Showing posts with label energy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label energy. Show all posts

April 24, 2014

On the Energy Front



Since the first of the year I have traveled 43,000 airline miles, taught three Piping System Fundamentals courses, attended a major trade show and visited countless customers.  It seems that everyone is asking what can be done to reduce their energy consumption.  I really enjoy that questions because of my deep involvement in helping people find the answers to that question.

I am a member of the ISO 14414-TC115-WG07 Pumping system energy assessment committee. I spent two days with 12 other committee member in Phoenix, AZ  to work on the final draft prior to submission for a wide review. We had members present from Europe, South America, and the United States, along with extensive comments from other members around the world.  The standard presents a variety of ways to look at how piping systems use the energy. 

In addition to the ISO meeting I’m a member of the Hydraulic Institute / Pump Systems Matter (HI/PSM) committee revising their Pump System Optimization course.  This course focuses on the value of conducting pump system assessments, and how to set up and conduct an assessment program.  

Since the first of the year, I have written a monthly column for Pumps & Systems Magazine on Pump System Improvements. Links to the articles can be found below:


They are a great group to work with and I would like to send out a special Thank You to Amanda Perry. She is a fantastic editor and does a great job of turning my submissions into a clear and concise article. I'm excited to share that last month they told me my column has been picked up for the remainder of 2014! I would encourage you all to get a subscription to Pumps & Systems Magazine, it’s full of excellent articles, and industry news. 

Once again, if you have any questions or comments please feel free to leave a comment. 

January 17, 2014

Designing HVAC Expansions


Headed to the AHR Expo 2014

As I write this month’s blog, I am getting ready to attend the AHR Expo (Air Conditioning Heating & Refrigerating) Jan 21-23 at the Javits Center in New York City. I don’t know why I look forward to this show so much each year, I guess because it’s our first trade show of the New Year and it is always well attended. 

At every trade show, we get to meet many of our existing customers and have an opportunity to talk to people who are interested in finding out how PIPE-FLO can help them do their job more efficiently.

The most often asked question at the AHR show is “I’m adding on to an existing chilled water system with a new (wing, building, etc.), can I get by just modeling the new addition, or do I have to model both the existing system and the new portion?" 

They often know the answer, but they ask anyway.

No matter how often I am asked that question, I always put my hand on my chin and count to five before giving a response. You never want to give an immediate answer, if you do it sounds as if you haven’t given their question any thought. 

After my thought-provoking pause, I respond with “It depends.” 

They immediately respond with “What does it depend on?” 

I then answer with “Do you want to do it right and get more business from this client, or do you want to do it fast and find another client to work with?”  

Now that you know my answer, I’ll explain further.

 

The Life of a Large Commercial Space

Large commercial building, campus, and business parks are always in a state of change. New tenants move in and out with different heating & cooling needs, new equipment is added to the system, and new wings or building are built. Often these new loads are added to an existing system, and as we say in our Piping Systems Fundamentals course, any change made to any item in a piping system effects the every item in the system. 

For example if you want to tie into an existing system the client may provide you with the pressures at the supply and return header where the proposed tie in will occur. They figure the designer can use this as boundary pressures when modeling the new expansion. The problem is when the new expansion is tied in (both supply and return header) fluid will be going to the new building resulting in a reduction of pressure where the tie in occurs. Not only does this affect the new expansion, but it affects the existing system as well.   

Future expansions are often taken into account when designing new system, the mechanical room is sized to accommodate additional chillers and pumps that may be needed for future system expansion. However, when a new building is added to an existing system the existing system must be factored into the new design. Once the addition is completed, the commissioning crew must balance the entire system (both the existing loads and the new loads). If only the loads in the addition are balanced, the loads in the existing system will have less flow than needed. Often these problems don’t show up until multiple additions have been accomplished, and the heat load on the building is in the worst cast conditions. 

During system modification, the flow rates in pipelines may increase to the point where a small change in flow can have a major increase in head loss. This results in a bottleneck and if they are not considered additional pump are purchased and added to the system in an attempt to get the flow to what is required.  Someone often comes up with the idea of adding a booster pump to the building to “fix a low flow problem”, this often causes more problems than if fixes.  That is how bad things can happen to HVAC systems by just looking at the additions.  

