1. business and industrial
2. energy
3. renewable energy

Industrial Energy Efficiency
Accelerator - Guide to the maltings
sector
Around 1.5 million tonnes of malt is produced in the UK each year by
seven large maltsters and seven smaller maltsters. Domestic beer and
whisky production accounts for almost 90% of the output from the
Malting industry, the remainder being used in a wide range of foods, with
some exported. The CO2 emissions associated with the Maltings sector is
approximately 340,000 tonnes of CO2 per annum.
Executive Summary
This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Investigation and Solution Identification Stage of
the Industrial Energy Efficiency Accelerator (IEEA) for the Maltings sector. The aims of this stage were to
investigate energy use within the Maltings sector-specific manufacturing processes and to provide key insights
relating to opportunities for CO2 savings.
Around 1.5 million tonnes of malt is produced in the UK each year by seven large maltsters, and seven smaller
maltsters. Domestic beer and whisky production accounts for almost 90% of the output from the Malting industry,
the remainder is used in a wide range of foods and some is exported. The CO2 emissions associated with the
Maltings sector are approximately 340,000 tonnes of CO2 per annum.
Five sites were directly involved in the investigations carried out for this project. Collectively the participating sites
represented about 28% of UK malt production. Process and energy data was collected from sub-metering
installed at two sites.
The methodology used in this study included:
Site visits and discussions with host site personnel
Gathering and analysing historical energy and process data from host sites
Installation of energy sub-metering on two sites
Collection and analysis of sub-meter data with process data
Desk based research of potential energy efficiency opportunities and innovations
A questionnaire to Maltsters on priorities, barriers, progress to date and their ideas
A workshop to identify and address barriers to deployment of energy efficiency opportunities
Maltings Sector Guide
2
Energy use within the sector
1
The Maltings sector uses some 1,375 GWh of energy each year. This is dominated by the use of fuels for
process heat, with annual fuel consumption being 1,176 GWh (86% of total). The majority of the heat demand is
for the kilning process, with grain drying representing the second largest heat energy use.
At least 78% of the heat demand in a kiln is thought to be associated with the evaporation of water, in order to dry
the malt to its final moisture content (see section 4.1). Most kilns are fitted with glass tube heat exchangers to
recover some of the vaporisation energy of water (latent heat) from the „air off‟ from the kiln, to preheat the
ambient air coming into the kiln. During the pre-break phase of kilning, a heat exchanger is able to recover some
20% of the energy available in the „air off‟ stream (see section 4.2). The remaining 80% of energy is lost to
atmosphere as saturated water vapour. Increasing the recovery of this energy is the key opportunity for the
sector.
The sector fuel consumption consists of the fossil fuels natural gas, gas oil, LPG, kerosene and coal.
Replacement of some of these with biomass, such as woodchip, would reduce energy costs and carbon
emissions.
During kilning, warm dry air is blown from below through the kiln bed, inducing both a temperature and a moisture
gradient across the depth of the bed. These gradients gradually reduce as the kilning cycle progresses, as the
moisture evaporates and the malt increasingly heats up. The temperature and moisture gradient throughout the
bed means that there is variation within the batch in terms of the length of time that the malt is held at a given
temperature. This variation necessitates the need for blending post-kilning, to ensure finished product
consistency. It also represents an opportunity to improve energy efficiency (see section 4.4).
The standard current practice within the industry is to control the germination and kilning processes primarily on
time, air temperatures and humidity. Whilst these control methodologies enable Maltsters to consistently produce
high quality malt, energy efficiency could be increased by using direct measurement of temperature and moisture
content of the malt bed itself. Direct process control could allow processes to be stopped sooner once the
required parameters have been met, thereby shortening the cycle time. This would result in energy savings and
potentially increased throughput (see section 4.3).
Load to kiln moisture refers to the moisture content of the grain at the end of the germination process. It has a
direct bearing on the amount of energy used in the kiln to evaporate the water and is therefore an important driver
of variation in batch energy consumption. Tighter process control and the use of statistical management methods
would help to drive continuous improvement in consistency and energy efficiency (see section 4.5).
Whilst extensive production information is captured within the industry, there is typically little energy use
information available at the unit process level to inform management decisions and measure performance
improvement. Implementation of automated Monitoring and Targeting (aM&T) systems is becoming more
common within the sector, but there is scope for further roll out (see Section 5.2.6).
Carbon Saving Opportunities
Significant opportunities for increased energy efficiency exist in the Maltings sector. The main opportunities
include increased energy recovery, increasing the final moisture content of the malt, implementation of Combined
Heat and Power (CHP) systems as well as increased uptake of Automatic Monitoring and Targeting (AMT)
systems.
The opportunities have been categorised into innovative and good practice opportunities. It must be noted that the
opportunities are not additive. This is due to some opportunities overlapping or being mutually exclusive.
1
Climate Change Agreement data
Maltings Sector Guide
3
Innovative opportunities
Energy recovery from the kilning process can be improved in a variety of ways, and three alternative solutions
have been outlined. The first, closed cycle heat pumps, can be used as a second stage of energy recovery after
the glass tube heat exchanger. It is considered possible to retrofit these to existing kilns. Such a heat pump is
considered able to recover an additional 43% of energy, for a total energy recovery of 64% in conjunction with the
glass tube heat exchanger. This solution is outlined in section 5.1.1.
The second solution for increased energy recovery, open cycle heat pumps, can potentially be adapted to suit the
malting process. Open cycle heat pumps differ from closed cycle heat pumps in that they are able to use the
water evaporated from the malt as the means to recover energy. A higher energy recovery factor can be achieved
than is possible with closed cycle heat pumps. It is not considered viable to retrofit open cycle heat pumps to
existing kilns, hence this solution is limited to new build kilns. Further details can be found in section 5.1.1.
The third solution for increased energy recovery is to implement a dedicated energy efficient drying system to dry
the malt before curing it in a traditional kiln. This solution is outlined in more detail in section 5.1.1.
Another significant opportunity for Maltings sites operating hot water, steam or hot oil systems to heat their kilns is
the burning of biomass instead of fossil fuels. With the addition of a suitable burner or boiler and associated fuel
storage and handling equipment, those sites would benefit from the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) for every
kWh of woodchip energy. This is discussed further in section 5.1.3.
The implementation of kiln bed turning during the kilning process would reduce the humidity and temperature
gradient across the depth of the malt bed. This may enable a shorter kilning cycle and hence reduce energy
consumption. This is discussed further in section 5.1.5.
A further opportunity to increase energy efficiency in the Maltings sector centres on the final moisture content of
the finished malt, which is typically 4%. Kiln heat requirements would be reduced if the final moisture content
could be increased to, for example to 6%. This opportunity requires negotiation and agreement with customers
including Brewers and Distillers. Please refer to section 5.1.7 for further details on this and other supply chain
collaboration opportunities.
Where possible, outline business cases have been calculated for each the innovative opportunities. The level of
confidence associated with these business cases is not currently sufficient for investment decisions to be based
on them. Rather, the business cases are intended to highlight areas that Maltsters should pursue and investigate
further. Table 1 below outlines the summary business cases for each of the innovative opportunities that we have
been able to quantify. A number of these opportunities are likely to require R&D activity as well as a pilot project
in order to develop sufficient confidence in their business cases to allow investment decisions to be taken. For
further details, please refer to section 5.1.
Table 1 Summary of innovative opportunity business cases, sector level
Opportunity
Heat pumps,
closed cycle
Heat pumps,
open cycle
Energy
efficient drying
Burning
Maltings co-
Implementation
costs (£)
Saving
(£ p.a.)
Saving
(t CO2 p.a.)
Cost
(£/t CO2)
Payback
(years)
Sites
applicable
(%)
£24,750,000
£4,500,000
33,000
£750
6
100%
£75,000,000
£14,650,000
115,000
£640
5
100%
£142,500,000
£10,400,000
85,000
£1,675
14
100%
£13,000,000
-£27,000,000
40,000
£320
None
100%
Maltings Sector Guide
products
Burning
woodchips
Direct T & RH
measurement
Kiln bed
turning
Process
management
Supply chain
collaboration
4
£21,000,000
£4,200,000
38,000
£550
5
26%
£1,130,000
£580,000
4,700
£240
2
100%
£7,500,000
£1,300,000
10,750
£700
6
67%
£55,000
£200,000
1,750
32
<1
100%
£0
£5,250,000
43,000
£0
0
100%
Good practice opportunities
Maltings sites have a typical heat to power ratio around 4.8 to 1. Heat to power ratios within this range are an
indicator that the sector generally may be suited to the deployment of Combined Heat and Power (CHP) systems.
CHP offers carbon emission reductions as well as energy costs reductions. It is understood that 2 Maltings sites
currently have CHP installed. Please refer to section 5.2.2 for further details on this opportunity.
Compressed air is used in the sector for valve actuation and similar applications. The compressors used are often
relatively old and fitted with simple, decentralised control systems. The compressors typically vent their cooling air
into the compressor room. There is scope for improvements and optimisation of compressed air systems within
the sector.
Our survey indicated that respondents believed that high efficiency motors and VSDs have been installed on
around two thirds of suitable applications. The remaining one third of motors may still benefit from replacement
with high efficiency motors and addition of VSDs.
At the majority of UK Maltings sites the incoming voltage is expected to be higher than that required by the
electrical equipment installed on site. There is scope within the sector to consider voltage reduction and
optimisation.
Table 2 outlines the summary business cases for each of the good practice opportunities we have been able to
quantify. For further details, please refer to section 5.2.
Table 2 Summary of good practice opportunity business cases, sector level
Opportunity
CHP
Heat recovery
survey
Compressed
air
High
efficiency
motors
Monitoring &
targeting
Variable
speed drives
Voltage
optimisation
Implementation
costs (£)
Saving
(£ p.a.)
Saving
(t CO2 p.a.)
Cost
(£/t CO2)
Payback
(years)
£11,700,000
£2,285,000
29,000
£405
5
Sites
applicable
(%)
48%
£5,000
£30,000
230
£22
<1
100%
£435,000
£145,000
1,250
£350
3
100%
£72,000
£100,000
940
£75
1
100%
£950,000
£1,650,000
15,300
£62
1
70%
£810,000
£250,000
2,350
£350
3
100%
£925,000
£250,000
2,350
£390
4
70%
Maltings Sector Guide
5
Overall Potential
The total savings potential for the sector from the opportunities identified is difficult to quantify with confidence
because a number of opportunities are mutually exclusive (i.e. implementing one may preclude another), and
others target the same energy using equipment. Therefore the total savings available to the sector are less than
the sum of the savings of individual measures.
However the total savings potential avoiding duplication and interaction is thought to be in the order of 40%. This
would be worth circa £16 million pa and reduce carbon emissions by 134,000 tonnes CO2 pa. It should be noted
that a number of the innovative opportunities are likely to require R&D activity as well as a pilot project in order to
develop sufficient confidence in their business cases to allow investment decisions to be taken.
The following chart shows the relative attractiveness of the most significant innovative (green) and good practice
(blue) opportunities. The majority of the savings can be achieved at a payback of 6 years or less.
CO2 Savings - Significant opportunities (>10,000 tonnes CO2)
18
16
85,000 Energy ef f icient
drying
14
Payback (Years)
12
10
10,750 Kiln bed turning
8
33,000 Closed cycle heat
pumps
6
38,000 Wood chip
4
115,000 Open cycle heat
pumps
29,000 CHP
15,300 M&T
2
43,000 Supply chain
0
£0
£50,000,000
£100,000,000
£150,000,000
£200,000,000
Capital Costs
Good practice opportunities
Innovative opportunities
The level of confidence associated with these business cases is not currently sufficient for them to form the basis
of investment decisions, rather they are intended to highlight areas that Maltsters should pursue and investigate
further.
Next steps
In the current economic climate in the UK at time of writing (March 2011), it is unlikely that funding support will be
available from the Carbon Trust for demonstration of projects. Hence Maltsters are encouraged to review the
opportunities highlighted, quantify these for their own sites and progress those which are considered most
beneficial. Maltsters are encouraged to consider collaboration with other MAGB members, their supply chains and
equipment and knowledge providers.
Maltings Sector Guide
6
Table of contents
1
Introduction
8
2
Background to sector
9
2.1
What is manufactured
9
2.2
Process operations
10
2.3
Overall scale (production, energy and carbon)
14
2.4
Legislation impacts
16
2.5
Energy saving progress
17
2.6
Business drivers
20
2.7
Energy saving drivers
23
3
4
5
6
Methodology
25
3.1
Metering and data gathering
26
3.2
Engagement with the sector
27
3.3
Understanding drivers and barriers
27
Key Findings
29
4.1
Kilning energy consumption
29
4.2
Efficiency of glass tube heat exchangers on kilns
30
4.3
Process control
32
4.4
Kiln bed temperature and humidity profile
33
4.5
Variation in load to kiln moisture
34
4.6
High heat to power ratios
34
4.7
Co-products
36
4.8
Supply chain
36
Opportunities
39
5.1
Innovative opportunities
38
5.2
Good practice opportunities
55
Next steps
66
6.1
Significant opportunities
64
6.2
Significant innovative opportunities
65
6.3
Significant good practice opportunities
66
Appendices
Appendix 1
Indicative metering locations
Appendix 2
Opportunities not quantified
Appendix 3
Workshop summary
Maltings Sector Guide
8
1 Introduction
This report presents the findings of the Investigation and Solution Identification Stage of the Industrial Energy
Efficiency Accelerator (IEEA) for the Maltings sector. The aims of this stage were to investigate energy use within
the Maltings sector-specific manufacturing processes and to provide key insights relating to opportunities for CO2
savings.
Section 2 provides some background on the Maltings sector in terms of what is produced, the production
process, the overall scale of the sector, including energy consumption and carbon emissions, a brief summary of
some key energy legislation, and identifies some key business and energy saving drivers for the sector.
Section 3 outlines the methodology that was used to investigate energy use within the sector and to help identify
opportunities.
Section 4 outlines our key findings and briefly discusses what they might mean in terms of opportunities for the
sector.
Section 5 outlines the specific opportunities identified in the sector, including outline business cases where it has
been possible to quantify these.
Section 6 describes our recommended next steps for the opportunities identified by this project.
Maltings Sector Guide
9
2 Background to sector
Around 1.5 million tonnes of malt is produced in the UK each year by seven large maltsters, and seven smaller
maltsters. The sector is represented by the Maltsters‟ Association of Great Britain (MAGB) and has had a Climate
Change Agreement (CCA) in place for the past ten years. The CCA currently covers 27 of the 30 or so sites in
the sector.
The CO2 emissions associated with the sector‟s activities are approximately 340,000 tonnes of CO2 per annum.
Two Malting sites are part of Phase II of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS), and it is expected that
four sites will be involved in Phase III of EU ETS from 2013.
2.1 What is manufactured
Malt is made from malting grain cereals, usually barley. The Malting industry purchases nearly two million tonnes
of barley annually, approximately one-third of the UK crop. Other large barley consumers are the animal feed
industry (3 million tonnes p.a.) and export (1.5 million tonnes)2.
The barley is processed into malt, which is the principal raw material for the production of beer and whisky.
Domestic beer and whisky production account for approximately 80% of the output from the Malting industry, the
remainder is used in a wide range of foods and some is exported.
There are five main types of malt produced in the UK:
White malts
Peated malts
Coloured malts (such as crystal and caramel malts)
Roasted malts (range including both light and dark roasts)
Roasted barley
The main steps in the malting process are:
Steeping - to raise the moisture content of the grain by soaking in water, such that the grain starts to
germinate. Steeping typically lasts 2-3 days.
