining
End-Use Profile
The petroleum refining industry consumes energy to supply process heating and cooling, to power motor-driven
systems, and for other purposes. A breakdown of energy end-use is shown in Figure 4-4. The largest use of energy in
petroleum refining is for process heating and cooling, which includes fired systems, cooling, and steam systems.
Other Facilities
In 1998, 93% of the industry’s energy end-use was
0.3% consumed for this purpose. Motor systems (motor-
Motor 1.4% driven units such as pumps, conveyors, compressors,
Systems fans, mixers, grinders, and other materials handling or
5% processing equipment) rank second with 5% of the
Steam
industry’s energy end-use. Heating, cooling, and lighting
31% of facilities accounts for less than 2% of petroleum
refining energy use. Petroleum refining ranks first in
fired systems energy use, accounting for 30% of the total
Fired System &
energy use for fired systems by the manufacturing and
Cooling
mining sectors. The industry is also the third largest
62% steam user.
Loss Profile
Figure 4-4 Energy Use in Petroleum
Refining: Total Delivered Fuel and The energy footprint for the petroleum refining industry
Electricity – 3478 Trillion Btu
(see Appendix A) evaluates end-use and loss patterns to
better understand opportunities for energy efficiency
improvements. The general flow of energy and losses
within the average petroleum refinery is illustrated in
Figure 4-5, based on the energy footprint. As shown in
Energy To
Boilers/ Figure 4-5, as much as 28% of the energy that enters the
Power 23%
Processes plant is lost prior to use in process units. These losses
70% Distribution
Onsite occur in equipment and distribution systems that are
Losses 25%
28% converting energy into work or supplying energy to
Potential End- Energy
of-Process Conversion
process operations (see Section 1.0 for an explanation of
Losses (waste 42% loss categories). Energy conversion systems account for
gas, exhaust) Motors 10% 42% of the total onsite losses. The remaining onsite
losses are distributed evenly among boilers and power
Facilities
1% generation, distribution, and motor systems. Energy
losses that occur at the end of the process are not
Figure 4-5 Onsite Energy Loss Profile for included and can be substantial (approximated by dotted
Petroleum Refining: Total Onsite Losses – line in Figure 4-5).
958 Trillion Btu
System-Specific Losses
10 To Processes Figure 4-6 and Table 4-2 shows in detail the energy use
Other TBtu Generation Losses
and losses for component systems. Onsite losses total
183 Distribution Losses
TBtu Conversion Losses
about one quad; associated carbon emissions amount to
Motor Systems
nearly 16 MMTCE.
2156
Cooling As shown in Figure 4-6, the largest energy losses occur
1062
TBtu
in fired systems and cooling (includes fired systems and
Steam Systems
cooling units) and steam systems . Motor system
50
Facilities TBtu inefficiencies represent the largest proportional source of
system losses. About 52% of the energy input to motor-
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 driven systems is lost in energy generation, distribution,
Trillion Btu
and conversion. In terms of Btus, steam system losses
Figure 4-6 Energy End-use and Loss are the highest of all individual energy systems (484
Distributions in Petroleum Refining (NAICS trillion Btu). Approximately 45% of the total energy
324110) input to steam systems is lost.
Table 4-2 Petroleum Refining Energy Use and Losses (Trillion Btus)
To TOTAL Associated Total
Process/ Generation Distribution Conversion Onsite Carbon Energy
End-use Losses Losses Losses Losses (MMTCE)**
Facilities 50 na na na na na 50
Steam Systems 578 212 170 102 484 7.9 1062
Fired Systems
& Cooling 1776 na 68 312 380 5.7 2156
Motor Systems 89 na 5 89 94 1.7 183
Electrochemical 0 0.0 0
Export of Power 1 na na na 0.0 1
TOTALS 2501 229 243 506 978 15.6 3479
*Onsite generated power has been distributed among end-uses and is not included in the totals.
A breakdown of energy use and losses in motor systems is

Other 20 TBtu shown in Figure 4-7. More than 50% of the energy input for
motor systems is lost due to subcomponent inefficiencies. In
Btus, the greatest losses are exhibited by pump systems, but the
Compressed Air 27 TBtu greatest inefficiencies are experienced by compressed air
systems and materials processing (e.g., grinding, mixing,
Fans 17 TBtu crushing). The losses for some for some of these systems are as
high as 80-90% of energy inputs.
Pumps 105 TBtu
The highest motor system losses occur during energy

Motor Windings 8 TBtu Usable Work
conversion, and these total 89 TBtu for the industry. Additional
Losses conversion losses take place in motor windings (eight TBtu).
Distribution 5 TBtu
More than 92% of the energy used for motor systems consists
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 of electricity (146 trillion Btu); fuels comprise the remainder.
Trillion Btu
Figure 4-7 Petroleum Refining Motor A breakdown of steam use and associated losses for the
System Energy Use and Loss Profile petroleum refining industry is shown in Figure 4-8. About 45%
of energy inputs are lost via system inefficiencies. Boiler
inefficiencies account for the largest losses (20%), followed by
Energy
distribution losses (16%). Throughout industry, boiler
Conversion efficiencies range between 55-85%, with newer boiler systems
Losses 10%
(102 Tbtu)
at the higher end of the range. The type of fuel used also affects
boiler system efficiency. For example, waste heat boilers have
Distribution
much lower overall thermal efficiencies than natural gas-fired
Losses 16% boilers. Steam system distribution losses are also large, and
(170 Tbtu) Steam to
Processes 54%
occur in steam traps, valves, and pipes carrying steam to
(578 Tbtu*) processes and energy conversion units.
Boiler Losses About 33% of the boiler population in petroleum refining are
20% (212 Tbtu) large, field-erected boilers; the remaining 67% are package
boilers in a wide range of capacities. Of the entire population,
most boilers are in the 250-500 MMBtu/hr (33%) and 500-1500
Energy to Steam Systems 1062 TBTU MMBtu/hr (29%) capacity range.
Figure 4-8 Steam System Use and Loss
Profile for Petroleum Refining
An analysis to identify opportunities for reducing or recouping energy losses was conducted for both steam and fired
systems in petroleum refining. The processes covered in the analysis are shown in Table 4-3. The top energy
consuming processes include distillation (atmospheric and vacuum), hydrotreating, alkylation, and reforming. Some
processes, such as thermal cracking and fluid catalytic cracking, produce excess heat and steam and are either net
energy exporters or produce a good portion of the energy required to fuel the process. However, these processes can
still be targets for efficiency improvements or energy loss reduction.
Steam Systems Table 4-3 Refining Processes

Covered by the Analysis
The petroleum refining industry is the third largest steam user in U.S.
manufacturing and mining sectors. Table 4-4 illustrates the use of steam Atmospheric Distillation
in the industry by selected processes and the potential end-of-process Vacuum Distillation
energy losses, based on a recent steam assessment study [RDC 2002]. Visbreaking
Coking Operations
The most steam-intensive processes are atmospheric and vacuum Fluid Catalytic Cracking
Catalytic Hydrocracking
distillation, catalytic hydrotreating, alkylation, and catalytic reforming.
Catalytic Hydrotreating
For all these processes except vacuum distillation the average thermal Catalytic Reforming
efficiency was assumed to be 40%, as most of these processes are Alkylation
stripping or fractionating processes where the steam comes in contact with Isomers
the hydrocarbon stream, making steam recovery more difficult.
The efficiency of vacuum distillation was assumed to be somewhat higher (55%) as a portion of the steam is used for
creating a vacuum in the tower, a typically more efficient use of steam. Table C-3 in Appendix C provides the details
on the equipment used, the steam efficiencies assumed for each process, the major sources of energy losses, references,
and other pertinent data.
Atmospheric and vacuum distillation, followed by alkylation, isomers, and catalytic reforming represent the best areas
of opportunity for energy savings through advances or improvements in steam systems. The total potential energy
savings through future R&D and new equipment technologies amounts to about 100 trillion Btu. Waste heat reduction
and recovery potentially represents a large portion of the opportunities, particularly for lower-quality steam and exit
gases.
Fired Systems
The petroleum refining industry ranks first in energy used in fired systems. An analysis of the energy use and losses
attributed to fired systems for petroleum refining is shown in Table 4-5. The greatest opportunities for energy savings
are found in atmospheric and vacuum distillation, catalytic hydrotreating, catalytic reforming, fluid catalytic cracking,
and alkylation. In addition to steam use, energy is used in these processes mostly for fluid heating and to fire reactor
systems or cokers. The industry’s annual energy savings potential through improved fired systems totals about 325
trillion Btu. Details are provided in Table C-4 in Appendix C.
The primary sources of energy loss include hot flue gases, coolers, and condensers. Potential technology options for
reducing losses include recovery of waste heat for fluid heating, steam generation, and absorption cooling. There are
also opportunities for power generation and cogeneration by taking greater advantage of waste steam and heat available
at a wide temperature range.
Table 4-4 PETROLEUM REFINING: STEAM SYSTEMS Roll-Up Opportunities Analysis
Improvement Potential (%)
Best
Technology Options Practices Technology
Technology & Equipment

Energy Source Flexibility
Commercially Available
* Future* New Potential
* Future* R&D for New

Waste Heat Reduction
Alternative Equipment
Waste Heat Recovery
Alternative Process
Savings Tbtu/year
Existing Potential
*Future* R&D for

Motors & Drives
Robotics
2002 U.S.
Operating Energy Total Average
Production Intensity Energy Energy
Capacity (10^3 Use Loss
Process/ Unit billion Btu/bbl (Trillion (10^12
Operation Equipment Used bbls/year product) Btu/yr) Btu/yr)
Fractionating Tower,
Atmospheric Stripping (Direct Contact -
Distillation DC) 6.02 44.0 246.1 148 X X X X 40 60
Reboiler, Steam Ejection

for Pressure Control
(indirect contact),
Vacuum Stripping, Fractionating
Distillation Tower (DC) 2.76 48.0 123.3 55 X X X X 20 11
Visbreaking Stripping (DC) 0.03 net export -1.3 (1) 0
Coking
Operations Fractionating Tower (DC) 0.82 net export -9.4 (6) 0
Fluid Catalytic
Cracking Stripping (DC) 2.18 0.3 0.5 0 X X 20 0
Catalytic Stripping, Quenching
Hydrocracking (DC) 0.58 71.0 33.6 20 X X X 20 4
Catalytic
Hydrotreating Stripping (DC) 4.26 54.0 212.0 127 X X X X 20 25
Catalytic
Reforming Stripping (DC) 1.34 89.0 117.2 70 X X X X 20 14
Alkylation Stripping (DC) 0.42 348.0 139.5 84 X X X 20 17
Isomers Stripping (DC) 0.24 226.6 38.3 23 X X X 20 5
TOTAL 900 521 136
Assumptions: Efficiency improvements are based on cost-effective recovery of low level waste steam and contaminated waste steam that
is not recovered currently. Energy totals for steam come within 18% of 1998 MECS steam use. The remainder is used for power
generation, mechanical drive (direct drive systems for pumps, compressors), and other process operations.
Table 4-5 PETROLEUM REFINING: FIRED SYSTEMS Roll-Up Opportunities Analysis
Improvement Potential (%)
Best Practices Technology

Total
Savings Tbtu/year
Energy Thermal Energy Average
Intensity Energy use Use Efficiency
for Alternative
Technology &
Technology &
* Future* R&D
Commercially
Commercially
* Future* New
*Future* R&D
Process/ Unit Operation Equipment Used (10^3 10^3 (Trillion (Energy
Equipment
Alternative
Equipment
Equipment
Btu/barrel) Btu/barrel Btu/yr) Loss)
Available
Available
Potential
Potential
Process
Existing
for New
Atmospheric Distillation Charge Heating With Fired Heater. 113.8 89.00 641.6 75.00 5 5 10 10 96.2
Vacuum Distillation Charge Heating With Fired Heater. 91.5 63.00 238.8 75.00 5 5 5 10 29.9
Delayed Coking Crude (charge) Heating With Fired 166 230.00 114.6 80.00 5 5 5 10 14.3
Coker Heater.
Fluid Coking Combustion of Coke in "Burner". 258 7.1 5 10 10 15 1.4

Flexcoking Oxidation of Coke in Gasifier. Steam 167 6.7 5 10 10 15 1.3
addition to gasifier.
Visbreaking Fired Heater/reactor, Steam Addition 99.5 145.00 2.07 78.00 5 5 5 10 0.26
Fluid Catalytic Cracking Cat feed Fired Heater, Catalyst 100 100.00 190.6 75.00 5 10 15 15 42.9
Regenerator.
Catalytic Hydrocracking Fired Charge Heater and Exothermic 240 195.00 109.7 75.00 5 10 15 15 -
Catalytic Reaction
Alkylation Reactor (Heat of Reaction) 368 377.00 149 75.00 5 10 10 15 29.8
Catalytic Reforming Fired Heater 284 270.00 376.3 80.00 5 5 5 10 47.4
Isomerization Indirect Heating With Heat 359 Indirect 40 80.00 5 5 10 4.0

Exchangers. Heating
Ethers Manufacture 403 33.4 5 5 10 3.3
Catalytic Fired Heater 120 468.3 80.00 5 5 10 10 70.3

Hydrotreating/Hydroprocessing
Lube Oil 1506 0.00 109.5 75.00 5 10 10 10 19.2
359.9
TOTALS 2,487.67
5.0 Forest Products Industry (NAICS 321 & 322)
5.1 Overview of the Forest Products Industry

The forest products industry produces thousands of products from renewable raw materials (wood) that are essential
for communication, packaging, consumer goods, and construction.
Forest Products Industry Sectors The industry is divided into two major categories: Wood Product
Manufacturing (NAICS 321) and Paper Manufacturing (NAICS 322).
NAICS 321 = Wood Products
Wood Product Sectors
These industries are often grouped together because both rely on the
Sawmills nation’s vast forest resources for raw material. In addition, many
Wood Preservation companies that produce pulp and paper also produce lumber and wood
Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Woods products in integrated operations.
Other Wood Products
NAICS 322 = Paper The forest products industry is the third largest consumer of fuels and
Paper Sectors power in the U.S. industrial sector. The manufacture of wood and paper
Pulp Mills products is highly energy-intensive, requiring large quantities of thermal
Paper Mills energy to convert raw materials to useful products. In addition to fossil
Newsprint Mills
Paperboard Mills fuels, the industry uses wood residues and byproducts (black liquor) to
self-generate over 50% of its energy needs.
5.2 Energy Use and Loss Analysis for Forest Products
Table 5-1 Snapshot of the Forest Products Overview

Industry: Energy Use and Rank Within U.S.
Manufacturing and Mining A snapshot of where the forest products industry ranks in
Energy terms of energy use and losses within manufacturing and
Category Rank (TBtu) mining is shown in Table 5-1. Forest products ranks
Primary Energy Use 2 4039 among the top three in U.S. manufacturing and mining in
Offsite Losses 2 767 nearly every energy end-use category. The industry
Fuel and Electricity 3 3272 ranks first in steam use and cogeneration, and second
Onsite Losses 1 1473
only to chemicals in primary energy use.
Power Generation 1 67
Energy Distribution 1 401 Figure 5-1 shows fuel distribution in forest products.
Energy Conversion 3 470 Biomass (black liquor and wood residues) is the primary
Facilities 7 76 fuel (52%), followed by natural gas (22%). Forest
Energy Export 3 24 products constitute the largest industrial use of biomass.
Energy Delivered to 3 1699 Biomass resources utilized by the industry include black
Processes liquor produced by kraft pulping processes and wood
residues collected from wood handling and
Other manufacturing processes. These wood byproducts are
10% burned by the forest products industry to generate steam
Fuel Oils
(300 Tbtu)
6% and electricity. Coal, fuel oils, and other petroleum-
(173 Tbtu) based fuels make up the remainder of fuel use.
Biomass Improvements in the efficiency of energy systems impact

Natural 52% fuel use distribution directly in forest products. The
Gas 22% (1534
(659 Tbtu)
forest products industry is steam-intensive, so increasing
Tbtu)
boiler and process heat transfer efficiencies can have a
significant impact. Much of boiler fuel, however, comes
Coal 10%
from process byproducts. There is subsequently a trade-
(279 Tbtu) off between increased yield and process efficiency
(producing less byproducts), the biomass available for
Figure 5-1 Fuel Use in the Forest Products boiler fuel, and the use of more costly fossil fuels.
Industry – 2936 Trillion Btu
Fuel
Transport Primary Energy Use
Losses 2% Purchased
Power 8% Primary energy, which includes purchased fuels and electricity,
Direct Fuel
Use 6% Net Onsite byproduct fuels, and the energy losses associated with offsite
Power* 5% power generation and energy supply systems, provides a
perspective on the total energy use associated with forest
Electricity products. Primary energy inputs to the industry are shown in
Losses**
19%
Figure 5-2. Fuels for boilers comprise 60% and power demand
Boiler 13% , of the industry’s primary energy use.
Fuel
60% Electricity generation and fuel transport losses represent 21% of
the primary energy consumed by the forest products industry.
The bulk of energy losses occur during the generation of
*Excludes losses; includes 24 Tbtu electricity transported offsite. electricity at offsite utilities, where the efficiency of generating
**Includes both offsite and onsite losses. systems can be as low as 28-30%. Thermal efficiency of onsite
power is greatly improved through the use of cogeneration. The
Figure 5-2 Primary Energy Use in the U.S. forest products industry is the largest cogenerating industry,
Forest Products Industry – 4039 Trillion Btu meeting 39% of electricity demand with onsite power systems.
Fuel and Electricity Use Trillion Btu
Over 3.2 quads of fuel and electricity were consumed by the 1200
forest products industry in 1998. On average, fuels comprise

1000
Fuels
90% of the industry’s primary energy use; about 10% is
Electricity
electricity. The industry creates a diversity of products with 800
many different production processes, so energy use patterns

600
vary across sectors. Figure 5-3 illustrates energy use among the
major product sectors of the industry [MECS 1998]. 400
200
Within the same product sector processes can also differ
depending upon the technology used. For example, pulp can 0
be made by chemical pulping, mechanical pulping, or a ills ts ills ills lls

wm uc lp
M rM Mi ls
Mi
combination of the two pulping processes. Energy demand Sa od Pu pe int
Pr Pa pr ard
d s o
oo ** w rb
among these pulping processes can be quite different. W Ne
Pa
pe
**
It should be noted that the data reported in Figure 5-3 may be **Includes integrated pulp/paper mills.
somewhat misleading due to how sectors are categorized by Figure 5-3 Fuel and Electricity Use
NAICS. Paper and Paperboard Mills, for example, include in Selected Forest Products Sectors
operations where pulping is done at the same facility (integrated
pulp/paper mills). Subsequently, in those cases, energy reported
Power
includes energy for pulping as well as papermaking. Energy
Losses
shown for pulp mills only includes mills that do not make paper. 67 TBtu
Boiler
Onsite Generation and Electricity Demand Losses
CHP
43 TBtu
Steam
173 TBtu
The forest products industry is ranked second in electricity demand at
500 TBtu per year. Electricity demand is equal to purchases of CHP
electricity, plus electricity generated onsite, minus electricity Electricity
exported offsite. It provides the most complete picture of actual 173 TBtu
Conventional
electricity use. On average, electricity demand accounts for only Electricity*
15 TBtu
15% of energy consumption across the forest products industry. Renewable
Electricity
As noted earlier, the forest products industry meets a significant 9 TBtu
amount of electricity demand through onsite generation. A profile of *Steam or gas turbines not producing steam for
onsite produced energy is shown in Figure 5-4. Nearly 430 TBtu of process use
energy is associated with the production of onsite electricity. Figure 5-4 Onsite Power Generation
Approximately 88% of this electricity comes from cogenerating Profile for Forest Products
units, which also yield about 173 TBtu of steam.
End-Use Profile
Energy is consumed in forest products manufacturing to provide process heating and cooling, to power motor-driven
systems, and for various other purposes. A breakdown of energy end-use is shown in Figure 5-5. It should be noted
that the energy trends shown here are an average for the industry and may not reflect mill and sector differences.
Process heating and cooling systems, particularly those used for

Other Facilities
4% 2% drying or evaporation, represent the bulk of energy use (81%) in
forest products manufacture. These systems include steam
systems, fired systems such as furnaces and reboilers, as well as
Fired Heaters &
Motor cooling units. Motor systems, which include motor-driven units
Systems
Cooling Systems 13%
such as pumps, conveyors, compressors, fans, mixers, grinders,
6% Steam and other materials handling or processing equipment, rank
75% second with 13% of the forest products energy end-use.
Heating, cooling, and lighting of facilities accounts for only
about 2% of energy use.
The forest products industry ranks first in steam, and ranks

second in motor-driven systems energy end-use, within the U.S.
Figure 5-5 Energy End-Use in the Forest industrial sector.
Products Industry: Total Delivered Fuel and
Electricity – 3272 Trillion Btu
Loss Profile
The energy footprint for the forest products industry (see

Boilers/
Appendix A) evaluates end-use and loss patterns to better
Power 41% understand the opportunities for energy efficiency
Energy To
Onsite improvements. Figure 5-6, which is based on the energy
Processes
Losses Distribution
53% 45% footprint, illustrates the general flow of energy and losses within
27%
Energy the average forest products mill. As Figure 5-6 shows, 45% of
Conversion the energy that enters the mill is lost prior to use in process
32%
units. These losses occur in equipment and distribution systems
supplying energy to process operations or converting energy to
Facilities usable work (see Section 1.0 for an explanation of loss
2% categories). The majority of the onsite losses (41%) are boiler
Figure 5-6 Onsite Energy Loss Profile for the and electricity generation losses. Boiler losses represent 36% or
Forest products Industry (NAICS 325) Total 535 TBtu of total onsite losses. Energy distribution and
Onsite Losses – 1474 TBtu conversion systems account for the remaining offsite energy
losses.
23 To Processes
Other TBtu Generation Losses
Detailed energy use and losses for component
systems are summarized in Figure 5-7 and Table 5- Distribution Losses
429 Conversion Losses
2. These provide more insight to the source of Motor Systems TBtu
energy losses and identify targets for energy-saving
opportunities. As shown in Figure 5-7, most energy Fired Heaters & 211
TBtu 2442
losses occur in steam systems. In terms of TBtus, Cooling TBtu
steam system losses are the highest of all energy
systems, about 1.1 quads, which represents 47% of Steam Systems
the total energy input to steam systems.

76
Proportionally, however, motor system losses are Facilities TBtu
the greatest. About 51% of the energy input to
motor-driven systems is lost due to system 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
inefficiencies. Downstream losses (e.g., flue gas, Trillion Btu
exhaust, stack) have not been estimated, but could Figure 5-7 Energy End-Use and Loss Distributions
be substantial (as much as 30-50% of delivered in Forest Products NAICS 321 & 322)
energy).
Table 5-2 Forest Products Energy Use and Losses (Trillion Btus)
To TOTAL Associated
Process/ Generation Distribution Conversion Onsite Carbon Total
Facilities 76 na na na - - 76
Steam Systems 1299 535 379 229 1143 9.4 2442
Fired systems
& Cooling 174 na 7 30 37 0.6 211
Motor Systems 211 na 16 202 218 3.2 429
Export of Power 24 na na na na na 24
TOTALS 1798 602 402 470 1474 13.8 3272
*Onsite generated power is distributed among end-uses and is not included in the totals.
**Carbon emissions associated with total energy losses, in million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCE)
Other 44 TBtu A motor use profile for forest products is shown

Materials Processing in Figure 5-8. The losses, indicated in gray,
88 TBtu
illustrate the sizeable amount of energy that is
Materials Handling 30 TBtu wasted due to the inefficiencies of motor-driven
equipment. Compressed air and materials
Refrigeration 20 TBtu Usable Work processing (e.g., grinding, mixing, crushing)
Compressed Air 19 TBtu
Losses exhibit the greatest proportion of losses. Some of
these systems have efficiencies as low as 10-20%.
Fans 82 TBtu
Pumps 130 TBtu
TBtu; conversion losses in motor windings
Motor Windings 18 TBtu comprise another 18 TBtu. The associated
energy distribution losses are 16 TBtu.
Distribution 16 TBtu Combined losses attributed to motor systems
(excluding distribution) are about 202 TBtu.
0 50 100 150
Most of the energy used for motor systems is
Trillion Btu
electricity (>95%), although small amounts of
Figure 5-8 Forest Products Industry Motor fuel are also employed.
System Energy Use and Loss Profile
A profile of forest products industry steam use
and associated losses is shown in Figure 5-9.
Energy About 47% of energy inputs are lost via system
Conversion
Losses 9%
inefficiencies. A majority of these occur in the
(229 Tbtu ) boiler, where thermal efficiencies range between
55-85%, depending upon the age of the boiler and
Distribution type of fuel burned. Wood byproduct or hog fuel
Losses 16%
(379 Tbtu ) Steam to
boilers, for example, will have much lower
Processes 53% overall thermal efficiencies than natural gas-fired
(1299 Tbtu *)
boilers. Distribution losses for steam systems are
Boiler
also significant. These occur in steam traps,
Losses 22% valves, and pipes carrying steam to processes and
(535 Tbtu )
energy conversion units.
Energy to Steam Systems 2442 TBTU
Figure 5-9 Steam Use and Loss Profile for

the Forest Products Industry
Steam Systems
The forest products sector ranks first among U.S. industries in steam use. Table 5-3 illustrates the use of steam and
potential end-of-process energy losses in the industry by selected processes. The processes that use the most steam
are Kraft pulping, bleaching, chemical recovery, and paper drying. The efficiency of steam use in these processes
depends upon steam recovery and the quality of the recovered steam. For this analysis , it was assumed that
approximately 50-60% of the steam delivered to the process was lost downstream of the process. For chemical
recovery, where considerable amounts of steam are produced, the net steam requirement is provided. Appendix B
provides the details on the steam efficiencies assumed for each process, the major sources of energy losses, references,
and other data. Assuming improvements to steam systems could recover from 10-30% of lost energy, it is estimated
that energy savings would approach 200 TBtu/year.
Chemical pulping, bleaching, chemical recovery, and paper drying represent the largest area of opportunity for
improving steam system energy efficiency in the forest products industry. In pulp making, potential steam system
improvements can be made via the implementation of more efficient digesters (continuous versus batch), increased
recovery of waste steam, implementation of increased CHP, and employment of alternative heat sources such as the
replacement of steam heating with indirect heating methods.
Better heat integration to reduce bleaching stages , and increased heat recycling, are options for improving steam use in
bleaching. Falling film evaporation and increased steam recycling are potential methods for increased heat recovery
in the chemical recovery process.
Paper drying is a highly inefficient process that relies largely on the use of steam, and represents one of the most
significant opportunities for improved steam system efficiency. Options to improve paper drying efficiency include
the use of direct-fired dryers, utilization of alternative drying systems (impulse drying infrared drying, press drying),
recovery of heat from air, and recovery of waste heat using mechanical vapor recompression pumps.
Fired Systems
Lime mud calcining is the only significant use of fired systems in the forest products industry (see Table 5-4). The
average efficiency of the lime kiln is very low (30-40%). Improvements could be made by increasing heat transfer
between lime mud and combustion gases, using lime product coolers for heating combustion air, and employing flash
dryers for mud preheat. The steam energy savings potential from these options is estimated to be about 23 TBtu/year,
based on the recovery of approximately 35% of lost process energy. Appendix B provides details on the analysis and
the methodology used.
Table 5-3 FOREST PRODUCTS: STEAM SYSTEMS Roll-Up Analysis Improvement Potential (%)
Technology Option Best Technology
Practices
*Future* R&D for Alternative

Savings Tbtu/yr
Total Average

Waste Heat Recovery

2000 U.S. Energy Energy Energy
Existing Potential
Motors & Drives
Production Intensity Use Loss
10^6 short 10^6 Btu/ 10^12 10^12
Robotics
Process
Process/ Unit Operation Equipment Used tons/yr ston pulp Btu/yr Btu/yr
Kraft Pulping Steam heated 52.0 3.8 196 88 X X X X X 10 15 22

batch/continuous
digesters, pre-
steamers
Sulfite Pulping Steam heated batch 1.2 3.6 4 2 X X X X X 10 10 0
digesters
Thermo-mechanical Pulping Pre-steamers 3.7 0.8 3 1 X X X X X 10 0
Semi-chemical Pulping Digesters or pre- 4.0 4.6 18 8 X X X X X 20 2

steamers
Bleaching Steam-heated 37.6 3.7 139 56 X X X X X X 10 15 14
bleaching
towers/stages
Chemical Recovery Recovery boilers, 57.1 3.8 216 86 X X X X X X 5 15 17
superheaters,
stripper, evaporators
Pulp Drying Dryer, condenser, 8.4 3.9 33 16 X X X X X X X 10 10 3

thermocom-pressor
Paperdrying (million tons of Drum dryers and 96.3 9.2 886 461 X X X X X X X X 10 20 138
paper) Yankee dryers
TOTAL 1495 719 197
Table 5-4 FOREST PRODUCTS: FIRED SYSTEMS Roll-Up Analysis Improvement Potential (%)
Energy Loss Recovery or Best
Reduction Category Practices Technology
Commercially Available Technology &
*Future* R&D for Alternative Process

* Future* R&D for New Technology &
Commercially Available Alternative
Controls, Automation, Robotics
Savings Tbtu/year

Waste Heat Recovery

Energy Average
Existing Potential
Motors & Drives
2001 U.S. Intensity Energy
Equipment
Equipment
Equipment
Production (10^6 Total Energy Loss
Process/ Unit Operation Equipment 10^6 Short Btu/ston Use (10^12 (10^12
Used Tons/year pulp) Btu/yr) Btu/yr)
Lime Mud Calcining Lime Kiln X X X X 15 20 23