 

Giving the Customer What They Really Want

A building owner wants to rent out space in their building and have happy tenants that pay their rent on time. If a new tenant needs to change the space, they pay for tenant improvements, things like new lighting, walls, etc. If they are adding new heating loads, computers, new medical equipment, etc. they may need to pay for modifications to the chilled water system in their office space as well.  However, as we saw earlier when any change is made to the system (even if it is just in their space) it affects the entire system, impacting the spaces of the existing tenants. 

As time goes on, changes are made to the original building to meet the changing tenants' needs. The market is good so it’s time to consider adding that second wing to the building. If you don’t do it right (simply look at the new wing without considering the impact on the existing building), then the temperature in your customers spaces will move to the unhappy range.  

The best way to keep the tenants happy is to evaluate the entire system each time new loads are added or removed from the building HVAC system. 

Now an engineering firm is in business to obtain customers, get the job done on time and under budget, and leave the job with a happy building owner. The engineering firm should realize that any building that has been in service for any length of time more than likely has problems due to previous system modifications. That fact will make it more difficult to tie in the new expansion to the existing system. 

Since the engineering firm sell hours, and you know the clients wants to have happy tenants, why not share with them system expansion horror stories. Then suggest the client may want to include the modeling of the existing system to the contract. This will let you identify and correct existing problems, evaluate the entire system (both existing & expansion). While you are at it, you may suggest that they want to look at what can be done to minimize the power consumption. Who knows, maybe the local utility will pick up some of the cost?! All these things and more can be done when there simulating the operation of the entire system.

Then when the commissioning of the new system goes off without a hitch and all the tenants are happy your client will thank you for doing such a great job and have you back when they add that third wing.

If you would like to see how PIPE-FLO is used in the HVAC market to commission and balance loads, troubleshoot existing systems, or design system expansions stop by our booth at AHR and we can talk and share some stories.  If you aren’t going to be at AHR give us a call and sign up for a Webinar so you can see how PIPE-FLO simulations are being used on HVAC piping systems.


December 17, 2012

Darcy's Fables IV

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes 49 seconds. Read Later

A couple of nights ago I was reading to my grand-kids from their favorite book, Piping System Fundamentals. We were reading the section on how to properly specify equipment for a pumped system. They all appeared to be a little confused, so the oldest asked “Pop Pop, why is it so important to know the system requirements when specifying equipment?” I then decided it was time for a Darcy’s Fable.

The Farmers and their Horses' Power


Once in the deep woods there was a bear, a puma, and a wolf. They were all friendly animals wanting to shed their common stereotypes passed down throughout the ages in popular fables and folk stories. These three friends decided to make a career change and tried their hand in farming.

After a couple of days of being farmers they were sitting down together and shared their experiences. They all complained about how hard it was to prepare the ground for planting.

All of a sudden the bear said “I think I will go into town and buy a horse!”

“That’s a great idea,” said the puma, “I am hungry and a horse would taste good now.”

“No, no, no! I want the horse to pull my plow not to eat it,” replied the bear. So, after a lengthy discussion, each of the friends resolved to go to the market and purchase a horse.

The bear told the horse trader, “I am the strongest animal in the forest; I need to buy a big strong horse to plow my field. As I expand my farm to meet my future goals, having a big horse will allow me to pull my big plow and get much more done.” Later that afternoon, the bear came back from the market with a Belgian Draft horse.

The puma told the horse trader, “I am the fastest animal in the forest; I must have the fast horse to pull my plow.  As my farm gets bigger, and to meet my future goals, I would like to have fast horse that will be able to run while pulling the plow.” By the afternoon, the puma came back from the market with a Thoroughbred horse. 

At the horse market the wolf said, “I am not the strongest or fastest animal in the forest, so I must buy smart. What type of horse would you suggest that I purchase to help me around my small farm?” So, later that afternoon, the wolf returned from the market with a mule*.

The bear and the puma laughed at how funny and small the wolf’s mule looked, and teased the wolf for is choice. “That animal will not get the job done at all!” they said to him. The wolf took no mind.

After a week the bear, puma, and wolf were again at their favorite watering hole for happy hour and the conversation turned to their horses.

The bear said that his Belgian horse was so strong it could pull the dark out of midnight. But that it was so big that it wouldn’t fit into the barn.