Germination - controlled to achieve modification of the contents of each grain without allowing it to develop
into a plant. Germination typically lasts 4-5 days.
2
www.ukagriculture.com
Maltings Sector Guide
10
Kilning - to carefully dry and stabilise the grain for extended storage without damaging the natural enzymes
required by brewers and distillers. Kilning typically lasts around 24 hours.
2.2 Process operations
Figure 1 shows a schematic diagram of the manufacturing process illustrating major energy consuming steps.
The boundary of the IEEA investigation is shown as a red dashed line.
Kilning is the dominant user of heat and electricity. Further discussion of energy consumption in the process is
provided in Section 0.
Figure 1 Malt Manufacturing Process and IEEA investigation boundary
Raw Barley Intake
Waste Grain
Raw Barley Drying
Heat
Raw Barley Storage
Power
Screening and Weighing
Power
Water to air (evaporation)
Grain to air (respiration)
Power
Steeping
Grain to Waste Water
Water
Waste Water
Grain to air (respiration)
Germination
Power
Grain to air (evaporation)
Grain to air (respiration)
Heat
Kilning
Grain to air (evaporation)
Waste Grain
Power
De-culming
Output to Brewing
Power
Maltings Sector Guide
11
Steeping
Steeping is the first stage of the core malting process and takes 2-3 days in total. The moisture content of the
barley is raised from around 12% to 43-46%. This is achieved by a series of immersions or "wet stands" followed
by “dry stands”. During the wet stands, air is blown through the wet grain, during the dry stands carbon dioxide is
removed with extraction fans. At the end of steeping, the root (chit) begins to emerge from the grain, showing as
a white dot. The hydrated grain exhibits an increase in grain respiration and demand for oxygen which signals the
beginning of germination.
There are two main designs of steeping vessel used in the UK; conical bottomed and flat bottomed. Our
understanding from speaking with the Maltsters is that conical bottomed vessels are more effective for raising the
moisture content of the grain, whereas the flat bottomed vessels are more efficient for CO2 extraction.
Therefore, some maltings employ both vessel designs in series.
Germination
Commonly, the steeped barley is moved to a custom germination vessel designed to control temperature and
provide high flows of moist air to the active barley. During the 4-5 days of germination the barley is modified by
the action of specific enzymes on grain structural components, giving it the characteristics required by brewers
and distillers. The cell walls are broken down rendering the hard barley as easily crushable malt, allowing the
starches to be released during the brewing and distilling processes.
Figure 2 Two common types of germination vessel (a) Circular Saladin and (b) Saladin Box
In the germination vessel the grain is turned every 12 hours or so to prevent rootlets of the developing plant
becoming entangled and maintain a loosely packed grain bed. The germination conditions, such as humidity,
temperature, air flow and time can be manipulated in order to vary the final characteristics of malt.
Figure 2 above shows two common types of germination vessel used in the UK. There are a number of different
designs of germination vessel including:
Circular Saladins – a circular vessel fitted with turners attached to an arm that rotates around the vessel
Saladin Boxes - horizontal boxes fitted with turners that automatically travel backwards and forwards along
the length of the box. An older method of germination, still used at some plants
Maltings Sector Guide
12
Boby Drums – a „gentle‟ method of producing good quality malt, typically used for small production runs.
These consist of large horizontal drums which are rotated slowly. The malt is contained within the drums and
as a result of the rotary motion of the drum it is kept in continuous motion.
Combined Germination and Kilning Vessels (GKVs) – in which the germination and kilning occur in the same
vessel i.e. on completion of germination the humidified air is stopped and replaced with heated air from the
kiln burners.
With the exception of GKVs, the germinated barley, known as „green malt‟, is then transferred from the
germinating vessels to the kiln.
Kilning
In order to halt germination in advance of significant nutrient losses, the germinated barley (green malt) is dried in
a kiln. Great care is taken to minimise enzyme damage as the compounds created at early stages of germination
are those needed by brewers. The malt is stabilised by reducing the moisture content to 3-6.5 % over a period of
about 24 hours. The kilning process imparts flavour and colour into the malt, and the low moisture content allows
safe storage. The final malt superficially resembles the original barley in outward appearance, but is physically
and bio-chemically much changed.
There are three main phases to the kilning process:
Forced drying‟ phase lasting three to four hours, where moisture is driven from the interior of the grain by Prebreak drying phase lasting approximately twelve hours, where large volumes of air at around 60oC are
passed upward through the bed. During the pre-break phase, moisture is driven off from the surface of the
grain. The air coming off the bed is at 25-30oC and has a relative humidity of nearly 100%. At many sites,
the warm, saturated air is passed through a set of heat exchangers and the heat used to pre-warm the
incoming air.
Post-break increasing the temperature and decreasing flow of air through the bed. At many sites, the
unsaturated air coming off the bed during the post-break phase is re-circulated through the bed.
Curing phase lasting two to three hours, where the temperature is increased to 70, 80 or 90oC to impart
colour into the malt. During the curing phase the fan speed is reduced and the re-circulation of air is
increased.
Maltings Sector Guide
13
Figure 3 Malt kiln
A number of kiln designs are in use in the UK. Approximately one third of the industry uses combined GKVs
(described above), the other two thirds use dedicated kilns. Twin kilns which operate in a lead-lag configuration
are thought to be more energy efficient than single kilns because they allow unsaturated air from the lead kiln in
the post-break phase to be used in the lag kiln that is in the pre-break phase.
Maltings Sector Guide
14
2.3 Overall scale (production, energy and carbon)
Table 3 provides a summary of the energy consumption of sites within the in the Malting sector Climate Change
Agreement (CCA) for the period 2008/09. During this period, the sector produced around 1.5 million tonnes of
malt, with associated emissions of 340,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide.
Table 3 Energy consumption within the Malting sector, 2008/09
Electricity
(GWh)
Mean site
use
Total
Fuel Oil
(GWh)
Coal
(GWh)
LPG
(GWh)
Kerosene
(GWh)
Gas & Diesel Oil
(GWh)
Total
(GWh)
7
Natural
Gas
(GWh)
38
5
0
0
1
1
52
196
998
128
2
0
27
23
1,376
Figure 4 shows that fuel use accounts for about 68% and electricity for about 32% of the sector‟s CO2 emissions.
Therefore it is appropriate that fuel use should be the main target of the investigations for this project, but also
that electricity should not be ignored.
Figure 4 Contribution of electricity and fossil fuels to total energy consumption and CO2 emissions in the Malting
sector
100%
90%
80%
70%
Gas Oil/ Diesel Oil
60%
Kerosene
LPG used
50%
Coal
Fuel Oil
40%
Natural Gas
Electricity
30%
20%
10%
0%
Energy
Emissions
Maltings Sector Guide
15
Figure 5 shows that there is a strong relationship between output and energy consumption, indicating that energy
use is closely aligned with production.
Total Energy Consumption (GWh/yr)
Figure 5 Scatter plot showing the relationship between energy use and output across the sector, 2008/09
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
Throughput (te/yr)
The weighted average Specific Energy Consumption (SEC) was 961 kWh/tonne. Figure 6 (a) and (b) show that
there is a relatively large range of SEC (642 kWh/tonne) between sites. Differences in SEC between sites are
influenced by a number of factors including:
Economies of scale i.e. larger sites being able to process larger batches and sites operating close to capacity
making better utilisation of plant
Differences in core process equipment e.g. separate germination and kilning vessels vs. GKVs, Boby drums
vs. Saladin box etc.
Efficiency of energy consuming equipment (boilers, motors etc.)
Energy management on sites
Age of plant
Differences in product specification
Differences in raw barley
Figure 6 Histogram of SEC for 27 Malting Plants (b) Scatter plot showing SEC vs. Throughput
7
(a)
(b)
5
SEC (kWh/te)
Number of sites
6
4
3
2
1
0
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
0
SEC (kWh/te)
50,000
100,000
150,000
Throughput (te/yr)
200,000
Maltings Sector Guide
16
A key point from Figure 6(b) is that there is a wide spread of SEC for smaller scale plants – those with through
put of less than 50,000 tonnes pa. If the worst performers were able to match the best, energy use would fall
from over 1,200 kWh/tonne to around 800 kWh/tonne. This suggests a significant opportunity from good practice
measures.
2.4 Legislation impacts
2.4.1 Climate Change Agreement
The sector has had a Climate Change Agreement (CCA) in place for ten years. The Sector CCA currently covers
27 of the 30 or so sites in the sector. Over the period that the sector has had the CCA in place, specific energy
consumption (SEC) has reduced by around 10%. Although there are other drivers of energy efficiency (discussed
further in Section 2.7), the CCA has had a significant influence on the sector.
2.4.2
EU Emissions Trading Scheme
Two Malting sites are part of Phase II of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), and it is expected that four
sites will be involved in Phase III of EU ETS from 2013.
The combination of the CCA and the EU ETS will be key drivers in pushing forward the uptake of energy
efficiency measures within the sector.
There is some concern amongst European maltsters (and other sectors) that European greenhouse gas emission
reduction targets increase the risk of „carbon leakage‟ from the EU. In a globalised industry, multinational
companies can move production to less expensive or less restrictive regions.
2.4.3
CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme
The majority of sites within the sector are covered by either the CCA or EU ETS. Therefore the CRC Energy
Efficiency Scheme is not considered to be of major importance to the Maltings sector.
2.4.4
Renewable Heat Incentive
The Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) is intended to provide long term support for renewable heat technologies
such as industrial wood pellet boilers.
The scheme will make payments to those installing renewable heat technologies that qualify for support, year on
year, for a fixed period of time. It is designed provide an attractive 12% rate of return on the difference in cost
between conventional fossil fuel heating and renewable heating systems (which are currently more expensive).
The government is currently carrying out work to determine support levels and is expected to be in a position to
announce the details of the scheme, including RHI tariffs and technologies supported, shortly. It is expected that
the scheme will go ahead after July 2011.
The most attractive investments will be found in industry sectors with high, year round heat use, as found in
Malting sites. Furthermore, the availability of suitable biomass waste streams and co-products from the malting
process, close links with the agricultural sector and the location of maltings in rural areas with good transport
links are all factors that may make biomass energy an attractive option for some maltsters.
Maltings Sector Guide
17
2.5 Energy saving progress
Figure 7 shows the primary energy use per tonne of malt produced by sites within the sector CCA over the period
2001-2009. The figure highlights the improvement in energy efficiency the sector has achieved over this time.
Sector energy efficiency was 1,250 kWh/tonne in 2001, which has improved to 1,181 kWh/tonne in 2009. This
represents an improvement in energy efficiency of 5.5%.
Figure 7 Maltings Sector energy efficiency history (primary energy)
As part of the investigations carried out for this project, a questionnaire was completed by 11 respondents from
six companies, representing a total of 20 sites. The questionnaire gave a list of „standard‟ energy efficiency
measures and asked the respondent to estimate how far their company has implemented them to date. The
respondents who completed the survey are responsible for malting plants that account for roughly 75% of the
sector‟s output and energy consumption. Therefore we can have a reasonable level of confidence in
extrapolating the responses for the sector as a whole.
Figure 8 to 11 show the upper and lower estimates provided by energy managers for the current level of
implementation of a range of „standard‟ energy efficiency measures. For example, it was estimated that for
automated Metering and Targeting, between 20 and 40% of the sector potential has been implemented. Our
experience of visiting malting sites would suggest that this is an overestimate .
Maltings Sector Guide
18
Figure 8 Current degree of implementation of ‘standard’ energy management measures in the UK Malting
Industry (questionnaire results)
Proactive boiler maintenance and
servicing
Formal energy strategy and policy
Implementation of energy strategy and
policy
Boiler Plant Metering and Targeting
Motor management policy
Air leak detection
Automated Monitoring and Targeting
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Proportion of sector potential
Figure 9 Current degree of implementation of ‘standard’ heat energy efficiency measures in UK Malting Industry
(questionnaire results)
Insulation of hot water, oil and air ducts
Heat recovery from kiln air
High efficiency boilers (net thermal efficiency…
PLC combustion control and O2 trim on burners
Condensate return heat recovery systems
Heat recovery from boiler flue gasses
Automatic steam controls
Boiler sequencing and pressure optimisation
Ground Source Heat Pump to preheat cold…
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Proportion of sector potential
100%
Maltings Sector Guide
19
Figure 10 Current degree of implementation of ‘standard’ electrical energy efficiency measures in UK Malting
Industry (questionnaire results)
Electrical power factor correction
Variable Speed Drives
High efficiency electric motors (EFF1)
High efficiency lighting units
Lighting controls e.g. presence
detection
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Proportion of sector potential implemented
Figure 11 Current degree of implementation of two simple behaviour change measures in UK Malting Industry
(questionnaire results)
Energy training for key staff
Energy awareness raising campaign for
all staff
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Proportion of sector potential implemented
The survey results presented in the figures above indicate that although progress has been made and many of
the standard energy management measures have been implemented to an extent, there remains significant
scope for further adoption of these measures.
Figure 12 shows the remaining potential for each of the measures outlined above. The potential has been taken
to be the difference between the midpoint of the survey results for each measure and 100% implementation.
Maltings Sector Guide
20
Figure 12 Remaining potential for ‘standard’ practice energy efficiency measures in UK Malting Industry
(questionnaire results)
Electrical power factor correction
Heat recovery from kiln air
Proactive boiler maintenance and servicing
Insulation of hot water, oil and air ducts
Formal energy strategy and policy
Implementation of energy strategy and policy
Boiler Plant Metering and Targeting
Energy training for key staff
Variable Speed Drives
High efficiency boilers (net thermal…
Control of germination based on direct…
High efficiency electric motors (EFF1)
Motor management policy
PLC combustion control and O2 trim on…
Control of kilning cycle based on direct…
Energy awareness raising campaign for all…
Condensate return heat recovery systems
Air leak detection
Heat recovery from boiler flue gasses
High efficiency lighting units
Lighting controls e.g. presence detection
Boiler sequencing and pressure optimisation
Automated Monitoring and Targeting
Automatic steam controls
Renewable energy
Turning kiln bed during kilning cycle
Combined Heat and Power generation
Ground Source Heat Pump to preheat cold…
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Proportion of sector potential remaining
2.6 Business drivers
When considering making a capital investment, malting companies go through a process of prioritisation and
building an internal business case. The details of this process vary from one company to another, as do the
required criteria for investment (payback period, IRR, NPV, etc.). The required payback period for an investment
can vary from 2 to 10 years depending on the type and size of the investment, as well as other influencing factors
such as complying with customer demands.
Maltings Sector Guide
21
As with all businesses, there are a number of key drivers influencing decisions made. In the questionnaire we
asked maltsters to rate the importance to their companies‟ decision making of a range of potential drivers. Figure
13 below summarises the survey results for the perceptions of drivers for decision making in malting companies.
Figure 13 Perceptions of drivers for decision making in malting companies (questionnaire results)
Energy Efficiency
Production Costs
Food safety
Customer Satisfaction
Energy Security
Brand Image
Water Security
Corporate and Social Responsibility
Sustainability
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Proportion of respondents
Important
Neutral
Not Important
The survey results shown in Figure 13 indicate that while all of the drivers identified were considered to be
important by the majority of respondents, food safety, production cost and energy efficiency ranked highest in
terms of their importance to company decision making.