52 2.00 103 65
TOTAL 103 65 23
Assumptions: Efficiency improvements are based on recovery of kiln waste heat, reduction of kiln heat losses, and reduction of heat needed for lime mud dissociation.
Energy use is consistent with 1998 MECS fuels used in fired systems (166 TBtu), and with the LBL study, which indicates about 3-4% of energy use is attributed to lime
burning (115 TBtu).
6.0 Iron and Steel Industry (NAICS 333111)
6.1 Overview of the Iron and Steel Industry
Steel is an integral part of the U.S. infrastructure, providing the foundation for construction (bridges, buildings),
transportation systems (railroads, cars, trucks), and utility systems (municipal water systems, power systems). It is
also the material of choice for such diverse applications as military equipment, food storage, appliances, and tools.
Traditionally valued for its strength, steel has also become the most recycled material, with two-thirds of U.S. steel
now produced from scrap.
Steel is made via two different routes, both of which are energy-intensive. An integrated steel mill produces molten
iron in blast furnaces using a form of coal known as coke, which is either produced onsite or purchased. This iron is
used as a charge to produce steel in a basic oxygen furnace (BOF). An electric arc furnace (EAF) steel producer, also
known as a mini-mill, uses EAFs to produce steel fro m steel scrap and other iron-bearing materials.
Steel is the fourth largest consumer of fuels and power in manufacturing. The efficiency of the processes and
equipment used to produce iron and steel is constrained by thermodynamic, kinetic, or transport limitations, and
operating conditions are severe (high temperatures, corrosive environments). These factors contribute collectively to
proportionally high energy use per ton of product.
6.2 Energy Use and Loss Analysis for Iron and Steel
Overview
Table 6-1 Snapshot of the Iron and Steel Industry:
Energy Use and Rank Within U.S. Manufacturing
and Mining A snapshot of where the iron and steel industry ranks in
Energy terms of energy use and losses within manufacturing and
Category Rank (TBtu) mining is shown in Table 6-1. The industry ranks among
Primary Energy Use 4 2056 the top five in U.S. manufacturing and mining in a
Offsite Losses 8 384 number of energy end-use categories. The industry is a
Fuel and Electricity 4 1672 large user of fired systems and ranks sixth in energy used
Onsite Losses 5 378 for motor-driven systems.
Power Generation 6 6 Coke and coal are the primary fuels used by the iron and
Energy Distribution 5 62 steel industry (38%), followed by natural gas (27%),
Energy Conversion 4 291
byproduct fuels produced onsite (23%), and electricity
Facilities 9 56
Energy Export * ~0 (9% excluding losses). Small amounts of fuel oil and
Energy Delivered to 4 1238 other fuels make up the remainder. The main byproduct
Processes fuels are coke oven gas and blast furnace gas (coal-based
* Not available in origin).
Purchased
Primary Energy Power 8% Net Onsite
Power 1%

byproduct fuels, and the energy losses associated with offsite power Electricity
Losses* 18%
generation and energy supply systems, provides a perspective on the total
energy use associated with the manufacture of iron and steel. Primary
energy inputs to the industry are shown in Figure 6-1. Fuels for boilers Direct Fuel
Use 67% Boiler Fuel
and direct-fired systems comprise two-thirds of total primary energy; 6%
power demand is about 9%.
A considerable portion of the primary energy associated with the

manufacture of iron and steel (18%) is lost during energy generation and *Includes both offsite and onsite losses.
transport. Almost all of these energy losses occur during the generation
of electricity at offsite utilities, where the efficiency of generating Figure 6-1 Primary Energy Use in the U.S.
systems can be as low as 28-30%. Losses also occur in onsite power Iron and Steel Industry - 2056 Trillion Btu
generating systems, but thermal efficiency is greatly improved through
Trillion Btu
the use of cogeneration. Only about 1% of iron and steel
industry electricity demand is currently met by onsite
power systems. 1200
Fuels
1000
Electricity
Fuel and Electricity Use 800
600
About 1.7 quads of fuels and electricity were consumed by
the iron and steel industry in 1998. On average, around 400
90% of its energy use is fuels, and the remainder is 200

electricity (10%).
0
F
ed EA
As discussed earlier, the industry has two main routes for eg
rat
Int
making steel. Figure 6-2 illustrates the energy
Figure 6-2 Fuel and Electricity Use in the
consumption patterns across the two major sectors of the
Integrated and EAF Sub-sectors
industry (electricity losses are excluded). Overall, the
production of steel via the integrated route is responsible for
75% of fuel and 36% of electricity consumption in the industry. EAF steelmaking accounts for the remainder – 25%
of total industry fuel consumption and 64% of industry electricity consumption.
The iron and steel industry is ranked ninth in demand for electricity, at 181 TBtu per year. Electricity demand is equal
to purchases of electricity, plus electricity generated onsite, minus electricity exported offsite. It provides the most
complete picture of actual electricity use. On average, electricity use only accounts for about 10% of energy
consumption across the industry. However, EAF steelmaking is electricity-intensive and accounts for almost 30% of
total electricity consumption in the steel industry.
As noted earlier, the steel industry meets some amount of electricity demand through onsite generation. About 18
TBtu of energy use is associated with the production of onsite electricity. Most of the electricity produced onsite in
the steel industry comes from cogenerating units.
End-Use Profile
Energy is consumed in the manufacture of iron and steel to supply process heating (reduction of FeO, melting,
reheating), to power motor-driven systems such as rolling mills, and for various other purposes. A breakdown of
energy end-use is shown in Figure 6-3.
Other Facilities Fired systems (excluding boilers), particularly ironmaking blast

Motor 2% 3% Steam 7% and other furnaces, represent the bulk of energy use in the
Systems industry (81%). Boilers contribute another 7% to total energy
7% use for process heating. Motor systems, which include motor-
driven units such as rolling mills, pumps, conveyors, fans, and
materials handling equipment, consume another 7% of steel
industry energy use. Heating, cooling, and lighting of facilities
accounts for just 3% of its energy use.
Fired Heaters
81%
The industry ranks seventh in steam use within manufacturing
and mining, and ranks sixth in the use of motor-driven systems
in the industrial sector.
Figure 6-3 Energy End-Use in the Iron and
Steel Industry:
Other Total Delivered Fuel and
Facilities
Electricity - 1672 Trillion Btu
Loss Profile
Boilers/ The energy footprints for the iron and steel industry (see
Power 5%
Appendix A for footprints for the integrated sector, the EAF
Distribution
Energy To Onsite 17%
sector, and the industry overall) evaluate end-use and loss
Processes Losses 23%
Energy
patterns to better understand the opportunities for energy
74% Conversion efficiency improvements. Figure 6-4, which is based on the
56%
Motors 22%
overall industry energy footprints, illustrates the general flow of
energy and losses within the average steel mill. As Figure 6-4
Facilities shows, nearly one-quarter of the energy that enters the plant
3%
(23%) is lost prior to use in process units. These losses occur in
equipment and distribution systems supplying energy to process
Figure 6-4 Onsite Energy Loss Profile for operations or converting energy to usable work. The majority of
the Iron and Steel Industry:
onsite losses in the iron and steel industry occur in energy
Total Onsite Losses - 378 Trillion Btu
conversion systems.
Detailed energy use and losses for component systems are summarized in Table 6-2 and Figure 6-5. As shown in
Figure 6-5, the bulk of energy losses occur in fired systems and cooling. In terms of TBtus, these heating and cooling
losses total about 241 TBtu, which represents approximately 18% of the total energy input to these systems.
Proportionally, however, motor system losses are the greatest. Nearly 70% of the energy input to motor-driven
systems is lost due to system inefficiencies.
Table 6-2 Iron and Steel Industry Energy Use and Losses (Trillion Btus)
Associated
To TOTAL Carbon
Process/ Generation Distribution Conversion Onsite Emissions Total
Steam Systems 56 19 15 10 44 0.7 100
Fired Systems
& Cooling 1131 na 42 199 241 4.0 1372
Electrochemical 4 na na 1 1 0.0 5
Export of Power 0 na na na na na 0
TOTALS 1294 25 62 291 378 6.3 1672
** Carbon emissions associated with total energy losses, in million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCE).
12 TBtu To Processes
Other
Generation Losses
Trillion Btu
A motor use profile for the iron and steel industry is
5 TBtu Distribution Losses
Electrochemical shown in Figure 6-6. The losses, indicated in gray,
Conversion Losses
illustrate the significant amount of energy that is
121 TBtu
Motor Systems wasted due to the inefficiency of some motor-
driven equipment. Compressed air and materials
Fired Heaters & 1377 TBtu
Cooling processing (e.g., grinding, mixing, crushing) exhibit
100 TBtu
the greatest proportion of losses; some of these
Steam Systems systems have efficiencies as low as 10-20%.
56 TBtu
Facilities
-100 400 900 1400 1900 TBtu; conversion losses in motor windings
comprise another 6 TBtu. The associated energy
Figure 6-5 Energy End-Use and Loss distribution losses are 5 TBtu. Combined losses
Distributions in the Iron and Steel Industry attributed to motor systems (excluding distribution)
are about 80 TBtu iron and steel making. More
than 90% of the energy used for motor systems in
the industry is electricity.
Materials
72 TBtu A profile of the iron and steel industry’s steam use
Processing
and associated losses is shown in Figure 6-7. About
Compressed
Air
17 TBtu 44% of energy inputs are lost due to system
inefficiencies. Most of these losses occur in the
Fans 18 TBtu boiler, where thermal efficiencies range between
55-85%, depending upon the age of the boiler and
Pumps 10 TBtu fuel type burned. Waste heat boilers, for example,
will have much lower overall thermal efficiency
Motor Usable Work than natural gas-fired boilers.
Windings 6 TBtu
Losses
Distribution 5 TBtu
Distribution losses are also significant. These occur
in steam traps, valves, and pipes carrying steam to
0 20 40 60 80 processes and energy conversion units. These
Trillion Btu losses can vary widely between facilities, and are
Figure 6-6 Iron and Steel Industry Motor System highly dependent on plant configurations, how
Use and Loss Profile effectively heat sources and sinks are integrated,
and operating and maintenance practices.
Energy
Conversion
Losses 10%
(158 Tbtu )
Distribution
Losses 15%
(262 Tbtu) Steam to
Processes 55%
(897 Tbtu*)
Boiler Losses
20% (328 Tbtu)
Energy to Steam Systems 1645 TBtu

Figure 6-7 Steam Use and Loss Profile for
the Iron and Steel Industry
Combined Steam and Fired Systems

The iron and steel industry ranks second in the use of fired systems , and ranks seventh in the use of steam within the
U.S. industrial sector. Table 6-3 illustrates the use of fired systems in the industry by selected processes and the
potential end-of-process energy losses. Major areas of loss for fired systems include hot gases (both contaminated and
clean), warm water (120-150 o F), and hot products that require cooling or quenching (coke, annealed metal, molten
iron, hot slabs, process gases). The total energy savings potential for the iron and steel industry (based on the
efficiencies shown in Table 6-3) is approximately 270 TBtu. The largest opportunity area is ironmaking in basic
furnaces, which accounts for 36% of potential energy savings. More than 29% of the savings opportunities are
concentrated in EAFs. Other savings opportunities are found in slab reheating furnaces (19%) and annealing (~7%).
Steam is used extensively in integrated steel plants to generate power and to supply steam to several low-to-medium
temperature heating systems. Traditionally byproduct fuels (coke oven gas, blast furnace gas) have been used to
supply heat to steam generators and furnaces. With structural changes in the steel industry, many integrated plants
have eliminated or restricted severely the use of processes that generate byproduct fuels such as blast furnace gas,
coke ovens, and so forth. This has adversely affected the cost of heating in the plants.
A significant amount of steam use in integrated mills can be replaced by direct-fired systems. In many cases , a large
quantity of steam is generated using primary fuels such as natural gas and fuel oil where byproduct fuels (coke oven
gas, blast furnace gas) have been used historically; using primary fuels has a significant cost “penalty” for the plants.
Gas-turbine-based CHP systems can be utilized for supplying heat to steam generators and to fluid heating processes
used in the plant. Waste heat from combustion products , or flue gases from reheat furnaces, coke oven batteries,
continuous annealing furnaces, etc., can be supplied to combustion air preheating, to charge preheating, or to
adjoining lower-temperature processes. Thermo -electric systems are a viable option for utilizing medium-
temperature, clean flue products or cooling air.
For mini-mills , major energy sources include electricity and natural gas. Electricity is the primary source of energy
for EAFs, while natural gas is the principal source of heat for reheating operations. Modern installations utilize oxy -
fuel burners and other sources of chemical heat to supplement heat supply to EAF, which helps to reduce energy
consumption. EAFs represent a major source of waste heat discharged as gases that include chemical and sensible
heat. However, the gases are highly contaminated and recovering their energy presents several technical challenges.
Flue products from reheat furnaces are relatively clean and can be used in steam generation or other heating
operations located close to the furnaces , if the plant has a downstream process plant. Although steam is not used
extensively in mini-mills , its use is increasing and could be promoted through the use of steam as a supplement to
electricity.
Table 6-3 IRON AND STEEL: COMBINED STEAM AND FIRED SYSTEMS Roll-Up Analysis Improvement Potential (%)
Best
Savings Tbtu/year


Waste Heat Recovery
Alternative Process
Motors and Drives
Existing Potential
*Future* R&D for

Robotics
Pro- Energy Total
duction Intensity Energy
10^6 (10^6 Use Average
ID Process/Unit Short BTU/ston (10^12 Efficiency
# Operation Equipment Used Tons/yr Product) Btu/yr) %
1 Coke Making Coke Ovens 23 3.4 77 X X 5 4

2 Sintering 12 1.5 18 0
BF Ironmaking (MM
3 tons/yr) Blast Furnace 60 16.1 966 10 97
Basic Oxygen
4 BOF Steelmaking Furnace 60 0.9 54 0
Electric Arc
5 EAF Steelmaking Furnace 49 6.5 316 56 25 79
6 Ingot (4%) Soaking pits 4 2.8 12 90 11
7 Continuous (96%) Caster 104 0.3 30 X X X 25 8
Various Reheat
8 Slab Reheat Furnace Furnaces 98 1.5 146 36 X X X X X X X 10 15 35 51
Tunnel - equalizing
9 Tunnel furnace Furnaces 10 0.7 7 36 X X X X X 25 2
10 Hot Rolling Hot Rolling Mills 109 0.8 87 X 0

11 Acid pickling Pickle baths 1.2 0 X X X X X 20 0
12 Cold rolling Cold Rolling Mills 71 0.7 49 X 0

Cleaning/Annealing Annealing 71
X X X
13 Furnaces 1.0 71 32 X X 25 18
TOTAL 1833 269
Assumptions: Efficiency improvements are based on heat reduction and recovery, and application of CHP. Values are within 10% of 1998 MECS energy use.
7.0 Food and Beverage Industry (NAICS 311 and 312)
7.1 Overview of the Food and Beverage Industry

The food and beverage industry is an integral component of the U.S. economy, transforming livestock and agricultural
products into intermediate and final food and beverage products. Food and beverage is one of the largest U.S.
manufacturing sectors, accounting for $570 billion in annual shipments, or about 14% of total U.S. manufacturing
shipments. Increasing globalization of agriculture markets and companies has led to increased trade for food and
beverage products ; exports in 2002 were about $29 billion, along with imports of $31 billion.
Food and Beverage The food and beverage industry is highly diversified, and produces thousands of
Industry Sectors different products. Processing facilities range from small plants to large industrial
Animal Food
Grain and Oilseed Milling
units, and most plants produce more than one product. The industry is divided
Sugar and Confectionery Products into sectors that reflect major product categories.
Fruit and Vegetable Preserving
and Specialty Food The food and beverage industry is one of the top five consumers of fuels and
Dairy Products power in the U.S. industrial sector. The manufacture of foods and beverages often
Meat Products
requires significant quantities of thermal energy to convert raw materials to useful
Seafood Product Preparation and
Packaging products. The efficiency of the processes and equipment used to produce foods
Bakeries and Tortillas and beverages is often constrained by thermodynamic, kinetic, or transport
Beverages limitations, and high temperature or pressure operating conditions. All these
Tobacco Products factors contribute to high energy use per pound of product.
7.2 Energy Use and Loss Analysis for Food and Beverage
Table 7-1 Snapshot of the Food and Overview
Beverage Industry: Energy Use and Rank
Within U.S. Manufacturing and Mining
A snapshot of where the food and beverage industry ranks in
Energy
terms of energy use and losses is shown in Table 7-1. The food
Category Rank (TBtu)
Primary Energy Use 5 1685 and beverage industry ranks among the top six in U.S.
Offsite Losses 3 529 manufacturing and mining in nearly every energy end-use
Fuel and Electricity 5 1156 category.
Onsite Losses 4 407
Steam Generation 4 121 Natural gas is the primary fuel used by the food and beverage
Power Generation 5 7 industry (67%), followed by coal (17%). Lesser amounts of
Energy Distribution 4 113 petroleum products, natural gas liquids (NGL), liquefied
Energy Conversion 6 166 petroleum gases (LPG), and other fuels make up the remainder.
Facilities 6 87
Energy Export 3 4
Energy Delivered to 5 658 Primary Energy Use
Processes
Fuel
Transport
Purchased byproduct fuels, and the energy losses associated with offsite
Power
Losses 2%
14% Net power generation and energy supply systems, provides a
Onsite
Power*
perspective on the total energy use associated with food and
Direct Fuel 1% beverage manufacture. Primary energy inputs to the industry
Use 17%
are shown in Figure 7-1. Fuels for boilers and direct-fired
Electricity
systems comprise about 53% of total primary energy; power
Losses** demand is about 15%.
Boiler Fuel 30%
36%
About 32% of the primary energy associated with food and
beverage manufacture is lost during energy generation and
transport. The bulk of these energy losses occur during the
*Excludes losses; includes 4 Tbtu electricity export. generation of electricity at offsite utilities, where the efficiency
**Includes both offsite and onsite electricity generation. of generating systems can be as low as 28-30%. Losses also
Figure 7-1 Primary Energy Use in the U.S. Food and
Beverage Industry - 1685 Trillion Btu
occur in onsite power generating systems, but thermal efficiency is greatly improved through the use of cogeneration.
About 9% of food and beverage industry electricity demand is currently met by onsite power systems. The food and
beverage industry is the fifth largest cogenerating industry.
Fuel and Electricity Use Million Dollars
1800
Nearly 1.2 quads of fuels and electricity were consumed by 1600
the food and beverage industry in 1998. On average, about 1400 Fuels
79% of energy use is fuels, and the remainder is electricity
1200 Electricity
(21%).
1000
800
The food and beverage industry makes an array of different
600
products and uses many different processes in their
400
manufacture. As a result, energy use patterns can vary
200
significantly across sectors.
0
Figure 7-2 illustrates the energy purchase patterns across od t uct d s co

Fo ing ry le uc ct s oo ge ac
al ll a tab Prod Prod rodu rtilla er F vera Tob
major sectors of the industry [ASM/DOC 2001]. Overall, im M i
on eg
e t P To
Ot
h Be
An eed fecti & V Dairy Mea ood &
grain milling, fruit and vegetable processing, meat product ls
Oi & C Fru
on it af
Se ker
ies
& r Ba
output, and beverage production are responsible for the ain uga
Gr S
majority of its energy purchases. Processing of meat
products consumes the most electricity. Figure 7-2 Fuel and Electricity Purchases in
Selected Food and Beverage Industry Sectors, 2001

Boiler
The food and beverage industry is ranked fourth among the U.S. Losses
manufacturing and mining sector in demand for electricity at 258 TBtu 6 TBtu
per year. Electricity demand is equal to purchases of electricity, plus
electricity generated onsite, minus electricity exported offsite. It Power
CHP
provides the most complete picture of actual electricity use. On Losses
Electricity
7 TBtu
average, electricity use only accounts for about 21% of energy 20 TBtu
consumption across the industry. However, some sectors are more
electricity-intensive than others. CHP Steam
24 TBtu
As noted earlier, the food and beverage industry meets a moderate Conventional
Electricity*
amount of electricity demand through onsite generation. A profile of 1 TBtu
onsite produced energy is shown in Figure 7-3. About 52 TBtu of *Steam or gas turbine, not
annual energy use is associated with the production of onsite electricity. cogeneration
Approximately 95% of electricity produced onsite in the food and
beverage industry comes from cogenerating units, which also generate Figure 7-3 Onsite Power Generation
about 24 TBtu in steam. A small amount of electricity is produced in Profile for Food and Beverage
conventional steam and gas turbines or other systems that are not
generating steam for process use. Other Facilities 8%
3%
End-Use Profile
Motor
Energy is consumed in food and beverage manufacture to provide Systems
12%
process heating and cooling, to power motor-driven systems, and Steam 52%
for various other purposes. A breakdown of energy end-use is Fired
Heaters &
shown in Figure 7-4. It should be noted that the energy trends Cooling
shown here are an average for the industry and may not reflect Systems
sector differences. 25%
Process heating and cooling systems represent the bulk of energy

use (77%) in food and beverage manufacture. These include steam Figure 7-4 Energy End-Use in the Food and
systems , fired systems such as ovens and furnaces, and cooling units. Beverage Industry: Total Delivered Fuel and
Electricity - 1156 Trillion Btu
Motor systems, which include motor-driven units such as pumps,
conveyors, compressors, fans, mixers, grinders, and other materials handling or processing equipment, rank second
with 12% of energy use. The food and beverage industry ranks fourth in steam use within manufacturing and
mining, and also fourth in the use of fired systems . It is also the fifth largest user of motor-driven systems in the U.
S. industrial sector.
Loss Profile
The energy footprint for the food and beverage industry

(see Appendix A) evaluates end-use and loss patterns to
Boilers/ Power
32%
better understand the opportunities for energy efficiency
Energy To
Processes Distribution
improvements. Figure 7-5, which is based on the energy
Onsite
57% Losses 35% 28% footprint, illustrates the general flow of energy and losses
Conversion
within the average food and beverage plant.
25%
Motors 15% As Figure 7-5 shows, a substantial share (35% ) of the

energy that enters the plant is lost prior to use in process
Facilities
units. These losses occur in equipment and distribution
8% systems supplying energy to process operations or
converting energy to usable work (see Section 1.0 for an
Figure 7-5 Onsite Energy Loss Profile for the Food explanation of loss categories). Total energy conversion
and Beverage Industry (NAICS 311 and 312) Total losses account for about 40% of onsite losses, including
Onsite Losses - 407 Trillion Btu those of motor systems (15%) and other systems (25%).
The remaining onsite losses are split nearly evenly between
boilers and power generation and energy distribution.
Downstream, end-of-process losses (exhaust, stack) have
not been estimated, but could be substantial (as much as 30-
50% of delivered energy).
Detailed energy use and losses for component systems are summarized in Figure 7-6 and Table 7-2. As shown in
Figure 7-6, most energy losses occur in process heating and cooling, which includes steam systems as well as fired
systems and cooling or refrigeration units. In terms of trillion Btus, steam system losses are the highest of all energy
systems, (277 trillion Btu), which represents about 45% of the total energy input to steam systems. Proportionally,
however, motor system losses are even higher. About 49% of the energy input to motor-driven systems is lost due to
system inefficiencies.
6
Other TBtu To Processes
Generation Losses
142 Distribution Losses
Motor Systems TBtu
Conversion Losses
300
Cooling
610
Steam Systems TBtu
87
Facilities TBtu
-100 400 900 1400 1900

Trillion Btu
Figure 7-6 Energy End-Use and Loss Distribution in

Foods and Beverages (NAICS 311 and 312)
Table 7-2 Food and Beverage Energy Use and Losses (Trillion Btus)
Associated
To TOTAL Carbon
Steam Systems 333 121 97 59 277 4.9 610
Fired Systems
& Cooling 250 na 10 40 50 0.7 300
Export of Power 4 na na na 0.0 4
TOTALS 749 128 113 166 407 7.1 1156
*Onsite power generation is distributed among end-uses and is not included in the totals.
A motor use profile for food and beverage is

Other 57 TBtu shown in Figure 7-7. The losses indicated in gray,
illustrate the substantial amount of energy that is
Materials Processing 36 TBtu wasted via motor-driven equipment inefficiency.
Compressed air and materials processing (e.g.,
Compressed Air 11 TBtu grinding, mixing, crushing) exhibit the greatest
portion of losses. Some of these systems have
Fans 10 TBtu efficiencies as low as 10-20%.
Pumps 22 TBtu Motor system energy conversion losses total 57

TBtu; conversion losses in motor windings
Motor Windings 6 TBtu Usable Work comprise another 6 TBtu. The associated energy
Losses distribution losses are 6 TBtu. Combined losses
Distribution 8 TBtu attributed to motor systems (excluding
distribution) are approximately 63 TBtu. Most of
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 the energy used for mo tor systems is electricity
Trillion Btu (>90%), although small amounts of fuel are also
employed.
Figure 7-7 Food and Beverage Industry Motor
System Energy Use and Loss Profile
A profile of food and beverage industry steam use
Energy and associated losses is shown in Figure 7-8.
Conversion
Losses 10% About 45% of steam system energy inputs are lost
(59 Tbtu ) due to system inefficiencies. The bulk of these
occur in the boiler, where thermal efficiencies
Distribution range between 55-85%, depending upon the age of
Losses 16% the boiler and type of fuel burned. Waste heat
(97 Tbtu ) Steam to
Processes 55% boilers, for example, will have much lower overall
(333 Tbtu*) thermal efficiency than natural gas-fired boilers.
Distribution losses in steam systems are also
Boiler Losses
significant. These occur in steam traps, valves,
20% (121 Tbtu) and pipes carrying steam to processes and to
energy conversion units.
Energy to Steam Systems 610 TBtu
Figure 7-8 Steam Use and Loss Profile for the

Food and Beverage Industry
Steam Systems
The food processing industry is the fourth largest steam user in the U.S. manufacturing and mining sector. Table 7-3
illustrates the use of steam in the industry by selected processes and the potential end-of-process energy losses.
The most steam intensive processes are found in wet corn milling (steeping, steepwater evaporation, germ drying),
and cane sugar and beet sugar processing (solution, refining). Lesser amounts of steam are used for meat evisceration,
cheese processing (whey drying), and fats and oils processing (meal drying). The numerous drying and evaporative
processes of the food processing industry are considerably inefficient and use large amounts of steam. For this
analysis it was assumed that steam system efficiencies for these processes ranged between 45-50%. Appendix B
provides details about the efficiencies assumed for each process, the major sources of energy losses, references, and
other pertinent data.
The best areas of opportunity for efficiency improvements in food and beverage manufacture are in wet corn milling
and sugar processing and refining. Technology options include the use of direct-fired drying systems (impulse drying,
infrared drying, press drying) and waste heat recovery. Replacing steam-heated systems with direct firing could also
increase efficiency in food drying. Another option is the use of CHP and secondary heat recovery from boiler flue
gases.
Assuming improvements to steam systems could enable the recovery of 10-30% of energy wasted currently, potential
energy savings for the industry as a whole are estimated at more than 80 TBtu/year.
Fired Systems
The food processing industry is the fourth largest user of fired systems. Meat products, cheese processing, dry
condensed and evaporated products, wet corn milling, bread cake and related products, and fats and oil processing are
the major sub-sectors that employ fired systems, mostly for drying, evaporation, cooking, and baking.
Not enough data was available to conduct a detailed analysis of fired systems used in food processing. However, if
the basic assumption is made that these processes lose considerable waste heat and are relatively inefficient (40-50%
energy lost), this would amount to about 135 TBtu annually. Recouping even a small percentage of that energy (e.g.,
20%) would provide energy savings of about 30 TBtu annually, which is significant. In addition, because steam and
electricity use are high in this sector, it is an ideal candidate for increasing the use of cogeneration as well as other
waste heat recovery technologies.
Table 7-3 FOOD PROCESSING: STEAM SYSTEMS Roll-Up Analysis Improvement Potential (%)
Best

Available Technology
Available Alternative
Waste heat recovery
Savings Tbtu/year
Alternative Process
Existing Potential
*Future* R&D for

Motors & Drives
Energy Source
Technology &
* Future* New
Commercially
Commercially
& Equipment
Equipment
Equipment
Flexibility
Potential
Robotics
Total Average
U.S. Energy Energy Energy
Production Intensity Use Loss
Process/ Unit 10^6 (10^6 (10^12 (10^12
Operation Equipment Used lbs/ye ar Btu/lb) Btu/yr) Btu/yr)
Rotary steam tube

Wet Corn Milling dryers, flash dryers 2625.0 115 63 X X X X X X 10 15 16
Sugar Processing/ Evaporators, dryers,

Refining vacuum pans 169 93 X X X X X X 10 15 23
Steam Vacuum,
Meat Products Steam Pasteurization 19000.0 333.0 6 3 X X X X 10 15 1
Feed System, Drying
Cheese Chamber, Fluid Bed 6900.0 1020.0 7 4 X X X X 10 15 1
Fats and Oils Dryers 72515.0 93.0 7 3 X X X X 10 15 1
Miscellaneous
(baking, dairy, Steam Pasteurization,
others) Ovens, Dryers 272 136 X X X X X 10 15 34
TOTAL 576 302 76
Assumptions: Efficiency improvements are based on cost-effective waste steam recovery, waste heat reduction, and other options
such as reducing excess air and flue gas, improving process control, and using CHP. Energy totals for steam cover all of 1998 MECS
steam use.
8.0 Mining Industry (NAICS 212)
8.1 Overview of the Mining Industry

The mining industry plays an important role in the U.S. economy and its energy supply. In 2000, mined materials such
as uranium and coal represented 72% of energy inputs for electric power production in the United States, and process
materials of mineral origin accounted for 5% of the nation’s GDP. The U.S. mining industry also directly employs
more than 320,000 people. On average, 47,000 pounds of material are mined per person each year, making the
industry indispensable to our quality of life. In 2000, 35% of the 1.1 billion tons of coal produced were mined from
underground; the remainder was obtained from the surface. That same year, mining of crude industrial and metal ores
totaled 3.1 billion pounds and 1.3 billion pounds respectively.
Mining Industry Sub-sectors Some mining operations are highly energy intensive. For example,
Oil and Gas Extraction rock crushing, drilling, and grinding require considerable mechanical
forces and subsequently large amounts of energy. Substantial
MiningExcept Oil and Gas
• Coal Mining amounts of energy are also expended to transport massive quantities
• Metal Ore Mining of ore and rock from mining to milling operations.
• Nonmetallic Mineral Mining
and Quarrying The mining industry (NAICS 21) includes several sub-sectors. Metal
Support Activities for Mining and minerals mining account for a large portion (50%) of mining
industry shipments, and are the focus of this analysis. Oil and gas
extraction are excluded.
8.2 Energy Use and Loss Analysis for the Mining Industry
Table 8-1 Snapshot of the Mining Industry: Energy Overview
Use and Rank Within U.S. Manufacturing & Mining
Energy
A snapshot of where the mining industry ranks
Category Rank (TBtu)
Primary Energy Use 6 1273 in terms of energy use and losses within
Offsite Losses 4 520 manufacturing and mining is shown in Table
Fuel and Electricity 6 753 8-1. The industry ranks sixth in primary
Onsite Losses 6 311 energy use, fuel and electricity use, and onsite
Steam Generation 12 0.8
Power Generation 4 16 losses. The mining sector also ranks fourth in
Energy Distribution 12 13 offsite losses and fifth in energy conversion
Energy Conversion 5 281 losses.
Facilities * *
Energy Export 5 0.01
Energy Delivered to 6 442 Fuel oil (diesel, residual) represents the largest
Processes portion of the mining industry’s total energy
* Not available supply (35%), followed by electricity (32%).
Trillion Btu
The remaining energy needs are satisfied by
250 243 natural gas (22%), coal (10%), and gasoline
250
(2%). Figure 8-1 shows the breakdown of the
mining industry’s energy supply by energy
200
167 source. The mining industry uses large quantities
150
of diesel fuel for service trucks and other hauling
equipment. Electricity is used for fans, drills,
100
crushers , and conveyors, all of which are
77
relatively energy-inefficient.
50
16
0
al l
Co Oi s lin
e
cit
y
el Ga so tri
Fu ral Ga ec
tu El
Na
Figure 8-1 Mining Industry Energy Supply By
Energy Source (NAICS 212) – 753 Trillion Btu
Fuel Primary Energy Use
Transport
Losses 1% Purchased Figure 8-2 shows the primary energy inputs to the mining
Power
19%
industry. Fuels for boilers and direct-fired systems
comprise 37% of total primary energy; power demand is
Direct Net Onsite 20%. Primary energy includes purchased fuels,
Fuel Use Power* 1% electricity, byproduct fuels, and the energy losses
37% associated with offsite power generation, providing a
perspective on total mining industry energy use.
Electricity
Boiler Losses** On average, 43% of the primary energy associated with
Fuel 42% the mining industry is lost during energy generation and
0.3%
transport. Offsite utilities, responsible for electricity
*Excludes losses generation, are accountable for the main portion of these
**Includes both offsite and onsite energy losses (42%). The efficiency of generating systems
losses. at these offsite utilities can be as low as 28-30%.
Figure 8-2 Primary Energy Use in the
U.S. Mining Industry – 1273 Trillion Btu Fuel and Electricity Use
Total fuel and electricity supplied to the mining industry