The puma said that his Thoroughbred could run faster than the wind but it was so high strung that it kicked out the walls in the barn.

The wolf said that his mule was a hard worker, and he enjoyed living in the dry barn.

After the crops were in the bear, puma, and the wolf meet up at the harvest ball. Soon the discussion turned to their farming success.

The bear said that he had to sell his larger Belgian Draft horse. He said that although his crops were in early because his big horse made such short work of the plowing, the horse was so big and hungry it ate half his crops! In addition, the Belgian was just too big to work around the bear’s small farm.

The puma said that he too had to sell his Thoroughbred. His crops were planted late because the horse didn’t want to pull the plow. Due to the late planting and short growing season his crops didn’t come in that well. The Thoroughbred horse enjoyed running but would not help around the puma’s small farm.

The wolf said that with the help of his hard working mule he got the crops planted on time. Since the mule was the right size for the small farm he didn’t eat a lot of the crops and was able to help around the farm. The wolf said that after the crops came in he had enough money to pay all his bills, put some money in the bank for the future, and buy some more land and a second mule to expand the farm.

. . .

All of a sudden one of my grand-kids said, “Now I get it Pop Pop, if you don’t size the process equipment to meet the systems requirements, the operating and maintenance cost will be excessive which affects the plants profitability.”

With a twinkle in my eye I said “Yes my little ones, you learn well.”

The youngest of the grand-kids wanted to know what became of the Belgian and the Thoroughbred horses. Well, the Belgian was sold to a brewery in St. Louis and is making nightly beer runs. The Thoroughbred was sold to a jockey to run at the track but it turns out the Thoroughbred was a nag and never finished in the money and is now working at a glue factory.

* To be correct a mule is not a horse. A mule is the offspring of a male donkey and a female horse. Mules are typically more patient, sure footed, and live longer than a horse, and are typically less obstinate, faster, and more intelligent that donkeys.[1]

If you like reading about my Piping System Fundamentals, Darcy’s Fables, let me know! I’d welcome your version of a Darcy’s Fable as well. Send your email to blogger@eng-software.com. Thanks for reading!



1.    Jackson, Louise A. The Mule Men: A History of Stock Packing in the Sierra Nevada, p. 5 (Mountain Press Publishing Co, Missoula, Montana, 2004).

November 29, 2012

Darcy's Fables III

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes 38 seconds. Read Later

The other night I was babysitting my grand-kids and they asked me to read them a story from their favorite book Piping System Fundamentals. So I asked my middle grandchild, what part of the book she would like me to read. She said the part about balancing the energy usage within a pumped system and the need to identify and eliminate excess pump head. When I started reading, she said “No Pop-Pop not with those words, make it into a story with kings, and animals.” Well I knew I needed to bring out my old French friend Henry Darcy to create another “Darcy’s Fable.”

 

The Story of the Elephant King and the Busy Beavers

 

Once upon a time, there lived an Elephant King, who liked to provide his subjects with all the best the kingdom could offer. The King decided that for the kingdom to grow and prosper he would need to bring water from Lake Lilly, the giant water hole in the center of the kingdom, to all the cities and villages.

The first order of business was to get the Zebras together to plan the water system for the future and make sure it wasn’t too small. The Zebras came up with their estimate and then doubled it just to be on the safe side. They forwarded their estimate to the Wart Hogs to come up with a design. (My grandson thinks Wart Hogs are nice and wants them in every story!) The Wart Hogs did all their calculations, and since they were planning for the future they too added an ample margin for future growth.

As the system was built, everyone was excited. The Squirrels, having a knack for saving, were in charge of kingdom finances. Since the Squirrels had to pay for the project out of the royal treasury, they were starting to get concerned about the project costs. The project went ahead and was finished on time but over budget. 

The water pumps were big and they took large teams of Horses to run them, but they were bright and shiny. Everyone was impressed with what had been built. Once the water system was finished and the pumps started, there was plenty of water everywhere around the kingdom. In fact, there was too much water in many locations and some of the villages had problems dealing with the water. 

In one farming village, there were floods in the fields but the resourceful farmers planted rice in the fields instead of wheat to try and “fix” or “cover” up the overabundance. In other villages, the excess water went into the streets making it difficult to travel, but it was quickly diverted by the Hippopotami to existing streams that lead back to Lake Lilly. Over time, all the startup problems were solved and the system worked. As the wise Elephant King envisioned the kingdom prospered.