Customer satisfaction was identified as being important by 90% of respondents. Figure 14 shows that malt
consumption in the UK is driven mainly by brewers and distillers. On a global scale, the customer base for malt is
highly consolidated with ten brewing companies accounting for over 70% of world beer production. Brewers and
distillers are perceived by maltsters to be in a relatively powerful position. In many cases, the customer specifies
not only the final malt characteristics, but also many of the processing parameters, which places some
restrictions on their ability to make changes. Examples include specifications on the number and length of wet
and dry stands in steeping, maximum bed temperatures and process time in germination and time and
temperature profiles for the kilning process.
Maltings Sector Guide
22
Figure 14 Uses of UK Malt in 2008
3
Other food and
drink
3%
Export
9%
Distillers
48%
Brewers
40%
The involvement of the customer in the malting process points to the importance of collaborative working to
achieve significant carbon savings. This is especially true where customers have carbon saving targets of their
own. For example, the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) has committed to a 20% switch to non-fossil energy by
2020 and a target of 80% by 2050. Although the details of how the maltings industry will work with the whisky
industry towards this aim are not yet clear, the SWA has expressed a willingness to work with its suppliers
(including maltsters) to agree partnership targets and other opportunities for environmental improvement to
minimise the total environmental impact of the Scotch Whisky industry.
Our survey indicated that issues such as brand image, corporate and social responsibility, and sustainability were
considered to be important to company decision making, though to a lesser extent than those discussed so
above. All of the companies surveyed had energy efficiency targets, and 80% or respondents said their
companies had greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, as shown in Figure 15.
Figure 15 Internal monitoring and targeting of energy and carbon (questionnaire results)
Does your company monitor energy
use?
Does your company have energy
efficiency targets?
Does your company monitor
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions?
Does your company have GHG
emission reduction targets?
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Proportion of respondents
Yes
3
Source MAGB
No
Don't know
100%
Maltings Sector Guide
23
Public reporting of energy and carbon was less widespread than internal monitoring and targeting. 40% or
respondents said that their company publicly reported energy efficiency and emission reduction targets, but only
30% of respondents said that their company publicly reported its energy use and GHG emissions (Figure 16).
Figure 16 Public reporting of energy and carbon (questionnaire results)
Does your company publicly report
energy use?
Does your company publish energy
efficiency targets?
Does your company publicly report
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions?
Does your company publish GHG
emission reduction targets?
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Proportion of respondents
Yes
No
Don't know
2.7 Energy saving drivers
There are a number of factors driving moves towards energy efficiency in the sector. In the questionnaire we
asked maltsters to identify the drivers for their energy and carbon reduction activities to date. The results are
summarised in Figure 17.
.
Figure 17 Perception of drivers for energy and carbon reduction activities (questionnaire results)
Energy Cost
100%
80%
Other
60%
Regulation
40%
20%
0%
Investor Driven
Customer Pressure
Internally Driven
Maltings Sector Guide
24
Energy costs represent the second largest cost to the Maltsters after barley costs and hence are a strong
financial driver. Energy typically represents between 6% and 15% of the price of a tonne of malt. Average energy
costs of £25 to £29/tonne of malt have been quoted, though these can vary significantly based on malt type and
fuel type. Barley purchase costs have ranged from £90/tonne of barley to over £200/tonne recently. Malt selling
prices can vary significantly, and have ranged from less than £200/tonne of malt to over £400/tonne over the last
few years.
The survey results shown in Figure 17 indicate that energy costs are the strongest driver for energy saving
activities, followed by regulation (see section 2.4), and internal company policy. Customer pressure and
investors were seen as drivers only by a minority of respondents.
During the sector workshop, participants were asked to look in more detail at the drivers for energy efficiency
within their organisations. A long list of drivers was identified, which were grouped into 5 categories (Policy,
Finance, Business, People and Other). This exercise helped to build on the insight gained from the questionnaire
and provide a more detailed understanding of the specific drivers of energy efficiency in the Maltings sector. For
example, although relatively few respondents to the questionnaire identified customer pressure as a significant
driver of carbon reduction activities, attendees of the workshop actually identify a number of examples, such as
customer carbon footprinting programmes, where the sustainability actions of brewers and distillers are either
currently, or are likely to, have consequences for Maltsters. A summary of the information captured from the
workshop, including the list of drivers for energy efficiency identified, is given in Appendix 5.
Maltings Sector Guide
25
3 Methodology
The aim of this project was to investigate sector specific manufacturing processes in order to build a detailed
picture of process energy use and identify practical, cost-effective carbon saving opportunities.
Five Malting sites were visited during Stage 1 of the Maltings IEEA. The aim of the site selection process was to
establish a sample of sites with a range of representative production levels, location, equipment and age. Table
4 gives some headline information on the host sites.
Table 4 Headline information for the Stage 1 site visits
No.
Company
Site
Products
Fuel
1
Diageo
Burghead
Maltings
Distiller Maltster
Fuel Oil, Gas Oil and waste heat
from distillery
2
Boortmalt
Buckie
Sales Maltster - principally
supplying distilleries
Natural Gas
3
Muntons
Stowmarket
Sales Maltster - principally
supplying brewers
Natural Gas and Gas Oil
4
Bairds Malt
Witham
Sales Maltster - principally
supplying brewers
Natural Gas
5
Crisp Malting
Great Ryburgh
Sales Maltster - principally
supplying brewers
Natural Gas and Gas Oil
Collectively the participating sites represented about 28% of UK production.
Our methodology was based on the following key elements:
Project kick off meeting
A teleconference was held with the Maltsters Association of Great Britain (MAGB) in May 2010 to reiterate the
aims of the project and outline our plans, what they could expect from us and what we required from them in
return.
Initial information gathering phase
o
An intensive period of site visits, desk based research and consultation with the MAGB to gain
a thorough appreciation of the sector and define the programme of work for the rest of the
project.
Maltings Sector Guide
o
26
A sector appreciation report was written and feedback sought from the MAGB and host sites to
verify that our understanding of the sector was correct, our ideas were sensible and the
proposed scope of work for the main data gathering and analysis stage was feasible.
Main data gathering and analysis phase
o
Site visits and discussions with host site personnel
o
Gathering and analysing historical energy and process data from host sites
o
Installation of energy sub-metering on two sites:
o
Collection and analysis of sub-meter data with process data
o
Desk based research potential energy efficiency opportunities
o
Desk based research of innovative opportunities in other sectors that may be transferable to
the Maltings sector
o
A questionnaire to maltsters on priorities, barriers, progress to date and their ideas
o
A workshops to identify and address barriers to deployment of energy efficiency opportunities
While we have endeavoured to work with a representative sample of sites from the sector, we have not visited or
monitored any sites producing <44,000 te/year. There are 16 sites in the UK with an output of less than <44,000
te/year. These sites account for around 30% of the sectors production and energy use.
Analysis of the CCA data for the sector indicates that there is no significant difference in SEC between sites with
an output <44,000 te/year and larger sites. Also, many of the sites with an output of 20,000 to 40,000 are owned
by companies that also have larger sites. However there are a number independent companies with sites
producing <20,000 te/year that have not been directly involved in this project.
It is likely that there are some operational differences between small sites and larger sites. It is also likely that
independently owned companies will face some different challenges when considering investment in energy
efficiency. Therefore, while we believe that the findings of this project are relevant to the whole sector, it is
accepted that they are based on working with multi-site companies and sites producing >40,000 te/year.
3.1 Metering and data gathering
Data from a number of data sources have been used in this study to help build a picture of process energy use
and quantify opportunities:
Climate Change Agreement (CCA) data showing total fuel and electricity for each site within the sector
Umbrella Agreement data for the period 2009/10 was used to gain a sector level overview of production and
energy use.
Historic energy and process data from the host sites
Sub-metered energy and process data from two sites, covering:
o
Electricity to grain intake fans
o
Natural gas to grain drying
o
Electricity to steeping fans
o
Electricity to germination fans
o
Kiln temperature (air flow and bed)
Maltings Sector Guide
o
Kiln moisture (air flow and bed)
o
Electricity to kiln fans
o
Gas to kilns
o
Kiln temperature
o
Ambient temperature
o
Ambient humidity
27
A Schematic diagram of the malting process showing indicative metering locations is given in Appendix 1.
Our monitoring strategy had two main aims:
To assist with the identification and confirmation and quantification of opportunities
To provide insight into the energy flows through the Maltings process
The metering installed was considered to be the minimum required to meet these two aims and protect the
anonymity of the host sites.
All metering provided as part of this project is considered temporary, and will be removed at the end of the project
where it is cost effective to do so.
3.2 Engagement with the sector
The Maltsters‟ Association of Great Britain (MAGB) were key to engaging with the sector - we are grateful to
them for facilitating initial contact with host sites, distributing communications and the questionnaire and providing
insight, guidance and feedback throughout the project.
Our strategy for engaging with the sector included the following key elements:
Visits to host sites
Telephone and email communication with the host sites
A questionnaire distributed to the wider sector via the MAGB
Communications to the wider sector distributed by the MAGB including the Initial Sector Report, invitation the
workshop and a summary of the workshop outputs
A workshop - held at a maltings site and attended by maltsters, equipment suppliers and research
organisations. A summary of the information captured from the workshop is given in Appendix 5.
Throughout the project we fostered close working relationships with key contacts from the host sites. These
relationships were important because the requirements made on the host sites, both in terms of time and making
potentially sensitive data available for our analysis, were significant.
3.3 Understanding drivers and barriers
In addition to our meetings and discussions with the host sites and the MAGB, a survey was conducted and a
workshop held to help us engage with the wider sector and understand key drivers and barriers to the
deployment of energy efficiency opportunities.
Maltings Sector Guide
28
We received 11 completed questionnaires from 6 companies. These six companies represent approximately
75% of the sector‟s output and energy consumption.
The workshop was attended by representatives from six maltsters as well as research organisations, equipment
suppliers, the MAGB, the British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA). The format of the day was designed to very
interactive, utilising facilitated group exercises to make the most of the breadth and depth of knowledge and
experience in the room.
A summary of the information captured from the workshop is given in Appendix 5.
Maltings Sector Guide
29
4 Key findings
4.1 Kilning energy consumption
Kilning is the largest energy consumer at a Maltings plant. From an energy consumption perspective, the two
major processes which occur during a kilning cycle are evaporation of water and curing of the malt.
The graph below shows the natural gas consumption over the course of a single kilning cycle, and illustrates the
drying and curing phases. The data was obtained from a gas meter installed at a kiln at one of the IEEA host
sites as part of the evidence collection for this project.
Figure 18 Kiln heat energy demand
Whilst it is too simplistic to say that no further drying occurs in the curing phase (post break), it is thought that the
majority of water has been evaporated during the drying phase as indicated in the above graph. The blue area
represents 78% of the heat energy used in this particular kilning cycle. The red area, associated with curing,
represents 22% of heat energy input.
Maltings Sector Guide
30
It is thought that the general point applies to all kilns, in that the majority of heat energy used in kilning is
associated with evaporation of water. Therefore, much of investigation work of this IEEA project has focussed on
improving the efficiency of the drying phase or providing the energy in a less carbon intensive way.
4.2 Efficiency of glass tube heat exchangers on kilns
Most kilns in the Maltings sector are fitted with glass tube heat exchangers, which recover some of the
vaporisation energy of water (latent heat) from the „air off‟ from the kiln, to preheat the ambient air coming into the
kiln. The heat exchangers are used throughout the kiln cycle.
The figure below illustrates typical energy flows through a glass tube heat exchanger during the pre-break phase
of kilning, for an indirect fired kiln. All air pressures are assumed to be 1 bar. Apparent summation errors are due
to rounding.
Figure 19 Typical average energy flows in a glass tube heat exchanger during pre-break kilning
Ambient air has an annual average temperature of approximately 10°C in the UK. At a relative humidity of 50%,
the enthalpy (or energy content) of the moist ambient air flow into the glass tube heat exchanger is 19.8 kJ/kg dry
air4.
During the pre-break phase the „air off‟ from the kiln has a temperature of 30°C and a relative humidity of 94% or
more. The enthalpy of this air stream is 96.5 kJ/kg dry air. Figure 20 below illustrates the low temperature and
high moisture content of the air off stream during the initial stages of kilning.
4
www.psychrometric-calculator.com/HumidAirWeb.aspx
Maltings Sector Guide
31
Figure 20 Air off temperature and relative humidity during initial stage of a kilning cycle
As the „air off‟ from the kiln cools down, the ambient „air in‟ heats up, up to the inlet temperature of the „air off‟
stream (i.e. 30°C). The ambient air gains 20.3 kJ/kg dry air as it heats up, giving it a heat exchanger exit enthalpy
of 40.0 kJ/kg dry air and a relative humidity of 14.5%.
The „air off‟ stream from the kiln cools down as it exchanges heat with the ambient air flow. The reduction in
enthalpy of 20.3 kJ/kg dry air means its heat exchanger exit enthalpy is 76.3 kJ/kg dry air, at a relative humidity of
100%. This is evidenced by the condensation of water within the glass tube heat exchanger.
From these numbers it can be seen that during the pre-break phase of kilning the heat exchanger is able to
recover 21% (20.3 / 96.5) of the energy available in the „air off‟ stream. The remaining 79% (76.3 / 96.5) of
energy is exhausted to atmosphere as saturated water vapour at a temperature of approximately 25°C. The
amount of energy which the glass tube heat exchanger can recover to the ambient air intake is limited by the
temperature differential between the air off and ambient intake.
This illustration is based on a heat exchanger efficiency of 100%. It is understood glass tube heat exchanger
efficiency is likely to be in the region of 80%, which would mean that the amount of energy recovered to the inlet
air is lower in reality than in the illustration. This in turn would indicate that the overall opportunity for increased
heat recovery is larger than in the illustration.
Using the above numbers, and assuming batch moisture contents of 43% (as indicated in
Figure 32) at start of kilning and 16% at break point, the enthalpy of the „air off‟ to atmosphere stream of 76.3
kJ/kg dry air is equivalent to 526 kWh/tonne of finished product. It must be noted that it is unlikely that the energy
available can be fully recovered.
Maltings Sector Guide
32
Section 5.1.1 outlines two potential solutions for this opportunity. In addition, further energy may be recoverable
from the germination exhaust air which has similar properties to kiln exhaust air (i.e. low temperature and high
relative humidity).
For further information, please refer to the European Brewing Convention Manual of Good Practice – Malting
Technology, pp 58-67
.
4.3 Process control
The current practice within the industry is to control the germination and kilning processes primarily on time, air
temperatures and humidity. Some examples of manual moisture content sampling and measurement were also
observed.
These variables are used to kiln fans and gas input to the kiln burners, which heat the kiln air in via a heat
exchanger.
Whilst these control methodologies enable Maltsters to consistently produce high quality malt, energy efficiency
could be increased by using direct measurement of humidity and moisture content of the malt bed in both
germination and kilning. As direct measurement is more responsive and more precise, it enables faster response
to changing conditions. However it may potentially be less representative of the average bed conditions as it
represents a point measurement.
The graph below shows results from an experimental sensor measuring the relative humidity of the kiln bed
directly. In the experimental set-up the probe measured a single location at the top of the kiln bed. The graph
below shows a single kiln cycle.
Figure 21 Graph of burner energy demand, air off and kiln bed moisture content during kilning cycle
Maltings Sector Guide
33
The blue line, kiln burner gas consumption (kW) gives insight into the kilning cycle. The existing relative humidity
reading (red line) is taken from a probe located in the air-off air flow. It appears to be reading a continuously high
relative humidity, which may indicate humid ambient conditions.