25
has been estimated at 750 TBtu of energy per year. Fuels
account for almost 68% of the industry’s purchased
20 energy. Energy patterns across the mining industry vary
primarily due to differences in mining methods
15 (underground versus surface mining), in the nature and
location of ore or mineral deposits, and in the size, depth,
10 and grade of minerals. Coal, for example, is mined using
both surface and underground methods. On the other
5 hand, 96% of industrial ores come sole ly from surface
mines .
0
al n ld r
Co Iro Go ck he Figure 8-3 illustrates the percent of energy use consumed
e el
ck Zinc oc
k Ot
rat Ni Ro dR by major mining industry sectors. Due to the large
, Bo & &
pa
e
t he
h er ad os Crus
As opp r, Le Ph volume of coal production, mining it accounts for the
da C ve
So Sil most energy use. However, mineral mining is
h,
tas significantly more energy intensive on a Btu/per ton basis .
Po
Figure 8-3 Fuel and Electricity Use in
Selected Mining Sectors Onsite Generation and Electricity
Demand
Boiler
Losses
1 TBtu The mining industry ranks third among U.S. industrial
sectors in electricity demand, topped only by the
chemical and forest product industries. Diesel- and coal-
Power
Losses fired power systems are used onsite to produce electricity
16 TBtu Conventional as needed for mining equipment.
Electricity*
19 TBtu
Current data is not readily available on electricity
cogeneration in the mining sector, although it is expected
to be moderate. The values shown in Figure 8-4 have
been extrapolated from an older source and applied to
current projected energy use [EIA 1978, ORNL 1980].
*Steam or gas turbines, not With this approach, conventional electricity generating
cogeneration
systems are estimated to supply about 19 TBtu per year.
Power generation losses from onsite generation are
Figure 8-4 Onsite Power Generation Profile approximately 16 TBtu. Total energy associated with
for the Mining Industry (NAICS 212) onsite power production in mining is around 36 TBtu.
End-Use Profile Electrochemical Steam
0.1% 1%
The mining industry consumes energy to supply direct heating, to
power motor-driven machinery, and for other purposes. A breakdown of Direct
energy end-use is shown in Figure 8-5. Heating
13%
Other Motor
The mining industry’s largest use of energy for heat and power is
61% Systems
classified under “other” uses. This includes drilling, materials transport
and other energy-intensive operations. Limited data are available on the 25%
exact breakdown of energy use among these processes, as the mining
industry is not part of the MECS conducted by the U.S. Department of
Energy. According to older studies [EIA 1978, ORNL 1980], over 61%
of the industry’s energy end-use is reflected in the “other” category.
Motor systems (pumps, material handling equipment) rank second with Figure 8-5 Onsite Energy Loss Profile for the
25% of the total energy end-use. Direct-heating represents 13% of the Mining Industry (NAICS 312) Total Onsite
industry’s energy end-use. Losses – 311 Trillion Btu
Loss Profile
Boilers/
Appendix A includes an energy footprint for the mining industry Power 5%
which evaluates end-use and loss patterns to better understand Distribution
the opportunities for energy efficiency improvement. Based on 5%
the energy footprint, Figure 8-6 shows a breakdown of the Onsite Energy
Energy To Conversion
mining industry’s onsite losses and general energy flow. As Processes
Losses
62%
42%
illustrated in the figure, as much as 42% of the energy that enters 58%
the plant is lost prior to use in process units. These losses occur
in equipment and distribution systems converting energy into Motors 29%
work or supplying energy to process operations (see Section 1.0

for an explanation of loss categories). Energy conversion
systems account for most of the total onsite losses (62%).
Motors represent 31% of the mining industry’s onsite losses, and Figure 8-6 Energy End-use and Loss
the remaining losses occur in boiler systems and in energy Distributions in Mining (NAICS 212)
distribution.
Figure 8-7 and Table 8-2 show in detail the energy use and losses for component systems . As shown, the largest
energy losses occur in the “Other” category. However, because the mining sector is not part of the DOE MECS, little
data are available on end-uses and losses within the “other” category. Losses are assumed to be mostly due to the low
efficiency of crushing, grinding, drilling, and transport equipment. Motor system inefficiencies represent the largest
proportional source of system losses. About 48% of the energy input to motor-driven systems is lost in energy
distribution and conversion. Steam use for mining operations is small, but approximately 36% of the total energy input
to steam systems is lost.
446
TBtu
Other
1
Electrochemical TBtu
185
Motor Systems TBtu
To Processes
101
Generation Losses
Direct Heating TBtu
Distribution Losses
4 Conversion Losses
Steam Systems TBtu
0 100 200 300 400

Trillion Btu
Figure 8-7 Energy End-use and Loss Distribution in Mining (NAICS 212)
Table 8-2 Mining Energy Use and Losses (Trillion Btus)
Associated
To TOTAL Carbon
Facilities 0 na na na Na 0
Steam Systems 3 1 0.3 0.3 1.6 0 4
Direct Heating 82 na 5 14 19 0.3 101
Electrochemical 1 na na na 0 0 1
Other Uses 268 na na 178 178 3.2 446
Export of Power 0.01 na na na 0 0.01
TOTALS 442 17 13 281 311 5.8 753
Materials Figure 8-8 shows a breakdown of energy use and losses

Handling & 117 in motor systems for the mining industry. Almost 50%
Processing TBtu
of the energy input for motor systems is lost through
subcomp onent inefficiencies. In Btus, the greatest
Pumps 60 TBtu losses are exhibited by materials processing systems,
with inefficiencies as high as 90%. Pump system
inefficiencies (40%) are also considerable.
Motor
Windings 8 TBtu
The highest motor system losses occur during energy
Usable Work conversion, and total 89 trillion Btu for the industry.
Distribution 8 TBtu Losses Additional conversion losses take place in motor
windings (8 trillion Btu), and distribution losses total an
additional 8 trillion Btu. The fuel-mix for motor
0 50 100 150
Trillion Btu
systems in the industry was estimated to be 82%
electricity and 18% fuel.
Figure 8-8 Mining Industry Motor System Energy
Use and Loss Profile
9.0 Cement Industry (NAICS 327310)
The cement industry is energy systems (fired systems, steam systems, motor drives), consuming about 347 TBtu in
1998 ranking them sixth among U.S. industries. Most cement industry energy is used in fired systems (305 TBtu) and
in motor driven equipment (41 TBtu). Energy utilized in its steam systems accounts for only about one TBtu. The
industry generates a minute amount of electricity and steam from waste fuels and byproducts to meet onsite energy
demand. In 1998, onsite power generation in the cement industry totaled to approximately 2 TBtu of electricity.
The energy footprint analysis estimates pre-process energy losses attributed to energy systems in the cement industry
(within the plant boundary) at around 71 TBtu. These include losses incurred in steam and power generation (0.1
TBtu), in distribution systems (11 TBtu), and in conversion to useful work (60 TBtu). About 91 TBtu of energy losses
are associated with offsite utilities providing electricity, gas, and other fuels to the cement industry.
An individual energy use and loss chapter was not developed for this industry because it ranks thirteenth on the list of
primary U. S. industrial energy users. However, cement ranks fifth in its use of fired systems, and the calcining
process used in cement making is similar to that used in other energy-intensive sectors , such as forest products ,
mining, alumina, petroleum coke calcining, and chemicals manufacture (materials production, catalyst regeneration).
Accordingly, the cement industry was included in the opportunities analysis to capture potential synergies from
reducing energy losses in calcining across several industries.
Fired Systems
Table 9-1 illustrates the use of fired systems and potential end-of-process energy losses in the industry for calcining,
which is the top energy consumer in cement. The efficiency of energy use in this process rests largely on the kiln type
used, fuel type employed, and heat recovery and integration schemes in place. Appendix B provides details on the
efficiencies assumed for each process, the major sources of energy loss, references, and other pertinent data.
The wet kiln process is the least efficient calcining technology in use and represents the principal opportunity for
improving energy efficiency in the cement industry fired systems . Sources of loss from the wet kiln include water
evaporation, inefficient combustion, unrecovered exhaust gases, and uncaptured radiative and convective heat.
Potential efficiency improvements could be made through the implementation of preheat systems , combustion system
optimization, adaptation to semi-wet conversion, enhanced heat recovery in the clinker cooler, and improvements to
the grate cooler.
While dry kilns are more efficient, they can also benefit from the addition of preheaters and precalcining units, as
shown in Table 9-1. Many of the older kilns in use are currently not retrofitted with effective preheat systems. Dry
kilns could also benefit from increased heat recovery in the clinker cooler and better grate coolers. Heat recovery via
cogeneration is also possible, but uses for the steam generated would need to be explored.
Assuming improvements to fired systems could reduce energy losses as shown in Table 9-1 (ranging from 11-50%,
depending on the process), energy savings are estimated at about 80 TBtu/year.
Table 9-1 CEMENT MANUFACTURING: FIRED SYSTEMS Roll-Up Analysis Improvement Potential (%)
Energy Loss Recovery or Best Technology
Reduction Category Practices
Savings Tbtu/year
Available Technology
Available Alternative
Waste heat recovery
Alternative Process
Existing Potential
*Future* R&D for

Motors & Drives
Energy
Energy Source
Technology &
* Future* New
Commercially
Commercially
& Equipment
Intensity Total Average
Equipment
Equipment
Flexibility
Potential
Robotics
2002 U.S. (10^6 Energy Energy
Process/ Unit Production Btu/ton Use Loss
Operation Equipment Short clinker) (10^12 (10^12
Used Tons/year Btu/yr) Btu/yr)
Wet Process Rotary kiln 24,647,428 148 104 X X X X X X X 25 25 52

Long Kiln 6.00
Dry Process Rotary kiln 46,450,922 209 100 X X X X X X X X 10 15 25
Long Kiln with heat 4.50
recovery
Dry Process Rotary kiln 11,849,725 45 14 X X X X X 11 2
Preheater Kiln with preheat 3.80
towers
Dry Process Rotary kiln 11,849,725 39 11 X X X X X 11 1
Precalciner Kiln with 3.30
precalciner
units
TOTAL 441 230 80
Assumptions: Efficiency improvements are based on reduction of kiln heat loss, conversion of wet kilns to semi-wet kilns, superior clinker cooling, higher efficiency motors,
optimized combustion, heat recovery for cogeneration, increased use of preheaters and precalciners, and other heat recovery schemes. Energy totals come within 15% of
1998 MECS, adjusted for increased production by 2% per year.
10.0 Energy Systems
10.1 Fired Systems and Cooling Net
Electricity
8%
Overview Fuel Oil
2%
Other
Fired systems and cooling systems play a crucial role in 40%
today’s manufacturing processes. Fired systems supply
heat to produce basic materials and commodities, and
cooling systems chill and refrigerate processes in which Natural Gas
44%
achieving lower temperatures is essential. Almost 39% of
Coal
the total energy used in manufacturing and mining is LPG 5%
consumed in fired systems. Natural gas accounts for 44% 1%
of the energy used in fired systems. Electricity and coal are
also important energy sources, and represent 13% of total Figure 10-1 Fuel Consumption in Fired
fired system energy end-use, as shown in Figure 10-1. Systems and Cooling
Energy
Conversion Energy Use and Loss Analysis: Fired Systems
Losses 15%
(1040 Tbtu)
Distribution As shown in Figure 10-2, annual U.S. manufacturing and mining

Losses 3% fired systems energy use totals 7.3 quads (including onsite losses).
(256 Tbtu) Heating and
Cooling of Only about 3.5% of this energy is consumed by cooling systems;
Processes fired systems account for a majority of the use. Fired heating
82% (5983
Tbtu*) equipment includes furnaces, dryers, calciners, evaporators,
condensers, and other direct- or indirect-fueled heating systems.
Cooling systems include cooling towers and ponds, heat
exchangers, cryogenic equipment, chillers, and refrigeration
equipment. Figure 10-2 does not incorporate energy that is lost
Energy to Fired Heating and Cooling
downstream via flue and stack gases , and other waste heat sources,
Systems 7279 TBTU
equal up to one-half of the energy delivered for heating and
Figure 10-2 Fired Systems Energy Use and cooling.
Losses in U. S. Manufacturing and Mining
Table 10-1 ranks industries by fired systems and cooling energy
use. Petroleum refining is the largest fired systems energy
consumer, accounting for 31% of the total. The iron and steel and
Table 10-1 Ranking Industry by Fired
chemicals industries rank second and third with 20% and 17% of
Systems Energy Use
Fired Heaters total energy use, respectively. These three industries consume
Sector approximately two-thirds of all energy used for fired systems in
TBtu Rank
manufacturing and mining. All three of these industries operate
Iron & Steel Mills 1372 2 under severe processing conditions (high temperatures, high
Chemicals 1207 3 pressures, corrosive environments) to convert raw materials to
Food & Beverage 300 4 usable products.
Cement 296 5
Mining 204 6 Figure 10-3 shows fired system energy use as a percentage of total
Glass & Glass Products 204 7 energy use for each industry. More than 81% of the iron and steel
Forest Products 196 8 industry’s energy use is consumed in fired systems, mostly in
Heavy Machinery 182 9 ironmaking and blast furnaces. Fired systems are a major portion
Fabricated Metals 182 10
of energy use in petroleum refining (62%), and include the use of
Foundries 147 12 thermal cracking processes for fuels and chemicals production.
Transportation Equipment 94 13
The petroleum refining industry is also a large producer of
Computers, Electronics 65 14 ethylene, which is accomplished primarily in a pyrolysis furnace.
Textiles 62 15 Chemicals and forest products industries are also significant users
Plastics & Rubber 60 16 of fired systems, mostly for separations and drying operations.
However, these industries both rely more heavily on steam for
process heating than direct-fired systems.
90%
81%
80%
70%
62%
60%
50%
40%
32%
30% 25%
20%
13%
10% 6%
0%
Iron and Petroleum Chemicals Food and Mining Forest
Steel Refining Beverage Products
Figure 10-3 Energy Use of Fired Systems and Cooling

Systems as a Percentage of Total Energy End-use
Figure 10-4 shows the energy use and losses in fired

systems for the six largest energy consuming
industries. Petroleum refining is the largest consumer
Food and Beverage
300
TBtu
To Processes
and exhibits the largest losses. In all six industries,
Generation Losses
Conversion Losses energy conversion to useful work comprises most
101
Mining TBtu losses in fired systems.
1372
Iron and Steel TBtu Note that the energy delivered to processes shown in
Dotted Lines Indicate Potential
211 End -of-Process Losses (stack, Figure 10-4 does not reflect downstream energy losses
Forest Products TBtu flue, exhaust, other)
exiting the process in flue and exhaust gases, in waste
Petroleum Refining
2156 water, and in other waste heat sources. These losses
TBtu
have not been estimated for this study, and can be
1207
Chemicals TBtu considerable (as much as 30-50% of the energy
delivered). The dotted lines shown in Figure 10-4
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
illustrate the potential magnitude of these losses for
Trillion Btu some of the larger energy consuming industries.
Figure 10-4 Fired Systems Energy Use and Though much of the waste heat exiting fired systems
Losses by Industry is recovered, thermodynamic and economic
equipment limitations often restrict the amount of
waste heat that can be recuperated feasibly.
Table 10-2 shows in greater detail the fired systems losses for each industry. The total losses attributed to these end-
users in manufacturing and mining total 1.3 quads. The six largest users shown in Table 10-2 account for 77% of the
total losses in this category (937 TBtu).
Table 10-2 Energy Delivery and Associated Losses in Fired Systems

Iron
Petroleum Forest and Food and
Chemicals Refining Products Steel Mining Beverage
Delivered To
Processes 997 1776 174 1131 82 250
Generation Losses 0 0 0 0 0 0
Distribution Losses 38 68 7 42 5 10
Conversion Losses 172 312 30 199 14 40
Industry Totals 1207 2156 211 1372 101 300
10.2 Steam Systems
Overview Net
Fuel Oil Electricity
4% 0.3%
Steam is used to heat raw materials, to generate electricity, to
provide heat for buildings, and to power equipment. In the Other
United States, the total cost of fuels used for steam generation is Natural Gas 44%
estimated at $18 billion (1997 dollars). Overall, more than 70% of 40%
U. S. manufacturing boiler population is concentrated in four
industries – chemicals, petroleum refining, forest products, and
food processing.
LPG
Coal
0.4%
In the manufacturing sector, byproduct fuels (fuel gas, black 12%
liquor, petroleum byproducts) account for 43% of energy inputs
to boilers. Almost 40% of the fuel used in boilers for steam Figure 10-5 Fuel Consumption in Boilers
generation is obtained from natural gas. Coal is the third largest
energy source, accounting for 12% of total steam system fuel use
[MECS 1998]. Figure 10-5 shows the boiler fuel mix for steam
generation used in manufacturing and mining.
Energy
Conversion Energy Use and Loss Analysis: Steam Systems
Losses 10%
(597 Tbtu)
Steam systems represent 35% of total energy use in U. S.
Distribution
manufacturing and mining, or 6.2 quads. Only 55% of this
Losses 15% energy is delivered to processes; the remaining 45% is lost due
(987 Tbtu) Steam to
Processes 55%
to inefficiencies in boilers, in energy distribution, and in energy
(3380 Tbtu*) conversion systems. Steam generation in boilers, with
efficiencies ranging from 55-85%, accounts for the largest
Boiler Losses losses . Boiler efficiency varies widely, and depends both on
20% (1233 Tbtu) equipment age and configuration as well as the fuel combusted.
In the top six energy intensive industries alone, steam system
inefficiencies are responsible for 2.7 quads of energy losses.
Energy to Steam Systems: 6201 Tbtu
Figure 10-6 Steam Use and Losses in Distribution losses are also significant, and these occur in steam
U.S. Manufacturing and Mining traps, valves, and pipes where steam is transported throughout
Table 10-3 Industry Ranked by Steam the plant site. In some industries, miles of pipe may be used to
Energy Use convey steam to process units. Energy conversion losses occur
Steam Use in heat exchangers, steam injectors and other equipment where
Sector Tbtu Rank steam heat is used to facilitate product conversion. Figure 10-6
Forest Products 2442 1 shows a breakdown of U.S. manufacturing and mining steam
Chemicals 1645 2 use and losses.
Food & Beverage 610 4 Table 10-3 shows U. S. industries ranked by steam energy use.
Textiles 132 5
Forest products is the largest steam user, consuming more than
Transportation Equipment 112 6
Iron & Steel Mills 96 7 38% of total industry steam use. Steam is used during pulp and
Plastics & Rubber 81 8 paper making in digesters, in wood chip preparation, in black
Computers, Electronics 53 9 liquor recovery, in bleaching, and in paper drying. The
Alumina & Aluminum 41 10 chemicals and petroleum refining industries are the second and
Fabricated Metals 35 11 third largest users, consuming 26% and 17% of the total,
Heavy Machinery 25 12 respectively. In these two industries, steam is an input to
Foundries 22 13 nearly every single production process and unit operation, and
Glass & Glass Products 5 14
is used for fractionation, for steam injection, for drying, and for
Mining 4 15
Cement 1 16
other purposes. In petroleum refining, steam is often in direct
contact with the product (steam stripping). The food and
beverage industry is another major steam user (10%), relying heavily on steam for processing, for sterilization, and
for cleaning. In textiles steam is used for dyeing and bleaching. Together, these five industries account for about
95% of the total energy used by U. S. industrial steam systems.
Figure 10-7 shows the energy used for steam systems as a percentage of the total energy end-use for each industry.
The forest products industry has the largest relative steam use of any U.S. industry, with steam accounting for 75%
of the industry’s energy end-use. Food and beverage, chemicals , and petroleum refin ing also depends heavily on
steam energy.
80%
75% Figure 10-8 shows the energy use and losses in
70% steam systems for the six largest energy
60%
consuming industries. The forest products
52% industry, specifically pulp and paper, exhibits the
50% 44% greatest energy losses in all categories. In all six
40% industries, boiler inefficiencies are responsible for
31%
nearly one-half of industrial steam system losses.
30%
20% Table 10-4 shows in detail the components of

10%
7% steam system losses for each of the six energy
1% intensive U. S. industries. This industry grouping
0%
Mining Iron and Petroleum Chemicals Food and Forest incurs 96% (2.7 out of 2.8 quads) of total
Steel Refining Beverage Products
industrial steam system losses is a significant
Figure 10-7 Steam Energy Use as a target for potential steam-system improvements in
Percentage of Total Energy Use manufacturing and mining. Steam generation
represents 45% of these losses, followed by
energy conversion (34%), and lastly distribution
(21%). As the most prolific user of steam, the
610 To Processes
Food and Beverage TBtu Generation Losses
forest products industry accounts for 42% of all
5
Distribution Losses steam losses in U. S. manufacturing and mining.
TBtu Conversion Losses
Mining
100
Iron and Steel TBtu
2442
TBtu
Forest Products
1062
Petroleum Refining TBtu
1645
Chemicals TBtu
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Trillion Btu
Figure 10-8 Steam Energy Use and Losses

by Industry
Table 10-4 Energy Delivered and Losses in Steam Systems

Iron
Delivered To
Processes 897 578 1299 56 3 333
Distribution Losses 262 170 379 15 0.3 97
Conversion Losses 158 102 229 10 0.3 59
Industry Totals 1645 1062 2442 100 4.6 610
10.3 Onsite Power Generation
Overview
Onsite power generation systems allow industries to satisfy power demand while reducing energy costs and reducing
electricity purchases . Combined heat and power (CHP) systems are used to produce power onsite and then recover
waste heat for use in processes. This recovered heat can be used to produce mechanical energy, to heat or cool water,
to make steam, or to control humidity in buildings. CHP accounts for 92% of the total U. S. manufacturing and
mining power generated onsite. The remaining power generation is obtained from gas turbines, combustion turbines,
and renewable electricity generating technologies (solar, geothermal, bioenergy, ocean, wind).
Power generation systems at utilities often exhibit low efficiencies ranging from 25-44%. At these efficiencies, as
much as two thirds of the fuel used for electricity generation is lost during the process. CHP systems help reduce
these losses by recovering waste heat, by creating steam, and by increasing overall thermal efficiency. The use of
cogeneration is rising, but is still limited by high capital costs and permitting issues. In the manufacturing and mining
sectors, cogeneration represents only 12% of the total industrial power demand and 8% of total industrial steam
demand. Given that power systems require large capital investments and have significant permitting and site issues ,
some industries are reluctant to adopt onsite generation systems. In addition, for CHP to be practical, the industry
must also be a large user of steam or have another use for the recovered waste heat.
CHP Steam
Solar, Geothermal Energy Use and Loss Analysis:
Losses 103
12TBtu
Onsite Power Generation
TBtu
Onsite electricity generation currently meets

CHP
Electricity
13% of total manufacturing and mining
Power Losses
182 TBtu
428 TBtu electricity demand, with CHP accounting for
the largest share. The proportionally large
use of CHP can be attributed to the high
CHP Steam 410
TBtu
thermal efficiencies of these systems, which
are up to 30% greater than conventional
Conventional power systems. Figure 10-9 shows an onsite
Electricity*
54 TBtu power generation and loss profile for U.S.
manufacturing and mining.
Figure 10-9 Onsite Power Generation and Loss
Profile for U. S. Manufacturing and Mining The forest products industry is the largest
*Onsite power systems producing only electricity.
user of CHP, followed closely by the
chemicals industry. These two industries
Table 10-5 Industry Rankings By CHP-
alone represent 77% of total manufacturing
Produced Electricity*
and mining CHP energy use. Petroleum
CHP Use refining, food and beverage, and iron and
Sector Tbtu Rank steel are much smaller users, but are still
Forest Products 161 1 significant when compared to other U. S.
Chemicals 148 2 manufacturing and mining sectors. These
Petroleum Refining 39 3 three industries are large consumers of
Food & Beverage 24 4 byproduct fuels and of steam and/or
Iron & Steel Mills 18 5 electricity thus logically can take significant
Mining 3 7 advantage of the benefits of cogeneration.
Table 10-5 shows industry rankings based on
Cement 2 8
electricity produced onsite via CHP.
Plastics & Rubber 1 9
Heavy Machinery 0 10
Textiles 0.5 11
Foundries <0.5 12
Glass & Glass Products 0 -
* Net electricity (losses not included)
1000 Figure 10-10 shows total electricity and CHP
20%
900 demand by industry. Forest products are not
800
700
only the largest CHP user, but also satisfies
Trillion Btu
33%
600 the largest amount of its electricity needs
500 with CHP (32%). CHP is attractive
400
1% 9% 1% economically and technically to pulp and
300
200
22% 10% 0.5% paper mills because their processes generate
100 5% large quantities of waste fuels that can be
0 used for power generation and are also
notably steam reliant.
t
ls
en
inin
ica
ils
m
ing
m
ts
er
rag
lM
uc
M
em
inu
Ce
bb
fin
rod
ve
ee
m
Re
Ru
Ch
Be
Alu
St
tP
s&
The petroleum refining and chemicals
n&
res
&
leu
&
stic
od
ina
Fo
Iro
tro
Pla
Fo
m
industries also meet a considerable portion of
Pe
Alu
CHP Demand Electricity Demand
their electricity requirements with CHP (22%
and 20%, respectively).
Figure 10-10 CHP as a Percentage of Total Electricity Demand
Figure 10-11 shows the energy use and losses in CHP systems for each industry. Losses occur primarily during both
power generation (conversion of fuels to electricity) and boiler and auxiliary system operation. However, because
cogeneration also produces steam for process use, the overall thermal efficiency of its electricity production is
significantly greater than that of purchased electricity.
161
160 148
140
120
Trillion Btu
100
80 67
54
60
39
40
18 24
17 16
20 6 7 3 3 2 5 1 1
0
Ru nt
Alu ning
als
s & me
ge
ing
Be s
m
s
er
res mic
il
n & uct
i
M
inu
od el M
ra
bb
Ce
fin
ve
rod
e
m
Re
Ch
e
tP
St
m
&
&
leu
stic
ina
Fo
tro
Iro
Pla
Fo
m
Pe
Alu
Energy Use Losses
Figure 10-11 CHP Energy Use and Losses in Selected Industries
10.4 Motor Systems
Other LPG Natural Gas
Overview 5% 0.3% 5%
Fuel Oil
Motor-driven systems (sometimes referred to alternatively as 1%
machine-driven systems ) include pumps, fans, compressors,
conveyor belts, mixers, grinders, refrigerators, and materials
handling and processing equipment. Motor systems consume a
significant portion of the total energy used by the most energy
intensive industries in the U. S. manufacturing and mining Net Electricity
89%
sectors. Total energy consump tion attributed to motor
systems exceeds 2.3 quads annually.
Figure 10-12 End-use Fuel Consumption for
Motor systems are powered largely by electricity (>89%), as
shown in Figure 10-12. Natural gas is the second most used Machine Drive Systems
energy source, but only represents about 5% of motor-driven
industrial energy use [MECS 1998].
Energy Use and Loss Analysis:

Motor Systems
In the top six energy-intensive U. S. industries
Energy Energy to covered in this report, motor systems account for
Machine Drive
Conversion
Systems 45%
over 1.5 quads of energy use with losses of nearly
Losses 51%
(1204 Tbtu) (1047 Tbtu* ) one quad. Motor systems represent 13% of total
energy end-use in U. S. manufacturing and mining.
Only 45% of this energy is delivered to processes;
the remaining 55% is lost due to inefficiencies in
Distribution motor-driven equipment, in motor windings, and in
Losses 4% distribution systems. Energy conversion losses
(85 Tbtu)
occurring during the conversion of motor energy to
Energy to Motor Systems: 2336 Tbtu useful work represent the largest motor losses (51%
of total energy supply to motor systems). Figure 10-
Figure 10-13 Motor Systems Use and Losses 13 outlines motor systems use and losses.
in Manufacturing and Mining
Table 10-6 Industry Rankings by Motor
Systems Energy Use
Motor Use
Table 10-6 ranks industry based on motor systems energy
consumption. The chemicals industry is the largest consumer of Sector Tbtu Rank
energy for motor systems, accounting for over 21% of total Chemicals 482 1
motor systems energy use in U. S. manufacturing and mining. Forest Products 429 2
The forest products industry ranks second utilizing another 18% Mining 185 3
of the total. Both of these industries are large users of motor- Petroleum Refining 183 4
driven pumps, fans, compressed air systems, and materials Food & Beverage 142 5
processing and handling equipment. Mining (8%), petroleum Iron & Steel Mills 121 6
refining (8%), food and beverage (6%), and iron and steel mills Fabricated Metals 104 7
(5%) are also significant users of motor-driven systems. Heavy Machinery 99 8
Together, these six industries account for 66% of the total Transportation Equipment 99 9
energy used for motor systems in U. S. manufacturing and Plastics & Rubber 98 10
mining. Textiles 85 11
Computers, Electronics 56 12
Cement 40 13
Glass & Glass Products 22 15
Foundries 19 16
Figure 10-14 shows the energy used for
30%
motor systems as a percentage of the total
25% energy end-use for each industry. While
25%
mining is only the third largest energy user
for machine-driven systems, motors represent
20% 25% of mining’s total energy end-use,
almost twice as much as higher-ranked
15%
13% 13% chemicals and forest products. This reflects
12%
the mining industry’s dependence on motor-
10% driven drills, grinders, fans, and crushers,
7% many of which are exceedingly inefficient in
5%
5% converting energy to useful work. While the
chemicals and petroleum refining industries
0%
are the first and second largest energy users
Mining Chemicals Forest Food and Iron & Steel Petroleum for motor systems, motors only represent
Products Beverage Refining
about 13% of their total energy use.
Figure 10-14 Motor Energy Use as a Percentage of Total
Energy End-use Figure 10-15 shows the energy use and losses
in motor systems for the six largest energy
consuming industries. The chemicals industry
142 To Processes
is the top user and accounts for the largest
Food and Beverage TBtu
Conversion Losses losses. In all six industries, energy conversion
Distribution Losses
185
TBtu
losses represent the bulk of total motor
Mining
121
system losses. The substantial energy
Iron and Steel TBtu conversion losses in chemicals and other
429 industries are due to the inherent
TBtu
Forest Products inefficiencies of some of the most commonly
183 used systems, particularly pumps,
compressors, and materials processing
Chemicals
482
TBtu
systems. Note that only onsite losses are
included in Figure 10-15. Energy losses
0 100 200 300 400 500 associated with electricity generated offsite
Trillion Btu and used to power motor systems are not
included.
Figure 10-15 Motor Systems Use and Losses by Industry
Table 10-7 shows more specifically the components of motor system losses for each industry. The total motor losses
in manufacturing and mining are 1.3 quads. Energy conversion inefficiencies account for 93% of these losses, and
distribution represents the remaining 7% of losses . Chemical industry motor losses represent 25% of the total motor
system losses in U. S. manufacturing and mining, followed by forest products at 17%.
Table 10-7 Energy Delivered and Losses of Motor Systems