After a couple of months, the Squirrels approached the Elephant King and said that the water project cost twice as much to operate than originally planned. But since the kingdoms productivity increased there was enough in the royal treasury to pay for the increased operating cost.

In the summer months, when the water was needed the most there were parts of the kingdom that didn’t have enough water. The King decided that something needed to be done so he brought in the Busy Beavers to look at the system to see what could be done.

The first thing the Beavers discovered was that some areas in the kingdom got too much water while other areas more distant from Lake Lilly didn’t get enough. The Beavers busily set about to plug some of the pipe outlets in the areas that had too much water. As they started plugging the pipelines close to Lake Lilly, they started getting more water to the more remote locations of the kingdom. As they worked their way out from Lake Lilly, they found that all the pipelines needed to be partially plugged to prevent flooding. Soon the Beavers found that over time, the plugs they placed in the pipelines to balance the flow would spring leaks requiring continual repairs.

After talking to the Squirrels about the operating costs, the Beavers discovered the cost to operate the large Horse driven pumps continued to climb. It seemed the raceway the Horses ran on to drive the pumps was also beginning to wear out. When the dirt raceway was replaced with a stone raceway, the Horses’ shoes wore out much faster and their hooves were splitting, increasing the system maintenance cost. Neither of those solutions worked!

Then the Beavers put two and two together and determined that the pump was too large for the needs of the system. After reviewing the pump curve and performing a few pump affinity speed calculations, they determined that if they replaced the fast Horses with smaller and slower Goats the pump would develop less pressure and would stop blowing out the plugs. After replacing the Horses with Goats, they rebalanced the system and all was well in the royal water system. The Beavers were able to reduce the cost to run the pumps as well as practically eliminate all of the breakdowns and maintenance troubles.

The Elephant King was so happy that the system worked that he had a royal dinner for the Beavers and everyone lived happily ever after.

THE END

My granddaughter was so happy about the story she said “See Pop-Pop, if you optimize a pump, you can reduce your capital costs, operating cost, and maintenance costs while increasing system reliability. I really like stories with happy endings.”

August 15, 2011

It’s the System Not the Pump: DOE’s Proposal for New Pump Efficiency Standards

Estimated Reading Time: 4 minutes 40 seconds. Read Later

This post covers the US Department of Energy (DOE) notice of proposed rule-making for pump efficiency. On June 13, 2011, the US DOE issued a Request For Information (RFI) regarding the establishment of energy conservation standards for pumps. (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-06-13/html/2011-14553.htm). After viewing the information found on the Federal Register RFI, I have serious doubts about some of the estimates presented along with the value of establishing minimum pump efficiency standard.

The RFI states there are other regulatory programs that provide energy efficiency information such as the Energy Star labeling program developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency and DOE. The Energy Star labeling can be found for a variety of products such as refrigerators, dishwashers and dryers.

The Energy Star labeling program deals with appliances that are typically standalone devices. For example, your refrigerator doesn’t work with any of the other appliances in your house, making it very easy to determine how much power it will take to operate a standalone appliance in a year.

A pump on the other hand, is part of a total system that may be called on to operate in a variety of ways during a year, with a variety of flow rates through the pump. As a result, a program similar to an Energy Start labeling program for pumps would have limited value.

The RFI continues that pumps are not covered under the Energy Star labeling. It further states in “The US DOE has the intention to evaluate the energy savings potential of energy conservation standards, labels, or both, for commercial and industrial pumps.” They continue with “After public comment on this RFI, DOE will consider developing test procedures and energy conservation standards or labels for this equipment.” (Bold & italic entered by the author.)

One area in the RFI that I have real concerns about is their estimation on the availability of pump efficiency improvements. It states:

“Reports cited in this RFI estimate potential energy savings from pumps of 10 percent to 50 percent. Because these estimates include a variety of system and pump efficiency measures including proper sizing of equipment, the lowest energy savings estimate of 10 percent, based on an European Union (EU) study of pump efficiencies (cited in (c) below), is assumed for the pump efficiency alone.”
The reports cited in the statement estimating a potential energy savings from pumps of 10 percent to 50 percent are based on finding of a variety of Pumped System assessments. The energy savings are based on system related issues. A pump does not know or care how the energy it supplies to the system is used, it only reacts to the system’s needs.