The green line shows the readings from the experimental probe (Hydronix) which shows the relative humidity or
moisture content of the top of the kiln bed. It can be seen that the probe detects the moisture in the malt from
approximately 12:30 onwards. After an initial dip, the moisture reading settles down on a progressively flattening
downward curve, until the break point. It is this downward curve that would allow for more accurate process
control than the air-off relative humidity sensor alone.
It must be noted that the Hydronix probe used in this measurement was not optimised for the measurement of
Malt, both in terms of its calibration and in terms of its measurement location. If these were to be optimised, the
readings should provide a more robust insight into the moisture (and temperature) profile throughout the full
kilning cycle than the existing probe. It could then be used to control the kiln burner, air fans and recirculation
systems automatically. This would allow for optimisation in terms of break point detection and final moisture
content control.
As the blue line shows the firing rate of the gas burner can change rapidly over a short period of time. This
suggests that some forms of alternative heat supply may be difficult to retrofit – as the response time to changes
in heat demand may be too slow. An example of this would be solid wood chip, biomass – where the fuel on the
grate will limit the response time. Some forms of biomass burners, such as dust burners may offer the
responsiveness required.
4.4 Kiln bed temperature and humidity profile
Malt in transferred into the kiln from germination once the appropriate criteria have been met. At transference the
malt has a temperature of approximately 30°C and a moisture content of 43%. During kilning, warm dry air is
blown from below through the kiln bed, inducing both a temperature and a moisture gradient across the depth of
the bed. The bottom of the bed is both warmer and drier than the top of the bed. The gradients gradually reduce
as the kilning cycle progresses, as the moisture evaporates and the malt increasingly heats up.
The graph below shows the temperature gradient for an individual batch over the kilning cycle. It can be assumed
that the moisture gradient has a similar but inverse shape.
Figure 22 Time and temperature profile for a kiln batch
Note: Units have been omitted for confidentiality purposes. The three dips are artefacts of the measurement process.
Maltings Sector Guide
34
It is clear from the temperature gradient that there is variation within the batch in terms of the length of time that
the malt is held at a given temperature. The bottom layer is exposed to a different temperature profile than the
top of the bed. It is therefore likely that the moisture content is also different, and product quality may also differ
between top and bottom.
This inconsistency necessitates the need for blending post-kilning, to ensure finished product consistency. It also
represents an opportunity to improve energy efficiency, if the gradients could be reduced.
It is considered likely that the temperature and moisture gradients are more pronounced in kilns with deeper
beds. In other words, it is thought likely that kilns with deeper beds are more prone to moisture and temperature
variations within the batch, however further monitoring of a variety of kilns would be required to confirm this.
4.5 Variation in load to kiln moisture
Load to kiln moisture refers to the moisture content of the grain at the end of the germination process. It has a
direct bearing on the amount of energy used in the kiln to evaporate the water and is therefore one of the most
important drivers of variation in batch energy consumption. The figure below shows the moving range (the
difference between one batch and the previous batch) for load to kiln moisture content for a series of 45
consecutive batches. The graph is used for illustrative purposes and there may be other reasons, such as
product specifications, for differences in load to kiln moisture
Figure 23 Moving range for load to kiln moisture content for a series of 45 consecutive batches
The figure above highlights two periods of exception:
A run of 8 consecutive batches with less than average variation in moisture content.
A single batch with significantly higher moisture content than the average.
The use of statistical methods to manage important input and process variables would help to identify such
exceptional occurrences so that the causes can be identified and the appropriate action taken in order to drive
continuous improvement in consistency of performance. This is discussed further in Section 5.1.6.
4.6 High heat to power ratios
Figure 24 below shows the distribution of the heat to power ratios for UK Malting sites. The average of those
shown is around 4.8:1. Typically heat to power ratios within these ranges are an indicator that the sector
generally may be suited to CHP, either conventional or biomass based.
Maltings Sector Guide
35
Figure 24 Frequency distribution of heat to power ratios for sites in the sector CCA (08/09)
Figure 25 shows daily electricity and gas consumption for three „typical‟ Maltings sites. It can be seen in all three
cases that gas consumption varied significantly from day to day, whereas electricity consumption showed much
less daily variability. The daily variations in gas consumption are predominantly due to the timings of kilning
cycles.
Daily energy consumption (kWh)
Daily energy consumption (kWh)
Figure 25 Daily electricity and gas consumption over 1 year for three Maltings sites
Time
Natural gas
Electricity
Natural gas
Daily energy consumption (kWh)
Electricity
Time
Time
Electricity
Natural gas
Figure 26 shows heat load duration curves for the same three Maltings sites. In each case the heat that could be
provided by a CHP plant sized to meet 100% of the site electricity demand has been shown. The heat load
duration curves are based on average hourly consumption derived from daily gas consumption data over a period
Maltings Sector Guide
36
of 1 year, and therefore does not account for variations in heat load over time periods of less than 24 hours.
Sizing the CHP plant to meet site electricity demand gives a fairly conservative estimate of the potential CHP
opportunity for similar sites. The estimated payback periods for the three sites shown in Figure 16 are in the
region of 5 years.
14,000
6,000
12,000
5,000
10,000
Heat load (kW)
Heat load (kW)
Figure 26 Heat load duration curves for three Maltings sites showing heat that could be provided by a CHP sized
to meet 100% of electricity demand
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
CHP Heat
0
CHP Heat
0
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Hours
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Hours
7,000
Heat load (kW)
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
CHP Heat
0
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Hours
4.7 Co-products
The Maltings sector generates an estimated 195,000 tonnes p.a. of organic co-products such as waste grain and
culms (rootlets). These co-products are collected and sold to animal feed manufacturers as a valuable feedstock.
The co-products could, alternatively, be used as an energy source. Currently, the price received for co-products
as animal feed is greater than their value as an energy source. This is discussed further in Section 5.1.2.
4.8 Supply chain
The Maltings sector is part of a supply chain which includes farmers, brewers, distillers, food manufacturers and
end customers. There are a number of opportunities, such as providing finished malt at higher moisture content,
which would require customer acceptance, and hence require some level of collaboration with customers. Other
opportunities, such as anaerobic digestion, are unlikely to be viable for Maltsters to pursue in isolation, but could
be attractive if pursued in partnership with other links in the supply chain.
Maltings Sector Guide
37
5 Opportunities
This section outlines the opportunities identified in the sector, including outline business cases where it has been
possible to quantify these. All business cases are presented on both a sector and an average site basis. The
business cases have been constructed based on information from energy meters installed during the IEEA
project, from process data made available by IEEA host companies, analysis of responses to the questionnaire,
publicly available information and AEA‟s internal expertise. References to publicly available information have
been provided where possible.
Table 5 below outlines the assumptions made during the calculation of the business cases.
Table 5 Business case assumptions
Assumption
Sector annual heat energy consumption
Sector annual electricity consumption
Average weighted fuel price
Average natural gas price
Average electricity price
Electricity CO2 emission factor
Natural Gas CO2 emission factor
Number of sites in sector
Number of kilns in sector
Value
1,176,854,289 kWh p.a.
196,264,539 kWh p.a.
2.39 p/kWh
2 p/kWh
6 p/kWh
0.545 kgCO2/kWh
0.185 kgCO2/kWh
27
45
The opportunities have been grouped into two broad categories:
Innovative opportunities – those opportunities that are considered to be within the IEEA project brief i.e. they
are innovative and specific to the Maltings process
Good practice opportunities – those opportunities that represent established good practice or established
technology. These opportunities fall outside the project brief for the IEEA i.e. they are not innovative and
specific to the Maltings process. In general, these opportunities have been partly implemented by the sector.
The cost and saving numbers in the business cases have been rounded, to reflect their indicative nature. It is
also important to note that several of the opportunities listed are mutually exclusive, and others target the same
energy using equipment. The total savings available to the sector are therefore less than the sum of the savings
of individual measures.
The sector emissions were 336,345 tonnes CO2 in 2008/09.
Maltings Sector Guide
38
5.1 Innovative opportunities
This section outlines the opportunities which are considered to be within the IEEA project brief i.e. they are
innovative and specific to the Maltings process. As these opportunities are innovative in nature, the level of
confidence that can be applied to the costs and savings is lower, reflecting the greater uncertainties. With this in
mind, the business cases have been constructed conservatively, i.e. the costs have been estimated higher and
the benefits lower.
The level of confidence associated with these business cases is not currently sufficient for investment decisions
to be based on them. Rather, the business cases are intended to highlight areas that Maltsters should pursue
and investigate further.
Table 6 Summary of innovative opportunity business cases, sector level
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Opportunity
Heat pumps,
closed cycle
Heat pumps,
open cycle
Energy
efficient
drying
Burning
Maltings coproducts
Burning
woodchips
Direct T & RH
measurement
Kiln bed
turning
Process
management
Supply chain
collaboration
Microwave
technology
Implementation
costs (£)
Saving
(£ p.a.)
Saving
(t CO2
p.a.)
Cost
(£/t
CO2)
Payback
(years)
Sites
applicable
(%)
£24,750,000
£4,500,000
33,000
£750
6
100%
£75,000,000
£14,650,000
115,000
£640
5
100%
£142,500,000
£10,400,000
85,000
£1,675
14
100%
£13,000,000
-£27,000,000
40,000
£320
None
100%
£21,000,000
£4,200,000
38,000
£550
5
26%
£1,130,000
£580,000
4,700
£240
2
100%
£7,500,000
£1,300,000
10,750
£700
6
67%
£55,000
£200,000
1,750
32
<1
100%
£0
£5,250,000
43,000
£0
0
100%
Text description only
Note: No total has been provided as most of the opportunities either overlap or are mutually exclusive.
Figure 27 below shows the location of the opportunities in diagrammatic form. The diagram gives some indication
of which opportunities overlap or are mutually exclusive.
Maltings Sector Guide
39
Figure 27 Location of opportunities within the Malting
process
Raw Barley Intake
Waste Grain
4
Raw Barley Drying
Heat
Raw Barley Storage
Power
Screening and Weighing
Power
Water to air (evaporation)
Grain to air (respiration)
5
Power
Steeping
Grain to Waste Water
Water
6
Waste Water
Grain to air (respiration)
Germination
Power
8
Grain to air (evaporation)
1
Grain to air (respiration)
2
Heat
Kilning
Grain to air (evaporation)
Power
3
7
9
Waste Grain
De-culming
Power
10
Output to Brewing
5.1.1
Kiln energy recovery
The key energy efficiency opportunity for the Maltings process is the increased recovery of the vaporisation
energy of water during the pre-break phase of kilning (and potentially post-break). On average almost 80% of
Maltings Sector Guide
40
energy supplied to the kiln to evaporate water during pre-break is lost to atmosphere. Approximately 45% to 50%
of sector emissions are associated with this.
Two opportunities (heat pumps and energy efficient drying) are outlined below which may be used to increase the
amount of energy recovered and hence reduce carbon emissions and energy costs.
Heat pumps
Heat pumps are a means of boosting the temperature of low grade heat energy to a higher temperature, thereby
increasing its usefulness. Typical examples of heat pumps (albeit with the principle applied in reverse), include
domestic refrigerators and air conditioning systems. Heat pumps are used in the evaporation of water in a range
of industries, including food & drink.
Heat pumps can be categorised into two categories:
Closed cycle heat pumps, where the working fluid does not leave the system
Open cycle heat pumps, where the working fluid is vented from the system
Both types of heat pump may present opportunities to improve energy efficiency.
Closed cycle heat pumps
Closed cycle heat pumps typically use a refrigerant gas as the working fluid. They can be deployed as a second
stage of energy recovery, after the glass tube heat exchanger. The diagram in Figure 28 shows how a heat pump
could be integrated in a kiln. The heat pump is shown in red.
Figure 28 Diagram of closed cycle heat pump energy recovery system (elevation)
Maltings Sector Guide
41
The warm, saturated air exiting the glass tube heat exchanger enters a second heat exchanger (the heat pump
evaporator) where it is cooled by the refrigerant liquid, as energy is transferred. As the refrigerant liquid heats up,
it is vaporised. The refrigerant vapour is than compressed which increases its pressure and temperature. It then
enters the heat pump condenser. This heat exchanger is located between the air recirculation inlet and the
primary heat exchanger (shown as heater in the above diagram). In the heat pump condenser energy is
transferred to the air-on stream, heating up the air. The refrigerant vapour is cooled and condensed, and brought
back to its initial state of a low pressure low temperature liquid by an expansion valve.
Retrofitting heat pumps for energy recovery may be possible in existing kilns. The main barrier is likely to be
technical viability, as there may be insufficient space to fit the condenser heat exchanger.
The preliminary business case for heat pump energy recovery is provided in Table 7 below. The following
assumptions are made:
Heat pump evaporator exit temperature of 12°C.
Heat pump condenser exit temperature of 65°C.
Heat pump heating capacity of 1MW.
Compressor electricity demand of 280kW.
Daily operation of 14 hours, 365 days per year.
Capital cost of £550/kW of heating capacity.
Heat pumps used in this way will not be eligible for the RHI
The relatively long payback period of heat recovery heat pumps may be an obstacle to their implementation.
Table 7 Business case for heat pump energy recovery
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
Sector
Average site
£24,7500,000
£920,000
£4,500,000 p.a.
£165,000 p.a.
6 years
6 years
33,000 tonnes CO2 p.a.
1,225 tonnes CO2 p.a.
27 (all sites within the CCA)
Technical. Retrofit may not be technically viable for all sites.
Supplier survey
European Brewing Convention Manual of Good Practice – Malting
Technology, pages 139 - 140.
http://www.r744.com/component/files/pdf/thermea_broschuere_short.pdf
http://produktordner.thermea.de/english
Open cycle heat pumps
Open cycle heat pumps can use evaporated water itself as the working fluid for heat recovery, which allows for
easier integration into water evaporating systems. Such open cycle heat pumps using water vapour as a working
fluid can be deployed in single or multiple stages. Electrically driven open cycle heat pumps are known as
mechanical vapour recompressors.
The heat transfer equipment comes in many forms, including climbing and falling film evaporators, fluidised bed
and rotary dryers. Of these, rotary dryers or similar equipment is likely to be most suitable.
The type of system referred to above could potentially be adapted for the Maltings sector. The system would rely
on the addition of a further heat exchanger, such as a rotary dryer, through which the wet malt passes
Maltings Sector Guide
42
continuously. Water is evaporated from the malt, using initial start-up heat provided by a separate system such
as a microwave system. The vapour is extracted and compressed by a Mechanical Vapour Re-compressor
(MVR), which boosts the temperature and pressure of the vapour. The higher temperature vapour is then
pumped into the heat exchanger (now separated from the malt) where it exchanges heat with the malt. The
recompressed vapour condenses in the heat exchanger, ensuring that all its vaporisation energy (latent heat) is
recovered to the malt. Finally, a pump removes the condensate from the heat exchanger. In effect, the
compressor provides the temperature and pressure rise required to allow condensation of vapour to occur at the
same temperature it was generated. It uses electricity to do so. An example of a possible layout is shown below.
The dry malt would be transferred from the additional dryer into a kiln where it can be cured.
To our knowledge, no such system is in used for the evaporation of water from solids such as malt. Systems like
it are used for the evaporation of water from liquids. Research and Development effort will be required to bring
the technology to the point of a commercial product.