Iron
Energy to Processes 163 89 211 36 89 73
Distribution Losses 18 5 16 5 8 6
Conversion Losses 301 89 202 80 88 63
Industry Totals 482 183 429 121 185 142
10.5 Facilities and Other Systems
Overview Other
Net Electricity 22%
Other energy systems used in industry include onsite transport 49%

equipment, electrochemical systems, facilities HVAC and
lighting, process controls, and other industry-specific
LPG
processing or non-processing systems. Onsite transport includes 1%
the energy used to fuel equipment (trucks, forklifts, etc.) that
carry materials between locations at the plant site.
Natural Gas
Electrochemical energy use occurs in systems that convert raw 25%
inputs to products through an electrochemical reaction. Fuel Oil
Facilities HVAC and lighting consists of energy used to provide 3%
heat, cooling, and lighting for building envelopes at the plant Figure 10-16 Energy Consumption by Source for
site. The amount of energy used in these miscellaneous systems Facilities HVAC and Lighting, Electrochemical
is specific to each industry. Processes, and Other Uses
As shown in Figure 10-16, almost one-half of the total energy consumption of these “other” systems is obtained from
electricity. Natural gas is another large energy source, accounting for 25% of the total fuel mix [MECS 1998]. Coal
is not included as a fuel source as it represents a very minute percentage of the total energy supply for facilities.
Trillion Btu
300
Energy Use and Loss Analysis: Facilities
Facilities
and Other Systems
250
Other Uses
Electrochemical
200 Figure 10-17 shows an industry breakdown of the
energy used in facilities, electrochemical processes,
150
and other uses. The mining industry has a large
100 amount of energy use classified as “other” uses. Since
mining is not covered by the Manufacturing Energy
50
Consumption Survey [MECS 1998], there are limited
0 data on energy use for its specific equipment
categories. However, from information that is
ng
ls
l
ee
ica
ini
ng
ge
St
ts
na
em
fini
era
uc
available, the “other” category in mining includes

mi
nd
Re
rod
Ch
ev
Alu
na
tP
dB
m
m/
Iro
res
leu
an
nu
onsite transport of mined materials, diesel-fueled

Fo
tro
mi
od
Alu
Pe
Fo
equipment for materials handling, and other energy

Figure 10-17 Energy Used in Facilities HVAC and intensive mining equipment. The aluminum industry
Lighting, Electrochemical Processes, and Other Uses is the leading energy user of electrochemical
processes, totaling 172 TBtu. The chemicals industry
70% is the principal energy user for facilities HVAC and
61% lighting systems (123 TBtu), and the second largest
60% user of electrochemical processes (117 TBtu).
50% 46%
The total energy used for facilities HVAC and
40% lighting, electrochemical processes, and other systems
accounts for 14% of total U. S. manufacturing and
30% mining energy end-use. More specifically, facilities
account for 8%, electrochemical processes for 2%, and
20%
11%
other systems for 4%. Figure 10-18 shows the energy
11%
10% 6% 5%
used for these systems as a percentage of the total
2% energy end-use for each industry. The mining industry
0%
Mining Aluminum Chemicals Food and Forest Iron and Petroleum
has the largest portion of its energy end-use (61%)
& Alumina Beverage Products Steel Refining classified under “other systems”. In the aluminum
industry, 40% of its total energy end-use is consumed
Figure 10-18 Other Systems Energy Use as a
by electrolysis operations.
Percentage of Total Energy End-use
The mining and chemicals industries are the two largest users of energy for facilities and other systems . The mining
industry exhibits the most severe losses in this category, primarily because materials handling and transport systems
are highly inefficient. Chemical industry use is attributed predominately to electrochemical reactors and to facilities
HVAC and lighting.
The aluminum and alumina industry is the third largest end-user of energy for facilities and other systems, and also
exhibits substantial losses. Figure 10-19 and Table 10-8 show the energy use and losses for each industry in facilities
HVAC and lighting, in electrochemical processes, and in other uses.
267 To Processes
Aluminum & Alumina TBtu
Losses
93
Food and Beverage TBtu
463
Mining TBtu
73
Iron and Steel TBtu
99
Forest Products TBtu
60
336
Chemicals TBtu
0 100 200 300 400 500
Trillion Btu
Figure 10-19 Energy Use and Losses in Facilities and Other Uses
Table 10-8 Energy Delivered and Losses in Facilities and Other Systems
Iron
Petroleum Forest and Food and Aluminum
Chemicals Refining Products Steel Mining Beverage & Alumina
Facilities 123 50 76 56 0 87 16
Electrochemical 117 0 2 4 1 0 172
Other Uses 44 7 12 11 268 2 1
Total Energy Use
to Process/Facility 284 57 90 71 269 89 189
Total Losses 52 3 9 2 194 4 78
Industry Totals 336 60 99 73 463 93 267
11.0 Top Twenty Opportunities
11.1 Opportunity Selection Criteria
Table 11-1 Opportunity Selection Criteria A set of criteria was developed and applied to aid in
identifying potential targets for energy loss reduction and
• Magnitude of potential energy savings for recovery. These criteria, which cover a range of energy,
combined individual and multiple-industry economic, environmental, and technical aspects, are shown in
applications
• Initial applicability across more than one industry Table 11-1. The first two criteria represent the greatest
• Potential for extending results to industries not potential for energy benefits.
included in the detailed study
• Identified in existing visions and roadmaps as a Opportunities were developed in two primary categories: 1)
priority for industry
• High potential for reducing costs and increasing
those that could be achieved through research and
efficiency development opportunities (whether near-, mid-, or long-
• Feasibility and industry acceptance of possible term), and 2) those that could be achieved without R&D
technology options through adoption or implementation of existing or newly
• Environmental soundness or potential for reduced emerging technology, tools, or best practices. These two
environmental impact
approaches are outlined below.
11.2 Research, Development, and Demonstration Opportunities

Individual results of the opportunity analysis for each of the energy-intensive industries profiled in this study were
used to compile a list of potential targets in key functional categories. The functional categories correspond to some
of the major technology approaches for improving efficiency and reducing energy losses – waste heat recovery,
energy recovery, alternative energy sources – and the major industrial sources of losses. While technology options
do exist in some cases to capture these opportunities, most are not currently feasible, technically or economically, and
will require some degree of research and development to move toward industry adoption. Some options are near-
term (0-3 years), while others will require moderate (4-10 years) or extended R&D (greater than 10 years). In some
cases , a combination of research and demonstration will be required. Federal funding might be appropriate for some,
but not all, and no judgments are made regarding funding applicability or potential research performers.
The approach was to calculate the potential energy savings based on end-of-process energy losses for individual
industries (see industry-specific chapters and Appendix C). These would include the energy embodied in waste gases
and fluids (e.g., stack, flues) heat, in byproducts, in radiative and evaporative heat loss, and in any other sources of
energy losses downstream of the process. The energy savings for industries were then grouped into common
technology options, all requiring some degree of research, development and demonstration (RD&D). These
opportunities are illustrated in Table 11-2, highlighted by shading. Potential reduction in end-of-process losses
achieved through RD&D amounts to about 2.1 quads.
In addition, a conservative estimate of the potential energy savings that could be attained by recovering a percentage
of pre-process energy losses (identified via the energy footprints) was also calculated. The pre -process loss
contributions for RD&D amounted to 960 TBtu and were taken from 8 industries: chemicals, petroleum refining,
forest products, iron and steel, food and beverage, cement, aluminum, and foundries. These are shown in Table 11-2.
The basic assumptions behind each opportunity are described in detail by opportunity number in Appendix C.
Potential energy savings are summarized in Table 11-3 according to broader categories that group similar approaches
across different industries. Some of the most worthwhile opportunities exist in the recovery of waste energy from
fluids and gases in a diversity of industries from petroleum refining to metals manufacture. Technology R&D areas
include innovative energy recovery cycles, waste heat pumping, thermally activated technologies, new heat recovery
techniques, and improved energy transport and storage. Supporting technologies such as hot gas cleanup and
corrosion-resistant materials would be needed to realize these opportunities.
Drying is another energy-intensive process that generates substantial amounts of wasted energy, and could benefit
from energy recovery as well as the exploration of alternative energy sources. The potential combined impacts from
waste heat and energy recovery in drying are over 1.8 quads of energy annually. Most of these opportunities require
R&D, and could be achieved in the mid- to long-term time frame.
Table 11-2 Top 20 R&D Opportunities (Trillion Btu)
[Shading indicates opportunity that will require some degree of RD&D; no shading indicates a near-term, best practices
opportunity that could be achieved without R&D, with moderate to no federal funding]
Pre- Post-
Process Process
Energy Energy Total Energy & Cost
# Opportunity Area Industries Analyzed Savings Savings (million $) Savings
Waste heat recovery from gases and liquids in
chemicals, petroleum, and forest products,
including hot gas cleanup and dehydration of chemicals, petroleum,
1 liquid waste streams forest products 0 851 851 ($2271 MM)
forest products, chemicals,
2 Combined heat and power systems food, metals, machinery 634 0 634 ($2000 MM)
chemicals, forest products,
petroleum, steel, food
3 Advanced industrial boilers processing 400 0 400 ($1090 MM)
chemicals, forest products,
4 Heat recovery from drying processes food processing 160 217 377 ($1240 MM)
Steam best practices (improved generation,
distribution and recovery), not including
5 advanced boilers all manufacturing 310 0 310 ($850 MM)
Pump system optimization in electric motor-
6 driven systems all manufacturing *302 (98) 0 *302 (98) $1370 MM)
chemicals, petroleum,
forest products, iron and
7 Energy system integration steel, food, aluminum 110 150 260 ($860 MM)
Improved process heating/heat transfer
systems for chemicals and petroleum
industries (improved heat exchangers, new
8 materials, improved heat transport) petroleum, chemicals 121 139 260 ($860 MM)
Energy efficient motors and improved rewind
9 practices all manufacturing *258 (84) 0 *258 (84) ($1175 MM)
Waste heat recovery from gases in metals and
non-metallic minerals manufacture (excluding
10 calcining), including hot gas cleanup iron and steel, cement 0 235 235 ($1133 MM)
Energy source flexibility (heat-activated power chemicals, petroleum,
generation, waste steam for mechanical drives, forest products, iron and
11 indirect vs. direc t heat vs. steam) steel 119 75 194 ($1100 MM)
chemicals, petroleum,
forest products, iron and
Improved sensors, controls, automation, steel, food, cement,
12 robotics for energy systems aluminum 39 152 191 ($630 MM)
Improved process heating/heat transfer for
metals melting, heating, annealing (cascade
heating, batch to continuous, better heat iron and steel, metal
13 channeling, modular systems) casting, aluminum 63 127 190 ($915 MM)
Compressed air system optimization in motor-
14 driven systems all manufacturing *163 (53) 0 *163 (53) ($740 MM)
Optimized materials processing (grinding,
15 mixing, crushing) all manufacturing *145 (47) 0 *145 (47) ($660 MM)
16 Energy recovery from byproduct gases petroleum, iron and steel 0 132 132 ($750 MM)
Energy export and co-location (fuels from
pulp mills, forest biorefineries, co-location of
17 energy sources/sinks) forest products 0 105 105 ($580 MM)
Waste heat recovery from calcining (not flue
18 gases) cement, forest products 11 63 74 ($159 MM)
Heat recovery from metal quenching/cooling
19 processes iron and steel 0 57 57 ($275 MM)
food processing,
chemicals, petroleum and
20 Advanced process cooling and refrigeration forest products *57 (15) 0 *57 (15) ($212 MM)
TOTALS 2892 2303 5195 ($18,418 MM)
*Includes losses incurred during offsite generation and transmission of electricity, based on conversion factor of 10500 Btu/kWh.
Number in parenthesis does not include losses.
Research to improve both boiler systems and fired
Table 11-3 Opportunity Energy Savings
systems (process heaters) represents an important
Summarized by Broad Categories
Combined Savings
opportunity to reduce energy losses in many industrial
Category (Trillion Btu) applications. While some incremental improvements
Waste Heat and Energy Recovery 1831 can be achieved, R&D could lead to innovations that
(Opportunities 1,4,10,16-19) increase the efficiency of process heaters and heat
Improvements to Boilers, Fired 907 transfer systems substantially. Combined energy
Systems, Process Heaters and
Cooling (Opportunities 3,8,13,20) savings for these categories are over 900 TBtus
Energy System Integration and 1438 annually.
Best Practices (Opportunities 5-
7,9,14-15) Another important cross-cutting area with significant
Energy Source Flexibility and 828
Combined Heat and Power potential for energy loss reduction is sensors, controls ,
(Opportunities 2, 11) and automation. Better sensors, for example, can
Sensors, Controls, Automation 191 enable more effective control of the combustion
(Opportunity 12) process, thereby helping manufacturers meet product
Total 5195 specifications while minimizing energy use and cost.
Achieving energy source flexibility is essentially finding new or alternative ways to provide the energy required for
manufacturing processes. Technology options range from innovations such as microwaves or heat-activated power to
the substitution of steam for direct heat or vice-versa, and new energy sources such as biomass. In some cases,
technology is already available and demonstrations may be needed to prove the technical and economic feasibility of
the alternative. In others, significant research may be needed to develop and apply the technical concept in an
industrial setting.
11.3 Energy Management and Integration

In addition to opportunities achieved through technology RD&D, there are potential energy savings to be gained via
the implementation of improved energy management and energy integration strategies. For example, tools to
integrate energy sources and sinks, and assist industries in improving operating and maintenance practices, will help
to achieve these near-term opportunities.
To capture the more near-term opportunities, estimates were made of potential reductions in energy losses based on
various sources. These include the system losses calculated in the energy footprint analysis for individual industries,
a motor opportunities study conducted by Oak Ridge National Laboratory [ORNL 1998], and a national roadmap
developed for combined heat and power [USCHPA 2001]. The results are opportunities with no shading in Table 11-
2. The assumptions and methodology behind these opportunities are provided in more detail by opportunity number
in Appendix C. Overall, the combined energy loss reductions for near-term opportunity areas total more three quads
annually.
There are also near- to long-term opportunities for increased use of CHP in industrial facilities. CHP represents a
means of reducing energy losses both onsite and offsite. By displacing purchased electricity with more efficiently
generated onsite energy, industry meets its energy needs more effectively and reduces its bottom line. As shown in
Table 11-2, large potential energy savings are possible from the increased use of combined heat and power (CHP)
systems in the industrial sector, specifically in the forest products, chemicals, metals, and machinery industries.
Savings are based on the potential adoption of 54 GW of new CHP capacity by 2020.
The optimization of motor-driven systems such as pumps, compressors, and materials processors (grinders, mixers,
crushers, sizers), as well as upgrading motors and improving rewind practices, represents a unique opportunity to
reduce energy losses both within and outside the plant boundary. Potential energy savings are estimated to total
around 1.4 quads annually (see Table 11-3). Reducing electricity demand in the plant translates into less electricity
generated at utilities, concurrently reducing generation and transmission losses.
Energy system integration involves a diversity of methods for integrating energy sources and sinks, for integration of
energy requirements to minimize the cost of operations, and for part-load cycling and load management. Energy
savings are based on a reduction in pre- and post-process energy losses in six energy-intensive industries (petroleum,
chemicals, forest products, iron and steel, food processing, and aluminum).
11.4 Cross-Industry Opportunities
Using the top 20 opportunities identified, a matrix of cross-cutting application areas was developed for all 16 of the
industrial sectors covered in the original energy footprint analysis (see Table 11-4). The matrix illustrates the
potential for the widespread extension of new energy systems (steam and fired systems) technology and the capability
to replicate energy loss reductions across U.S. industry.
The most industry-wide opportunities exist in a variety of industries in the recovery of waste heat from exit gases,
including flue and stack gases, flared gases, vent gases, metal heating, dryer vents, and combustion gases. These are
available throughout a range of temperatures, could have substantial energy content, are often contaminated, and may
include dilute concentrations of valuable products that are difficult to separate and recover and cannot be vented
directly to the atmosphere.
Another important cross-cutting area is improvements to heat transfer systems. This incorporates a wide range of
technologies, with the most important being advanced materials (both refractories and materials of construction),
innovative heat exchanger designs, improved insulation, new ideas for integration of heat sources and sinks, modular
heat transfer systems, oxy -fuel firing, and others.
Table 11-4 Cross-Industry Technology Matrix
13. Improved process heating/heat transfer/

10. Waste heat recovery/ gases/ metals and
8. Improved process heating/ heat transfer/
liquids/chemicals, petroleum, forest
9. Efficient motors/rewind practices
16. Energy recovery/ byproduct gas

15. Optimized materials processing
19. Heat recovery/metal quenching/

1. Waste heat recovery/ gases and
17. Energy export and co -location
18. Waste heat recovery/calcining

14. Compressed air optimization
12. Improved sensors, controls
20. Advanced process cooling/

3. Advanced industrial boilers
6. Pump system optimization
7. Energy system integration

4. Heat recovery from drying
2. Combined heat and power
11. Energy source flexibility

5. Steam best practices
metals melting, heating

chemicals, petroleum
refrigeration
minerals
products
cooling
Petroleum
Refining
Chemicals
Forest Products
Iron and Steel
Food and
Beverage
Cement
Heavy Machinery
Mining
Textiles
Transportation
Equipment
Aluminum &
Alumina
Foundries
Plastics &
Rubbers
Glass & Glass
Products
Fabricated
Metals
Computers,
Electronics
Note: Shading indicates opportunity is applicable to that industry.
References
Energy Footprint Data Sources
ADL 2000 Overview of Energy Flow for Industries in Standard Industrial Classifications 20-39, Arthur D.
Little, Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE), Industrial Technologies Program (ITP),
December 2000.
EIA 1978 End-use Energy Consumption Database: Series I Tables, Mining Tables, U.S. DOE, Energy
Information Administration (EIA), June 1978.
Foss 1998 Foss, R. Scott, “Compressed Air: A Facilities Perspective,” Applied Technology Publications,
1998, Maintenance Technology Magazine.
Hooper 2002 “How Efficient is Your Steam Distribution System?” Frederic A. Hooper and Ronald D. Gillette,
2002, www.swopnet.com/engr/stm/steam_dist_eff.html
MECS 1998 1998 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), U.S. DOE EIA.
Mining 2002 Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Mining Industry, BCS, Incorporated, for the U.S.
DOE, 2002.
Motors 2003 Personal communication with experts on efficiencies of motor-driven systems at Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (ORNL) and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL).
NAICS 1997 North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS), Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), 1997.
ORAU 1981 Industrial Energy Use Data Book , Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Garland STM Press, New
York, NY, 1981.
ORNL 1998 U.S. Industrial Motor Systems Market Opportunities Assessment, ORNL/Xenergy, for the U.S.
DOE, Industrial Technologies Program, 1998.
PNNL 1999 Steam Trap Performance Assessment, PNNL, July 1999.
Other Resources
ACEEE 1999 “Combined Heat And Power: Capturing Wasted Energy, “R. Neal Elliott and Mark Spurr .
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). May 1999.
ASM 2001 Annual Survey of Manufactures 2001, Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries, U.S.
Department of Commerce, January, 2003.
Bandwidth 2004 Chemical Bandwidth Study Energy Analysis: A Powerful Tool for Identifying Process
Inefficiencies in the U.S. Chemical Industry, JPV International, Inc and Psage Research, LLC, for
U.S. DOE-ITP, December 2004.
DOE/EIA 2003 Annual Energy Statistics, Energy Consumption By Sector, U.S. DOE-EIA, www.eia.doe.gov
EI 2004a Engineering and Economic Analysis Tool: “Super Boilers”, Energetics, Inc. for the U.S. DOE,
Government Performance Reporting Act FY 2006 submissions, June 2004.
EIA 2003 Petroleum Supply Annual 2003, Volume I, U.S. DOE-EIA.
EIA 2002 Annual Energy Review 2001, U.S. DOE-EIA, 2002.
RDC 2002 Steam System Opportunity Assessment for the Pulp and Paper, Chemical, Manufacturing, and
Petroleum Refining Industries, Resource Dynamics Corporation, for U.S. DOE Industrial
Technologies Program.
USCHPA 2001 National CHP Roadmap, U.S. Combined Heat and Power Association, with the U.S. DOE and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, March 2001 and updates.
Appendix A
Energy Footprints and

Sample Calculations
In alphabetical order, by industry
All Manufacturing
Alumina and Aluminum
Cement
Chemicals
Computers, Electronics, and Electrical Equipment
Fabricated Metals
Food and Beverage
Forest Products
Foundries
Glass and Glass Products
Heavy Machinery
Mining
Petroleum Refining
Plastics and Rubber
Steel Industry
Textiles
Transportation Equipment
Sample Calculations: Forest Products
Distribution U.S. Manufacturing Energy Footprint:
losses 440 24658 Trillion Btu
Energy Export 79
Facilities/HVAC/Lighting 1405
Fossil Process Energy Systems
Energy Solar/Geo- Recycle Energy
thermal/Wind
Supply Energy 12 Steam, Recycle Energy
14660 heat By-product fuels and
feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion
Energy 13561 Process
Supply Central Energy Energy Use
• Process Heating (10649) 10699
17762 Generation/ (heat exchangers, condensers, fired
Utilities 17774 Energy • Separations
heaters, heat pumps)
•Fuels Distribution • Furnaces
• Steam Plant 16375 • Process Cooling/
•Purchased • Melters
(4934) Refrigeration (255)
Electricity • Reactors
• Fossil Power
and Steam • Steam Piping • Electrochemical (346) • Electrolytic Cells
(463)
• Renewable Power • Fuel Piping • Machine Drives (2074) • Drying
(12) • Transmission Lines (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers, • Mixing/Grinding
• Direct Fuel Supply conveyors, mixers) • Forming
Utility/
(7864) • Onsite Transport (118) • Fabrication
Power
• Purchased • Energy Storage
Plant Electricity (3102) • Other (119) • Waste Handling
3102
Energy Losses Energy Losses
Losses in boilers and Losses in pipes, valves, Losses due to equipment
electricity generation traps, electrical inefficiency (motors, Process energy losses
Electricity losses 1399 transmission lines 1330 mechanical drive, waste from waste heat, flared
generation and heat) 2862 gases, by-products
transmission TBD
losses 6444 Industrial Plant Boundary
U.S. Manufacturing Sector Total Energy Input: 24658 Trillion Btu
Central Energy Plant Energy Distribution Energy Conversion Process Energy
17774 16375 13561 10699

Distribution Losses 1330
Onsite Transport 118 Equipment
Losses
Facilities 1405 (5 Electric) Losses 1746
440
Fuel 7864 824 Process Heating
6672 (356 Electric)
Purchased Central 4524 Other 119
Fuels (17 Electric)
Boilers
14660 Steam 4934 Steam 3977 (30 Electric)
Combined
Heat/Power Process Cooling 255
Process Use
410 (42 Fuel, 213 Electric)
Electricity
Electrochemical 346
Purchased 463 581
Electricity
Electricity Pumps 514
3102
Motor-Driven 2074
Electricity
(1843 Electric, 231 Fuel)

to Fans 284
Solar/Geo- Processes
thermal/Wind 2810 Compressed Air 328
Energy 12 Refrigeration 139
Losses
Fuel
6444 Boiler Losses Materials Handling 253

1233
Power Losses Materials Processing 467
166
Other Systems 89
Industrial Plant Boundary Motor Losses 89

System Losses 1027
Energy Export 79
Distribution NAICS 3313 Aluminum and Alumina
losses 6 Energy Footprint: 958 Trillion Btu
Energy Recycle Energy
Supply Steam, Recycle Energy
feedstocks, heat
Energy Process
Central Energy Energy Conversion Energy Use
Supply
441 Generation/ 396 272
Energy
Utilities 441 • Process Heating (190)
•Fuels Distribution (heat exchangers, condensers, fired • Electrolytic cells
• Steam Plant (33) 432 heaters, heat pumps) • Anode Production
•Purchased • Fossil Power (3))
Electricity • Refining
• Direct Fuel Supply • Electrochemical (172)
and Steam • Steam Piping • Rolling/Extrusion
(150) • Machine Drives (33) • Scrap Treatment/
• Purchased • Fuel Piping (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers,
• Transmission Casting
Electricity (246) conveyors, mixers)
• Waste Handling
Utility/ Lines
• Onsite Transport (1)
Power
Plant
246
transmission TBD
NAICS 3313 Aluminum and Alumina Total Energy Input: 958 Trillion Btu
441 432 396 272

Equipment
Losses 6 Onsite Transport 1 Losses 110
Facilities 16
Fuel 150 6 Fired Heaters 164

(28 Electric)
Purchased Central 30
Fossil Boilers
Fuels Steam 33 Steam 26
195 Combined
Heat/Power
Process Use
3
Electrochemical 172
Electricity
Purchased 3 10
Electricity
Electricity Pumps 2.9
246 Electricity
Motor-Driven 33
to Fans 5.0

Processes
231 Compressed Air 4.7
Refrigeration <0.1
Losses
Fuel
511 Boiler Materials Handling 15.5

Losses 8
Materials Processing 4.2
Power
Losses 1 Other Systems 0.6

System Losses 13
Distribution NAICS 327310 Cement Total Energy Input:
feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion
Energy 342
Supply Central Energy
Generation/ • Process Heating (297)
355 Energy (heat exchangers, condensers, fired Process
Utilities 355 heaters, heat pumps)
•Fuels Distribution Energy Use
• Steam Plant (1) 353 • Process Cooling/ 280
•Purchased
• Fossil Power (2) Refrigeration (1)
Electricity • Pyroprocessing
• Direct Fuel Supply
and Steam • Steam Piping • Machine Drives (40) • Drying
(308) (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers,
• Fuel Piping • Mixing
• Purchased conveyors, mixers)
Electricity (39) • Transmission Lines • Grinding
Utility/ • Onsite Transport (3) • Waste Handling
Power • Other (1)
Plant
39
transmission TBD
NAICS 327310 Cement Total Energy Input: 446 Trillion Btu
355 353 342 280

Equipment
Losses
Facilities 2 Onsite Transport 3 Losses 46
10
Fuel 311 Fired Heaters 296
(4 Electric)
Purchased Other 1
Fuels
316 Central Steam 0.8 Steam 0.6
Boilers
Process Use
Onsite
Power
2 Process Cooling 1
Electricity
Purchased
2
Electricity
Electricity Pumps 3
39 Electricity
Motor-Driven 40
to Fans 6

Processes
38 Compressed Air 6
Refrigeration <0.05
Losses
Fuel
81 Boiler Materials Handling 19

Losses 0.2
Materials Processing 5
Power
Losses 2 Other Systems 1

System Losses 14
Distribution
NAICS 325 Chemicals Total Energy
losses 94 Energy Export 25 Supply: 5074 Trillion Btu
Electricity
Supply Recycle Energy
3127 By-product fuels and
Steam,
feedstocks, heat
heat
Energy Energy Conversion Process

Supply 2877 Energy Use
3729 Central Energy • Process Heating (2154)
2221
Energy
Generation/ (steam systems, heat exchangers, • Distillation
•Fuels Distribution reboilers, condensers, fired heaters,
Utilities 3729 3347 heat pumps)
• Reactors
•Purchased
• Steam Crackers
Electricity • Steam Plant • Process Cooling/ • Electrolytic Cells
and Steam (1312) • Steam Piping Refrigeration (70) • Other Separations
• Power Generation • Fuel Piping
• Electrochemical (136) • Mixing/Agitation
(156) • Transmission Lines
• Energy Storage
Utility/ • Direct Fuel Supply • Machine Drives (464)
• Waste Handling
Power • Purchased conveyors, mixers)
Plant Electricity (602) • Other (53)
602
Losses in boilers and Losses in pipes, valves, Losses due to equipment Losses from waste
electricity generation traps, electrical inefficiency (motors, heat, flared gases, by-
losses 382 transmission lines 322 mechanical drive, waste products TBD
Electricity
generation and heat) 656
transmission
losses 1251
Chemical/Petrochemical Plant Boundary
NAICS 325 Chemicals Total Energy Input: 5074 Trillion Btu
3729 3347 2877 2221
Distribution Losses 322 Equipment

Losses Losses 355
94 Facilities 123 Onsite Transport 5
Fuel 1277 48
Fired Heaters 1099
(17 Electric)
Fuels Other 48 (1 Electric)
Boilers
3127 1312 Steam 1055 (5 Electric)
Combined
Process Use
148 (15 Fuel, 55 Electric)
Electricity 75 Electrochemical 136

Purchased 156
Pumps 120
Electricity
Electricity
602 Electricity
Motor-Driven 464
Fans 55

to
Processes
658 Compressed Air 129
Losses Refrigeration 36
Fuel
1251 Boiler
Materials Handling 6
Losses 328
Power Materials Processing 110
Losses 54
Other 8
Plant Boundary Motor Losses 26
Energy Export 25 System Losses 275
Distribution NAICS 334, 335 Computers, Electronics, Appliances,
losses 4 Electrical Equipment Total Energy Input: 728 Trillion Btu
Energy Export 0.35
feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion
Energy 183 Process
Generation/ • Process Heating (100) 134
321 Energy (steam systems, heat exchangers,
Utilities 321 fired heaters, heat pumps) • Assembly and
•Fuels Distribution Fabrication
42
• Steam Plant (42) • Process Cooling/
•Purchased 311 • Semiconductor,
• Fossil Power Refrigeration (17) Circuit Board
Electricity (<0.4)
and Steam • Steam Piping • Electrochemical (5) Processes
• Direct Fuel Supply • Laminating
(75) • Fuel Piping • Machine Drives (53)
• Transmission Lines • Melting
• Purchased (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers,
conveyors, mixers)
• Welding
Utility/ Electricity (194)
• Electrolytic Cells
Power • Onsite Transport (1) • Drying
Plant • Other (7) • Waste Handling
194
transmission TBD
NAICS 334, 335 Computers, Electronics, Appliances, Electrical Equipment Total Energy Input: 728 Trillion Btu
321 311 183 134

Equipment
Losses Onsite Transport 1
Facilities 112
Losses 18
4
Fuel 75 29 Fired Heaters
65 (27 Electric)
Purchased Central Steam 35 (1 Electric)
Fuels Boilers
127 Steam 42
Electrochemical 5
Onsite
Power Process Cooling 17
Process Use
(1 fuel)
Electricity 83 Other 7 (3 fuel)
Purchased <0.4
Electricity
Electricity Pumps 9
194 Electricity
Motor-Driven 53
to Fans 6

Processes
Refrigeration 3
Losses
Fuel

10
Power Losses
<0.4 Other Systems 2

Energy Export 0.35 System Losses 29
Distribution NAICS 332 Fabricated Metals
losses 8 Total Energy Input: 815 Trillion Btu
Energy Export 0.2
feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion
Energy 321 Process
Generation/ • Process Heating (205)
441 (steam systems, heat exchangers, 229
Utilities 441 Energy
fired heaters, heat pumps)
•Fuels Distribution • Casts/Molds
• Steam Plant (28) 434 • Process Cooling/ • Electrolytic Cells
•Purchased
• Direct Fuel Supply Refrigeration (3) • Metal Forming
Electricity (230)
and Steam • Steam Piping • Electrochemical (8) • Fabrication
• Purchased • Waste Handling
Electricity (176) • Fuel Piping • Machine Drives (99)
• Transmission Lines (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers,
Utility/ conveyors)
Power • Onsite Transport (3)

Plant • Other (3)
176
Losses in boilers and Losses in pipes, valves, Losses due to equipment Process energy losses
electricity generation traps, electrical inefficiency (motors, from waste heat, flared
Electricity losses 7 transmission lines 18 mechanical drive, waste gases, by-products
generation and heat) 92 TBD
transmission
NAICS 332 Fabricated Metals Total Energy Input: 815 Trillion Btu
441 434 321 229