For example if a pump operating with a 100 psi discharge pressure, delivering a flow rate of 300 gallons per minute and has an 80% pump efficiency, that pump consumes a given amount of energy. If the system requires 300 gallons per minute at only 60 psi a control valve could be installed to reduce the pressure by 40 psi to what is required by the system. The pump still remains 80% efficient but approximately 60% of the supplied energy by the pump to the system is wasted across the control valve. Remember, the purpose of the control valve is to reduce the excess pressure provide by the pump to that needed by the attached system.

In this example there could be a 40% saving in energy consumption by running the pump at a lower pressure and eliminating the control valve. To accomplish this, an adjustment must be made to the pump so it only produces the 60 psi required by the system. This can be accomplished by either changing the pump impeller diameter or by changing the pump rotational speed. These types of decisions are made when performing an assessment of the total pumped system.

What I really disagree with is the statement “… the lowest energy savings estimate of 10 percent, based on European Union (EU) study of pump efficiencies is assumed for the pump efficiency alone.” What they seem to be saying is based on their experience they could expect at least a 10% system efficiency improvement by improving the pump design. Earlier in the RFI it is stated:
"Pump system efficiencies depend on design factors such as surface roughness, internal clearances, solids handling capability, curve shape, mechanical shaft seal losses, and other factors.

Analyses based on data from the 2003 EU ”European Guide to Pump Efficiency for Single Stage Centrifugal Pumps ”show that for typical flow rates it is reasonable to expect an efficiency improvement of 10 percent from the mean pump efficiency to the maximum practically attainable level."
The European Guide to Pump Efficiency for Single Stage Centrifugal Pumps referenced in the RFI statement above appears to provide an indication to the pump buyer if the pump being supplied by the manufacturer is the most efficient pump. The main focus of the article is to select a pump where the system requirements are close to the pumps Best Efficiency Point based upon the pump design. I was unable to see how a pump’s efficiency could be improved by improving surface roughness, internal clearances, curve shape or mechanical seal losses.

In 2009, I attended the Hydraulic Institute (the North American pump manufacturers association) annual meeting in Marco Island, FL. During that meeting I sat in on a session presented by EuroPump (the European pump manufacturers association) describing a recent statute passed by the EU to increase pump efficiency for industrial centrifugal pumps.

What was really interesting, is the EU enacted the statute without any comments or discussion with the pump manufacturers. I find it amazing that a group of bureaucrats can state that pump efficiency can be increased by 10% simply by changing internal clearances, increase the smoothness of the castings and changing the shape of the pump curve. If it was that simple it would already have been done!

Rather than looking at new ways to develop test procedures and energy conservation standards or labels for pumps the US DOE should concentrate their efforts on their Superior Energy Performancecm program. The Superior Energy Performance program is based on the recent Energy Assessment for Pumped Systems ASME E-2 2009 standard which concentrates on the evaluation of the entire system rather than concentrating on just the pump.

Pump manufacturers, as well as owners and operators of pumps and pumped systems, have done an excellent job of developing a variety of test standard and ways of presenting the data. The various standards have been developed by the ASME, HI, ANSI, and ASHRAE over the years to meet the needs of both the manufacturers and buyers of pumps. The standards are also reviewed on a periodic basis to ensure they are current and reflect the latest technology. Anyone who has been involved in the development or review of a standard will attest to the care to ensure the standard meets the needs of everyone concerned.

I would love it if you left a comment or even sent me an email to blogger @ eng-software.com. Also, we are currently welcoming guest bloggers. If you are interested, just send me a message about becoming a guest blogger, and what you would like to write about. Thanks!

April 1, 2011

ESI Announces Solution

I rarely post product release information or press releases on my blog but this announcement is just too exciting not to share:

ESI Announces Solution to End the Energy Crisis


LACEY, Washington - April 1, 2011
- Engineered Software, Inc. makers of the PIPE-FLO® and PUMP-FLO software, today announced the release CEPO™, a revolutionary new software program capable of converting unused computing power into clean electrical power that can be supplied back to the power grid.
 