Figure 29 Example arrangement of single effect Malt drying system
Recompressed
vapour
Wet Malt
Vapour
extraction
MVR
Malt dryer
(heat exchanger)
Dry Malt
Initial heat
Condensate
Condensate
pump
In a multi-effect set-up, the vapour from dryer 1 is used to heat dryer 2, the vapour from dryer 2 is used to heat
dryer 3 and the vapour from the last dryer is used to heat dryer 1. In essence the performance of a multi-dryer
unit is similar to that of a single effect unit, though as multiple MVRs are used, the total pressure drop across the
effects can be greater.
This means that the last effect could be operated at a pressure which is a fraction of ambient pressure (i.e. a
partial vacuum). If this pressure can be low enough, water will boil at 30°C. As boiling is a much faster method of
converting water to vapour than evaporation, this may enable intensification of the drying phase, particularly the
falling rate phase (i.e. evaporating water from within the body of each grain). This may result in further energy
efficiency improvements.
It may be advantageous to slightly heat the malt in the stage where boiling is induced as this reduces the need
for a deep vacuum, and hence reduces the electrical demand of the MVRs. A balance would need to be struck
between introducing additional heat and reducing electrical input. Such a temperature increase could be
accomplished by the use of microwave technology (see section 5.1.8).
Maltings Sector Guide
43
An example multi-effect set-up is shown below.
Figure 30 Example arrangement of multi effect Malt drying system
Recompressed
vapour
MVR
MVR
Vapour
extraction
Wet Malt
Recompressed
vapour
Malt dryer
(heat exchanger)
MVR
Vapour
extraction
Recompressed
vapour
Malt dryer
(heat exchanger)
Vapour
extraction
Malt dryer
(heat exchanger)
Dry Malt
Initial heat
Condensate
Condensate
pump
Condensate
Condensate
pump
Condensate
Condensate
pump
Mechanical Vapour Recompression works most efficiently when operated continuously, as this minimises start-up
heat requirements. The equipment required could then also be relatively small, reducing the capital cost. A
continuous operation is also likely to reduce the temperature and humidity variation within the drying malt
compared with traditional batch fed kilns, as these parameters can be more precisely controlled in continuous
systems.
The system would require buffer capacity upstream of the multi effect evaporators to allow a full batch to be held
following the end of germination, and before processing. A separate kilning stage would still be required
downstream from the evaporators to provide curing of the dry malt.
It must be noted that references to MVR have been found for the evaporation of water from fluids. No references
have been found to their use for the evaporation of water from grain or similar solid materials. This may represent
a technical hurdle that would need to be addressed through research and development. Research and
development areas that may require addressing include:
Feasibility of using open cycle heat pumps to evaporate water from solids
Energy transfer from condensing vapour to malt
Effects on product quality
Potential for integration of open cycle heat pumps with existing kilns
The preliminary business case for MVR dryers is provided in Table 8 below. The following assumptions are
made:
Drying requires 63% of sector‟s heat input (based on kiln energy demand pre-break).
MVR electricity requirements are 38.6 kWh / tonne of water vapour5.
Assumed initial heat requirement of 627 kWh per batch, to evaporate 1 tonnes of water. 365 batches per year
for each of the sector‟s 45 kilns.
Assumed capital costs of £75,000,000. It must be noted that this is an estimate, and it subject to significant
change based on the outcome of an R&D project.
5
http://profmaster.blogspot.com/2010/07/mvr-use-it-for-higher-benefits.html`
Maltings Sector Guide
44
Table 8 Business case for open cycle heat pumps
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
Sector
Average site
£75,000,000
£2,800,000
£14,650,000 p.a.
£540,000 p.a.
5 years
5 years
115,000 tonnes CO2 p.a.
4,250 tonnes CO2 p.a.
27 (all sites within the CCA)
Product quality concerns, technical viability
This opportunity requires further R&D work to establish the effect on
product quality. This work will also give insight into the technical
viability of the opportunity.
http://www.barr-rosin.com/applications/evaporation.asp
http://www.windsorsathyam.com/evaporation_processes.html
The above opportunity recovers energy from saturated water vapour at a low temperature from the kiln. It may
also be possible to recover energy from water vapour available from the germination process exhaust air flow
using the same equipment. This energy could potentially be used in the kiln, or to pre-heat steep water. The
opportunity to recover energy from the germination process is likely to be relatively small and has not been
quantified.
Energy Efficient Drying
Tri Phase Drying Technologies LLC, a US company, markets a system that they claim results in highly energy
efficient drying. A detailed assessment of the effectiveness of this technology is not within the scope of this
report. This system is the only reference to an energy efficient grain drying system found during the project.
Extracts of the website are shown below:
‘Tri-Phase Drying Technologies system achieves energy savings by recycling heat of vaporization. A fluid or solid
medium circulates within the system to recover the heat of vaporization (Recovery Phase) and returns it to a
product stream (Heating Phase). A minimal counter-current air stream carries water vapour from the heated
product (Drying Phase) so that the air is saturated at the heat Recovery Phase.’
‘Energy use of less than 500 Btu/lb of water removed is possible. Results of an economic analysis are presented
showing payback period of about 3 years based solely on energy savings.’
Maltings Sector Guide
45
Figure 31 Tri-Phase process diagram
The company‟s website appears to have been updated in 2009. AEA has not established whether the company is
actively trading, or if the technology is still in active use for grain drying.
The business case outlined below is based on information found on the company‟s website. There appears to be
some discrepancy between the payback periods quoted by the company, and those calculated for this business
case. The assumptions used are:
Energy use of a standard kiln during pre-break is 4,442 kJ/kg
Energy use of Tri-Phase technology is 1,815 kJ/kg
Tri Phase unit costs of £3,125,000
It must be noted that many configurations of the Tri-Phase technology are possible, according to the website.
This may include configurations which can be retrofitted to existing kilns at significantly reduced capital costs.
Table 9 Business case for energy efficient drying
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
Sector
Average site
£142,500,000
£5,300,000
£10,400,000 p.a.
£385,000 p.a.
14 years
14 years
85,000 tonnes CO2 p.a.
3,150 tonnes CO2 p.a.
27 (all sites within the CCA)
Technical, Financial
It appears that the technology is in use in the US, though some
technical barriers may remain. The relatively long payback period
may indicate implementation is only viable at kiln replacement stage.
www.triphasetechnologies.com
Maltings Sector Guide
5.1.2
46
Burning malting co-products
The Maltings sector generates organic co-products in the course of its operations. These co-products are
collected and sold to animal feed manufacturers as a valuable feedstock.
The co-products could be used for the generation of energy using anaerobic digestion, CHP, or using biomass
burners to heat the kilns. As the co-product has a relatively high monetary value as animal feed, this opportunity
does not have a financial return. It is listed here purely to illustrate the potential reduction of CO2 emissions
(through reduced fossil fuel consumption) that could result from the burning of biomass co-products.
Cheaper biomass may be available from elsewhere in the supply chain, or from other sources.
The business case assumes:
Approximately 300,000 tonnes p.a. of co-product across the sector6, assumed to be 256,500 tonnes of dry
mass.
Energy value of 1 MWh/tonne
Biomass burner costs of £300/kW, and 80% efficiency
£125/tonne for co-product sold as animal feed7
It must be noted sites operating hot water, steam or hot oil systems (as opposed to warm air) can qualify for the
Renewable Heat Incentive. The RHI is not sufficient to alter the business case below significantly.
Table 10 Business case for burning Maltings co-products
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
5.1.3
Sector
Average site
£13,000,000
£480,000
-£27,000,000 p.a.
-£1,000,000 p.a.
None
None
40,000 tonnes CO2 p.a.
1,500 tonnes CO2 p.a.
27 (all sites within the CCA)
Financial. Not currently financially viable. Further benefits and value
may be available.
None
http://www.esru.strath.ac.uk/Documents/MSc_2006/hamilton.pdf
Woodchip burner for hot water, steam or hot oil kilns
Biomass burners could replace some or all of the heat energy used for kilning. Several sources of biomass can
be used for combustion purposes, including wood chip and wood pellets. Of these, wood chip tends to be used
for large scale applications due to it lower price per unit of energy.
Whilst all sites could potentially benefit from wood chip burners, this opportunity is most attractive to sites
operating hot water, steam or thermal oil systems (as opposed to direct or indirect fired kilns warm air). This is
because to the Renewable Heat Incentive, which is due to be introduced this year, will apply to hot water, steam
and thermal oil systems, but will not (initially at least) apply to direct or indirect fired warm air systems.
6
7
http://www.ukmalt.com/maltindustry/industry.asp
MAGB, personal communication, average of £90/t and £160/t.
Maltings Sector Guide
47
In addition to those sites benefiting from the Renewable Heat Incentive, kilns fitted with such systems are thought
to be able to cope with less responsive burners, as the hot water, steam or thermal oil introduces a thermal lag.
This makes the kiln less susceptible to a relatively slow responding burner such as a wood chip burner.
The business case below outlines the case for the addition of a 5MW wood chip burner to an existing natural gas
fired kiln. The benefits at sites with warm water, steam and thermal oil systems fuelled by LPG or gas oil are
likely to benefit greater as these fuels are more expensive than natural gas.
The business case assumes:
7 sites in the sector operate warm water, steam and thermal oil systems
The addition of a 5MW woodchip burner to the existing heating system, fuelled by natural gas
The above burner is able to displace 80% of the natural gas currently used
Woodchip price of £90/tonne, and an energy content of 3,500 kWh/tonne
The woodchip system would qualify for the Renewable Heat Incentive scheme, at a rate of 2.6 p/kWh8.
Capital costs include £1,500,000 per site for site fuel storage, fuel handling and de-ashing equipment
Table 11 Business case for burner Maltings co-products
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
5.1.4
Sector
Average site
£21,000,000
£3,000,000
£4,200,000
£600,000
5 years
5 years
38,000
5,500
7
Logistics. Woodchip takes space to store.
http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/what_we_do/uk_supply/energ
y_mix/renewable/policy/incentive/incentive.aspx
Process control based on direct measurement of humidity & temperature
The current standard practice within the industry is to control the germination and kilning processes primarily on
time, air temperature and humidity. Some examples of manual moisture content sampling and measurement
were also observed.
Whilst these control methodologies enable Maltsters to consistently produce high quality malt, energy efficiency
could be increased by using direct measurement of temperature and moisture content of the malt bed in both
germination and kilning. As direct measurement is more responsive and more precise, it enables faster response
to changing conditions. It is however a more localised measurement and as such may be less representative of
average conditions in the bed.
One example of where direct measurement could reduce energy consumption is in the termination of a kilning
cycle. It is typically necessary for the malt to have a maximum moisture content of 4% or less. If a manual
sampling and testing regime is used, it may take 30 minutes between time of sampling and the decision time to
stop the kilning process. Such a delay would lead to energy being used to provide heat which is no longer
necessary, as well as a kilning cycle which is longer than required.
8
Must be confirmed
Maltings Sector Guide
48
The business case below outlines an example where the finished moisture content is lower than required, and
hence more than the minimum amount of energy and time have been used. The business case assumes:
1.2% additional moisture in load to kiln moisture content.
The above additional moisture resulting in 13 minutes additional pre-break kilning time.
A total of 225 sensors (45 in kilns, and 4x 45 in germination vessels).
Sensors can be integrated into manual or automated control processes.
Barriers to this opportunity include:
Sensors exist with the capability to measure moisture and temperature at the same time. These sensors may
require some adaptation to ensure best fit (operationally) for the Maltings sector.
For best value the sensors should be integrated into automated control systems. Where this is not practical or
viable, the output from the sensors should be used to manually control the processes. Both automated and
manual control based on these sensors may be difficult.
Table 12 Business case for process control based on direct measurement of humidity & temperature
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
5.1.5
Sector
Average site
£1,130,000
£42,000
£580,000 p.a.
£21,500 p.a.
2 years
2 years
4,700 tonnes CO2 p.a.
175 tonnes CO2 p.a.
27
Technical (sensor and sensor integration)
R&D project
http://www.hydronix.com/
Kiln bed turning
If kilns were fitted with turning mechanisms, similar to those in germination vessels, those turning facilities could
be used to reduce the temperature and moisture gradients across the bed. The benefits are thought to include
faster, more consistent drying of the bed, thereby reducing the length of the kilning cycle. In addition turning
during the kilning cycle may improve the distribution of air flow across the area of the bed, as short-circuits are
reduced.
The major risk associated with this opportunity is likely to be the stirring up of additional dust into the kiln air
stream during turning. This could potentially increase fouling of the glass tube heat exchanger, with negative
implications for energy recovery. Mitigation of this risk is likely to be a combination of timing of turning, and
ensuring kiln air velocities are as low as possible to ensure dust is minimised and settles quickly. However, if air
velocities are too low, the kilning cycle would need to be extended, thereby increasing energy consumption.
In addition, some kilns may not be structurally strong enough to cope with the additional machine weight. It may
be more feasible to turn the top half of the bed rather than the whole bed. This has not been taken into account in
the business case below.
The business case outlined below assumes the following:
An estimated 7.5% reduction in energy demand during pre-break phase of kilning.
Equipment and installation costs of £250,000 per kiln, applied to 30 kilns in the sector.
All GKVs where kiln bed turning during kilning is viable do so already.
Maltings Sector Guide
49
Table 13 Business case for kiln bed turning
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
5.1.6
Sector
Average site
£7,500,000
£420,000
£1,300,000 p.a.
£72,000 p.a.
6 years
6 years
10,750 tonnes CO2 p.a.
600 tonnes CO2 p.a.
18 sites, (30 kilns)
Operational. Dust control may be an issue.
Technical. Some existing kilns may not be suitable for retrofit.
Confirm benefit through measurement of GKV kiln bed turning.
Statistical management of input and process variables
The consistent production of high quality malt relies on the management of key input and process variables,
including moisture content, temperatures and time cycles. The aim of managing key input and process variables
is twofold:
To continuously increase the consistency (i.e. continuously reduce variation) of input and process variables to
improve the consistency and predictability of the output
To optimise the level of output to as close to the target as the consistency of output allows.
Several techniques and methods have been developed to assist with the aim of continuous systems
improvement. These form part of an approach known as continuous improvement or lean manufacturing. AEA
has used this technique to develop a series of charts that provide insight into the control of the core process.
The example below shows a control chart (one of the 7 basic quality tools, and also known as a process
behaviour chart) of the moisture content of „load to kiln‟ batches, for a series of 45 consecutive batches. The load
to kiln moisture content has a direct bearing on the amount of energy used in the kiln to evaporate the water. It is
therefore important to ensure the minimum moisture content possible consistent with product quality.
Control charts are a useful and objective way of detecting unusual behaviour in processes. They are constructed
using two basic time series graphs, and include control limits which are calculated based on the variation present
in the data (i.e. they are not user defined and they are therefore objective). Control charts are interpreted using a
set of detection rules (see below) that will objectively indicate when the process is behaving in a manner that is
different to normal. This allows for investigations to be carried out and improvement action to be taken.
The upper chart (known as the X-Bar chart) shows the process variable (load to kiln moisture content), together
with its average and an upper and lower control limits. The lower chart (known as the moving range chart) shows
the moving range between points, i.e. the absolute difference between one point and the next. This chart also
shows the average for the moving range and an upper control limit. There is no lower control limit in the moving
range chart.
The formula‟s used to calculate the control limits are shown below.
The factors used in the calculation of control charts have been empirically derived and have been in use in
industry for more than 50 years.