Losses Equipment
8 Facilities 95
Onsite Transport 3 Losses 34

(29 Electric)
Purchased Steam 23
Central
Fuels Steam 28
265 Boilers
Electrochemical 8
Process Use
40 Process Cooling 3
Direct Other 3 (2 Fuel)
Purchased Electricity 176
Electricity
176 Electricity
Motor-Driven 99
to Fans 13

Processes
Boiler 131 Compressed Air 15
Losses 7 Refrigeration 7
Losses
Fuel
366 Materials Handling 10
Other Systems 4

Energy Export 0.2 System Losses 54
NAICS 311 and 312 Food and Beverage Total Energy
Distribution
Supply for Heat and Power: 1685 Trillion Btu
losses 28
Energy Export 4
Supply Solar/Geothermal/ Steam, Recycle Energy
915 Wind Energy 0.1 heat By-product fuels and
feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion
Energy 824 Process
• Process Heating (613)
1156 Generation/ (steam systems, heat exchangers, 658
condensers, fired heaters, heat • Concentration
•Fuels Distribution pumps) • Crystallization
• Steam Plant 1028
•Purchased • Process Cooling/ • Drying/Evaporation
(485)
Electricity Refrigeration (69) • Distillation
• Fossil Power
and Steam • Steam Piping • Freezing
(21) • Machine Drives (136)
• Direct Fuel • Fuel Piping • Melting
(pumps, compressors, fans, blowers,
Supply (281) • Transmission Lines conveyors, mixers) • Mixing/Stirring
Utility/ • Purchased • Grinding
Electricity (241) • Packaging
Power
• Other (3) • Energy Storage
Plant
• Waste Handling
241
electricity generation traps, electrical inefficiency (motors, Losses from waste
Electricity losses 128 transmission lines 113 mechanical drive, waste heat, flared gases, by-
generation and heat) 166 products TBD
transmission
losses 501
NAICS 311 and 312 Food and Beverage Total Energy Input: 1685 Trillion Btu
1156 1028 824 658

Equipment
Losses
28
281 43 Fired Heaters 221
(6 Electric)
Purchased Central 461 Other 3
Fuels Boilers
Combined
Process Use
24
(3 Fuel, 66 Electric)
Electricity 44
Purchased 21 Pumps 22
Electricity
Electricity
Motor-Driven 136
Fans 10

241 Electricity
Solar/Geother- to Compressed Air 11
Processes
mal/Wind 210
Energy 0.1 Refrigeration 40
Losses
Fuel
501 Boiler Losses 121
Power Losses 7 Materials Processing 36
Other Systems 9
Motor Losses 6
Industrial Plant Boundary System Losses 57
Energy Export 4
Distribution NAICS 321 and 322 Forest Products
losses 88 Energy Footprint: 4039 Trillion Btu
Energy Export 24
Fossil & Process Energy Systems
Biomass Solar/Geo- Recycle Energy
thermal/Wind
Fuels Energy 9 Steam, Recycle Energy
feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion
Energy 2168 Process
3263 Energy (heat exchangers, condensers, fired
Utilities 3272 heaters, heat pumps) • Digesters
• Fuels Distribution • Gasifiers
• Steam Plant 2670 • Process Cooling/
•Purchased • Pulping Processes
(1895) Refrigeration (8)
Electricity • Bleaching
• Fossil & Biomass
and Steam • Steam Piping • Electrochemical (2) • Evaporators
Power (188)
• Renewable Power • Fuel Piping • Machine Drives (413) • Refiners
(9) • Transmission Lines (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers, • Chemical Recovery
Utility/ • Direct Fuel Supply conveyors, mixers) • Energy Recovery
(251) • Onsite Transport (15) • Energy Storage
Power
• Purchased • Waste Handling
Plant Electricity (327) • Other (6)
327
transmission TBD
NAICS 321 and 322 Forest Products Total Energy Input: 4039 Trillion Btu
3272 2670 2168 1698

Equipment
Facilities 76 Losses 268
88
196(11 Electric)
Fossil & Central 1734 Other 6 (1 Electric)
Biomass Boilers
Fuels Steam 1895 Steam 1528 (19 Electric)
2936 Combined
Process Use
161
( 7 Electric)
Electricity
Electrochemical 2
Purchased 188 50
Electricity
327 Electricity
Motor-Driven 429
Fans 82

to
Energy 9 Refrigeration 20
Losses
Fuel
679 Boiler Materials Handling 30

Losses 535
Power
Losses 67 Other Systems 44

System Losses 184
Energy Export 24
Distribution NAICS 3315 Foundries Total Energy Input:
feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion
Energy 184 Process
Utilities fired heaters, heat pumps)
•Fuels Distribution • Moldmaking and
233 • Process Cooling/
•Purchased 229 Coremaking
• Steam Plant Refrigeration (1) • Cupola and
Electricity
and Steam (18) • Steam Piping • Electrochemical (1) Electric Arc
• Direct Fuel Supply • Fuel Piping Furnaces
(148) • Machine Drives (19) • Refining/Casting
• Transmission Lines (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers,
• Purchased conveyors, mixers) • Finishing
Utility/ Electricity (63) • Energy
Power • Onsite Transport (1) Recovery
63
transmission TBD
NAICS 3315 Foundries Total Energy Input: 369 Trillion Btu
233 229 184 151

Equipment
Losses
5
(31 Electric)
Purchased Steam
Fuels 18 Steam 14
Central
170 Boilers
Process Cooling 1
Process Use
Other 1
10 Electrochemical 1
Purchased Electricity
Electricity
Electricity
63 Electricity Pumps 2
Motor-Driven 19
to

Processes Fans 3
51
Boiler Compressed Air 3
Losses Losses 4
Fuel
131 Materials Handling 9
* Data for onsite generation is withheld to Other Systems <0.5

avoid disclosing data for individual facilities.
However, it is estimated to be very small. A
Motor Losses 1
small amount of electricity is also Industrial Plant Boundary
transported offsite (less than 40 billion Btu). System Losses 7
NAICS 3272 and 3296 Glass & Glass Products, Fiber Glass
Distribution
Total Associated Energy: 372 Trillion Btu
losses 6
Energy Recovered Heat
Supply
200 Recovered Heat
Steam,
heat
Energy Energy Conversion

Required 232
254 Central Energy Energy • Process Heating (207)
(steam systems, heat exchangers,
Process
•Fuels Generation/ Distribution Energy Use
heat pumps, fired furnaces)
•Purchased
Utilities 253 187
254 • Steam Piping • Process Cooling (2)
Electricity
and Steam • Steam Plant (4) • Fuel Piping • Machine Drives (22) • Batch Handling
• Direct Fuel Supply • Transmission Lines (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers, • Melting
(195) conveyors, mixers)
• Forming
• Purchased • Other (1) • Post Forming
Utility/ Electricity (54)
Power
Plant 54 Energy Losses
Losses in pipes, valves, Energy Losses
traps, electrical Losses due to equipment Losses from waste
Boiler Losses 1 transmission lines 8 inefficiency (motors, heat, flared gases, by-
Electricity mechanical drive, waste products TBD
transmission
losses 112
Glass Plant Boundary
Sources: Based on 1998 MECS data for 3272 and 1994 MECS data for Fiber Glass (NAICS 3296).
NAICS 3272 and 3296 Glass & Glass Products, Fiber Glass Total As sociated Energy: 372 Trillion Btu
254 253 232 187

Losses 32
Losses 6
7 6 Fired Heaters
204 (23 Electric)
Direct Fuel 195 Other Fuel 3
Purchased
4 Steam 3
Process Use
Fuels Steam Plant
200
Process Cooling 2
Pumps 4
Motor-Driven 22
Purchased

Electricity 54 Fans 3
Electricity
54 Compressed Air 3
Electricity to
Processes
Refrigeration 2
47
Boiler
Losses 1 Materials Handling 2
Losses
112 Materials Processing 7
Other 1
Glass Plant Boundary
Motor Losses 1
Sources: Based on 1998 MECS data for 3272 and 1994 MECS data for Fiber Glass (NAICS 3296).
System Losses 12
Distribution NAICS 333 Heavy Machinery (farm, mining, industrial
losses 4 equipment) Total Energy Input: 416 Trillion Btu
Energy Export <02
feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion
Energy 106 Process
Utilities 213 fired heaters, heat pumps) • Multiple Metal
•Fuels Distribution Forming Processes
• Steam Plant (19) 207 • Process Cooling/ • Forging
•Purchased • Fossil Power (1) Refrigeration (3) • Stamping
Electricity
• Direct Fuel Supply • Bending
and Steam • Steam Piping • Electrochemical (1)
(91)
• Fuel Piping • Machining
• Purchased • Machine Drives (45)
Electricity (96) • Transmission Lines (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers, • Welding
Utility/ conveyors, mixers) • Painting/Coating
• Assembly
Power • Onsite Transport (2)
• Electrolytic Cells
96
transmission TBD
NAICS 333 Heavy Machinery (farm, mining, industrial equipment) Total Energy Input: 416 Trillion Btu
213 207 106 70

Equipment
Facilities 91
Losses 10
4
38 (9 Electric)
Purchased Central Steam 16 (1 Electric)
Fuels Boilers
117 Steam 19
Electrochemical 1
Onsite
Power
Process Use
Process Cooling 3
Electricity 38 Other 1
Purchased 1
Electricity
Electricity Pumps 9
96 Electricity
Motor-Driven 45
to Fans 6

Processes
56 Compressed Air 7
Refrigeration 3
Losses
Fuel

5
Power Losses
0.8 Other Systems 2

Energy Export <0.2 System Losses 24
Distribution MINING: NAICS 212 Coal, Metal Ore, and Nonmetallic Mineral
losses 15 Mining Total Energy Input: 1273 Trillion Btu
Energy Export ~0.01

feedstocks, heat

Supply Central Energy 723 Energy Use
753 Generation/ 442
Energy • Process Heating (99)
Utilities 753 (steam systems, heat exchangers,
•Fuels Distribution • Furnaces
• Steam Plant (3) preheaters, fired heaters)
•Purchased 736 • Smelters
• Onsite Power • Electrochemical (1)
Electricity • Calciners
(19)
and Steam • Direct Fuel Supply • Steam Piping • Machine Drives (177) • Electrolytic Cells
(471) • Fuel Piping (pumps, conveyors, crushing, • Mixers/Grinders
grinding, drilling) • Waste Handling
• Purchased • Transmission Lines
Utility/ Electricity (243) • Other Equipment, Mine
Power Transport (446)
Plant
243
Losses in boilers and Losses in pipes, valves, Losses due to equipment Process energy losses
electricity generation traps, electrical inefficiency (motors, from waste heat, flared
Electricity 17 transmission lines 13 mechanical drive, waste gases, other mechanical
generation and heat) 281 losses TBD
transmission
losses 505 Mining Operation Boundary
MINING: NAICS 212 Coal, Metal Ore, and Nonmetallic Mineral Mining Total Energy Input: 1273
Trillion Btu Central Energy Plant Energy Distribution Energy Conversion Process Energy
753 736 723 442
Equipment
Losses
Distribution Losses 13 Losses 193
15
Fuel 471 Fired Heaters 96
Purchased Steam 3
Fuels Boilers
510 Steam 3
Other (transport,
Onsite mining equipment) 446
Power
Process Use
Electrochemical 1
Purchased Electricity 19
Electricity
Electricity
Motor-Driven 177
Electricity
243

Pumps 60
to
Processes
254
Materials Handling and

Losses Processing 117
Fuel
505 Boiler Losses 1

Power Losses 16
Motor Losses 8
System Losses 80
Mine Operation Boundary

Energy Export ~ 0.01
NAICS 324110 Petroleum Refining Total Energy Input:
Distribution
3835 Trillion Btu
losses 101
Energy Export 1
feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion
Energy 2956 Process
• Process Heating (2747)
3478 Generation/ (steam systems, heat exchangers, 2442
condensers, fired heaters, heat • Distillation
•Fuels Distribution pumps) • Thermal Cracking
• Steam Plant 3249
•Purchased • Process Cooling (21) and Coking
(849)
Electricity • Catalytic Cracking
• Fossil Power • Machine Drives (178)
and Steam • Steam Piping • Hydrotreating
• Direct Fuel • Fuel Piping conveyors, mixers) • Alkylation
Supply (2225) • Transmission Lines • Isomerization
• Onsite Transport (3) • Hydrogen
Utility/ • Purchased
Electricity (123) • Other (7) Production
Power • Energy Storage
Plant • Waste Handling
123
transmission
losses 256
NAICS 334110 Petroleum Refining Total Energy Input: 3835 Trillion Btu
3478 3249 2956 2442

Equipment
Losses
101
2225 38 Fired Heaters
2067 (1 Electric)
Purchased Central 810 Other 7 (1 Electric)
Fuels Boilers
Combined
Process Use
39
Electricity
Purchased 52 12 Pumps 105
Electricity
Electricity
Motor-Driven 178
Fans 17

123 Electricity
to Compressed Air 27
Processes
157 Refrigeration 1
Losses Materials Handling 5

Fuel
256 Boiler Losses 212

Power Losses 17 Materials Processing 20
Other Systems 3
Motor Losses 8
Industrial Plant Boundary System Losses 89
Energy Export 1
NAICS 326 Plastics and Rubber Products Total Energy Supply for
Distribution
Heat and Power: 711 Trillion Btu
losses 4
Energy Export <0.5
feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion
Energy 231 Process
Supply Energy Use
Central Energy • Process Heating (115)
327 (steam systems, heat exchangers, 156
Generation/ Energy
condensers, fired heaters, heat • Separations
•Fuels
Utilities 327 Distribution pumps) • Melters
•Purchased 310 • Dryers
• Steam Plant (64) • Process Cooling/
Electricity Refrigeration (17) • Mixing/Grinding
• Fossil Power (1)
and Steam • Steam Piping • Forming/Molding
• Direct Fuel Supply • Machine Drives (98)
(62) • Fuel Piping • Fabrication
(pumps, compressors, fans, blowers,
• Purchased • Transmission Lines conveyors, mixers) • Energy Storage
Utility/ Electricity (183) • Waste Handling
Power
Plant • Other (1)
183
transmission
losses 380
NAICS 326 Plastics and Rubber Products Total Energy Input: 711 Trillion Btu
327 310 231 156

Losses Equipment
4 Facilities 58 Onsite Transport 3
Losses 21
62 22 Fired Heaters 60
(30 Electric)
Fuels Other 1
Boilers
Combined
Process Use
1
Electricity 36
Purchased 1
183 Electricity
Motor-Driven 98
to Fans 13

Processes
Refrigeration 7
Losses
380 Boiler Losses 16 Materials Handling 12
Power Losses 1
Other Systems 4

System Losses 50
Energy Export < 0.5
Distribution
NAICS 33111 Total Steel Industry Energy Input: 2056 Trillion Btu*
losses 45 Energy Export ~0
Electricity
Steam,
feedstocks, heat
heat

1672 Central Energy • Process Heating (1329)
1143
Energy
Generation/ (steam systems, coke ovens, blast
•Fuels Distribution furnaces, reheat furnaces)
• Cokemaking
•Purchased
Utilities 1672 1647 • Ironmaking
• Process Cooling/ • Steelmaking
Electricity • Steam Plant (77) Refrigeration (4) • Ladle refining
and Steam • Power Generation • Steam Piping
• Electrochemical (5) • Casting
(18) • Fuel Piping
• Reheating
• Direct Fuel Supply • Transmission Lines • Machine Drives (122) • Forming
Utility/ (1372) (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers,
conveyors, grinders)
• Finishing
• Purchased
Power Electricity (180)
• Waste Handling
Plant • Other (12)
163
electricity generation traps, electrical inefficiency (motors, heat, by-products
losses 25 transmission lines 62 mechanical drive, waste TBD
Electricity
transmission
losses 339*
Steel Plant Boundary
Distribution
Total EAF Steel Industry Energy Supply: 703 Trillion Btu
Electricity
Steam,
feedstocks, heat
heat

476 Central Energy • Process Heat/Steam (360)
312
Energy
Generation/ (Steelmaking – 106; Ladle furnace –
•Fuels Distribution 15; Reheating – 75; Clean/anneal –
• Steelmaking - 85
•Purchased
Utilities 476 465 15; Heat treating – 20; Other
• Ladle furnace - 13
process heating – 129) • Reheating - 56
Electricity • Steam Plant (35) • Clean/anneal - 13
and Steam • Power Generation • Steam Piping • Process Cooling/
• Heat treating - 17
(8) • Fuel Piping Refrigeration (2)
• Other - 109
• Direct Fuel Supply • Transmission Lines • Electrochemical (2)
Utility/ (318)
• Purchased • Machine Drives (52)
Power Electricity (104) (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers,
Plant conveyors, grinders)
104 • Other (5)
Electricity
transmission
losses 216
Distribution
Total Integrated Steel Industry Energy Supply: 1353 Trillion Btu
Electricity
Steam,
feedstocks, heat
heat
Energy Energy Conversion Process Energy

Supply 1112 Use 835
1196 Central Energy Energy • Process Heat/Steam (1031) • Sintering - 15;
Cokemaking - 44;
Generation/ (Sintering - 18; Cokemaking - 52;
•Fuels Distribution Ironmaking - 641; Steelmaking - 53;
Ironmaking - 481;
Utilities 1196 Steelmaking - 53;
•Purchased 1182 Ladle furnace - 18; Reheating - 90; Ladle furnace - 15;
Electricity Clean/anneal - 18; Heat treating - Reheating - 68;
• Steam Plant (42) 24; Other process heating - 117)
and Steam Clean/anneal - 15;
• Power Generation • Steam Piping Heat treating - 21;
(10) • Fuel Piping • Process Cooling/ Refrig (2) Other process heating
• Direct Fuel Supply • Transmission Lines - 99; Comp air - 2;
• Electrochemical (3) Pumps - 3; Fans - 6;
Utility/ (1071) Grind - 4; Other - 8
• Purchased • Machine Drive (69) (Comp air
Power Electricity (59)
- 9; Pumps - 6; Fans - 10; Crush/
Plant 59 grind - 35; Other - 9)
• Other (7)
Electricity
transmission
losses 123
NAICS 33111 Total Steel Industry Energy Input: 2056 Trillion Btu*
Central Energy Plant Energy Distribution Energy Conversion
1672 1647 1529 1143

Losses Losses 299
45 Facilities 56
1389 36 Fired Heaters
1329 (27 Electric)
Purchased Central 59 Other Systems 12 (10 fuel, 2 elec)
Fuels Boilers
1509 77 Steam 62
Combined
Process Use
18
Electricity Electrochemical 5
Purchased 18 20
Electricity Compressed Air 17
163 Electricity
Motor-Driven 122
to

Processes
Refrigeration 0
161
Pumps 11
Losses 339*
Boiler/Power Fans 18
* Does not include
most of the Losses 25
inefficiencies on Materials Handling 60
the electric grid
caused by Other 16
steelmaking highly
varying loads
Motor Losses 7
Plant Boundary
System Losses 80
Energy Export ~0
Distribution NAICS 313, 314, 315, 316 Textiles Total Energy
losses 7 Input: 659 Trillion Btu
Energy Solar/Geo- Recycle Energy
thermal/Wind
Supply Energy 0.14 Steam, Recycle Energy
feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion
Energy 249 Process
Utilities 359 condensers, fired heaters, heat • Separations
•Fuels Distribution pumps) • Drying
• Steam Plant (105) 333
•Purchased • Process Cooling/ • Dyeing
• Fossil Power
Electricity Refrigeration (12) • Spinning
(0.5)
and Steam • Renewable Power • Steam Piping • Weaving
• Fuel Piping • Machine Drives (85) • Assembly
(0.14) (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers,
• Direct Fuel Supply • Transmission Lines conveyors, mixers)
• Finishing
Utility/ (86) • Waste Handling
• Other (5)
Power • Purchased
Plant Electricity (141)
141
transmission TBD
NAICS 313, 314, 315, 316 Textiles Total Energy Input: 659 Trillion Btu
359 333 249 175

Equipment
Losses
Facilities 56
Losses 24
7
62 (7 Electric)
Purchased Central 104.5
Fuels Boilers
Combined
Process Use
0.5
38
Electricity Other 5 (4 Electric)
Purchased 0.5
Electricity
141 Electricity
Motor-Driven 85
to Fans 12

Energy 0.14 Refrigeration 6
Losses
Fuel

26
Power Losses
0.2 Other Systems 3

System Losses 46
Distribution
NAICS 336 Transportation Equipment
losses 9 Total Energy Input: 902 Trillion Btu
Steam,
heat feedstocks, heat
Energy Conversion Process

Energy
289 Energy Use
Supply
488 Central Energy • Process Heating (166) 201
Energy (steam systems, heat exchangers,
•Fuels Generation/ Distribution steam systems, fired heaters, heat • Metal Working
Utilities 488 463 pumps) • Assembly/
•Purchased Fabrication
Electricity • Steam Plant (89) • Steam Piping • Process Cooling/
• Welding/Joining
and Steam • Fuel Piping Refrigeration (9)
• Power Generation • Electrolytic Cells
(3) • Transmission Lines • Electrochemical (2) • Molding/Casting
• Direct Fuel Supply • Painting
(176) • Machine Drives (98)
Utility/ (pumps, compressors, fans, blowers, • Cleaning
Power • Purchased conveyors, mixers) • Waste Handling
Electricity (195)
Plant • Onsite Transport (7)
195 • Other (7)
electricity generation traps, electrical inefficiency (motors, heat, flared gases, by-
Electricity losses 25 transmission lines 29 mechanical drive, waste products TBD
transmission
losses 405
Plant Boundary
NAICS 336 Transportation Equipment Total Energy Input: 902 Trillion Btu
488 463 289 201

Equipment
Losses Onsite Transport Losses 30
Facilities 145
9 7 (1 Electric)
Fuel 176 65
Fired Heaters 94
(19 Electric)
Purchased Steam Other 7 (2 Electric)

Fuels Central
89 Steam 72 (1 Electric)
293 Boilers
Process Cooling 9
Process Use
(8 Electric)
Conventional
Power* 80 Electrochemical 2
Electricity
Purchased Pumps 19
3
Electricity
Fans 13
Motor-Driven 98
195 Electricity

to
Processes Compressed Air 15
127
Refrigeration 7
Losses Boiler
405 Losses 22
Power Materials Processing 30
Losses 2.5
Other 4
Plant Boundary Motor Losses 5
*Some cogeneration may be part of onsite power generation;
System Losses 53
data was withheld.
Sample Calculations: NAICS 321 and 322 Forest Products Industry
Footprint
All energy values are in trillion Btu (1012 Btu, or trillion Btu).
Total Energy Supply, 4039 trillion Btu

This is the sum of energy supply plus any energy losses incurred during energy generation, transmission and
distribution.
3272 trillion Btu + 679 trillion Btu + 88 trillion Btu = 4039 trillion Btu
Energy Supply, 3272 trillion Btu

This number is the sum of Fuel Consumption, from MECS Table N3.2 for and Electricity Sales and Transfers Offsite,
from MECS Table N13.1. The total includes purchased steam, biomass, black liquor, and byproduct fuels.
Fuel consumption: 504 + 2744 = 3248 trillion Btu

Transfers out: (805 + 6,130) million kWh * 3412 = 24 trillion Btu
Energy Supply = 3248 + 24 = 3272
Utility Power Plant, 327 trillion Btu

This number is the sum of Purchased Electricity and Transfers In, from MECS Table N13.1.
Purchased electricity: (21,826 + 73,464) = 95,290 million kWh * 3412 = 325 trillion Btu
Transfers in: (149 + 549) = 698 million kWh * 3412 = 2.4 trillion Btu
Electricity from Utility Power Plant = 325 + 2.4 = 327.4
Electricity Generation and Transmission Losses, 679 trillion Btu

This number represents losses incurred during the generation and transmission of electricity at off-site utilities. It is
based on utility power plant purchases and a loss conversion factor of 10500 Btu/kWhr.
327 trillion Btu *(10500 Btu/kWhr/3412 Btu/kWhr) = 1006 trillion Btu (electricity use with losses)
1006 trillion Btu – 327 trillion Btu = 679 trillion Btu (losses)
Renewables, 9 trillion Btu

Table N13.2 Renewable Energy (excluding Wood and Other Biomass)
2,481 million kWh * 3412 = 8.5 trillion Btu ~ 9 trillion Btu
Biomass, 1534 trillion Btu Table N5.2
Black Liquor = 903 trillion Btu

Biomass = 271 + 360 = 631 trillion Btu
Total = 903 + 631 = 1534 trillion Btu
Fossil Energy Supply, 1402 trillion Btu

This number is obtained by subtracting utility power plant purchases (327 trillion Btu), renewables (9 trillion Btu), and
biomass (1534 trillion Btu) from energy supply (3272 trillion Btu). This includes net purchased steam and byproduct
fuels.
3272 – (327 + 9 + 1534) = 1402 trillion Btu
Fuel Distribution Losses, 88 trillion Btu

This number represents losses incurred in natural gas pipelines, and in the transport and/or transfer of fuels from off-site
to on-site facilities. It is a rough estimate of 3%.
2936 trillion Btu * 0.03 = 88 trillion Btu
Central Energy Generation/ Utilities, 3272 trillion Btu
This number represents the energy that actually enters the plant boundary. It is the same as Energy Supply,
above. Breakouts for central energy are calculated as shown below.
• Steam Plant Energy, 1895 trillion Btu – First the total energy going to boilers for all purposes is calculated by
adding the total fuel to boilers, from MECS Table N6.2, End-uses of Fuel Consumption (832 trillion Btu) to the
fuel for conventional electricity generation from the same table (Adjusted, 45 trillion Btu, see Non-process Energy
table).
The end-use of 1824 trillion Btu of fuel and 7 trillion Btu of net electricity were not reported on the Table N6.2,
therefore the end-uses were adjusted to account for this fuel and round-off errors:
FOREST PRODUCTS Non- Adjusted

Net Fuel Added Fuel Adjusted Adjusted
Total Reported Net
NAICS 321 & 322 Electricity Only Biomass Use % Fuel Total
(305) Electricity
TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 312 3,248 2,936
Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel 4 836 832 2,366 89.9% 274 2640.280 10.295 2651
Direct Uses-Total Process 267 455 188 188 7.1% 22 209.794 267.500 477
Process Heating 8 174 166 166
Process Cooling and
Refrigeration 4 5 1 1
Machine Drive 252 269 17 17
Electro-Chemical Processes 1 1 0 0
Other Process Use 0 4 4 4
Direct Uses-Total Nonprocess 34 111 77 77 2.9% 9 85.926 34.205 120
Facility HVAC (g) 16 39 23 23
Facility Lighting 15 15 0 0
Other Facility Support 3 3 0 0
Onsite Transportation 0 13 13 13
Conventional Electricity
Generation 0 40 40 40
Other Nonprocess Use 0 0 0 0
End-use Not Reported 7 1,846 1,839 305
Net Electricity & Total = Data from Table N6.2. Total is the Total energy consumption broken down by end-use.
Fuel Only = (Total) – (Net Electricity)
Added Biomass = Biomass energy use (1534) added to indirect energy end-use – boiler fuel. This was done
because biomass (black liquor and wood residues) is burned in boilers (recovery/hog fuel) to generate
steam/electricity.
Fuel Use Distribution = Fuel use (w/biomass) percent distribution by end-use, 2366+188+77 = 2631
Indirect = 2366/2631 = 89.9%, etc.
Non-Reported Distribution = (Fuel Use Distribution) * 305

1831 (non-reported end-use energy) – 1534 (biomass energy) = 290, added 15 (round off errors with table so that
total will add up to 3248 trillion Btu). Distributed net electricity (7 trillion Btu) using % fuel distribution because
assumed that non-reported electricity was related to non-reported biomass (biomass accounted for 84% of non-
reported), 7 trillion Btu included in Adjusted Net Electricity.
Adjusted Fuel = (Added Biomass) + (Non-Reported Distribution)
Adjusted Total = (Adjusted Fuel) + (Net Electricity)
Using the adjusted data, the fuel to the boilers is 2640 + 45 = 2685 trillion Btu
To calculate steam not used for electricity, the fuel used for cogeneration and conventional electricity generation
must be subtracted. From MECS Table 13.2, Components of Onsite Generation, Cogeneration represents 50,814
(1,418 + 49,396) million kWh (173 trillion Btu), and conventional generation (Other) is 4327 million kWh (15
trillion Btu), based on a use factor of 3412 Btu/kWh. Steam is then calculated by difference using the following
heat rates and applying boiler efficiency of 78 percent:
(Total fuel to boilers – energy for cogen– energy for conv electricity)*.80 = Steam Energy
(2685 trillion Btu – (173 trillion Btu *(4500/3412)) - (15 trillion*(6200/3412)))*.78 = 1895 trillion Btu
Heat rates and boiler efficiencies are taken from Overview of Energy Flow for Industries in Standard Industrial
Classifications 20-39, Arthur D. Little, 2000. Boiler efficiencies were weighted based on 1998 MECS boiler fuel
use (18% natural gas, 6% oil, 11% coal, and 65% biomass).
Steam Plant Energy to CHP = ((173 * (4500/3412)) / 2685) * 1895 = 161 trillion Btu
Steam Plant Energy to Central Boilers = 1895 – 161 = 1734 trillion Btu
• Power generation, 188 trillion Btu – This is the sum of electricity produced onsite by cogeneration and
conventional electricity generation, from Table N13.2, as discussed in Steam Plant Energy (173 Tbtu + 15 Tbtu =
188 Tbtu).
• Direct Fuel Supply, 251 trillion Btu – This is calculated as follows:
(Energy Supply) – (Steam Plant Energy) – (Power Generation) – (Utility Power Plant) – (Losses in Boilers and
Electricity Generation) – 2(Exports) + (Renewables) – (Non-process Fuel)
Net Electricity = 312 = (Utility Power Plant) – (Exports) + (Renewables)
(Energy Supply) – (Steam Plant Energy) – (Power Generation) – (Losses in Boilers and Electricity
Generation) – (Net Electricity) – (Non-process Fuel) – (Exports)
Fuel to Boilers = (Steam Plant Energy) + (Power Generation) + (Losses in Boilers and Electricity Generation)
= 1895 + 188 + 602 = 2685
Direct Fuel Supply = (Energy Supply) – (Fuel to Boilers) – ( Net Electricity) – (Exports) =
3272 – 2685 – 312 – 24 = 251 trillion Btu
To Process = 251 – 26 (Non-Process Fuel Use) = 225
Losses in Boilers and Electricity Generation, 602 trillion Btu

This number is calculated by first determining total energy to boilers and on-site electricity generation (see Steam Plant
Energy, above), and subtracting steam and electricity generated.
(Fuel to Boilers) – (Steam Plant Energy) – (Power Generation)

2685 trillion Btu – 1895 trillion Btu – 188 trillion Btu = 602 trillion Btu losses
The losses attributed to turbines are:
(173 trillion Btu*(4500/3412) - 173) = 228 – 173 = 55 trillion Btu (cogeneration)

(15 Tbtu*(6200/3412) – 15) = 27 – 15 = 12 trillion Btu (conventional power generation onsite)
55 + 12 = 67 trillion Btu turbine losses
Boiler losses = 2685 – 228 – 27 = 2430*.22 = 535 trillion Btu
Exports, 24 trillion Btu