When CEPO is installed on a computer, it runs as a transparent background application. When the computer power is not needed for viewing PowerPoint® presentations, reading e-mail, updating Facebook®, or playing solitaire, the patented software converts the unused computing power to electrical power that is returned to the nation’s power grid.

“With CEPO the United States is well on its way to energy independence,” said Ray Hardee, P.E. Chief Engineer at Engineered Software, Inc. “The goal is to employ CEPO to the cloud computing environment. Here owners of major server farms will be able to harvest much of their unused computing power to the grid saving countless megawatts of power each year.”


Currently the process is not self-sustaining and only 95% of the unused power can be returned to the power grid. However, with an expected influx of investment capital for Wall Street investors, the process is capable of becoming self-sustaining within 10 years. Additional assistance may be needed in the form of government tax incentives. Members of congress are already lining up to support the bill, and the company claims there will be plenty of government money available.
 

Once the process is self-sustaining, a simple laptop can produce enough clean energy to power all the LED lighting in a standard size house. By networking just five Windows® PC’s into a hybrid electric car’s electrical system, CEPO can provide sufficient energy to operate the car indefinitely. That is provided the driver of the car does not “Text” while driving, or any of the Windows does not need to be rebooted. If you have the new Apple® iHybrid car there is an "App for that” and you will need to download the Apple CEPO application at your nearest Apple Store location.

“CEPO will be used by power companies to generate electricity so cheaply that there will be no need to meter the power to their customer,” said Alec Tricity, Manager for Public Utilities Incorporated. “Imagine all the power we need, without having to pay to any foreign oil interests, and full employment at home. I can hardly wait the 10 years until we have everything worked out.”
 

For more information about this faux product please contact april@fools.net.



I Can Explain


Estimated Reading Time: 6 minutes 57 seconds. Read Later

I always run my blog ideas past Natalie in our marketing department. She is the one that makes my blog writing sound intelligent and well written as opposed to the various random ideas I send her. This special April Fool’s post was no different. I suggested to her that I write a post announcing a new software discovery that would solve the energy crisis by providing an unlimited supply of free electrical power simply by using unused computing power.

She said I should write about something that sounds more realistic, and then throw the punch line in at the end. After all, the more believable and entertaining the story, the funnier it will be when you reach the punch line. She suggested I write about taking the summer off and pursuing the life of an Alaskan bush pilot. Those who know me personally know I love flying and try to get up in my plane whenever the sun is shining. One of my favorite shows is the “Flying Wild Alaska” on the Discovery Channel. She thought it might be funny to have me claim that I was on a sabbatical trying out for this reality show. Tempting as it sounded, I have been in the energy business in one way or another since 1971 so I decided to use some of my energy experiences to help develop the story.

It always seems the solution to the energy crisis is only 10 years into the future. I don’t know why 10 years is the magic number, but it seems that everyone uses it. If you’re a politician 10 years is well into the next election cycle and no one will remember your campaign promises.  If you’re a CEO, in 10 years you’ll either retire rich or move on to a bigger company to cause more damage.  If you are in the news business 10 years is over 120 news cycles, (remember the infamous “wardrobe malfunction, ” the “Balloon Boy”, Pluto’s demotion from Planet Status, Leno vs. Conan, Tiger Woods' marital problems, the financial meltdown, ... see I told you). And if you are the one actually involved in doing the work, within 10 years you’ll have kids and you won’t be able to remember back 10 weeks let alone 10 years.

The next thing is you need to make the technology reward sound almost too true to believe. For example in the 1960’s I can remember GE, Westinghouse, and Combustion Engineering say that in the future nuclear power will be so cheap to produce, the power company will not need to meter the power anymore. That sounded really great so I decided to go study nuclear power in school. 

In the 1970’s when I was actually starting up nuclear power plants, it turned out the costs to build a plant got out of control and nuclear power was really not that cheap. In addition, everyone was worried about the China Syndrome and suddenly no one wanted a nuclear power plant in their state let alone their back yard. 

In the late 70’s the next big thing was the breeder reactor. Breeder reactors were supposed to make their own fuel (Plutonium) from Uranium 238 that could not be used as fuel in a regular nuclear reactor. The process actually worked, because that is how the US Government created all the plutonium for the nuclear weapons program. With the breeder reactors we can turn swords into plowshares (another great slogan of the time). It turns out that some people were concerned that with all the power plants making all that plutonium someone could sneak into a nuclear reactor, steal some plutonium and make their own nuclear weapons. As a result the breeder reactor lived a short life.