Maltings Sector Guide
50
Figure 32 Control charts for load to kiln moisture content
Control charts allow for the robust and objective detection of unusual performance in processes. This detection is
based on a set of detection rules, two of which have been illustrated in the above example. The same detection
rules apply to both graphs. The illustrated rules are:
Any individual point outside of the control limits indicates an exception.
Any run of 8 or more consecutive points either above or below the average indicates an exception.
In the above example, the X-bar chart shows no unexpected behaviour, i.e. the process is operating within its
capabilities. The Moving Range chart however shows two exceptions:
A run of 8 consecutive batches with less than average variation in moisture content. The causes should be
investigated and encouraged to re-occur.
A single batch with significantly different moisture content than expected. The causes should be investigated
and eliminated.
Both actions will result in process improvement, which shows up on control charts in two ways:
Narrower control limits on the X-bar chart and a lower average and lower upper control limit on the moving
range chart. This is the result of the process becoming more consistent.
A shift in the average of the X-bar chart in the desired direction.
Control charts, and the other techniques and methods referred to above, can be used to improve the outputs
from any type of process. They are at their most valuable when used to minimise variation in input and process
variables.
Maltings Sector Guide
51
The same data is shown in the scatter diagram below. The equation of the line of best fit is shown in the top right,
as is the R2 value (R2 is a measure of how closely the estimated the trend line corresponds to the actual data).
The value of R2 is quite low, indicating that the data does not correspond closely with the trend line and that
other factors exist which have a more dominant effect on kiln gas consumption.
Figure 33 Scatter diagram of batch moisture content and kiln gas consumption
Scatter diagrams are part of the 7 basic quality tools, which can be used to improve processes by management
of key input and process variables.
The business case below is based on the following assumptions:
Training costs of £2,000 per site
Application of skills to reduce load to kiln average moisture content by 0.5%.
No benefits have been calculated of applying skills to other process improvements
Table 14 Business case for statistical management of input and process variables
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
Sector
£55,000
£200,000 p.a.
<1
1,750 tonnes CO2 p.a.
27 (all sites within the CCA)
Knowledge/skills
Training and experience
Average site
£2,000
£7,500 p.a.
<1
60 tonnes CO2 p.a.
Maltings Sector Guide
5.1.7
52
Supply chain collaboration
The Maltings sector is part of a supply chain which includes farmers, brewers, distillers, food manufacturers and
end customers. They are also supported by equipment and knowledge providers.
Further collaboration with the supply chain offers opportunities to reduce the carbon footprint, and potentially
energy costs, of the sector. Examples of such opportunities include:
Negotiating a higher finished product moisture content with brewers. This reduces the energy consumption
required during kilning.
Collaborating with farmers on the deployment of renewable energy systems, such as a wind turbine or
anaerobic digester constructed on a farmer‟s land under a lease agreement, funded by a Maltster.
Development of barley varieties which require less energy consumption during processing.
Negotiating supply of other biomass from farmers or customers to a Maltings site, specifically to fuel biomass
burners, biomass CHP or anaerobic digesters.
Final moisture content
The business case below outlines the energy cost and carbon emission implications of an agreement with the
sector‟s customers to increase the finished product moisture content. It assumes:
Brewers agreed to a change in moisture content from 3% to 4%.
Management time is expended for negotiations.
No capital costs are involved in changing moisture content.
Relative carbon emissions are improved by 25%9
Table 15 Business case for supply chain collaboration – final moisture content
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
Sector
£0
£5,250,000 p.a.
43,000 tonnes CO2 p.a.
27 (all sites within the CCA)
Customer acceptance
Negotiation
Average site
£0
£195,000 p.a.
1,600 tonnes CO2 p.a.
Renewable energy systems
Sector members have opportunities to deploy Renewable Energy (RE) systems at their own sites. Examples
include biomass combustion (see section 5.1.3) and Anaerobic Digestion, as well as wind turbines at suitable
locations.
For systems that generate up to 5 MW of electricity from renewable sources the new Feed-In-Tariff provides a
significant new financial incentive.
9
http://www.muntons.com/downloads/carbon%20emissions%20in%20malting%202010%202.pdf accessed 10/02/11
Maltings Sector Guide
53
The location of a Maltings site may place restrictions on the types or sizes of RE systems that could be deployed
at a particular site. As there are often economies of scale associated with RE systems often (i.e. larger systems
offer a higher rate of return), any restrictions may make deployment of RE system less favourable.
Such constraints can be overcome by investing in RE systems on a less restrictive site away from the main
Maltings plant. The benefits of RE, including carbon credits, electricity and revenue are tradable. For example, a
Maltster could enter into a contract with a farmer where the farmer agrees to lease a small parcel of land to the
Maltster for the (co)funding, construction and operation of a wind turbine for a number of years. The farmer
receives an annual lease payment, whilst the Maltster receives the carbon credits and income from the sale of
electricity. The carbon credits can be used to effectively reduce the carbon footprint of the Maltster, or they can
be sold to increase the financial return. Similar methods can be used to deploy other RE systems, including solar
thermal, photo voltaic, anaerobic digestion, biomass, ground source heat pumps, etc. It must also be noted that
this opportunity is not limited to the Maltsters supply chain as it could be conducted anywhere within the UK.
The main barrier to this opportunity is likely to be organisational, in that Maltsters are not in business to generate
RE and hence the above scenario may be too much of a distraction from the core business.
Barley varieties development
New species of barley are continuously under development. It may be possible for new species to be developed
which require less energy in processing. This may take the form of lower moisture content required for
germination or lower energy requirement for drying.
This opportunity is technically difficult, and the influence of the Maltsters over the development of new barley
species is limited. In addition, it is thought that any benefits could take a long time to materialise.
Biomass supply
The agricultural suppliers to the Maltings industry could potentially supply biomass for use in biomass burners
CHP plant or an Anaerobic Digester. This opportunity could have similar carbon benefits to those outlined in
section 5.1.2, but with financial savings as well.
5.1.8
Microwave technology
Microwave technology can be used to input energy to wet malt in the initial stages of kilning. The potential
benefits of microwave technology include:
Allows for fast energy transfer – as energy reaches the core of each grain
Allows for precise control
Energy efficient
Established technology
Following discussions with the National Centre for Industrial Microwave Processing (NCIMP) at Nottingham
University, we understand that whilst microwave technology can be applied to the Maltings process, it does have
some restrictions. These include:
Microwave technology is not suited to batch processing for the size of batches currently used in the Maltings
sector. The technology is more suited to continuous processes, as these allow for smaller hardware.
Maltings Sector Guide
54
Microwave technology has high energy efficiency (80-85%) when used for heating. This high efficiency alone
does not necessarily make microwave technology more attractive than other drying/heating technologies, due
to the relatively high cost and carbon intensity of the electricity compared with gas.
Microwave technology could be deployed in conjunction with other drying / heating technology, such as multieffect evaporators/dryers, in order to provide initial energy input, or final drying. As microwave technology is
unlikely to be deployed other than as part of a larger improvement measure, no separate business case has been
presented here.
5.1.9
Summary
Table 16 below outlines the advantages and disadvantages of each of the innovative opportunities, including the
carbon emission reduction and payback periods.
Table 16 Advantages and disadvantages of the innovative opportunities
Opportunity
Heat pumps, closed cycle
Advantages
33,000 t CO2, 6 years
Retrofit opportunity
Does not affect product quality
Heat pumps, open cycle
115,000 t CO2, 5 years
Largest energy efficiency opportunity
identified
Expected to be relatively cost
effective
May speed up kilning process
Energy efficient drying
85,000t CO2, 14 years
Existing technology
Burning Maltings co-products
Large carbon saving
Established technology
Burning woodchips
Direct T & RH measurement
Kiln bed turning
38,000 t CO2, 5 years
Large carbon saving
Established technology
Attracts Renewable Heat Incentive
4,700 t CO2, 2 years
Relatively low cost of implementation
Short payback expected
Improved process control
10,750 t CO2, 6 years
Existing technique in GKVs
Disadvantages
Relatively long payback period
Space requirements for heat
exchangers may be limited
Technology may not be adaptable to
evaporating water from solids –
Requires R&D
Effects on product quality not known
New build / replacement opportunity
only as it would represent a
significant change to existing kilning
process
Long payback period
Availability of market-ready solutions
uncertain
Use of Maltings co-products is not
financially viable at current animal
feed prices
Fuel handling and storage may be an
issue
Requires R&D to optimise technical
solution
Savings potential uncertain
Process management
1,750 t CO2, 1 year
No/low cost
Existing techniques, applied to
process and input variables
Flexible techniques, can be applied
to many processes
Relatively small energy efficiency
gains
Requires management time and
expertise to analyse data and
identify savings
Savings result only if action is taken
on the information
Supply chain collaboration
43,000 t CO2, immediate
Large, low risk opportunity (higher
finished malt moisture content)
Requires on-going agreement with
customers
Microwave technology
Fast, precise and energy efficient
Only considered suitable in addition
to other innovative technology such
as open cycle heat pumps
Maltings Sector Guide
55
The following chart shows the relative capital costs (x-axis) payback period (y-axis) and CO2 savings (label and
diameter of bubble) for each of the innovative opportunities.
As these opportunities are innovative in nature, the level of confidence that can be applied to the costs and
savings is lower, reflecting the greater uncertainties. The business cases are not intended to form the basis of
investment decisions, rather they are intended to highlight areas that Maltsters should pursue and investigate
further.
Figure 34 Bubble diagram of capital costs, payback period and carbon savings for innovative opportunities
18
16
85,000 Energy ef f icient
drying
14
Payback (Years)
12
10
10,750 Kiln bed turning
8
33,000 Closed cycle heat
pumpts
6
38,000 Woodchip
115,000 Open cycle heat
pumps
4
2
4,700 Direct measurement
43,000 Supply chain
collaboration
1,750 Process Management
0
£0
£50,000,000
£100,000,000
£150,000,000
£200,000,000
Capital Costs
5.2 Good practice opportunities
This section outlines opportunities to reduce energy costs and CO2 emissions that are considered to represent
established good practice or established technology. These opportunities fall outside the project brief for the
IEEA i.e. they are not innovative and specific to the Maltings process. However, we believe that there is
significant scope for emissions savings through further dissemination and implementation of good practice within
the sector. Moreover, implementation of these measures may represent the best opportunity for carbon savings
in the short to medium term.
Maltings Sector Guide
56
The opportunities are listed here to allow the sector to gain additional insight and confidence in their potential.
Table 17 Summary of good practice business cases at sector level
Opportunity
Implementation
costs (£)
Anaerobic
digestion
Saving
(t CO2 p.a.)
Cost
(£/t CO2)
Payback
(years)
Sites
applicable
(%)
Text description only
CHP
Heat recovery
survey
Compressed
air
Condensate
recovery
High
efficiency
motors
Monitoring &
targeting
Variable
speed drives
Voltage
optimisation
5.2.1
Saving
(£ p.a.)
£11,700,000
£2,285,000
29,000
£405
5
48%
£5,000
£30,000
230
£22
<1
100%
£435,000
£145,000
1,250
£350
3.0
100%
Text description only
£72,000
£100,000
940
£75
1
100%
£950,000
£1,650,000
15,300
£62
1
70%
£810,000
£250,000
2,350
£350
3
100%
£925,000
£250,000
2,350
£390
4
70%
Anaerobic digestion
Anaerobic digestion (AD) involves the conversion of organic matter to into a methane rich biogas that can be
used to generate localised heat and power. AD can be a viable proposition for industrial sites that produce large
volumes of organic wastes and have a high demand for heat. The output from the process, known as digestate,
tends to be high in nutrients and can be used to substitute conventional fertilisers.
While maltsters do produce organic wastes, much of this waste stream has a relatively high monetary value as
animal feed. Therefore AD is unlikely to be an economic proposition for a typical Maltings site in isolation.
However, maltsters are part of a supply chain that includes farmers, brewers, distillers and other food and drink
sector companies. AD plants are likely to be more attractive where maltsters can collaborate with parts of their
supply chain.
5.2.2
CHP
Combined Heat and Power (CHP) is a highly efficient method of simultaneously generating electricity and heat at
or near the point of use. By capturing and utilising the heat that is a by-product of the electricity generation
process, CHP can achieve overall efficiencies of up to 80% in industry. As well as reduced emissions, CHP offers
reduced energy and fuel costs, and is suitable for a wide range of applications. It is also viable for a whole range
of fuels, including gas, oil, biomass, and biogas and waste.10
With their high demand for heat, sites in the Maltings industry are likely to be suitable for CHP. To operate
successfully CHP will need to be integrated with the heat demand and control systems in the kiln. Feasibility
studies would need to be carried out for individual sites.
10
Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC)
http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/what_we_do/uk_supply/energy_mix/distributed_en_heat/chp/chp.aspx Accessed
10/02/11
Maltings Sector Guide
57
The business case outlined below makes the following assumptions:
CHP is in the form of a reciprocating gas engine sized to meet the total electricity demand of a medium sized
site with natural gas (around 900 kWe). Heat capacity is 1,350 kW.
The electrical generation efficiency is 32% and the overall efficiency is 80%.
Ratio of heat to power output is 1.5:1.
CHP availability is 90%.
Electricity (grid) price 6 p/kWh, electricity export price 4 p/kWh and natural gas price 2 p/kWh.
OPEX is in line with typical costs for reciprocating engines (£0.01/kWh electricity generated excluding natural
gas costs).
CHP heat used to displace steam generated heat with boiler efficiency of 80%.
The capital cost of the CHP installation is in line with typical costs for reciprocating gas engines (£1,000/kWe
installed).
CHP can be deployed in 50% of the sector (13 sites).
Table 18 Business case for CHP
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
5.2.3
Sector
Average site
£11,700,000
£900,000
£2,285,000 p.a.
£175,000 p.a.
5 years
5 years
29,000 tonnes CO2 p.a.
2,200 tonnes CO2 p.a.
13
Technical. Integration with existing system may be difficult.
Comparison of maintenance and efficiency of existing heat recovery equipment
Correct and adequate maintenance of heat exchangers has a direct impact on energy efficiency, as the
performance of systems degrades naturally over time. This is of course true for all equipment, not just heat
exchangers.
Maintenance of heat exchangers results in improved heat transfer and heat recovery. Given the nature of the
operations and equipment, in particular the humid and dusty atmosphere, this maintenance task is difficult. It is
recommended that the sector carries out a survey of heat exchanger maintenance methods in use within the
sector, in order to establish and disseminate best practice.
The business case outlined below assumes the following:
Costs of £5,000 for a survey and site visits
Benefits amount to a 1% improvement in heat recovery in the glass tube heat exchangers
It is thought that no significant barriers exist to the implementation of a survey and best practice.
Maltings Sector Guide
58
Table 19 Business case for comparison of maintenance and efficiency of existing heat recovery equipment
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
5.2.4
Sector
Average site
£5,000
£200
£30,000p.a.
£1,100 p.a.
<1 years
<1 years
230 tonnes CO2 p.a.
10 tonnes CO2 p.a.
27 (all sites within the CCA)
Operational. Heat exchanger maintenance can be difficult.
Adoption of best practice.
Compressed air optimisation
Compressed air is used in the sector primarily for valve actuation and similar applications. The compressors used
are often relatively old and fitted with simple, decentralised control systems. The compressors typically vent their
cooling air into the compressor room.
Several opportunities have been observed which each may reduce energy consumption. These include:
Heat recovery from compressor cooling.
Compressed air leak detection and repair.
Replacement of old fixed speed compressors with modern high efficiency, variable speed units.