This number represents excess electricity that is sold and transferred to off-site facilities or to the local grid. It is
obtained from Electricity Sales and Transfers Offsite, MECS Table N13.1 in million kWh, and converted to Btu as
follows:
805 + 6,130 = 6,935 million kWh*3412 Btu/kWh = 24 trillion Btu
Non-Process Energy, 76 trillion Btu
This number is taken from End-uses of Fuel Consumption, MECS Tables N6.2 and N6.4. Table N6.4 includes use of
electricity generated on-site (net demand). Values in Table N6.2 have been adjusted upward to include the end-uses
that facilities did not report on and round off error. This non-reported energy was distributed among the categories
using the same distributions as energy that was reported on. The values taken from Tables N6.2 and N6.4 include:
FOREST PRODUCTS Net Demand Fuel Use Adjusted Adjusted

Fuel
NAICS 321 & 322 for Electricity % Fuel Use Total
Direct Uses-Total Nonprocess 50 76 86 136

Facility HVAC (g) 23 23 30% 26 49
Facility Lighting 21 0 0% 0 21
Other Facility Support 5 0 0% 0 5
Onsite Transportation 0 13 17% 15 15
Conventional Electricity Generation 0 40 53% 45 45
Other Nonprocess Use 1 0 0% 0 1
Facility HVAC 49 trillion Btu *Conventional Electricity Generation included in Steam Plant
Facility Lighting 21 trillion Btu Energy
Other Facility Support 5 trillion Btu
Onsite Transportation 15 trillion Btu * Included in Direct Process
Other Nonprocess Use 1 trillion Btu
TOTAL 76 trillion Btu
Energy Distribution, 2670 trillion Btu

This represents the energy that is distributed to process energy systems. It is obtained by subtracting boiler and on-site
power generation losses from Central Energy Generation.
3272 trillion Btu – 602 trillion Btu = 2670 trillion Btu
Distribution Losses, 402 trillion Btu

Energy losses in pipes, valves, traps, and electrical transmission lines. This value is based on a rough estimate that from
5-40% of energy can be lost in pipes, valves, traps, and electrical transmission lines. This value is very site-specific and
varies considerably across different types of plants and even in plants producing the same types of products. For this
calculation it is assumed that the greater losses are in steam pipes (20%), with small losses incurred in other fuel
transmission lines (3%) and electricity transmission lines (3%). Losses in steam pipes and traps have been reported to
be as high as from 20 to 40% {Steam Trap Performance Assessment, PNNL, for the U.S. Dept of Energy, July 1999;
“How Efficient is Your Steam Distribution System?” Frederic A. Hooper and Ronald D. Gillette, 2002,
www.swopnet.com/engr/stm/steam_dist_eff.html . } For conservatism, a value of 20% was used for steam distribution
losses.
Calculations are as follows:

Steam Pipes: (Steam Plant Energy) * 20%
1895 trillion Btu * 0.20 = 379 trillion Btu
Fuel Pipes: (Direct Fuel Supply) * 3%
225 trillion Btu * 0.03 = 6.75 ~ 7 trillion Btu
Electricity Lines: {(Utility Power Plant) + (Power Generation) + (Renewable Power)} * 3%
(327 trillion Btu + 188 trillion Btu + 9 trillion Btu) = 524 * 0.03 = 15.72 trillion Btu
Total Losses: 379 + 7 + 16 = 402 trillion Btu
Energy Conversion, 2168 trillion Btu

This value is calculated by subtracting distribution losses, facilities energy, and export energy from Energy Distribution.
It represents the energy that is used by process energy systems, including motor driven equipment, process heating and
cooling units, and other process equipment.
(Energy Distribution) – (Distribution Losses) – (Non-process Energy) – (Exports)

2670 trillion Btu – 402 trillion Btu – 76 trillion Btu – 24 trillion Btu = 2168 trillion Btu
• Process Heating, 1724 trillion Btu - This value is the sum of energy used for process heating and steam delivered
to process systems. Using Adjusted table below:
Adjusted Net
Net Demand Fuel
FOREST PRODUCTS Demand for
for Electricity Distribution
Electricity
NAICS 321 & 322

TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION 500
Indirect Uses-Boiler Fuel 12 89.9% 19
Direct Uses-Total Process 430 7.1% 431
Process Heating 11
Process Cooling and
Refrigeration 7
Machine Drive 407
Electro-Chemical Processes 2
Other Process Use 1
Direct Uses-Total Nonprocess 50 2.9% 50
Facility HVAC (g) 23
Facility Lighting 21
Other Facility Support 5
Onsite Transportation 0
Conventional Electricity
Generation 0
Other Nonprocess Use 1
End-use Not Reported 8
(Steam Plant Energy) – (Steam Pipe Losses) – (Fuel Pipe Losses) + (Net Demand for Electricity by Boilers) = 1895
trillion Btu – 379 trillion Btu – 7 trillion Btu + 19 trillion Btu = 1528 trillion Btu of steam used for Process Heating
Add this to the Adjusted Process Heating Energy table:
Net Demand Adjusted

FOREST PRODUCTS Net Demand Adjusted Adjusted
for Fuel Only Fuel Use %
NAICS 321 & 322 for Fuel Total
Electricity
Electricity
Direct Uses-Total Process 430 431 188 210 641
Process Heating 11 11 166 88.30% 185.24 196
Process Cooling and Refrigeration 7 7 1 0.53% 1.12 8
Machine Drive 407 410 17 9.04% 18.97 429
Electro-Chemical Processes 2 2 0 0.00% 0.00 2
Other Process Use 1 1 4 2.13% 4.46 6
1528 trillion Btu + 196 trillion Btu = 1724 trillion Btu of Energy used for Process Heating
• Process Cooling, 8 trillion Btu – This value is taken directly from the adjusted table above. This includes 7
trillion Btu of electricity and 1 trillion Btu of fuel.
• Machine Drive, 413 trillion Btu - This value is taken from the table above, minus the electricity distribution losses
(16 trillion Btu).
• Electrochemical Processes, 2 trillion Btu - This value is taken fromthe table above.
• Other, 6 trillion Btu - This value is taken from the table above.
• Onsite Transport, 15 trillion Btu – This value is taken directly from the non-process adjusted table.
Losses Due to Equipment Inefficiencies, 470 trillion Btu
These represent losses occurring in machine driven systems and motors, preheaters, other heat exchange systems,
inefficient burners, and other energy conversion systems prior to process-level losses. These include some of the waste
heat lost during energy convers ion. In practice, these losses overlap in many cases with the losses from process
operations, as it is difficult to separate what is lost in energy conversion and what is lost from process equipment.
Losses were thus calculated using rough estimates or potential efficiency improvements, as follows. Losses in actuality
could be much higher. In compressed air systems, for example, a relatively efficient operating system will only produce
about 11% of the input energy in the form of work at the point of use {“Compressed Air: A Facilities Perspective,” R.
Scot Foss, Applied Technology Publications, 1998, Maintenance Technology Magazine.} Sources also include rule-of-
thumb judgments obtained from national laboratory experts in specific equipment systems. Va lues in some cases have
been adjusted for round-off error.
Energy Conversion Equipment Losses, 268 trillion Btu

Steam delivery systems Losses: 1528 trillion Btu * 0.15 = 229 trillion Btu (15%, rough estimate)
Steam energy delivered: 1528 – 229 = 1299 trillion Btu
Process heating systems: 196 trillion Btu * 0.15 = 29 trillion Btu (15%, rough estimate)
Process heat energy delivered: 196 – 29 = 167 trillion Btu
Cooling systems: 8 trillion Btu * 0.10 = 0.80 ~ 1 trillion Btu (10%, rough estimate)
Cooling energy delivered: 8 – 1 = 7 trillion Btu
Electrochemical systems: 2 trillion Btu * 0.15 = 0.30 ~ 0 trillion Btu (15%, rough estimate)
Other: 6 trillion Btu * 0.10 = 0.60 ~ 1 trillion Btu (10%, rough estimate)
Other energy delivered: 6 – 1 = 5 trillion Btu
Onsite Transport: 15 trillion Btu * 0.50 = 7.5 ~ 8 trillion Btu (50%, assumes gasoline or diesel engines)
Onsite transport energy delivered = 15 – 8 = 7 trillion Btu
Total Energy Conversion Equipment Losses: 268 trillion Btu

Energy Delivered to these process systems: 1487 trillion Btu
Machine Driven System Losses, Total of 202 trillion Btu (windings plus systems)
System
% Energy Use Loss Energy Loss Usable Work
Machine Drive 413
Pumps 31.40% 130 40.00% 52 78
Fans 19.80% 82 40.00% 33 49
Compressed Air 4.60% 19 80.00% 15 4
Refrigeration 5.00% 20 5.00% 1 19
Materials Handling 7.40% 30 5.00% 2 29
Materials Processing 21.30% 88 90.00% 79 9
Other 10.60% 44 5.00% 2 42
184 229
Motor (Windings) Losses = 413 trillion Btu * 0.043 = 18 trillion Btu
Energy Use and Loss Percentages taken from ORNL/Xenergy U.S. Motor Systems Assessment)
Total Machine Drive Losses: 184 trillion Btu + 18 trillion Btu = 202 trillion Btu
Total Machine energy delivered: 413 – 202 = 211 trillion Btu
Total Equipment losses: 268 trillion Btu + 202 trillion Btu = 470 trillion Btu
Total Energy Delivered to all process systems: 1487 + 211 trillion Btu = 1698 trillion Btu (Process Energy Use)
Process Energy Use, 1698 trillion Btu

This is calculated by subtracting equipment losses from energy delivered to energy conversion systems.
Appendix B
Opportunity Analysis Backup Data
Table B-1 Petroleum - Steam Systems Detailed Table
Potential
Heat Possible Potential
Steam Steam Average Losses Methods of % Savings Potential
Production Energy Use Use 10^3 Efficienc y (10^12 Major Sources for Energy (to be Savings
2,3
No. Process (10^12 Btu)1 Btu/barrel Equipment Used % Btu) Losses Recovery verified) (Tbtu/yr)
Low level steam
recovery,
recycle of
Fractionating Tower, steam, decon-
Atmospheric Stripping (Direct Contaminated waste tamination of
1 Distillation 246.1 44.0 Contact - DC) 40 148 steam steam 40 60
Reboiler, Steam
Ejection (indirect Contaminated waste
Vacuum contact), Stripping, steam, heat losses
2 Distillation 123.3 48.0 Fractionating (DC) 55 55 from reboiler Same as above 20 11
Contaminated waste
3 Visbreaking -1.3 export Stripping (DC) 40 -1 steam Same as above 20 0
Coking Fractionating Tower Contaminated waste
4 Operations -9.4 export (DC) 40 steam Same as above 0
Fluid
Catalytic Contaminated waste
5 Cracking 0.5 0.3 Stripping (DC) 40 0 steam Same as above 20 0
Catalytic
Hydro- Stripping, Quenching Contaminated waste
6 cracking 33.6 71.0 (DC) 40 20 steam Same as above 20 4
Catalytic
Hydro- Contaminated waste
7 treating 212.0 54.0 Stripping (DC) 40 127 steam Same as above 20 25
Catalytic Contaminated waste
8 Reforming 117.2 89.0 Stripping (DC) 40 70 steam Same as above 20 14
Contaminated waste
9 Alkylation 139.5 348.0 Stripping (DC) 40 84 steam Same as above 20 17
Contaminated waste
10 Isomers 38.3 226.6 Stripping (DC) 40 23 steam Same as above 20 5
Total 900 527 136
1
Steam Systems Opportunity Assessment for the Pulp and Paper, Chemical Manufacturing, and Petroleum Refining Industries , Resource Dynamics Corp. 2000
2
Improving Steam Systems Performance, A Sourcebook for Industry, U.S. DOE
3
Direct contact indicates steam is directly contacting hydrocarbon stream, which creates a contaminated wastewater stream. Contaminated wastewater steam from stripping, for
example, is often not reused, leading to lower thermal efficiency. In addition, it must often be heated later to reduce the amount of wastewater that must be treated and disposed of.
Some waste steam is dilutely contaminated, making separation of contaminants costly.
Table B-2 Petroleum – Fired Systems Detailed Table
Average Energy Annual Energy Thermal Energy
Equipment Used (Heat
No. Production Process Thermal process Use 10^3 Use 10^12 use 10^3
Addition)
Btu/Barrel Btu/year Btu/barrel
Fluid heating, Boiling-

1 Topping Atmospheric Distillation distillation 113.8 641.6 Charge Heating With Fired Heater. 89.00
Fluid heating, Boiling-

Vacuum Distillation 91.5 238.8 Charge Heating With Fired Heater. 63.00
distillation
Thermal and
Fluid heating, Crude (charge) Heating With Fired
2 Catalytic Delayed Coking 166 114.6 230.00
Agglomeration Coker Heater.
Cracking
Fluid heating,
Fluid Coking Agglomeration 258 7.1 Combustion of Coke in "Burner".
Fluid heating, Oxidation of Coke in Gasifier.

Flexcoking Agglomeration 167 6.7 Steam addition to gasifier.
Fluid heating, Fired Heater/reactor, Steam

Visbreaking Agglomeration 99.5 2.07 Addition 145.00
Fired Heater 700.00
Fluid Catalytic Fluid heating, Boiling- Cat feed Fired Heater, Catalyst
Cracking distillation 100 190.6 Regenerator. 100.00
Catalytic Fluid heating, Boiling- Fired Charge Heater and

240 109.7 195.00
Hydrocracking distillation Exothermic Catalytic Reaction
Combination/
Rearrange- Fluid heating, Curing-
3 Alkylation 368 149 Reactor (Heat of Reaction) 377.00
ment of forming
Hydrocarbons
Fluid heating -
Catalytic Reforming Thermal oxidation 284 376.3 Fired Heater 270.00
reactions
Fluid heating, Curing- Indirect Heating With Heat
Isomerization forming 359 40 Exchangers. 359.00
Catalytic Hydrotreating/
4 Treating Fluid heating 120 468.3 Fired Heater 120.00
Hydroprocessing
Specialty
Fluid heating, Curing-
5 Product Lube Oil 1506 109.5 1506.00
forming
Manufacture
TOTALS 2,487.50
Table B-2 Petroleum – Fired Systems Detailed Table (continued)
Potential
Average (%) Three major
heat losses Major source for
No. Production Process Efficiency of possible methods Potential for savings
10^12 losses
FIred Systems of energy recovery
Btu/year
Atmospheric Hot Flue Gases

1 Topping Distillation 75.00 125.44 and Coolers 1 2 3 65.00 81.54
Hot Flue Gases

Vacuum Distillation 75.00 41.10 and Coolers 1 2 3 65.00 26.72
Hot Flue Gases,

Thermal and
2 Delayed Coking 80.00 31.76 Coke Drum 1 2 3 65.00 20.64
Catalytic Cracking
Cooling, Oil Cooler
Fluid Coking ? Hot Flue Gases

Flexcoking ? ?
Hot Flue Gases,
Visbreaking 78.00 0.66 Coolers and 1 65.00 0.43
Condensers
Hot Flue Gases
75.00 and Cooler
Fluid Catalytic
75.00 47.65 Hot Flue Gases 1 2 3 65.00 30.97
Cracking
Catalytic
75.00 22.28 Hot Flue Gases 1 2 3 65.00 14.48
Hydrocracking
Combination/
3 Rearrangement of Alkylation 75.00 38.16 Cooling water 3 60 22.90
Hydrocarbons
Hot Flue Gases
Catalytic Reforming 80.00 71.55 and Coolers 1 2 3 65.00 46.51
Isomerization 80.00 8.00 Coolers 3 60 4.80
Catalytic
4 Treating Hydrotreating/ 80.00 93.66 Hot Flue Gases 1 2 3 65.00 60.88
Hydroprocessing
Hot Flue Gases,

Specialty Product
5 Lube Oil 75.00 27.38 Coolers and 1 2 3 53.33 14.60
Manufacture
Condensers
TOTALS 507.65 324.47

Sources:
Energy and Environmental Profile of the Petroleum Refining Industry, Energetics, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy, 1998.
The John Zinc Combustion Handbook , John Zinc Corporation.
Personal communication with Dr. Richard Martin, Aztec Engineering, December 2003.
Table B-2 Notes and Assumptions
No. Energy Recovery Technology Status Effectiveness *

1 Fluid heating - hot water, heat transfer fluids etc. Mature - available 50 80
2 Steam generation Mature - available 50 60
3 Absorption cooling (through steam generation or hot available 60 80
gases)
4 Power generation using low temperature fluid cycles Emerging 60 80
5 Inert gas generation using combustion products Emerging 60 70
6 Thermal reforming (H2/CO production) R&D stage 40 50
7 Thermoelectric power production R&D stage 25 40
8 Other technologies to be developed Does not exist
Notes * Effectiveness represents possible percentage heat recovery from the waste heat stream using one or more
technologies. It is based on savings of primary energy (for electric power generation it is based on 10,500 Btu/Kwh).
Energy Savings Assumptions

• Energy Cost $4.00/million Btu
• 8736 operating hours per year
• Load factor 80%
Table B-3 Chemical Industry – Combined Steam and Fired Systems Detailed Table
Energy for Process Heat - Steam (10^12 btu/yr.)
Average Possible
Total Feed Fired
Coal - % waste waste heat
Process Fuel Oil N. Gas Other from stock Total Export Net Heater Comments
Coke heat recovery
fuels reaction /Boiler
recovery (10^12 Btu)/yr
The Ethylene Chain
Waste
Ethylene 5.60 143.50 18.60 18.60 186.30 760.20 946.50 (146.90) 799.60 Yes 10.00 18.63
gases
Waste
Polyethlene 0.30 6.30 0.80 0.80 8.20 583.90 592.10 - 592.10 Yes 5.00 0.41
gases
Waste
Ethylene Dichloride 1.90 47.70 6.20 0.20 56.00 201.00 257.00 - 257.00 -
gases
Waste
Poly Vinyl Chloride 0.40 10.80 1.40 1.40 14.00 143.10 157.10 - 157.10 Yes 5.00 0.70
gases
Waste
Ethylene Oxide 0.30 6.70 0.90 0.90 8.80 138.20 147.00 - 147.00 Yes 5.00 0.44
gases
Waste
Ethylene Glycol 0.30 6.50 0.90 0.90 8.60 138.20 146.80 - 146.80 Yes 5.00 0.43
gases
Waste
Polystyrene 2.00 50.00 6.50 6.50 65.00 132.40 197.40 Yes 7.50 4.88
gases
TOTAL 10.80 271.50 35.30 29.30 346.90 2,097. 2,443.9 (146.90) 2,099.6 25.49
The Propylene Chain
Propylene 1.00 24.50 3.20 3.20 31.90 582.50 614.40 - 614.40 Yes 10.00 3.19
Flared
Polypropylene - 1997 0.10 3.30 0.40 0.40 4.20 281.10 285.30 - 285.30 3.00 0.13
gases
Propylene Oxide - 1997 0.20 6.30 0.80 0.80 8.10 104.40 112.50 - 112.50 Yes 5.00 0.41
Flared
waste
Acrylonitrile 0.10 2.00 0.30 0.30 2.70 80.10 82.80 - 82.80 Yes 10.00 0.27
gases -
HCN
Acrylic Acid 4.00 4.4 8.4 Yes 10.00 0.84
Polymeri-
zation
Acrylic Fiber 0.30 6.50 0.90 0.90 8.60 10.50 19.10 - 19.10 5.00 0.43 gases ,
solvent
vapors
TOTAL 1.70 42.60 5.60 5.60 55.50 1,058.6 1,114.1 - 1,114.1 5.27
Table B-3 Chemical Industry – Combined Steam and Fired Systems Detailed Table (continued)
Possible
Total Fired Average % waste heat
Coal - Feed stock
Process Fuel Oil N. Gas Other from Total Export Net Heater/ waste heat recovery Comments
Coke reaction
fuels Boiler recovery (10^12
Btu)/yr.
The BTX Chain
BTX 1.00 26.40 3.40 3.40 34.20 935.30 969.50 (6.70) 962.80 Yes 3.4
10.00
Benzene 0.10 2.40 0.30 0.30 3.10 70.00 73.10 - 73.10 Yes 10.00 0.31
Vent
gases,
Ethylbenzene 0.60 14.60 1.90 1.90 19.00 264.70 283.70 (3.20) 280.50 0.95
5.00 boiler
waste heat
Heater
Styrene 3.30 84.50 11.00 11.00 109.80 130.40 240.20 - 240.20 Yes 8.24
7.50 flue gases
Polystyrene 0.40 10.50 1.40 1.40 13.70 128.40 142.10 - 142.10 Yes 1.03
7.50
Cumene 0.10 3.10 0.40 0.40 4.00 110.40 114.40 (2.30) 112.10 0.20
5.00
Phenol/Acetone 1.60 41.90 5.40 5.40 54.30 1.60 55.90 - 55.90 -
-
Oxidation
Terephthalic Acid 0.40 8.90 1.20 1.20 11.70 188.40 200.10 - 200.10 Yes 0.59
5.00 process
Cyclohexene 0.10 2.70 0.40 0.40 3.60 3.70 7.30 (3.10) 4.20
Adipic Acid 1.00 24.30 3.20 3.20 31.70 28.80 60.50 - 60.50
Caprolactam 0.60 16.00 2.10 2.10 20.80 35.80 56.60 - 56.60
Nylon 6.6 0.30 8.60 1.10 1.10 11.10 18.50 29.60 - 29.60 Yes 0.56
5.00
Nylon 6 0.10 3.10 0.40 0.40 4.00 8.80 12.80 - 12.80 Yes 0.20
5.00
2,445.
TOTAL 9.60 447.00 32.20 32.20 521.00 1,924.80 (15.30) 2,430.50 15.30
80
Table B-3 Chemical Industry – Combined Steam and Fired Systems Detailed Table (continued)
Possible
Average
Fired waste heat
Coal - Total Feedstock % waste
Process Fuel Oil N. Gas Other Total Export Net Heater recovery Comments
Coke from fuels reaction heat
/Boiler (10^12
recovery
Btu)/yr.
Agricultural Chemicals
Reformer waste
Ammonia 3.60 291.60 11.90 11.90 319.00 - 319.00 - 319.00 Yes 10.00 31.90
heat
Urea 0.30 6.70 0.90 0.90 8.80 - 8.80 (1.30) 7.50 2.50 0.22
Process
modification
Nitric Acid 0.10 2.70 0.40 0.40 3.60 - 3.60 (7.80) (4.20) Yes 5.00 0.18
using CHP
system
Ammonia Nitrate 0.10 2.10 0.30 0.30 2.80 - 2.80 - 2.80 - -
Steam
Ammonia Sulfate 0.40 10.40 1.30 1.30 13.40 - 13.40 - 13.40 2.50 0.34
replacement
Sulfuric Acid 0.10 1.70 0.20 0.20 2.20 - 2.20 (74.80) (72.60) - -
Phosphoric Acid (Wet
0.40 10.90 1.40 1.40 14.10 - 14.10 - 14.10 - -
Process).
Phosphoric Acid Waste heat
- - 9.60 - 9.60 - 9.60 - 9.60 Yes 5.00 0.48
(furnace Process) recovery
Drying system
Ammonia Phosphate 0.10 3.50 0.50 0.50 4.60 - 4.60 (2.20) 2.40 Yes 5.00 0.23 heat recovery
Drying system
Superphosphates 0.10 0.90 0.10 0.10 1.20 - 1.20 - 1.20 Yes 5.00 0.06 heat recovery
TOTAL 5.20 330.50 26.60 17.00 379.30 - 379.30 (86.10) 293.20 33.41
The Chlor-Alkali Industry
Caustic Soda Use of CHP,
(Chlorine/Sodium 2.30 58.30 7.60 7.60 75.80 - 75.80 - 75.80 Yes 10.00 7.58 heater flue
Hydroxide) Mfg. gases
Soda Ash (Sodium Use of CHP,
2.30 59.60 7.70 7.70 77.30 - 77.30 - 77.30 Yes 10.00 7.73 heater flue
Carbonate) Mfg.
gases
TOTAL 4.60 117.90 15.30 15.30 153.10 - 153.10 - 153.10 15.31
Industry Total 31.90 1,209.5 115.0 99.40 1,455.8 5,080.4 6,536.2 (248.3) 6,090.5 94.10
Sources: Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Chemical Industry, Energetics, Inc. 2000; John Zinc Combustion Handbook
Private communication with Dr. Richard Martin, Aztec Engineering, 2004.
Table B-4 Major Fired Heater Applications in the Chemical Industry
Fired Heater Fired Heater
Firebox
Chemical Process Heater Type Energy Energy
Temperature
Intensity Requirement ('85)
Deg. F. Btu/unit 10^12 Btu/year
Benzene Reformer extraction Reboiler 700 64.8

Ethylbenzene Steam
Styrene 1500 -1600 32.1
dehydrogenation superheater
Ethylene dichloride
Vinyl chloride monomer Cracking furnace 12.6
cracking
Reactor-fired
p-Xylene Xylene isomerization 13
preheater
Reaction of p-Xylene and Preheater, hot-oil
Dimethylterephalate 480-540 11.1
methanol furnace
Butylene Preheater,
Butadiene
dehydrogenation reboiler 1100 2.6
Ethanol (synthetic) Ethylene hydration Preheater 750 1.3
Acetone Various Hot oil frunace 0.8
Ethylene - propylene Thermal cracking Pyrolysis furnace 1900-2300 337.9

Steam
Ammonia Natural gas reforming hydrocarbon
reformer 1500-1600 150.5
Steam
Methanol Hydrocarbon reforming
hydrocarbon 1000-2000 25.7
Sources: Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Chemical Industry, Energetics, Inc. 2000; John Zinc Combustion Handbook;
Private communication with Dr. Richard Martin, Aztec Engineering, 2004.
Table B-5 Forest Products: Steam Systems Detailed Table
Steam Use 2000 Annual Potential Major Potential
Production Mbtu/ton of Production M Steam Use Equipment Average % Heat Losses Sources Possible Energy Savings
Process Pulp1 tons of Pulp 2 Trillion Btu Used1,3 Efficiency (10^12 for Recovery Methods 1,3
No. 1,3 1,3 % 10^12
Btu/yr) Losses Btu/yr
1 Kraft Pulping 3.78 51.96 196.41 Steam heated 55 88 Waste Recycling of waste 25 22
batch/continuous steam heat, improved steam
digesters, pre- recovery, indirect
steamers heating
2 Sulfite Pulping 3.61 1.17 4.22 Steam heated 55 2 Waste Improved steam 20 0
batch digesters steam recovery, indirect
heating
3 Thermo- 0.77 3.75 2.89 Pre-steamers 55 1 Waste Low pressure steam 10 0
mechanical steam recovery, mechanical
Pulping vapor recompression,
heat pumps
4 Semi- 4.56 3.96 18.03 Digesters or pre- 55 8 Waste Waste heat recovery 20 2
chemical steamers steam
Pulping
5 Bleaching 3.7 37.60 139.13 Steam-heated 60 56 Waste Waste heat recycling, 25 14
bleaching steam reduced bleaching
towers/stages stages
6 Chemical 3.78 57.09 215.78 Recovery boilers, 60 86 Exit gases, Falling film 20 17
Recovery superheaters, radiation evaporation, steam
stripper, losses, recycling,
evaporators waste concentrators
steam
7 Pulp Drying 3.87 8.41 32.54 Dryer, condenser, 50 16 Exit gases 20 3
thermocompressor
9 Paper drying 9.2 96.31 886.04 Drum dryers and 48 461 Hot water, Direct fired dryers, 30 138
(million tons of Yankee dryers exit gases, alternative dryers
paper) waste (Condebelt), air heat
steam recovery, waste heat
recovery (mechanical
vapor recompression,
heat pumps)
TOTAL 1495.05 719 197
1
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Opportunities to Improve Energy Efficiency and Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the U.S. Pulp and Paper Industry. July
2000
2
American Forest & Paper Association. 2002a. Paper, Paperboard & Wood Pulp: 1998 Statistics, Data through 2001
3 Other Sources: G.A. Smook, Handbook for Pulp and Paper Technologists, 1997; Christopher Biermann, Handbook of Pulping and Papermaking, 1996
A. Elaahi, H. Lowitt, U.S. Pulp and Paper Industry: An Energy Perspective, Energetics, Inc. 1988.
Table B-6. Forest Products: Fired Systems Detailed Table
Potential
Average 2001 U.S. 2001 Annual Equipment heat Possible Potential
Energy Use Production Energy Use Used Average (%) losses Major Methods of Potential Savings
Production 10^6 Btu/ton 10^6 Short 10^12 (Heat Efficiency of 10^12 Source of Energy % (10^12
No. Process of pulp1 Tons Btu/year Addition) Fired System Btu/year Losses Recovery Savings Btu/yr)
1 Kraft Chemical 2 52 103 Lime Kiln 37.00 65 Exit gases Enhanced 35 23
Recovery/Lime Mud (evaporated heat transfer
Calcining 1 water, become lime
combustion mud and
gases, combustion
carbon gases, lime
dioxide from product
calcination), coolers for
radiation heating
losses combustion
air, flash
dryers to
predry mud
TOTALS 103 23
1
N. Martin, N. Anglani, D. Einstein, M. Khrushch, E. Worrell, an L.K. Price. Opportunities to Improve Energy Efficiency and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in
the Pulp and Paper Industry, July 2000.
2
American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA), 2002 Statistics, Data Through 2001, Page 11
3
U.S. Pulp and Paper Industry: An Energy Perspective, A. Elaahi and H.E. Lowitt, April 1988. Energetics, Inc. for Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
Table B-7 Steam Systems - Food and Beverage
Potential
Wet Corn Milling (SIC 2046) Based on 1998 MECS Energy Data for Boiler Fuel Savings 1
Total
Total Steam Possible
Energy Steam Energy Potential Major Energy
Use Use Production (Trillion Equipment Average Heat Sources for Recovery 10^12
No. Production Process Btu/lb Btu/lb1
(Million lbs) Btu) Used1 Efficiency1,2 Losses Losses1 Methods 1 % Btu/yr
Steeping, Waste steam, Heat recovery
Steepwater Rotary steam exit gases, from flue gas,
evaporation, Germ tube dryers, radiative heat blowdown
1 Drying 2625 115 flash dryers 45 63.25 losses steam recovery 25.0 15.8
Potential
Cane Sugar and Beet Sugar Processing and Refining (SIC 2061, 2062 and 2063) Based on MECS 1994 Energy Data for Boiler Fuel Savings 3
Total
Energy Steam Energy Potential Major Energy
2 2
No. Production Process Btu/lb Btu/lb (Million lbs) Btu) Used Efficiency Losses Losses2 Methods % Btu/yr
Heat recovery
Evaporators, from flue gas,
dryers, vacuum Waste steam, blowdown
1 Solution and Refining 169.00 pans 45 92.95 exit gases steam recovery 25.0 23.2
Potential
Meat Products (SIC 201) Savings 3
Total
Energy Steam 2001 Energy Potential Major Energy
No. Production Process Btu/lb3 Btu/lb3 (Million lbs)4 Btu) Used3,4 Efficiency Losses Losses Methods % Btu/yr
Steam
Vacuum,
Steam Waste steam,
1 Evisceration 383 333 19000 6.33 Pasteurization 50 3.1655 exit gases Heat recovery 25.0 0.8
Table B-7 Steam Systems - Food and Beverage (continued)
Potential
Cheese Natural And Processed (SIC 2022) Savings 3
Total
Total 1995 Steam Major Possible
Energy Steam Production Energy Potential Sources Energy
Use Use (Million lbs) (Trillion Equipment Average Heat for Recovery 10^12
No. Production Process Btu/lb Btu/lb5 5
Btu) Used5 Efficiency Losses Losses Methods % Btu/yr
Feed System, Heat
Drying recovery
Chamber, Fluid from exit
1 Whey Drying 2000 1020 6900 7.04 Bed 50 3.519 Exit gases gases 25.0 0.9
Potential
Fats and Oils (SIC 2075) Savings 3
Total
Total 1999 Steam Major Possible
Energy Steam Production Energy Potential Sources Energy
Use Use (Million lbs) (Trillion Equipment Average Heat for Recovery 10^12
No. Production Process Btu/lb3 Btu/lb3 6
Btu) Used6 Efficiency Losses Losses Methods % Btu/yr
Heat
recovery
from exit
1 Meal Drying 182 93 72515 7 Dryer 50 3.36544 Exit gases gases 25.0 0.8
Potential
Other Food Processes (baking, dairy processing,others) 1998 MECS Boiler Fuels Savings
Total
Total Steam Major Possible
Energy Steam Energy Potential Sources Energy
Use Use Production (Trillion Equipment Average Heat for Recovery 10^12
No. Production Process Btu/lb Btu/lb (Million lbs) Btu) Used2,3 Efficiency Losses Losses Methods % Btu/yr
Waste
steam, exit
gases, Heat
Steam radiative recovery,
Pasteurization, heat heat
1 Miscellaneous 272 Ovens, Dryers 50 136 losses reduction 25.0 34.0
TOTALS 576.1 302.2 75.6
Sources:
1 LBNL, Energy Efficiency Improvement and Cost Saving Opportunities for the Corn Wet Milling Industry, July 2003
2 Industrial Energy Data Book, Oak Ridge Associated Universities, 1988.
3 DOE, Office of Industrial Technologies, Industry Profiles Final Report: Energy Profiles for U.S. Industry, Prepared by Energetics Inc. 1990
4 Accountingweb, Industry Profiles Meat Products Manufacture 2011, http://www.accountingweb.com/cgi-bin/kasbrowse.cgi?action=detail&id=2553
5 1995 data. EPA Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 9.6.1 Natural and Processed Cheese, July 1997
6 EPA, Economic Impact Analysis for the Final Vegetable Oil Processing NESHAP, EPA-452/R-01-005, January 2001
Table B-8 Cement Manufacturing: Fired Systems Detailed Table
Average Annual
energy use 2002 U.S. Energy Thermal
Thermal process 1 1,2,3
No. Production Process 10^6 Production Use Equipment Used Energy use
Btu/ton of Short Tons 4 10^12 10^12 Btu/yr
clinker 1,2 Btu/yr
Dry, preheat, calcine, and