Well not to be outdone someone came up with the fusion program in the late 70’s and early 80’s. With a fusion reactor we would be able to harness the unlimited energy of the sun, with an abundant source of fuel coming from sea water. Once again, they promised power so cheap the electric utilities wouldn’t need to meter it. Trust me, the physics work; there is no need to go into details when we’re solving the energy crisis. Many of the world’s industrial countries started major fusion programs with the goal of developing working fusion reactors in 10 years. (Seems like all the smaller countries were developing their own breeder reactors to make their own nuclear weapons because of the cancelled breeder program in the US.)  Initially the fusion programs had some success by getting the temperature of the hydrogen plasma up to million or so degrees needed for fusion to occur, but the process never could be sustained. In other words, it took more energy to get started that it could ever produce. Work is still proceeding on fusion power but it is still a research project. 

In the late 70’s the shine had worn off anything nuclear and the US Department of Energy had to look at other ways to gain our energy independence from Middle Eastern oil. (Now that’s a concept we can all agree with, and it got started after the 1967 Oil Embargo). So we decided clean up our coal industry. I was in Indiana, PA working at a dirty coal preparation facility. Down the road, they had a clean coal gasification facility that would turn dirty coal into clean natural gas. The gas companies weren’t going to get rid of the gas meter but since the US has more than a 200-year supply of coal, we were well on our way to becoming energy independent within 10 years. 

As it turns out, these plants had a tendency to blow up, so much so that they built special blast walls. These walls were designed to blow off to prevent a buildup in pressure that would bring the entire building down. It also turned out the byproducts of coal gasification were really bad for the environment, and even Pennsylvania didn’t want that stuff in their backyard.

Another group in the government was working on liquefying coal, or turning coal into crude oil that could be refined to end our dependence on foreign oil. This time they decided to do everything underground that way they didn’t have to worry about bringing the coal to the surface, blowing up the process plant, and getting rid of the waste products. I’m not too sure on the details, but I think it involved injecting steam into coal seams, high temperatures, along with problems controlling the reactions underground. Coal liquefaction inevitably turned out to be a dead end on the road to energy independence.

In the late 80’s and the 90’s were the government was serious about ending the cold war so they didn’t have many energy initiatives in the works. The power utility business was more involved in developing power plants that were smaller and cheaper to build. It seems large power generation units, (nuclear of fossil) were very expensive to license because of all the resistance by the environmentalists. So the power utilities started building many smaller gas turbines to run a generator to make electricity (simple cycle). By keeping the projects small, they avoided much of the opposition. They then added a steam boiler to the back end of the process to take advantage of the high exhaust gas temperatures of the gas turbines (combined cycle). Everyone was building combined cycle units and it looked like the energy crisis might be ending.

In the 90’s something strange happened, one day we woke up and we found out the west won the Cold War. With the end of the cold war, we had a much larger problem; the Russians and Chinese quit the cold war to become capitalists. With over 1 billion people in China and all of them wanting a Chevy Tahoe or Ford Explorer, the oil prices went through the roof, and we were no closer to energy independence.

In the early 2000’s after the dot com bust, people decided that it was high time to invest in something new, so why not invest in becoming energy independent. Not only independent but environmentally responsible with our energy consumption, if we used less then we wouldn’t have to produce so much. With the financial power of Wall Street and the promise of tax incentives for “Clean Energy” we were well on our way. 

World's Most Fuel Efficient Car
The next focus for energy reduction spurred by our need for independence from foreign oil involved automotive transportation, developing cars with the promises of 60-100 miles per gallon. California wanted it, the people wanted it (but we also want our SUVs) and with a healthy dose of tax incentives to help speed the process along we had a clear objective. The first step was the ethanol tax incentive where every farm co-op in the Midwest decided to convert subsidized corn into subsidized ethanol. The investment bankers all wanted to get some of this action so there were hundreds of ethanol plants popping up everywhere to feed our nations thirst for domestic oil. Unfortunately, this hasn’t quite panned out because the energy needed to produce and ship the final product was still supplied by burning oil and coal.