Compressed air generation pressure reduction.
Centralised computerised control system for systems with multiple compressors.
Using electrical alternatives to compressed air consumers, where it is safe and viable to do so.
All the above opportunities will reduce the energy consumption of the compressors, whilst providing the same
level of functionality provided at present. The business case outlined below illustrates the benefits of this
opportunity and it is based on the following assumptions:
Based on heat recovery, VSD compressors and optimisation
Assumes 2 x 37 kW compressors, duty/standby
50% of heat generated can be used to displace other heat
50% of compressors benefit from VSD technology, and these gain a 20% improvement in energy efficiency
10% energy efficiency gain due to optimisation
Table 20 Business case for compressed air optimisation
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
Sector
Average site
£435,000
£16,000
£145,000 p.a.
£5,500 p.a.
3
3
1,250 tonnes CO2 p.a.
50 tonnes CO2 p.a.
27 (all sites within the CCA)
None
None
http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/publications/pages/home.aspx
Maltings Sector Guide
5.2.5
59
High efficiency motors
The efficiency of electric motors is defined as the ratio of shaft power to the input power. Most modern electric
motors are already quite efficient, with efficiencies between 90 and 95% being common. Given the high price and
carbon intensity of electricity, and typically a high annual utilisation of electric motors, further roll out of high
efficiency should be pursued.
It is considered likely that the majority of electric motors do not warrant pro-active replacement based on the
energy cost savings alone. Hence this opportunity should be taken forward when electric motors are due for
replacement. It is therefore important that sector members pre-plan the replacement for each significant electric
motor with the highest efficiency alternative, before replacement becomes necessary.
The business case outlined below assumes the following:
Implementation costs cover the marginal cost of replacement only (i.e. the additional cost of a high efficiency
motor over a standard motor).
67% of electricity used by the sector is used by electric motors11
67% of all suitable motors are high efficiency already, according to questionnaire responses. The efficiency of
the remaining 33% is assumed to improve by 4%.
Energy efficient motors are assumed to cost 25% more than standard motors.
Savings are based on an extrapolation of an 11 kW motor operating 4,000 hours per year.
It is thought that no significant barriers exist to the installation of further high efficiency motors in the sector.
Table 21 Business case for high efficiency motors
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
5.2.6
Sector
Average site
£72,000
£2,700
£100,000 p.a.
£3,700 p.a.
1 year
1 year
940 tonnes CO2 p.a.
35 tonnes CO2 p.a.
27 (all sites within the CCA)
None
None
http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/publications/pages/home.aspx
Monitoring and Targeting
Automated Monitoring and Targeting (aM&T) systems enable improved management of energy use, including the
highlighting of wasteful consumption patterns. aM&T systems consist of energy meters for each of the major
process at a site, local data storage using a data logger as well as analysis software. aM&T systems can deliver
savings of 5-10% of energy costs, but only if the data they collect is analysed and acted upon.
The Maltings sector has some existing energy metering installed, consisting primarily of electricity and natural
gas meters. In addition, analysis of the questionnaire responses indicated that 30% of sites already have some
form of aM&T system. As such, the summary outlined below covers the remaining 70% of the sector. An average
saving of 7.5% has been assumed for all utilities.
Besides funding its implementation, it is thought that no significant barriers exists to the deployment of aM&T
systems in the sector.
11
Carbon Trust - Motors and Drives Technology Overview (2007) CTV016
Maltings Sector Guide
60
Table 22 Business case for monitoring and targeting
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
5.2.7
Sector
Average site
£950,000
£50,000
£1,650,000 p.a.
£87,000 p.a.
1 year
1 year
15,300 tonnes CO2 p.a.
800 tonnes CO2 p.a.
19
None
None
http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/publications/pages/home.aspx
Variable speed drives
Variable speed drives (VSDs) allow electric motors to run at speeds other than their nominal speed. This is
achieved by altering the frequency of the alternating current supplied to the motor. Energy savings result from the
electric motor being able to better match the supply of energy with the demand for energy. Applications that
benefit most from variable speed drives include centrifugal fans and pumps.
The Maltings sector has a large number of variable speed drives installed, though the driving factor for this has
often been improved process control rather than energy savings. Analysis of the questionnaire responses
indicates that the respondents considered that 67% of all applications that could benefit from VSDs have them
installed already. Examples include the large kiln fans and some compressors. Regardless of the driving factor,
energy savings will result from the installation of variable speed drive on the majority of applications.
The business case summary below is based on the following assumptions:
67% of electricity used by the sector is used by electric motors12
67% of all motors already have VSDs installed
Of the remaining 33% of applications, 50% can benefit from a VSD
An average saving of 20% can be achieved on the remaining applications
Besides funding its implementation, it is thought that no significant barriers exist to the deployment of variable
speed drives in the sector.
Table 23 Business case for variable speed drives
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
5.2.8
Sector
Average site
£825,000
£30,500
£250,000 p.a.
£9,250 p.a.
3 years
3 years
2,350 tonnes CO2 p.a.
90 tonnes CO2 p.a.
27 (all sites within the CCA)
None
None
http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/publications/pages/home.aspx
Voltage optimisation
Voltage optimisation equipment reduces the voltage of the incoming supply to a site. This is viable for the
majority of UK sites, as the incoming voltage is higher than that required by the electrical equipment installed on
12
Carbon Trust - Motors and Drives Technology Overview (2007) CTV016
Maltings Sector Guide
61
site. By reducing the voltage, energy consumption can be reduced for certain types of electrical loads, including
electric motors.
Based on the site visits it has been estimated that 5% of sites have already implemented some form of voltage
optimisation, which may include tapping down owned transformers.
The business case summary below assumes the following:
Voltage optimisation is possible at 70% of the remaining sites in the sector
33% of all electrical equipment at those sites will show a saving due to voltage optimisation
That equipment will show an average electricity cost saving of 10%
It is considered that there are no significant barriers to the implementation of voltage optimisation, beyond the
need to fund the improvement. The site electricity supply will need to be de-energised during the installation of
the equipment. It is thought this can be achieved with appropriate planning.
Table 24 Business case for voltage optimisation
Summary
Implementation costs
Cost reduction
Payback period
CO2 reduction
Number of sites where applicable
Barriers
Barrier mitigation
References
5.2.9
Sector
Average site
£925,000
£50,000
£250,000 p.a.
£13,000 p.a.
4 years
4 years
2,350 tonnes CO2 p.a.
125 tonnes CO2 p.a.
19
Operational. The electricity supply must be de-energised during
installation.
Appropriate scheduling
Condensate recovery
The glass tube heat exchangers are used to recover a proportion of the energy available in the kiln exhaust air
flow. As a result of the humid and warm exhaust air flow cooling down, a proportion of the moisture content of the
air flow is condensed and this exits the heat exchanger as warm water. Analysis indicates that the amount
condensed is approximately 22.4% of the amount of water evaporated from each batch on average.
Recovery of this water may allow its direct or indirect re-use in other parts of the process, including steeping and
germination. A potential secondary benefit is that the water exits the glass tube heat exchanger at a temperature
of 20-25°C. This is warmer than borehole or mains water (at approximately 10°C) and as such it may offer
benefits in steeping or germination, in terms of process speed.
It is thought that no significant barriers exist to the recovery of condensate in the sector. No attempt has been
made to quantify the benefits of recovering the condensate, due to lack of information on water costs and water
use in the industry.
Maltings Sector Guide
5.2.10
62
Summary
Table 25 below outlines the advantages and disadvantages of each of the good practice opportunities, including
the carbon emission reduction and payback periods.
Table 25 Advantages and disadvantages of the good practice opportunities
Opportunity
Anaerobic digestion
Advantages
Generates bio-gas suitable for combustion in
boilers or CHP, use as vehicle fuel
or injection to the gas grid
Feedstock flexibility
Displacement of mineral fertiliser with
digestate can reduce the GHG impact of
agriculture
CHP
29,000t CO2, 5 years
Highly efficient means of generating heat
and electricity
Potential to generate revenue from sale of
excess electricity to the grid
Heat recovery survey
230 t CO2, 1 year
No / low cost
Easily implemented
Improved
management of
compressed air
Condensate recovery
High efficiency
motors
Monitoring &
targeting
Variable speed
drives
Voltage optimisation
1,250 t CO2, 3 years
Established techniques and savings
Simple implementation
940 t CO2, 1 year
Established technology
Efficiency is key in motors with high annual
operating hours
15,300 t CO2, 1 year
Established techniques and savings
Enables detailed insight into how and when
processes use energy
Rapid return on investment possible
2,350 t CO2, 3 years
Established technology
2,350 t CO2, 4 years
Suitable for most sites
Very high reliability
Disadvantages
Requires dedicated feasibility study for
each site
Require access to adequate land to
accept digestate
Additional operating costs
Process integration can be difficult,
particularly for heat
Relative movement of gas and electricity
prices can alter the economics of CHP
over time
Additional operating costs
No direct savings as a result i.e. savings
only realised when survey
recommendations are implemented
Savings can be difficult to measure
Low savings
Cost effective only when existing motor
is due for replacement
Collection of reliable data can be an
issue
Requires management time and
expertise to analyse data and identify
savings
Savings result only if action is taken on
the data collected
Largest opportunities already
implemented
Tapping down own transformers may be
cheaper and give a partial saving
The following chart shows the relative capital costs (x-axis) payback period (y-axis) and CO2 savings (label and
diameter of bubble) for each of the good practice opportunities.
Maltings Sector Guide
63
Figure 35 Bubble diagram of capital costs, payback period and carbon savings for good practice opportunities
6
Payback (Years)
5
29,000 CHP
2,350 Voltage
optimisation
4
1,250 Compressed air
3
2,350 VSDs
940 High efficiency
motors
2
1
0
15,300 aM&T
230 Heat recovery
survey
£0
£5,000,000
£10,000,000
£15,000,000
Capital Costs
This shows:
M&T as key measure with relatively low costs, short payback and significant CO2 savings.
CHP is the most capital intensive and longest payback of the good practice measures, but CHP offers very
significant CO2 savings.
Other measures offer much lower CO2 savings, but at lower costs and paybacks up to 4 years .
Maltings Sector Guide
64
6…Next steps
This section describes our recommended next steps for the significant opportunities (larger than 10,000 tonnes
CO2 p.a. sector-scale emissions reduction) discussed in Section 5.
6.1
Significant opportunities
Table 26 and Figure 36 below outline the significant opportunities, together with their estimated capital
investment, payback period and CO2 savings. The level of confidence associated with these business cases is
not currently sufficient for them to form the basis of investment decisions, rather they are intended to highlight
areas that Maltsters should pursue and investigate further.
Table 26 Significant opportunities
Opportunity
Heat pumps, closed cycle
Heat pumps, open cycle
Energy efficient drying
Burning woodchip
Supply chain collaboration
Kiln bed turning
CHP
Monitoring & targeting
Capital investment
(£)
£24,750,000
£75,000,000
£142,500,000
£21,000,000
£0
£7,500,000
£11,700,000
£950,000
Payback period
(years)
6
5
14
5
0
6
5
1
CO2 savings
(Tonnes CO2 p.a.)
33,000
115,000
85,000
38,000
43,000
10,750
29,000
15,300
Maltings Sector Guide
65
Figure 36 Bubble diagram of significant opportunities
18
16
85,000 Energy ef f icient
drying
14
Payback (Years)
12
10
10,750 Kiln bed turning
8
33,000 Closed cycle heat
pumps
6
38,000 Wood chip
4
115,000 Open cycle heat
pumps
29,000 CHP
15,300 M&T
2
43,000 Supply chain
0
£0
£50,000,000
£100,000,000
£150,000,000
£200,000,000
Capital Costs
Good practice opportunities
6.2
Innovative opportunities
Significant innovative opportunities
Following the completion of the investigation stage of the IEEA project, individual Maltsters and the MAGB are
encouraged to review the opportunities and their business cases and decide which opportunities are the highest
priorities for their sites, companies and the sector. Consideration should be given to collaboration with academia
and equipment or knowledge providers.
In the current economic climate in the UK at time of writing (March 2011), it is unlikely that funding support will be
available from the Carbon Trust for demonstration of projects.
The opportunities listed below are each likely to require R&D activity as well as a pilot project in order to develop
sufficient confidence in their business cases to allow investment decisions to be taken.
Heat pumps
Direct temperature and humidity measurement
Kiln bed turning
Microwave technology
There is a clear role for the MAGB to liaise with the relevant industry bodies for the Brewing and Distilling sectors
on progressing certain opportunities that require supply chain collaboration, such as increasing final product
moisture content. Other supply chain opportunities, such as biomass and AD, can be taken forward by individual
Maltsters.
Maltings Sector Guide
66
The remaining innovative opportunities are considered to be more mature and able to be progressed by Maltsters
relatively quickly. It is thought that suppliers can be identified and suitable systems can be designed and priced.
In all cases, the innovative opportunities should be considered at times when major capital projects, such as kiln
replacement, are being planned. Including innovation within major capital projects is likely to reduce their capital
costs as inclusion in design is typically cheaper than retrofit.
In summary, Maltsters are encouraged to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
6.3
Consider which innovative opportunities they can take forward themselves
Consider which innovative opportunities require collaboration with other MAGB members, the MAGB
itself, the supply chain, equipment or knowledge providers
Confirm the development needs for each opportunity
Conduct any necessary R&D work, potentially in collaboration with others
Implement a pilot project
Roll-out once sufficient confidence has been developed
Significant good practice opportunities
The good practice opportunities reflect well established methods for reducing energy consumption and these are
considered to be cost effective. In particular, further implementation of Combined Heat and Power systems and
Automated Monitoring and Targeting systems are considered to be significant opportunities for the sector.
Maltsters are encouraged to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Confirm and quantify each opportunity for their sites individually, potentially using suppliers to do so
Arrange for solution quotations from suppliers
Secure funding
Implement the projects
Confirm the benefits of each project
Maltsters may find that implementing the remaining good practice opportunities may still be beneficial, and they
are encouraged to review these in the same manner.
Maltings Sector Guide
67
Acknowledgements
The Maltsters‟ Association of Great Britain (MAGB) were key to engaging with the sector - we are grateful to
them for facilitating initial contact with host sites, distributing communications and the questionnaire and providing
insight, guidance and feedback throughout the project.
AEA are also grateful to the host sites for providing access to their sites and sharing process and energy data
with the project.
AEA also wishes to thank all individuals who assisted us throughout this project.
Maltings Sector Guide
Appendices
Appendix 1: Indicative metering locations
Appendix 2: Opportunities not investigated
Appendix 3: Workshop summary
68
Maltings Sector Guide
69
Appendix 1: Indicative metering
locations
Figure 37 Indicative metering points
Raw Barley Intake
Ambient
measurements
Waste Grain
Raw Barley Drying
Heat
Raw Barley Storage
Power
Screening and Weighing
Power
Water to air (evaporation)
Grain to air (respiration)
Power
Steeping
Grain to Waste Water
Water
Waste Water
Grain to air (respiration)
Germination
Power
Grain to air (evaporation)
Grain to air (respiration)
Heat
Kilning
Grain to air (evaporation)
Waste Grain
Power
De-culming
Output to Brewing
Symbol
Parameter measured
Electricity
Natural Gas
Relative humidity
Temperature
Power
Maltings Sector Guide
70
Appendix 2: Opportunities not
quantified
During the course of the investigative stage of the IEEA project, several potential opportunities were identified for
which business cases have not been quantified. These opportunities have been listed here, together with the
rationale for not quantifying them. The criteria applied when deciding which opportunities to progress included
whether opportunities were innovative to the sector, offer significant carbon emissions reductions across the
sector and present low barriers to implementation.