1 Wet Process Long Kiln sinter slurry feed 6.0 24647428 148 Rotary kiln 148
Rotary kiln (equipped

Dry, preheat, calcine, and with crosses, lifters, and
2 Dry Process Long Kiln sinter feed 4.5 46450922 209 trefoils for heat recovery) 209
Dry, preheat, calcine, and Rotary Kiln with Preheat

3 Dry Process Preheater Kiln sinter feed 3.8 11849725 45 Towers 45
Dry Process Precalciner Dry, preheat, calcine, and Rotary Kiln with
4 Kiln sinter feed 3.3 11849725 39 Precalciner Units 39
TOTALS 441 441
Note: Production values are for 2002. Dry process kilns estimated to account for 74% of the total cement production.
Of dry processes, preheaters and precalciners account for 25% of all U.S. cement production.
Sources:
1
EPA, Alternative Control Techniques Document_NOx Emissions From Cement Manufacturing, 1994
2
Energy Efficiency and Carbon Dioxide Emissions Reductions Opportunities in the U.S. Cement Industry, N. Martin, E. Worrelland L. Price, LBL 1999
3
The U.S. Cement Industry: An Energy Perspective, S.R. Venkateswaran, H.E. Lowitt, Energetics, Inc. 1988.
4
DOE/EIA, Documentation for Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States, 2002 January 2004 [USGS data]
5
Colorado Energy Efficiency Guide: Recommendations By Sector - Cement Manufacturing, Www.coloradoefficiencyguide.com
Table B-8 Cement Manufacturing: Fired Systems Detailed Table (continued)
Average (%) Potential

Potential
Efficiency of heat Potential %
3 Major Source for Possible Methods of Savings
No. Production Process Fired System losses Savings
Losses Energy Recovery 2,3,5 (10^12
(to be 10^12
Btu/yr)
verified) Btu/yr
Water evaporation, Combustion improvements,

combustion, exhaust controls, preheat, semi-wet
gases, conversion, heat recovery in
radiative/convective the clinker cooler, improved
1 Wet Process Long Kiln 30.00% 104 losses grate cooler 50 52
Combustion improvements,
controls, preheat, heat
Combustion, exhaust recovery in the clinker
gases, cooler, improved grate
radiative/convective cooler, heat recovery with
2 Dry Process Long Kiln 52.00% 100 losses cogeneration 25 25
Combustion, exhaust Combustion improvements,
gases, controls, heat recovery in
Dry Process Preheater radiative/convective the clinker cooler, improved
3 Kiln 68.00% 14 losses grate cooler 11 2
Combustion, exhaust Combustion improvements,
gases, controls, heat recovery in
Dry Process radiative/convective the clinker cooler, improved
4 Precalciner Kiln 71.00% 11 losses grate cooler 11 1
TOTALS 230 80
Appendix C
Additional Data for Top Twenty

Opportunities
Opportunity 1 Waste Heat Recovery From Gases and Liquids in
Chemicals, Petroleum, and Forest Products
This opportunity area encompasses energy savings possible from waste heat recovery from gases and liquids (both high and low
quality energy) in chemicals, petroleum refineries, and the forest products industry. Waste heat sources include waste steam
(possibly contaminated), exhaust and flue gases, flares, hot water and radiation heat losses. The energy potential in these
sources is considerable; energy content in waste streams above 75oF has been conservatively estimated to be nearly 7 quads.
Priority technology R&D areas include innovative energy recovery cycles, alternatives to shaft power, waste heat pumping and
thermally activated technologies for low temperatures, waste heat boilers recovering corrosive heat streams, heat recovery from
contaminated fluids, new heat recovery techniques, and improved energy transport and storage. Enabling R&D areas include
separations such as hot gas cleanup and the dehydration of liquid waste streams, development of corrosion-resistant materials,
innovative heat exchanger geometries, and development of innovative working fluids.
Energy Savings (TBtu) Cost Savings (million $)
Pre-Process 0
Post-Process 807 TOTAL $2,154
TOTAL 807
Methodology
Potential heat recovery from gases and liquids in chemicals manufacture was calculated for five chemical chains based on
average waste heat recovery potentials found in common practice, which range from 2.5-10%, with most values around 5-10%
(see Table 1.1). Waste heat recovery potentials were applied to energy use in these chains to yield energy savings of 94 Tbtu.
This accounts for about 6.5% of energy used by these chains for steam and fired systems (94/1456 Tbtu). However, these chains
only represent 42% of total energy use (3451 Tbtu) in chemicals manufacture for steam and fired systems. To capture the
savings represented by the other 58% of energy use, the energy savings rate of 10% was applied to the remaining energy (1995
Tbtu) to estimate additional potential savings from waste heat recovery of ~200 Tbtu. Combined energy savings are 294 Tbtu.
Potential heat recovery in petroleum refineries was calculated separately for steam and fired systems. For fired systems,
average efficiencies of 75-80% were applied to energy used in major unit operations to estimate potential energy losses (see
Table 1.2 below). It was then assumed that between 20-45% of those losses could be captured, depending upon the process.
This yielded energy savings of 357 Tbtu. For steam systems, an average efficiency of 40-55% was assumed for steam-using
operations, with 20% recovery of the potential losses, except for atmospheric distillation, where a recovery value of 40% was
applied (see Table 1.2). Energy savings using this approach came to 136 Tbtu. Combined savings for petroleum refining in this
category amount to 493 Tbtu.
Potential heat recovery in the forest products industry was calculated for four major processes utilizing steam and fired systems
(see Table 1.3). Average efficiencies of 40-45% were applied to energy use in these processes, followed by a potential10-25%
recovery of energy losses in the form of waste energy from gases or liquids. Total energy savings from the four processes
amount to 64 Tbtu. Combined energy savings for all three industries of 827.5 Tbtu are shown in Table 1.4.
For simplicity, cost savings are based on a fuel mix of 46% natural gas ($5.65/MMBtu), 5% coal ($1.50/MMBtu) and 5% electricity
($0.0477/kWh). The remainder is assumed to be mostly waste fuels – no cost assigned). Boiler fuel mix is taken from the 1998
MECS. Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004.
References
Chemicals: Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Chemical Industry, Energetics, Inc. 2000. John Zinc Combustion Handbook;
Personal communication with Dr. Richard Martin, Aztec Engineering, 2004 and Arvind Thedki, E3M, Inc., 2004.
Petroleum: Steam Systems Opportunity Assessment for the Pulp and Paper, Chemical Manufacturing, and Petroleum Refining Industries,
Resource Dynamics Corp. 2000; Improving Steam Systems Performance, A Sourcebook for Industry, U.S. DOE; Energy and
Environmental Profile of the U.S. Petroleum Refining Industry, Energetics, Inc. 1998; Personal communication with Dr. Richard
Martin, Aztec Engineering, 2004 and Arvind Thedki, E3M, Inc., 2004.
Forest Products:
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Opportunities to Improve Energy Efficiency and Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions in
the U.S. Pulp and Paper Industry. July 2000; American Forest & Paper Association. 2002a. Paper, Paperboard & Wood Pulp:
1998 Statistics, Data through 2001; G.A. Smook, Handbook for Pulp and Paper Technologists, 1997; Christopher Biermann,
Handbook of Pulping and Papermaking, 1996; A. Elaahi, H. Lowitt, U.S. Pulp and Paper Industry: An Energy Perspective,
Energetics, Inc. 1988.
General: Characterization of Industrial Process Waste Heat and Input Streams, PNNL, May 1984, for U.S. DOE.
Opportunity 1 Waste Heat Recovery From Gases and Liquids in
Chemicals, Petroleum, and Forest Products: Supporting Data Tables
Table 1.1 Energy Table 1.2 Energy
Chemicals Manufacture Savings Petroleum Fired Systems Savings
10^12 Btu 10^12 Btu
The Ethylene Chain 25.6 Atmospheric Distillation 96.24
Ethylene 18.63 Vacuum Distillation 29.85
Polyethlene - 1997 0.41 Solvent Deasphalting 2.6
Poly Vinyl Chloride 0.70 Delayed Coking 7
Ethylene Oxide 0.44 Fluid Coking 1.42

Flexcoking 1.34
Ethylene Glycol 0.43
Visbreaking 0.26
Polystyrene 4.88
Fluid Catalytic Cracking 20
5.27
Catalytic Reforming 47.04
The Propylene Chain 5.27
Alkylation 29.8
Propylene 3.19 Ethers Manufacture 3.34
Polypropylene - 1997 0.13 Isomerization 4
Propylene Oxide - 1997 0.41 Catalytic Hydrotreating 70.25
Acrylonitrile 0.27 Catalytic Hydrocracking 24.7
Acrylic Acid 0.84 Lube Oil Mfg 19.16
Acrylic Fiber 0.43 357.0

Petroleum Steam Systems
The BTX Chain (Benzene, 15.3
Atmospheric Distillation 60
Toluene, Xylene)
BTX 3.40 Vacuum Distillation 11
Benzene 0.31 Fluid Catalytic Cracking 0
Ethylbenzene 0.95 Catalytic Hydrocracking 4

Catalytic Hydrotreating 25
Styrene 8.24
Catalytic Reforming 14
Polystyrene 1.03
Alkylation 17
Cumene 0.20
Isomers 5
Terephthalic Acid 0.59 136.0
Nylon 6.6 0.56 493.0
Nylon 6 0.20
Agricultural Chemicals - 32.80

Table 1.3 Energy
Fertilizers
Forest Products Steam Savings
Urea 0.22
Systems 10^12 Btu
Phosphoric Acid (furnace Process) 0.48 Kraft Pulping 22
Ammonia 31.90 Semi Chem Pulping 2
15.31 Chemical Recovery 17
Caustic Soda (Chlorine/Sodium Hydroxide) 7.58 Lime Reburning 23
Soda Ash (Sodium Carbonate) 7.73 Total Forest Products 64

Total Five Chains 94.28
Estimated Additional Savings 200 Table 1.4 Energy Savings
TOTAL Industry 294.28 Combined Energy Savings 10^12 Btu
Chemicals 294
Petroleum 493
Forest Products 64
TOTAL All Industries 851
Opportunity 2 Combined Heat and Power
This opportunity area encompasses potential energy savings accruing from the increased use of combined heat and power (CHP,
or cogeneration) systems in the industrial sector. Cogeneration systems produce both electricity and steam, which increases the
thermal efficiency of the system when compared with utility power generating systems (from thermal efficiency of about 30-40% to
as much as 75% or more for cogeneration). Energy savings accrue from a reduction in the energy losses associated with power
generation inefficiencies. Net electricity generated by the manufacturing sector in 1998 amounted to nearly 500 Tbtu, with 428
Tbtu generated through cogenerating systems. Total purchased electricity for manufacturing amounted to 3.1 quads in 1998; the
generation and transmission losses associated with manufacturing purchases were over 6.4 quads for that year. Onsite power
generation currently accounts for only about 14% of manufacturing electricity demand.
While any power-consuming industry can potentially install onsite cogeneration units, the industry must be able to use or export
the steam that is produced. In addition, if the industry produces excess electricity, it can be exported to the local grid (if permitted
by local regulation), providing an additional revenue stream to offset energy costs. While this opportunity specifically targets the
forest products, chemicals, food, metals, and machinery industries, other steam-using industries such as textiles manufacture are
potential but smaller targets for increased use of CHP. Advanced cogeneration technologies include systems made more efficient
through advances in turbine designs (microturbines, reciprocating gas turbines) or other innovations (e.g., advanced materials).
Such technologies can also provide “trigeneration” capability, i.e., generation of power, heating and cooling.

Pre-Process 634
TOTAL 634
Methodology
Energy savings are based on the potential adoption of 56 GW of new CHP capacity by 2020 (total predicted potential capacity is
88 GW). These additions were assumed to be installed in four industries: pulp and paper (26 GW), chemicals (9 GW), food (8
GW), machinery (6 GW), and metals (7 GW). Energy consumption was estimated by first calculating the energy required to
produce electricity at the heat rate of 10,500 Btu/kWh (typical of purchased electricity generated at utilities) and at the more
efficient heat rate of 4500 Btu/kWh (typical for cogeneration facilities). Energy savings were then determined by calculating the
reduction in energy losses achieved by producing electricity at the more efficient heat rate. Energy loss reductions are taken
offsite, at the utility that would have been producing the purchased power. New capacity was assumed to be operating at 67% of
capacity, or about 5900 hours per year, which yields an estimated 106 billion kWh. Fuel required by the utility to produce 106
billion kWh was estimated to be about 1110 Tbtu (750 Tbtu losses); for the industrial cogenerator, the same amount of kWh would
require 476 Tbtu (115 Tbtu losses). The reduction in losses (and the potential opportunity for energy savings) was calculated to
be 635 Tbtu.
For simplicity, cost savings are based on a fuel mix of 40% natural gas ($5.65/MMBtu) and 60% coal ($1.50/MMBtu). Average
fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004, and EIA Petroleum Marketing Monthly June 2004.
References
“Combined Heat And Power: Capturing Wasted Energy, “ R. Neal Elliott and Mark Spurr. American Council for an Energy
Efficiency Economy (ACEEE). May 1999. Additional communication with the authors in June 2004.
National CHP Roadmap, U.S. Combined Heat and Power Association, with the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, March 2001 and updates.
CHP Market Assessment, Onsite Sycom Energy Corporation, for the U.S. Department of Energy, 2000.
Hendrick G. van Oss, Cement 2001, U.S. Geological Survey.
N Martin, E. Worrell, and L. Price, Energy Efficiency and Carbon Dioxide Emissions Reduction Opportunities in the U.S. Cement
Industry, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1999.
Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey, 1998, Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy, 2001.
Opportunity 2 Combined Heat and Power Systems:
Supporting Data Tables
Table 2.1 Industrial Onsite Power Generation

Onsite Electricity
% of Electricity Future Potential for
Industry Million kWh Trillion Btu Demand CHP (MegaWatts)
Pulp & Paper 55,000 188 37 26,198
Cement 560 2 4 204
Steel 5,275 18 10 6,941 (primary metals)
Chemicals 45,721 156 21 9,440
Petroleum 15,240 52 30 6,789 (refining plus coal
Refining products)
Food 6,155 21 8 8,086
Sources:
CHP Market Assessment, Onsite Sycom Energy Corporation, for the U.S. Department of Energy, 2000.
Hendrick G. van Oss, Cement 2001, U.S. Geological Survey.
Opportunity 3 Advanced Industrial Boilers
This opportunity area encompasses the development and adoption of more efficient boilers, such as the “Super
Boiler” now under development, and other revolutionary boiler and combustion system innovations. While many
industry steam users could benefit from advanced boilers, most of the impact will be achieved in the heavy steam-
using industries such as chemicals, forest products, petroleum refining, food processing, and textiles.
About 6 quads of energy are currently consumed in industrial boilers every year (manufacturing and mining). Based
on 80% conversion efficiency (an average value – some boilers have efficiencies as low as 60%, depending on age
and fuel type), the energy losses associated with conversion of water to steam in boilers is about 1.2 quads annually.
The conversion efficiency of industrial boilers can be improved by boiler innovations such as high intensity heat
transfer, high efficiency, low emission burners, smart control systems, efficient preheating, flame radiation and other
enhancements. The Super Boiler technology, for example, combines a number of innovations in one system to
achieve optimum efficiency.
Pre-Process 400
TOTAL 400
Methodology
Energy savings are based on an energy and environmental analysis performed for the Super Boiler technology using
the ITP Impacts Projection Model, and extrapolated to larger market segments. This analytical model projects energy
benefits for a span of 30 years, based on escalation of current markets, selected market penetration curves, and user
inputs of energy impacts relative to conventional technology. A conservative scenario for the Super Boiler was
assumed to be a potential accessible market of 35%, with 70% of that market penetrated by 2025. This scenario
yields a projected energy savings of about 200TBtu in 2025 (see Table 3.1).
Since Super Boiler technology is assumed to impact a limited market segment (about ½ of industrial boilers of 10
MMBtu/h capacity or larger, and about 40% of total firing capacity of these boilers), it was assumed that similar results
could be achieved with other technology advances in at least 80% of the total boiler market. Extrapolating results to
this larger market yielded roughly an additional 200 TBtu of potential energy savings by 2025. Total energy savings
were thus assumed to be about 400 TBtu, based on long-term market penetration of advanced boiler systems over 20
years (see Table 3.2).
For simplicity, cost savings are based on a fuel mix of 41% natural gas ($5.65/MMBtu), 12% coal ($1.50/MMBtu), 5%
fuel oils ($4.7/MMBtu) and 42% other (mostly waste fuels – no cost assigned). Boiler fuel mix is taken from the 1998
MECS. Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004, and EIA Petroleum
Marketing Monthly June 2004.
References
Engineering and Economic Analysis Tool: “Super Boilers”, Energetics, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy,
Government Performance Reporting Act (GPRA) FY 2006 submissions, June 2004.
Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities Analysis, Energetics, Inc. and E3M, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy,
November 2004.
Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey 1998, Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy,
2001.
Opportunity 3 Advanced Industrial Boilers: Supporting Data Tables
Table 3.1 Potential Energy Impacts Based Solely on Super Boiler Technology
Impact By Year 2010 2015 2020 2025
ANNUAL SAVINGS
Energy Metrics
Total primary energy displaced (trillion Btu) 3.57 30.12 130.03 186.86
Direct electricity displaced (billion kWh) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Direct natural gas displaced (bcf) 3.48 29.33 126.61 181.94
Direct petroleum displaced (million barrels) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Direct coal displaced (million short tons) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Table 3.2 Potential Energy Impacts Based on 80% of Boiler Population

Impact By Year 2010 2015 2020 2025
ANNUAL SAVINGS
Energy Metrics
Total primary energy displaced (trillion Btu) 8.17 68.85 297.22 427.10
Direct electricity displaced (billion kWh) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Direct natural gas displaced (bcf) 7.95 67.04 289.40 415.87
Direct petroleum displaced (million barrels) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Direct coal displaced (million short tons) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Opportunity 4 Heat Recovery From Drying Processes
This opportunity represents energy savings from the recovery of waste heat from relatively inefficient drying processes
in a number of industries, including chemicals, forest products, and food processing. Improvements are possible in
processes such as paper drying, concentration, evaporation, and other processes where water is removed. This
opportunity would also encompass process operations such as paint drying and curing, which are used in assembly
and fabrication industries such as heavy machinery, fabricated metals, and transportation equipment.
Energy used for drying processes in just two industries (pulp and paper and food processing) is over 1 quad annually,
and most drying processes are inherently inefficient. Technologies for energy recovery could potentially include
direct-fired dryers, alternative-fuel dryers, air heat recovery, mechanical vapor recompression, and advanced heat
pumps. Heat could potentially be recovered from exhaust or flue gases and saturated vapors that are vented to the
atmosphere.

Pre-Process 160
TOTAL 377
Methodology
Energy savings are derived from pre-process and post-process drying operations in the chemicals, forest products
and food processing industries. Pre-process drying losses are based on 10% recovery of steam losses in steam -
driven drying systems in these three industries, which encompass losses from generation, distribution and conversion
of steam to useful work. Post-process drying heat recovery is based on 5-15% recovery of heat downstream of the
drying process, with the bulk of energy loss recovery coming from paper drying and food processing (see Table 4.1).
For simplicity, cost savings are based on a fuel mix of 46% natural gas ($5.65/MMBtu), 5% electricity ($0.0477/kWh)
and 49% other (mostly waste fuels – no cost assigned). This is based on the fuels used for process heating according
to the 1998 MECS. Drying is not specifically separated out in the MECS and better estimates of fuel distribution for
drying are only available for some industries. Drying systems can be direct-fuel fired, steam-driven, or powered by
electricity. Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004.
References
Energy Use, Loss and Opportunity Analysis, Energetics, Inc. and E3M, Incorporated, for the U.S. Department of
Energy, November 2004.
Table 4.1 Potential Downstream Energy Recovery in Drying Processes

Pre-Process Steam Pre-Process Energy Post-Process Energy
Sector Losses 10^12 Btu Savings 10^12 Btu Savings 10^12 Btu
Chemicals 748 74.8 0.29
Ammonia Phosphate 0.23
Superphosphates 0.06
Forest Products 1143 114.3 141
Pulp Drying 3
Paper Drying 138
Food Processing 277 27.7 76
TOTAL 216.8 217.29
Opportunity 5 Steam Best Practices
This opportunity area covers the application of best operating and maintenance practices to steam generation,
distribution and recovery systems (excluding development of advanced boilers) prior to steam delivery to the process.
Significant energy is lost throughout steam systems during generation, distribution, and conversion of steam to useful
work. Overall, these losses have been estimated to be as much as 55% of the energy that is input to the steam
system.
Current fuel inputs to steam systems amount to over 6 quads annually. Losses associated with steam systems, from
generation to distribution and conversion, amount to over 2.8 quads, representing a significant opportunity for
efficiency improvement.
Best practices includes a combination of improved maintenance and upkeep (e.g., leaks in pipes, traps, vents);
increased use of energy management tools to optimize steam system operation (vent steam, condensate recovery,
combustion efficiency, steam distribution, feed water heat exchange); and incremental equipment improvements (e.g.,
insulation).

Pre-Process 310
Post-Process 0 TOTAL $850
TOTAL 310
Methodology
Energy savings are based on a 5% reduction in energy inputs to steam systems across the entire manufacturing and
mining sector.
For simplicity, cost savings are based on a fuel mix of 46% natural gas ($5.65/MMBtu), 5% electricity ($0.0477/kWh),
10% coal ($1.50/MMBtu) and 39% other (mostly waste fuels – no cost assigned). This is based on boiler fuel inputs
according to the 1998 MECS. Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004.
References
Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities Analysis, Energetics, Inc. and E3M, Inc for the U.S. Department of Energy,
November 2004.
Opportunity 6 Pump System Optimization
This opportunity area involves the optimization of motor-driven pump systems that are used throughout the
industrial sector. Pumps are inherently inefficient (about 40% of energy inputs are lost in conversion), and
are often improperly sized or utilized. Pump system optimization can be achieved, for example, by
identifying systems that are inefficiently configured for the application (e.g., continuous pumping for batch
operations, over-sized), upgrading old or high-maintenance systems, and identifying damaged pumps.
Optimization of pumping systems can have significant energy impacts. These systems currently account
for about 25% of motor drive energy use in the manufacturing sector, or about 600 Tbtu (not including
offsite losses incurred during generation of purchased electricity at the utility).
Most pump systems are driven by electricity, which is primarily purchased from outside utilities.
Consequently, pump systems represent a unique opportunity to reduce energy losses both within and
outside the plant boundary. Reducing electricity demand for pumping in the plant translates into less
purchased electricity, which is typically generated at utilities with relatively inefficient power generation
systems (efficiency of electricity generation at utilities ranges from 25-45%).

Pre-Process 302* (98)
TOTAL 302* (98)
Methodology
Energy savings are based on energy reduction potentials derived in a recent survey conducted by
Xenergy in 1998 for the U.S. manufacturing sector. The conservative, lower range of energy savings was
assumed for this opportunity (see Table 6.1), and amounts to 98 TBtu. Additional energy savings were
estimated by calculating the amount of offsite energy losses associated with reduced purchased electricity
for pumping, assuming all pumping systems were power-driven. A conversion factor of 10,500 Btu/kWh
was assumed for offsite utility losses, which amounted to 204 Tbtu.
Cost savings are based on avoided electricity costs ($0.0477/kWh) for the plant. Average electricity price
was taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004.
References
U.S. Industrial Motor Systems Market Opportunities Assessment, Xenergy for Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the
U.S. Department of Energy, 1998.
Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities Analysis, Energetics, Inc and E3M, Inc for the U.S. Department of Energy,
November 2004.
Notes
*Includes losses associated with offsite generation and transmission of electricity, based on a conversion factor of
10,500 Btu/kWh. Number in parenthesis does not include offsite losses.
Table 6.1 Estimated Energy Savings for Pumping Systems

Billion KiloWatt-Hours Trillion Btu (Net)
Mid-Range Energy Savings 28.7 97.9
High-Range Energy Savings 38.4 131.0
Source: U.S. Industrial Motor Systems Market Opportunities Assessment, Xenergy for Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the
Opportunity 7 Energy System Integration
This opportunity area encompasses energy savings from energy system integration, which involves a diversity of
methods for integrating energy sources and sinks, integration of energy requirements to minimize the cost of
operations, and part-load cycling and load management. The objective is to optimize plant-wide energy utilization by
identifying and developing synergies among energy flows in process design and operation. Heat integration and CHP
are key facets of energy systems integration. Technologies to promote and implement energy system integration
would include tools to perform energy balances across the plant to integrate energy use and cost; pinch opportunity
identification tools; tariff calculators to assist in minimizing purchases from utilities; and tools to more effectively deal
with part-load cycling and load management. Tools should be user-friendly, and motivate end-users to pursue outside
expertise for in-depth cost and benefits analysis and systems engineering. A challenge will be to develop tools that
are suitable for a diverse industrial sector.
This opportunity potentially impacts all energy inputs used for heat and power in the manufacturing sector, which
amount to nearly 18 quads each year. The total pre-process energy losses (generation, distribution, and conversion)
associated with manufacturing equal about 5.9 quads annually.

Pre-Process 110
TOTAL 260
Methodology
Energy savings are first based on a reduction in pre-process energy losses in steam systems, power generation, and
process heating (fired systems) for six industrial sectors: petroleum refining, chemicals, forest products, iron and steel,
food processing, and aluminum manufacture. This includes generation, distribution, and conversion (pre-process)
losses. A conservative across-the-board reduction of 3% was assumed to be achievable due to the implementation of
enhanced energy system integration, which yielded energy savings of 110 TBtu.
Post-process loss reductions were estimated to be 2% of steam and other fuels delivered to processes (2% of about
7.5 quads) in five industries (all the above, excluding aluminum). These reductions amounted to 150 Tbtu.
and 49% other (mostly waste fuels – no cost assigned). This is based on a composite of the fuels used for steam and
process heating according to the 1998 MECS. Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review
June 2004.
References
November 2004.
Table 7.1 Pre-Process Losses Considered for Energy Systems Integration

Steam Fired System Fired System Total Pre-
System Distribution Conversion Process Losses
Losses* Losses Losses
Petroleum Refining 484 68 312 864
Chemicals 748 38 172 958
Forest Products 1143 30 7 1180
Iron and Steel 44 42 199 285
Food Processing 277 10 40 327
Aluminum 19 5 30 54
Opportunity 8 Improved Process Heating/Heat Transfer Systems in Non-
Metals Industries
This opportunity area encompasses potential improvements to process heaters (i.e., fired systems) and supporting
heat transfer systems (boilers excluded) in the non-metal industries, specifically chemicals and petroleum. Typical
fired systems in these industries include pyrolysis furnaces, preheat furnaces, evaporators, kettle boilers (reboilers)
and others. Energy expended in fired systems in these two industries currently amounts to 3.4 quads annually.
Technologies might include improved materials, innovative heat exchanger designs and geometries, better heat
transport configurations, predictive heat exchanger design, and other process heating enhancements. While the
opportunity is evaluated specifically for two industries, advances in process heating and heat transfer systems could
be extended to numerous other non-metal sectors, such as food processing, forest products, textiles, and plastics and
rubber.

Pre-Process 121
TOTAL 260
Methodology
Pre-process energy savings are based on a 25% reduction in pre-process energy conversion losses only in fired
systems in the two industries analyzed (see Table 8.1). Post-process losses are based on a 5% reduction in the final
energy delivered to fired systems in these two industries (taking into account generation, distribution and conversion
losses.
and 49% other (mostly waste fuels – no cost assigned). This is based on a composite of the fuels used for process
heating according to the 1998 MECS. Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June
2004.
References
November 2004.
Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey 1998, Energy Information Administration, 2001.
Table 8.1 Pre-Process Losses and Energy Delivered to Fired Systems (Tbtu)
Total Pre-
Generation Distribution Conversion Process Losses Delivered to
Losses Losses Losses Process
Petroleum 0 68 312 380 1776
Refining
Chemicals 0 38 172 210 997
Opportunity 9 Energy Efficient Motors and Rewind Practices
This opportunity area involves the adoption of high efficiency motor systems and improving motor rewind practices.
Every industrial sector makes use of motor-driven equipment, and in many cases the efficiency of motor use can be
enhanced by upgrading the motor (e.g., variable speed drives, high efficiency motor) or through rewinding. Motor-
driven equipment currently accounts for over 2.3 quads of energy use throughout manufacturing and mining.
Motors represent a unique opportunity to reduce energy losses both within and outside the plant boundary. Reducing
motor electricity demand translates into less purchased electricity, which is typically generated at utilities with
relatively inefficient power generation systems (efficiency of electricity generation at utilities ranges from 25-45%).