We also needed to replace dirty power plants that burned coal and generated green house gasses with clean energy, wind turbines, photoelectric energy, and tidal power. What was really amazing was the recent “Nuclear Renaissance” where nuclear power all of sudden became the green solution (that is until the nuclear meltdowns in Japan). It seems with “clean energy” all we need to do is cover large sections of the earth’s surface with wind farms or solar collectors then develop a “smart” power grid to get the power from where the land is cheap to where the people live.

The next energy solution is going to involve many different technologies. With the wisdom of Wall Street, a heavy doses of “clean energy” tax incentives, and lots of hard work I’m sure we can be energy independent of foreign oil within 10 years. So in a way, my April Fools is an example of how we need to continue to look outside the box for solutions and new technology to solve our energy crisis. There probably isn’t going to be only one fix-all answer. The US is going to need to be creative and figure out how to produce our own energy using new technology instead of relying on oil and coal to get us there.

Tell me your thoughts on the future of energy consumption, or how you think we might learn from the past. Please leave me a comment or send me an email to blogger @ eng-software.com

Also, we are currently welcoming guest bloggers. If you are interested, just send me a message about becoming a guest blogger, and what you would like to write about. Thanks!

December 21, 2010

My New Year’s Pumping Resolutions

Estimated Reading Time: 2 minutes 22 seconds. Read Later

This year my New Year’s Resolutions are going to be a little different. Instead of making resolutions for myself I would like to make resolutions for all of my readers. These resolutions are appropriate for design engineers as well as owners and operators of pumped systems. Using this approach I don’t have to break any of my own resolutions, and if you wish to break them, then you shouldn’t feel any guilt either. But I promise these are for the good of your plant designs.

So here goes, my resolutions for YOU, and the pumps in YOUR plant.
  1. “I resolve to get a copy of the manufacturer’s supplied pump curve for each centrifugal pump in my plant.”
    • By having the pump curve, you will be able to determine if the pump is operating properly. The manufacturer’s supplied pump curve is the most important document needed for pump system maintenance, without it you are flying blind.
  2. “I resolve to install pressure gages on the pump suction and pump discharge for each pump in my plant.”
    • Having accurate pressure gages on the pump suction and discharge allows you to easily determine the differential pressure across each pump. When used in conjunction with the pump curve (acquired by resolution 1) you can determine the flow rate through the pump.
  3. “I resolve to develop a means of determine the flow rate through a pump.”
    • This one is very flexible, it can either be an installed meter (only if you have the cash), a clamp on Doppler meter, or determine the power supplied to the motor. Using the flow rate, the pump curve (resolution 1) and the differential pressure values (resolution 2) you’ll be able to determine if the pump is operating on the pump curve. This is very helpful in troubleshooting the operation of any centrifugal pump.
  4. “I resolve to determine where each pump is operating in relation to the pumps Best Efficiency Point.”
    • If the pumps operational flow rate is between 80% to 120% of the pumps BEP listed on the manufacturer’s pump curve (resolution 1) then that pump should have a long and prosperous life.
  5. “I resolve to investigate all pump mechanical seal or bearing failures this year.”
    • If the pump is not operating between 80% to 120% around the BEP (resolution 4) the cause of the failure is most likely due to shaft deflection cause by continually running the pump outside the pumps sweet spot.
  6. “I resolve to look into performing a pumped system assessment per the ASME EA-2 Energy Assessment for Pumping Systems.”
    • The standard can be purchased from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Website www.asme.org, or the Hydraulic Institute Website www.pumps.org.
If you follow all these resolution then your pumped systems (or your customer’s pumped systems) will be running efficiently. You’ll have reduced your operating costs, reduced your maintenance costs, or reduced your capitol cost, all while increasing your plants reliability and profitability. Now wouldn’t you feel better if you were able to keep these resolutions rather than sweating off a couple of pounds at the gym?

That’s my list, but I’d like to hear your professional New Year’s Resolution Lists. Maybe I forgot something on my list? On the other hand, maybe you have other goals for 2011? Leave me a comment or better yet, send me an email, as I have resolved this year to once again answer all questions or comments.

In addition if you would like to be a guest blogger let me know, always interested in finding out what others are thinking about.