Individual Maltsters may still derive benefit from further investigation, and potentially implementation, of these
opportunities.
Cooling of germination air with borehole water
Germination air may require cooling in the height of summer, in order to keep the bed temperature within
acceptable limits. Some Maltings sites employ refrigerant cooling system for this purpose. Where these are used,
it may be possible to use borehole or mains water instead, especially if this water is to be used for steeping or
other purposes already (i.e. not used for this purpose specifically).
Benefits of cooling germination air with water include:
Improved germination during periods of high ambient temperature
Reduced electricity consumption (for sites with refrigerant germination air cooling systems)
It has not been possible to quantify the benefits of this opportunity, as insufficient information was available. Only
a single example of such a refrigerant system was seen during the site visits conducted in this project.
Freeze drying during pre-break phase
Freeze drying was raised as a potential alternative for hot air drying during pre-break kilning. This option has
been discounted due to the higher energy requirements of this form of drying compared with existing or
alternative drying methods. The table below illustrates the difference in energy requirements between sublimation
(transition from ice to vapour) and evaporation (transition from liquid to vapour) for water. It must be noted that
the evaporation energy requirement is sensitive to pressure.
Table Phase transition energy requirements
Phase transition
Sublimation
Evaporation
Energy requirement (kJ/kg water)
2,838
2,444
Other Heat recovery opportunities
The largest heat recovery opportunity in the sector is identified in section 4.2, and potential solutions are shown
in section 5.1.1. Several smaller heat recovery opportunities exist in the sector. These include heat recovery from
the compressors (section 5.2.4) as well as two additional opportunities listed below.
Maltings Sector Guide
71
Heat recovery from germination exhausts
The airflow coming from the germination beds has a slightly elevated temperature and moisture content due to
the respiration of the malt in the beds. It may be possible to recover some of this energy in a similar manner, or
into the same system, proposed in section 5.1.1.
It must be pointed out that this source of energy would be renewable, as it is derived from the respiration of
plants.
Heat recovery to offices
The offices of a Maltings site use a relatively small amount of energy for heating purposes, during the heating
season. It may be possible to recover process heat for use in the offices.
This opportunity has not been taken forward as the demand is relatively small and seasonal.
Improved conveying technology
Within a Maltings plant, Malt is typically moved between processes by conveyors. Whilst a typical Maltings plant
has numerous conveyors, each of these is only a small electricity consumer which operates intermittently.
No opportunities with significant carbon reduction potential were identified; hence this opportunity was not taken
forward.
Improved water uptake in steeping
Improved water uptake in steeping would reduce the length of the steeping process and hence the amount of
energy required. As steeping is the least energy intensive of the major Maltings process steps, improving its
energy efficiency will not lead to significant energy cost and carbon emission reductions.
It is also thought that as long as the appropriate moisture content criteria are met, steeping does not have a
major influence on energy consumption in the remainder of the process.
Maltings losses control
Maltings losses control, or optimising yield, is something the Maltsters work at on a daily basis. Though yield has
a direct bearing on the energy efficiency of a Maltings plant, no innovative improvements to current practices
were identified. A general process improvement method is outlined in section 5.1.6 and this could be used to
improve yield further.
Promote use of recycled water in process
Maltings plants use significant amounts of water in their processes, particularly in steeping and germination. The
steeping water can be recycled using suitable treatment processes such as Reverse Osmosis (RO) plants. RO
plants have a significant energy demand and as a result increase the carbon emissions from a Maltings plant.
Another source of recycled water may be the glass tube heat exchangers fitted to the kilns. These generate water
by condensing vapour from the air flow coming from the kiln. This water may be suitable for re-use in steeping or
germination, without the need for treatment. This opportunity has not been taken forward as it does not have a
significant impact on the energy efficiency of the Maltings plant. It should be noted that this is a relatively simple
and low cost opportunity to implement and it may recover some 20% of the water evaporated in a typical kiln.
Reduce malt blending requirements
Malt is blended following kilning to ensure a consistent product quality. This process consumes a relatively small
amount of energy. No innovative opportunities were identified which would offer significant reduction in carbon
emissions associated with this process. However, it should be noted that implementation of kiln energy recovery
(section 5.1.1) would reduce the need for blending if the heat exchangers are of the rotary dryer type. Kiln bed
turning (section 5.1.5) would also reduce the need for malt blending.
Maltings Sector Guide
72
Appendix 3: Workshop summary
The following workshop summary was prepared and circulated to the
participants and MAGB mailing list following the workshop. As such it
represents views that were held at the time, which may have changed
since it was prepared. It is provided here for information. The findings
of this IEEA Stage 1 project are presented in the main body of the report.
Maltsters, equipment suppliers, research organisations and trade associations all came together to explore how
opportunities to accelerate energy efficiency in the maltings sector can be taken forward. The workshop, held at
Boortmalt‟s Bury St Edmunds site on the 7th October, was part of the Carbon Trust‟s Maltings Industry Industrial
Energy Efficiency Accelerator (IEEA) project.
The day began with update on project progress to date from Jan Bastiaans, project manager at technical
consultants, AEA. Jan outlined some of the carbon saving opportunities that have been identified through energy
audits of maltings plants. His presentation also included some preliminary data from energy sub-metering that
has been installed at two sites as part of the project and a discussion of some barriers to energy efficiency as
identified through a recent survey of the industry. If you would like a copy of the presentation, please email
MaltingsIEEA@aeat.co.uk .
The first group activity of the day utilised the depth and breadth of knowledge and experience in the room to
generate as many potential opportunities for saving carbon in the maltings industry as possible. Almost 60
potential opportunities were identified, ranging from standard energy management practices like automated
metering and targeting (aM&T), to truly innovative ideas that would require extensive R&D before they could be
implemented, such as microwave drying. A list of the potential opportunities is given in tables A5.4 and A5.5 at
the end of this paper.
Maltings Sector Guide
73
Each group was then asked to priorities these opportunities according to their ease of implementation and how
effective they are likely to be at reducing the sector‟s carbon emissions. Opportunities were scored on scales
from 1-3 for both ease and effect, with low scores indicating an opportunity is difficult to implement or is likely to
have little effect on the sectors carbon emissions. A list of the potential opportunities is with their average ease
and effect scores is given in tables A5.4 and A5.5 at the end of this paper. The Figure below shows the overall
distribution of opportunities on the Ease and Effect scale. The size of the bubble indicates the number of
opportunities at that position, the number within the bubble refers to the opportunity number in table A5.4.
Figure A5.1 Distribution of opportunities on the Ease and Effect scale
3
30, 31
13, 14, 15, 16
1
High
33
2
34, 35, 36
26
25
27
29
Medium
Effect score
32
9
8
17, 18, 19, 20,
21
5
2
10
28
12
6
11
7
1
22, 23, 24
3, 4
Low
37, 38
0
0
Difficult
1
Medium
2
Easy
3
Ease score
This analysis helped to separate out those opportunities that should be taken forward by the industry right away
i.e. those that have a large carbon saving impact and are easy to implement, from the opportunities that are likely
to require some time and/or external support to bring to reality i.e. those that have a large carbon saving impact
but are difficult to implement.
Based on the prioritised opportunities, an exercise was carried out to identify the drivers and barriers to improving
energy efficiency in the maltings industry.
Maltings Sector Guide
74
These drivers and barriers were sorted into categories. Table A5.1 below lists the drivers for improving energy
efficiency that were identified.
Table A5.1 Drivers for energy efficiency
Category
Policy
Finance
Business
People
Other
Driver description
Government Policy and Legislation
Regulation, including the maltings sector Climate Change Agreement, EU Emissions
Trading Scheme and IPPC
Rising and volatile cost of energy
Energy cost savings
Opportunity of making other cost savings
Opportunity of carbon savings
Improving plant utilisation
Availability of external funding including soft loans and grants
Business Objectives
Competitiveness
Customers
Good for PR
Branding
Corporate Social Responsibility / Sustainability agenda within malting companies
Personnel in the company already engaged and therefore drive energy efficiency from
within
Customer carbon footprint programme flows through to suppliers
Brewers Corporate Reports asks questions of Maltsters
Distillers (SWA) Environmental Initiative asks questions of Maltsters
Customers favour improved environmental performance from suppliers
Consumer preference for improved environmental performance
Energy Security (long term)
Maltings Sector Guide
75
The table below lists the barriers to energy efficiency that were identified.
Table A5.2 Barriers to energy efficiency
Category
Policy
Finance
Technology
People
Barrier Description
Market Uncertainty
Perceived lack of government incentive
Issues of „Carbon Leakage‟
Legislation
Payback period for investments is too long in some cases
Large capital expenditure is difficult to justify in the current economic environment
Shortage of funding, both internally and externally
Internal funding ceiling within companies
Innovation has high initial outlay and uncertain returns
Market and margin instability
Operating expenditure
Lack of resources e.g. management time to implement solutions
Improvements are not always easy to demonstrate e.g. because monitoring data is
inadequate
Improvements are not always disseminated to other sites and companies
Technical difficulty / availability
Timescale to develop new technology suppresses innovation
Executive buy in required
Management commitment / drive required
Shortage of expertise within companies /sector
Supply chain acceptance of changes to process
Lack of inter-sector communication around energy e.g. between maltsters, brewers and
distillers
Sacred cows - things that must not be changed e.g. due to importance of tradition
Company awareness of energy / culture
Customer requirements / specifications
Towards the end of the day, attendees were each asked to identify one concrete action that they could take away
from the day. An impressive list of actions were produced, some of which can be progressed immediately by
individual malting companies, some will required the coordination of the MAGB, and others will require further
Maltings Sector Guide
76
investigation by AEA and the Carbon Trust as part of the IEEA programme. The table below summarises the
actions.
Table A5.3 Actions from the workshop
Lead organisation(s)
Actions to be progressed
by individual malting
companies
Actions to be progressed
by the MAGB
Actions to be investigated
further through the IEEA
programme
Actions
Investigate improved energy metering and monitoring
Hold an internal energy meeting and prepare an energy plan for 2011
Raise awareness of energy on the shop floor
Agree a company approach/strategy for energy efficiency
Energy awareness training for all staff
Share outputs of this workshop with others in the company
Update the company energy plan
Have a review of energy on the agenda for weekly meetings
Continue to influence supply chain regarding uptake of biofertilisers
Implement a structured Energy Management System
Establish an MAGB Energy Forum
Set up a meeting between the MAGB and the British Beer and Pub
Association to discuss shared opportunities to improve the energy
efficiency of both sectors
Supporting R&D in new malting technology
Investigate partial vacuum kilning pilot facilities
Feasibility of increased moisture for MMI Malt
Demonstration of improved metering and targeting
In-process moisture measurement
Feasibility of innovative kiln technology
Maltings Sector Guide
Table A5.4 Opportunities that fall within the scope of the IEEA project
No.
1
2
77
13
Potential Carbon Saving Opportunities
Comparison of maintenance and efficiency of existing heat recovery
equipment
Automated Kiln Moisture Measurement - End point determination
Ease
(average
score)
3
Effect
(average
score)
3
3
2
3
Reduce the requirement for malt blending (handling) through better control
of process variables to
3
1
4
Voltage optimisation
3
1
5
Compressed air optimisation
2.75
2
6
Direct Humidity measurement
2.75
1.5
7
Variation Measurement and Analysis
2.67
1.33
8
Monitoring and Targeting
2.6
2.2
9
Variable speed drives
2.5
2.5
10
Management of input and process variables
2.5
1.75
11
Direct moisture measurement
2.5
1.5
12
High efficiency motors
2.25
1.5
13
Challenge process specification by customers
2
3
14
Use of germination vessels for heat recovery to pre heat steep water
2
3
15
Use of microwaves in kilning process
2
3
16
Moving bed kilning
2
3
17
Cooling of germination air with borehole water
2
2
18
2
2
19
Steep to higher moisture, allow to dry during germination, go to kiln at lower
moisture
Improved conveying technology
2
2
20
Promote recycled water use in process
2
2
21
Investigate feasibility of changes to core process
2
2
22
Improve water uptake of barley during steep by vibratory EEPT
2
1
23
Recovery of heat from germination exhausts
2
1
24
Recycle waste heat for offices
2
1
25
Supply chain collaboration
1.8
2.4
26
Heat recovery
1.75
2.5
27
CHP
1.75
2
28
Kiln bed turning
1.75
1.75
29
Anaerobic Digestion
1.5
1.75
30
Falling bed kilning
1
3
31
Alternative heat sources e.g. biomass
1
3
32
Partial vacuum kilning
1
2.8
13
Opportunities were scored from 1-3 for ease and effect, with low scores indicating an opportunity is difficult to implement or is
likely to have little effect on the sectors carbon emissions.
Maltings Sector Guide
78
33
Freeze drying during pre-break phase
1
2.5
34
Coordinating use of co-products through supply chain
1
2
35
Green malt syrup - revisit
1
2
36
Cold' milling
1
2
37
Condensate recovery (glass tube heat exchange)
1
1
38
Maltings losses control
1
1
Maltings Sector Guide
79
Table A5.5 Opportunities that would fall outside the scope of the IEEA project
Potential Carbon Saving Opportunities
Ease (average score)
Effect (average score)
Education of staff / managers
3
3
Phasing production to suit cheaper night tariffs
3
3
Senior level lead on energy efficiency
3
3
Energy purchasing economies
3
3
BBPA / MAGB Energy Forum
3
2
Brewing sector to encourage maltsters to increase
energy efficiency
Closer collaboration with universities and research
associations
ISO 16000 Systematic approach. Dedicated person/team
3
2
3
2
3
2
MAGB Sector Energy Forum
3
2
Achievement of water and energy targets to be in each
person’s results and objectives
All non-energy efficiency investment to consider energy
efficiency
Full time energy manager
3
2
3
1.5
3
1
Energy efficiency investment given preferential
treatment
Positioning: Technical support organisation to prioritise
demonstration projects / research
Crossover technology with other industries
2.5
2.5
2
2
2
2
Optimisation of air flows
2
2
Look at all novel green fertilisers (farming)
2
2
Solar PV
1.33
2.67
Encourage banks to support green technology
1
2
Encourage government to hypothecate green taxes to
support green research
Influence marketing / brand managers to 'go green'
1
2
1
2
The Carbon Trust receives funding from Government including the Department of Energy and Climate Change, the Department
for Transport, the Scottish Government, the Welsh Assembly Government and Invest Northern Ireland.
Whilst reasonable steps have been taken to ensure that the information contained within this publication is correct, the authors,
the Carbon Trust, its agents, contractors and sub-contractors give no warranty and make no representation as to its accuracy
and accept no liability for any errors or omissions.
Any trademarks, service marks or logos used in this publication, and copyright in it, are the property of the Carbon Trust or its
licensors. Nothing in this publication shall be construed as granting any licence or right to use or reproduce any of the
trademarks, service marks, logos, copyright or any proprietary information in any way without the Carbon Trust‟s prior written
permission. The Carbon Trust enforces infringements of its intellectual property rights to the full extent permitted by law.
The Carbon Trust is a company limited by guarantee and registered in England and Wales under Company number 4190230
with its Registered Office at: 6th Floor, 5 New Street Square, London EC4A 3BF.
Published: May 2011.
© The Carbon Trust 2011. All rights reserved. CTG053