TOTAL 258* (84)
Methodology
Energy savings are based on energy reduction potentials derived in a recent survey conducted by Xenergy in 1998 for
the U.S. manufacturing sector. The conservative, lower range of energy savings was assumed for this opportunity
and amounts to 84 TBtu. Additional energy savings were estimated by calculating the amount of offsite energy
losses associated with the reduced purchased electricity for more energy efficient motors, assuming all are power-
driven. A conversion factor of 10,500 Btu/kWh was assumed for offsite utility losses, which amounted to 174 Tbtu.
Cost savings are based on avoided electricity costs ($0.0477/kWh) for the plant. Average electricity price was taken
from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004.
References
November 2004.
Notes
Opportunity 10 Waste Heat Recovery From Gases In Metals and Non-
Metallic Minerals Manufacture
This opportunity involves the recovery of waste heat from gases generated in metals and non-metallic minerals
manufacturing (excluding calcining, which is covered in Opportunity 18). Exit gases from processes used to
manufacture metals and other materials often have substantial embodied energy, but cannot be cost-effectively
captured as an energy source. New technologies are needed to recover waste heat from exit gases, especially those
that are corrosive or laden with c ontaminants.
Technologies could include enhanced heating system to improve quality and utility of exit gases (secondary heating,
destruction of selected chemical species), integration of heating and heat recovery (including transport), and feedback
systems to optimize performance. Supporting technologies such as hot gas cleanup and corrosion-resistant materials
are also included. While the energy savings for this opportunity have been determined only for iron and steel and
cement, these technologies could potentially be extended to a number of industries, such as lime and soda ash
manufacture, coal gasification, and others where hot contaminated, or corrosive gases are an issue.

Pre-Process 0
TOTAL 235
Methodology
Savings are based on a recent analysis of iron and steel and cement (see Table 10.1). This analysis assumes an
average percent of waste heat recovery that could be possible (10-20%), based on consultation with various industry
experts. A percentage of the flue gases from cement calcining are included here. Because of potential overlaps, the
remaining potential energy savings for cement calcining are covered under opportunities specific to calcining
(Opportunity 18).
For simplicity, cost savings are based on a fuel mix of 80% natural gas ($5.65/MMBtu) and 20% coal ($1.50/MMBtu).
Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004.
References
November 2004.
Table 10.1 Recovery of Waste Heat from

Exit Gases from Metals/Non-Metallics
Energy Savings
10^12 Btu
Iron and Steel
Coke Making 4
BF Iron Making 97
EAF Steelmaking 59
Tunnel Furnace 4
Slab Reheat Furnace 31
Steel Subtotal 195
Cement
Calcining Flue Gases 40
TOTAL 235
Opportunity 11 Energy Source Flexibility
This opportunity area encompasses covers energy source flexibility, which is defined as finding new or alternative sources to
meet energy requirements for manufacturing processes. Alternatives should be more energy efficient and cost- effective when
compared with conventional technology, and should be environmentally sound or exhibit improved environmental performance.
In some cases emerging or existing technology can be reconfigured to provide alternatives; in other cases, research,
development and demonstration of entirely new concepts will be required.
Energy source flexibility can impact a significant portion of energy use. Total manufacturing energy consumption for steam
generation and fired systems currently amounts to nearly 14 quads annually.
Technology options include innovations such as microwaves or heat- activated power; the substitution of steam for direct heat or
vice versa; CHP as a direct power source; small, cost- effective modular energy systems (e.g., chillers); steam applied directly to
mechanical drives; and alternative-fuel-fired systems (e.g., advanced burners for combustion of animal products, ethers, other
waste fuels).

Pre-Process 119
TOTAL 194
Methodology
Pre-process energy savings are based on a reduction of 5% of steam system pre-process losses in major steam using industries
(petroleum refining, chemicals and forest products), and amount to 119 Tbtu. The baseline steam losses for these industries are
484 Tbtu, 748 Tbtu, and 1143 Tbtu, respectively. Post-process energy savings (downstream of the process) are based on a prior
analysis (see Table 11.1) that encompasses four industries – chemicals, petroleum refining, forest products, and iron and steel.
In ammonia sulfate, manufacture, for example, savings were estimated to be 0.34 Tbtu, based on typical conversion efficiencies
and replacement of steam with an alternative energy source. Details of this analysis can be found in the Energy Use, Loss and
Opportunities Analysis, cited below.
Cost savings are based on a fuel mix of 46% natural gas ($5.65/MMBtu), 5% electricity ($0.0477/kWh), 5% coal ($1.50/MMBtu)
and 49% other (mostly waste fuels – no cost assigned). This is based on a composite of the fuels used for process heating
according to the 1998 MECS. Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004.
References
Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities Analysis, Energetics, Inc and E3M, Inc for the U.S. Department of Energy, November 2004.
Table 11.1 Potential Energy Recovery Achieved Through

Energy Source Flexibility: Post-Process
Energy Savings 10^12 Btu
Chemicals
Nitric Acid Mfg 0.18
Ammonia Sulfate 0.34
Subtotal 0.52
Petroleum
Delayed Coking 7
Forest Products
Bleaching 14
Iron and Steel
10% Loss Reduction 53
by energy redirection
TOTAL 74.52
Opportunity 12 Improved Sensors, Controls, and Automation
This opportunity area is a broad category for optimizing energy through the use of improved sensors, controls, and
automation. Research is needed to develop improved sensors and controls for process optimization. The goal is to
meet product specifications while minimizing energy use and cost, and ultimately achieve reductions in energy
requirements. Automation and robotics could also play a role in energy optimization in some industrial processes.
Technologies include remote measurement of temperature and pressure in harsh environments, direct measurement
of product specification parameters, and predictive models for on-line controls. Effective optimization of process
heater operations and innovations that enable automation of process heaters are also represented in this category,
including those that better control or reduce environmental emissions (e.g., NOX).

Pre-Process 39
TOTAL 191
Methodology
Pre-process energy savings are based on a reduction of 1% of pre-process losses in chemicals, petroleum, forest
products, iron and steel, food, foundries, aluminum and cement (see Table 12.1.)
End-of-process energy savings are based on a recent study which identified losses and target opportunities for six
selected industries (chemicals, petroleum, iron and steel, forest products, food processing, and cement (see reference
below, Energetics 2004). The savings are based on a 5% reduction in the identified losses, assumed to be achieved
through improved sensor and control systems and ultimate optimization of steam and fired systems.
and 49% other (mostly waste fuels – no cost assigned). This is based on a composite of the fuels used for process
heating according to the 1998 MECS. Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June
2004.
References
November 2004.
Table 12.1 Pre -Process Losses Considered for Improved

Sensors and Controls
Steam Fired System Fired System Total Pre-
System Distribution Conversion Process Losses
Losses* Losses Losses
Petroleum Refining 484 68 312 864
Chemicals 748 38 172 958
Forest Products 1143 30 7 1180
Food Processing 277 10 40 327
Cement 0.4 9 44 53
Aluminum 19 5 30 54
Foundries 10 4 22 36
*Includes steam generation, transport through distribution systems, and pre-process conversion to useful work.
Opportunity 13 Improved Process Heating/Heat Transfer for Metals Melting,
Heating and Annealing
This opportunity area covers potential improvements to process heaters (fired systems) and heat transfer systems in
the metal and non-metallic mineral industries (analogous to Opportunity 8 for chemicals and petroleum). Process
heating systems represent a large share of energy use and production costs in the metals and non-metallic minerals
industries (nearly 2 quads in iron and steel, aluminum, foundries, and fabricated metals). The competitiveness of
these industries could be enhanced by optimizing productivity (inputs, reliability, maintenance, product output) and
minimizing the energy intensity (Btu/lb of material processed) of process heating systems. The overall goal is to
improve thermal efficiency and maximize heat transfer (not necessarily reduce waste heat).
Technology options include innovative heat exchanger designs and geometries, better heat transfer (faster heating,
faster throughput), improved productivity via reduction in product waste, cascade heating techniques, switching from
batch to continuous furnace operation, rapid heat treating, metal heating, and melting technologies, hybrid heating
systems, and other process heating enhancements.

Pre-Process 63
TOTAL 190
Methodology
Pre-process energy savings are based on 25% reduction in pre-process energy conversion losses in fired systems in
three industries – iron and steel, aluminum, and metalcasting (based on a previous energy footprint analysis – see
references). Post-process energy savings are based on a 5-10% reduction in post-process losses in fired systems in
the industries analyzed (see Table 13.1).
For simplicity, cost savings are based on a fuel mix of 80% natural gas ($5.65/MMBtu) and 20% coal ($1.50/MMBtu).
This is based on a composite of the fuels used for process heating according to the 1998 MECS. Average fuel prices
were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004.
References
November 2004.
Manufacturing Energy Footprints, Energetics, Inc for the U.S. Department of Energy, November 2003.
Table 13.1 Potential Ene rgy Savings for Fired Systems

Pre-Process Energy Post-Process
Conversion Losses Potential Delivered to Potential Savings
Savings (25%) Process (5-10%)
Aluminum 29 7 272 14
Foundries 22 6 125 -
TOTAL 250 63 1403 127
Opportunity 14 Compressed Air System Optimization
This opportunity area involves the optimization of motor-driven compressed air systems. Compressors are inherently
inefficient (about 80-90% of energy inputs are lost in conversion to useful work). Compressor system optimization can
be achieved, for example, by identifying systems that are leaking, poorly configured for the end-use, and by reducing
system air pressure or reducing run times.
Optimization of compressed air systems can have significant energy impacts. These systems currently account for
about 15-16% of motor drive energy use in the manufacturing sector, or over 300 Tbtu (not including offsite losses
incurred during generation of purchased electricity at the utility).
Compressors are driven by electricity, which is primarily purchased from outside utilities. Consequently, compressor
systems represent a unique opportunity to reduce energy losses both within and outside the plant boundary.
Reducing electricity demand for compressors in the plant translates into less purchased electricity, which is typically
generated at utilities with relatively inefficient power generation systems (efficiency of electricity generation at utilities
ranges from 25-45%).

TOTAL 163* (53)
Methodology
Energy savings are based on energy reduction potentials derived in a survey conducted by Xenergy in 1998 for the
U.S. manufacturing sector. The conservative, lower range of energy savings was assumed for this opportunity (see
Table 14.1), and amounts to 53 TBtu. Additional energy savings were estimated by calculating the amount of offsite
energy losses associated with reduced purchased electricity for compressors. A conversion factor of 10,500 Btu/kWh
was assumed for offsite utility losses, which amounted to 110 Tbtu.
Cost savings are based on avoided electricity costs ($0.0477/kWh) for the plant. Average electric ity price was taken
References
November 2004.
Notes
Table 14.1 Estimated Energy Savings for Pumping Systems

Billion KiloWatt-Hours Trillion Btu (Net)
Mid-Range Energy Savings 15.5 52.9
High-Range Energy Savings 20.0 68.2
Source: U.S. Industrial Motor Systems Market Opportunities Assessment, Xenergy for Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the
Opportunity 15 Optimized Materials Processing
This opportunity area involves the optimization of motor-driven material processing systems (e.g., mixers, grinders,
crushers) that are used throughout the industrial sector. These systems are very inefficient in the conversion of
energy to usable work (as much as 80-90% of energy inputs are lost in conversion). Optimization of these systems
could be achieved through innovations in equipment, better integration of equipment and end-use, implementation of
continuous versus batch operations, upgrading old or high-maintenance systems, and identifying damaged systems.
Optimization of materials processing systems can have significant energy impacts. These systems currently account
for about 25% of motor drive energy use in the manufacturing sector, or about 600 Tbtu (not including offsite losses
incurred during generation of purchased electricity at the utility).
Most materials processing systems are driven by electricity, which is primarily purchased from outside utilities.
Consequently, these systems represent a unique opportunity to reduce energy losses both within and outside the
plant boundary. Reducing electricity demand for such systems in the plant translates into less purchased electricity,
which is typically generated at utilities with relatively inefficient power generation systems (efficiency of electricity
generation at utilities ranges from 25-45%).

TOTAL 145* (47)
Methodology
Energy savings are based on a reduction of 15% of current equipment conversion losses (473 TBtu) attributed to
materials processing systems in the U.S. manufacturing sector. These losses were estimated in a recent study (see
reference below).
Additional energy savings were estimated by calculating the amount of offsite energy losses associated with reduced
purchased electricity for these systems, assuming all pumping systems were power-driven. A conversion factor of
10,500 Btu/kWh was assumed for offsite utility losses, which were calculated to be 102 Tbtu.
Cost savings are based on avoided electricity costs ($0.0477/kWh) for the plant. Average electricity price was taken
References
November 2004.
Notes
Opportunity 16 Energy Recovery From Byproduct Gases
This opportunity area involves the recovery of energy from combustible byproduct gases in various industries, notably
petroleum refining and iron and steel. Byproduct gases contain various components (e.g., methane, propane, light
hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide) that often have significant fuel value but are not economically recoverable with
today’s technology. In some cases the components are very dilute, making recovery technically and economically
difficult.
Data is lacking on the true energy potential for this area, although sources indicate that millions of pounds of
combustible chemicals are lost in byproduct streams annually. Some of the technology options for capturing the
energy potential of these byproducts include novel techniques for separating or concentrating combustible
components, hot gas cleanup technology, materials for corrosive environments, and innovative burners. Examples of
sources include CO-rich gases from the electric arc furnace in steelmaking, and gases from fluid catalytic cracker
catalyst reburning.

Pre-Process 0
TOTAL 132
Methodology
Savings are based on a prior analysis (see references below and Table 16.1) for petroleum refining and iron and
steel. Sources in petroleum refining are the feed fired heater and catalyst regenerator on the fluid catalytic cracker
(average efficiency about 75%). As the prior study significantly underreports losses of combustible gases, it was also
assumed that another 5% of the energy delivered to fired systems after pre-process losses (1776 TBtu) could be
recouped as a combustible gas, or about 89 TBtu. Combined energy savings for petroleum refining are 112 TBtu.
The electric arc furnace is the primary source of combustible gases in iron and steel. Average efficiency of the
furnace was assumed to be about 56%.
Cost savings are based entirely on natural gas at $5.65/MMBtu, assuming this would be the primary fuel replaced.
Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004.
References
November 2004.
Table 16.1 Energy Savings Potentials for

Recovery of Combustible Gases
Energy Savings
Sector 10^12 Btu
Petroleum
Fluid Catalytic Cracking 23
Other Offgases 89
112
Iron and Steel
EAF Steelmaking 20
TOTAL 132
Opportunity 17 Energy Export and Co-Location
This opportunity area looks at the potential for exporting energy from pulp mills and other plants, such as fuels
produced by Fischer-Tropsch synthesis of synthetic gases from black liquor gasification. This topic also covers co-
location of plants to optimize energy resources (e.g., location of large excess steam producer near heavy steam user).
Fuels such as renewable ethanol could supplement current petroleum -based fuels and reduce our dependence on
foreign oil. Pulp mill wastes and forestry residues, as well as primary forestry resources could serve as the feedstock
for renewable fuels and chemicals. Such resources are considerable (see Figure 17.1). Co-location of plants
provides energy optimization by linking waste energy with potential users. It also provides opportunities to increase
the use of on-site combined heat and power (CHP).
Pre-Process 0
TOTAL 105
Methodology
While some estimates project potential wood-based fuels at 1 quad annually, this estimate uses a more conservative
estimate based on current mill waste and forestry residues (see Figure 17.1). The estimated conversion factor for
wood resources to ethanol is 72.8 gallons ethanol/dry ton of material. Based on this conversion factor, an energy
content of 3.539 MMBtu/bbl for ethanol, and 86 dry tons of wood-based materials available for conversion, energy
potential was calculated to be about 105 trillion Btu. These savings represent the petroleum feedstock that would be
supplemented with ethanol. Opportunities for co-location were not estimated, but could be substantial.
Other studies [Agenda 2020 Presentation 2004, below] have indicated that if 100% of pulp mills were converted to
forestry biorefineries, as much as 1.9 billion gallons of ethanol could be produced annually (about 160 TBtu). For this
analysis the more conservative number of 105 TBtu was chosen.
Cost savings are based entirely on cost of petroleum products at $5.80/MMBtu, assuming this would be the primary
fuel replaced. Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004.
References
Industrial Bioproducts: Today and Tomorrow, Energetics, Inc for the U.S. Department of Energy, Biomass Program,
March 2004.
Aden et al, Lignocellulosic Biomass to Ethanol Process Design and Economics Utilizing Co-Current Dilute Acid
Prehydrolysis and Enzymatic Hydrolysis for Corn Stover, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado
(NREL/TP-510-32438), June 2002.
B.A. Thorp, “The Forest Biorefinery: A Partial View,” Presentation on behalf of Agenda 2020, June 2004; data also to
appear in September and October issues of Paper Age.
Opportunity 17 Energy Export and Co-Location:
Supporting Data Tables
Potential Energy Crops

Sludge 159 MdT
50 MdT
(primarily switchgrass, also hybrid poplar and willow)
(manure and biosolids)
Agricultural Crop Residues

156 MdT
Biogas
11 MdT (corn stover, wheat and rice
straw, cotton stalks)
(landfill, digester,
and sewage gas)
Forest Residues
84 MdT
Other
Wastes
161 Primary Mill Residues
2 MdT
(unused organic fraction of municipal solid
waste, construction and demolition waste (excludes portion currently used for
wood, urban tree residues) fuel wood, fiber, and misc. by-product)
Total Feedstocks Available: 623 Million dry Tons (MdT) per year
FigureFigure
2-2 Additional Domestic
17.1 Biomass Biomass
Resources Resources
Available Available
for Fuels and Chemicalfor Feedstock Uses
Feedstocks
[ADL 2001]
Opportunity 18 Waste Heat Recovery From Calcining
This opportunity area involves the recovery of waste heat from calcining, specifically lime mud reburning in the pulp
and paper industry, and cement calcining. Flue gases from cement calcining are not considered, as these are
covered under Opportunity 10, Waste Heat Recovery From Metals and Non-Metallic Minerals. Calcining in these two
industries amounts to about 0.5 quads of energy use annually.
In cement manufacture, technology options include recovery of heat in evaporated water, dust, clinker cooling, and
from radiative and convective heat losses. In pulp and paper making, the efficiency of the lime kiln used for reburning
is very low (30-40%) and could be improved by increasing heat transfer between lime mud and combustion gases,
and using heat recovery for better preheating of combustion air and lime mud.

Pre-Process 11
TOTAL 74
Methodology
Pre-process energy savings are based on a 25% reduction in pre-process equipment conversion losses (25% of 44
TBtu). Post-process energy savings are based on an analysis that examines opportunities for reducing energy
losses in a number of industries, including cement and forest products. The assumptions and results are shown in
Appendix B. About 50% of recoverable losses (40 TBtu) in cement calcining are assumed to be flue gases and are
included under Opportunity 10. All potentially recoverable losses from lime mud reburning are considered here.
Cost savings are based on a mix of 30% natural gas ($5.65/MMBtu), 30% coal ($1.50/MMBtu), and 40% waste fuels
(no cost assigned), according to approximate fuel distribution for process heating in the 1998 MECs (see references
below) for process heating in iron and steel. Average fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review
June 2004.
References
November 2004.
Opportunity 19 Heat Recovery From Metal Quenching/Cooling
This opportunity area represents energy savings from recouping heat lost in the quenching and cooling of metals.
These processes lose significant energy in the form of evaporated water that is vented to the atmosphere, energy
embodied in medium - to low-temperature steam and cooling water. Capturing this waste heat is often not technically
or economically feasible with today’s technologies.
Technology options would efficiently recover heat from quenching and cooling of metals, glass and other high
temperature materials (both molten and solid metals). This includes technology to utilize combustion products of flue
gases from reheat furnaces, coke oven batteries, and continuous annealing. Innovations such as thermo-electric
systems for medium temperature, clean flue products or cooling air are desirable.

Pre-Process 0
TOTAL 57
Methodology
Savings are based on a prior analysis (see references below) for iron and steel, although they could be much higher if
other metal producing, casting and fabricating industries were considered. Results of the analysis are shown in Table
19.1, indicating the specific processes covered.
Cost savings are based a mix of 80% natural gas ($5.65/MMBtu) and 20% coal ($1.50/MMBtu), based on the
approximate fuel distribution in the 1998 MECs (see references below) for process heating in iron and steel. Average
fuel prices were taken from the EIA Monthly Energy Review June 2004.
References
November 2004.
Table 19.1 Potential Energy Savings From

Quenching/Cooling of Metals
Energy Savings
Sector 10^12 Btu
Iron and Steel
Ingot 11
Continuous casting 8
Slab Reheat 20
Cleaning/Annealing 18
TOTAL 57
Opportunity 20 Advanced Process Cooling and Refrigeration
This opportunity area covers advances in cooling and refrigeration processes, specifically in the chemicals and food
processing industries. Cooling and refrigeration accounts for over 200 trillion Btu of energy use in the manufacturing
sector every year. A large portion of current technology is motor-driven. Although not one of the largest users of
energy, refrigeration systems can be very energy-intensive (e.g., cryogenic chemical separations).
Technology options include innovative or alternative approaches to cooling, process redesign to eliminate the need for
energy-intensive cooling units, and system optimization.

Pre-Process *47(15)
TOTAL *47(15)
Methodology
Pre-process savings are based on a 20% reduction in electricity requirements for motor-driven refrigeration in these
industries as sited in a recent study (Xenergy 1998). Energy use for refrigeration in these industries was based on
the Xenergy study and a prior study utilizing MECs data (see references below, and Table 20.1). Additional savings
would be possible through improvements in other cooling systems (non-motor-driven), although these were not
estimated for this study.
Cost savings are based entirely on the avoided use of electricity ($0.0477/kWh). Savings are counted only for the
electricity saved by the industry user – not the losses avoided at the utility generator. Average fuel prices were taken
References
November 2004.
Notes
Table 20.1 Potential Energy Savings for Advanced

Refrigeration Systems
Energy Use for
Motor-Driven Potential
Sector Refrigeration, Tbtu Savings
(with losses) (Tbtu)
Chemicals 111 22
Food Processing 123 25
TOTAL 234 47
Appendix D
NAICS Descriptions
311 – Food Manufacturing

Establishments in the Food Manufacturing subsector transform livestock and agricultural products into products for
intermediate or final consumption by humans or animals. The food products manufactured in these establishments are
typically sold to wholesalers or retailers for distribution to consumers, but establishments primarily engaged in
retailing bakery and candy products made on the premises not for immediate consumption are included.
312 – Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing

Industries in the Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing subsector manufacture beverages (alcoholic and
nonalcoholic) and tobacco products. Redrying and stemming tobacco is included in the tobacco products sector while
ice manufacturing is included with nonalcoholic beverage manufacturing because it uses the same production process
as water purification.
313 – Textile Mills

Industries in the Textile Mills subsector group include establishments that transform a basic fiber (natural or synthetic)
into a product, such as yarn or fabric, which is further manufactured into usable items, such as apparel, sheets, towels,
and textile bags for individual or industrial consumption. The further manufacturing may be performed in the same
establishment and classified in this subsector, or it may be performed at a separate establishment and be classified
elsewhere in manufacturing.
314 – Textile Product Mills

Establishments in the Textile Product Mills subsector group manufacture textile products (carpets, rugs, linens, rope,
twine, etc), excluding apparel. With a few exceptions, these industries generally purchase fabric to cut and sew into
the final nonapparel textile products.
315 – Apparel Manufacturing

Industries in the Apparel Manufacturing subsector group are involved in two manufacturing processes: (1) the
manufacture of garments using purchased fabric and cutting and sewing, and (2) the manufacture of garments in
establishments that first knit fabric and then cut and sew the fabric into a garment. Knitting, when done alone, is
classified in the Textile Mills subsector (313).
316 – Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing

Establishments in the Leather and Applied Product Manufacturing subsector transform hides into leather by tanning or
curing and fabricating the leather into products for final consumption. It also includes the manufacture of similar
products from other materials, including products (except apparel) made from “leather substitutes,” such as rubber,
plastics, or textiles. Rubber footwear, textile luggage, and plastic purses or wallets are examples of “leather
substitute” products included in this group. The products made from leather substitutes are included in this subsector
because they are made in similar ways leather products are made, and they are produced in the same establishments so
it is not practical to separate them.
321 – Wood Product Manufacturing

Industries in the Wood Product manufacturing subsector manufacture wood products, such as lumber, plywood,
veneers, wood containers, wood flooring, wood trusses, manufactured homes (i.e., mobile homes), and prefabricated
wood buildings.
322 – Paper Manufacturing
Industries in the Paper Manufacturing subsector make pulp, paper, or converted paper products such as paperboard
containers, paper bags, and tissue paper. The manufacturing of these products is grouped together because they
constitute a series of vertically connected processes and more than one is often carried out in a single establishment.
324110 – Petroleum Refineries

This industry comp rises establishments primarily engaged in refining crude petroleum. Petroleum refining involves
one or more of the following activities: (1) fractionation; (2) straight distillation of crude oil; and (3) cracking.
325 – Chemical Manufacturing

The Chemical Manufacturing subsector is based on the transformation of organic and inorganic raw materials by a
chemical process and the formulation of intermediate or end products. Exceptions include beneficiating operations
such as copper concentrating, crude petroleum refining, and aluminum oxide production that are covered in other
subsectors.
326 – Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing

Industries in the Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing subsector make goods by processing plastic materials
and raw rubber. Plastics and rubber are combined in the same subsector because plastics are increasingly being used
as a substitute for rubber; however, the subsector is generally restricted to the manufacture of products made of just
one material, either solely plastics or rubber. Footwear and furniture manufacturing are therefore covered elsewhere.
3272 – Glass and Glass Product Manufacturing

This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing glass and/or glass products. They may
start with silica sand or cullet, or purchased glass. Glass products that are classified elsewhere include glass wool
(fiberglass), optical lenses, ophthalmic lenses, and fiber optic cable.
327993 – Mineral Wool

This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing mineral wool and mineral wool insulation
products made of such siliceous materials as rock, slag, and glass or combinations thereof.
327310 – Cement Manufacturing

Establishments classified in this subsector are primarily engaged in manufacturing Portland, natural, masonry,
pozzalanic, and other hydraulic cements. Establishments primarily involved in mining, quarrying, or manufacturing
lime or manufacturing of ready-mix or dry mix concrete are classified elsewhere.
331111 – Iron and Steel Mills

This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in one or more of the following: (1) direct reduction of iron
ore; (2) manufacturing pig iron in molten or solid form; (3) converting pig iron into steel; (4) making steel; (5) making
steel and manufacturing shapes (e.g., bar, plate, rode, sheet, strip, wire); and (6) making steel and forming tube and
pipe. Establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing ferroalloys or operating coke ovens are classified elsewhere.
3313 – Alumina and Aluminum Production and Processing

This industry is composed of establishments primarily engaged in one or more of the following: (1) refining alumina;
(2) making (i.e., the primary production) aluminum from alumina; (3) recovering aluminum from scrap or dross; (4)
alloying purchased aluminum; and (5) manufacturing aluminum primary forms (e.g., bar, foil, pipe, plate, rod, sheet,
tube, wire).
3315 – Foundries
This industry group comprises establishments primarily engaged in pouring molten metal into molds or dies to form
castings. Establishments making castings and further manufacturing, such as machining or assembling, a specific
manufactured product are classified in the industry of the finished product. When the production of the primary metal
is combined with the casting, the establishment is classified in sector 331 with the primary metal being made.
332 – Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing

Industries in the Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing subsector transform metal into intermediate or end products,
other than machinery, computers and electronics, metal furniture, and metal products fabricated elsewhere. Important
fabricated metal processes include forging, stamping, bending, forming, machining, welding, and assembling.
333 – Machinery Manufacturing
Establishments in the Machinery Manufacturing subsector create end products that apply mechanical force, such as the
application of gears and levers, to perform work. Although this subsector uses processes similar to those used in
Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing (332), machinery manufacturing is different because it typically employs
multiple metal forming processes in manufacturing the various parts of the machine. In addition, complex assembly
operations are an inherent part of the production process.
334 – Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing

Industry establishments in this subsector manufacture computers, computer peripherals, communications equipment,
and similar electronic products, and components for such products.
335 – Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing

Industry establishments in this subsector manufacture products that generate, distribute, and use electrical power.
Establishments are grouped into Electric Lighting Equipment, Household Appliances, Electrical Equipment (motors,
generators, transformers, etc), and Other Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing.
336 – Transportation Equipment Manufacturing

Industries in the Transportation Equipment Manufacturing subsector produce equipment for transporting people and
goods. Although transportation equipment is a type of machinery, an entire subsector is devoted to this activity
because of the significance of its economic size in all three North American countries.

Energy Use Loss Opportunities Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Energy Use Loss Opportunities Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Energy Use Loss Opportunities Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities

Analysis: U.S. Manufacturing & Mining

Prepared by Energetics, Incorporated and

U.S. Manufacturing and

Prepared by Energetics, Incorporated

Energy Use, Loss and Opportunities Analysis

Opportunities Analysis (petroleum, chemicals, iron and steel)

2.0 U.S. Manufacturing and Mining ................................................................................... 10

3.0 Chemicals Industry (NAICS 325).................................................................................. 21

4.0 Petroleum Refining (NACIS 324110)....................................................................................29

5.0 Forest Products (NACIS 321,322) ................................................................................. 36

6.0 Iron and Steel (NAICS 333111) .................................................................................... 43

7.0 Food and Beverage (NAICS 311, 312) .......................................................................... 49

8.0 Mining (NAICS 212).................................................................................................... 55

9.0 Cement (NAICS 327310) ............................................................................................. 59

10.0 Energy Systems

11.0 Top Twenty Opportunities ........................................................................................... 71

Appendix A Energy Footprints and Sample Calculations ....................................................... 77

The U.S. manufacturing sector depends heavily on fuels and

Improved efficiency can also reduce the use of feedstock energy

Opportunities for Energy Loss Reduction and Recovery

1.2.1.1 General Methodology

1.2.1.2 Energy Footprints

Energy losses occur all along the energy supply Losses

Losses were determined by applying equipment loss

1.2.1.3 Industry Rankings

1.2.2 Loss Reduction and Recovery Opportunities Analysis

For example, the thermal processes used in

Table 1-4 Definition of Thermal Processes

Table 1-5 Improvement Potential Categories

2.2 Energy Use and Loss Analysis

Energy consumption is also reported in the MECS as “first use of

4000 Energy Delivered a

Figure 2-2 Total Energy Use in Manufacturing and Mining

Figure 2-3 First Use of Energy in Manufacturing and Mining

Primary Energy Use

Primary energy use and offsite energy

Figure 2-4 U.S. Manufacturing and Mining Total Primary Energy

Fuel and Electricity Use

Figure 2-5 U.S. Manufacturing and Mining Direct Use of

Total fuel and electricity delivered to manufacturing and

The distribution shown in Figure 2-7 represents an average

right. This figure illustrates clearly that offsite

Industries that are proportionately large users of 1500

cogenerate large amounts of their electricity

and cogenerates a considerable amount onsite.

This is reflected in a lower percent of total losses

being offsite losses, as illustrated in Figure 2-8.

The same is true to a lesser extent for forest

products. Figure 2-8 U.S. Manufacturing and Mining Offsite and

Energy conversion systems (heat exchangers, preheaters, heat

Fired Heaters &

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Table 2-10 Manufacturing Energy Use and Losses (Trillion Btus)

capacity range (35%), followed by boilers in the 250-500

A profile of energy used in fired systems is shown in

Figure 2-12 Profile of Energy Use and Losses in

Materials Processing 567 TBtu

3.1 Overview of the Chemicals Industry

Future R&D for

Future R&D for Alternative

Future R&D for Alternative Process