Evaluation of energy saving potentials, costs and uncertainties in the chemical industry in Germany

Abstract In 2014, 19.3% of Germany’s industrial final energy consumption could be allocated to the chemical industry. Energy efficiency measures with focus on the chemical industry could thus contribute to reaching the German goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. To achieve this goal, energy planners and industries alike require an overview of the existing energy efficiency measures, their technical potential as well as the costs for realizing this potential. Energy efficiency opportunities are commonly presented in marginal cost curves, which rank these measures according to specific implementation costs. Existing analyses, however, do not take uncertainties in costs and potentials sufficiently into account. The aim of this paper is to create a marginal cost curve of energy efficiency measures for the chemical industry in Germany, while quantifying the uncertainties of the results and identifying the most influential input parameters. The identification of energy efficiency measures and the quantification of the associated technical potentials and costs were identified based on literature data and own assessments. Based on these findings a cost curve was created for the current technical potential. This potential was found to be 24.4 PJ per year, of which 23 PJ had negative lifetime costs. To investigate the uncertainties of these results, Monte Carlo simulations were performed to quantify the standard deviations of the implementation potential and costs. Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis, based on Morris Screening and linear regression, was conducted in order to identify the most influential model input parameters. With the applied approach, it was shown that uncertainties have a non-negligible impact on the final energy saving potential and costs, as well as the shape of marginal cost curves. The standard deviation of the energy saving potential was found to be 3.1 PJ. Furthermore, it is possible to systematically prioritise efforts in refining data.

[1]  Szu Hui Ng,et al.  Uncertainty quantification of CO2 emission reduction for maritime shipping , 2016 .

[2]  N. Metropolis,et al.  The Monte Carlo method. , 1949 .

[3]  Paul W. Griffin,et al.  Opportunities for Energy Demand and Carbon Emissions Reduction in the Chemicals Sector , 2017 .

[4]  Alois Kessler,et al.  Energieeffizienz in der Industrie , 2013 .

[5]  Szu Hui Ng,et al.  Emission reduction measures ranking under uncertainty , 2017 .

[6]  Chao Sun,et al.  Nonlinear Predictive Energy Management of Residential Buildings with Photovoltaics & Batteries , 2016 .

[7]  Amanda D. Smith,et al.  Incorporating performance-based global sensitivity and uncertainty analysis into LCOE calculations for emerging renewable energy technologies , 2018 .

[8]  Ernst Worrell,et al.  Energy efficiency in the German pulp and paper industry – A model-based assessment of saving potentials , 2012 .

[9]  Krist V. Gernaey,et al.  Data Handling and Parameter Estimation , 2016 .

[10]  Richard J. Beckman,et al.  A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output From a Computer Code , 2000, Technometrics.

[11]  Christoph Weber,et al.  Energy efficiency improvements in ammonia production—perspectives and uncertainties , 2005 .

[12]  M. K. Biddinika,et al.  Energy-saving combination of N2 production, NH3 synthesis, and power generation , 2017 .

[13]  P. Ekins,et al.  Marginal abatement cost curves: a call for caution , 2011 .

[14]  Martin Kumar Patel,et al.  Olefins from conventional and heavy feedstocks: Energy use in steam cracking and alternative processes , 2006 .

[15]  Max D. Morris,et al.  Factorial sampling plans for preliminary computational experiments , 1991 .

[16]  Qianli Deng,et al.  Strategic design of cost savings guarantee in energy performance contracting under uncertainty , 2015 .

[17]  Xingang Li,et al.  A hybrid design combining double-effect thermal integration and heat pump to the methanol distillation process for improving energy efficiency , 2017 .

[18]  Alistair B. Forbes,et al.  Carbon savings in the UK demand side response programmes , 2015 .

[19]  Fabian Kesicki,et al.  Marginal Abatement Cost Curves: Combining Energy System Modelling and Decomposition Analysis , 2013, Environmental Modeling & Assessment.

[20]  Luisa F. Cabeza,et al.  Industrial waste heat recovery technologies: An economic analysis of heat transformation technologies , 2015 .

[21]  Saltelli Andrea,et al.  Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer , 2008 .

[22]  Patrik Thollander,et al.  An interdisciplinary perspective on industrial energy efficiency , 2010 .

[23]  Gürkan Sin,et al.  Global sensitivity analysis of computer-aided molecular design problem for the development of novel working fluids for power cycles , 2015 .

[24]  Regett Anika,et al.  Eine anwendungsorientierte Emissionsbilanz , 2017 .

[25]  Aie,et al.  Tracking Industrial Energy Efficiency and CO2 Emissions , 2007 .

[26]  T. Barker,et al.  Pathways to a low-carbon economy for the UK with the macro-econometric E3MG model , 2010 .

[27]  Michel Bierlaire,et al.  Characterization of input uncertainties in strategic energy planning models , 2017 .

[28]  Qunxiong Zhu,et al.  Energy efficiency analysis method based on fuzzy DEA cross-model for ethylene production systems in chemical industry , 2015 .

[29]  Long-term energy efficiency analysis requires solid energy statistics: The case of the German basic chemical industry , 2012 .

[30]  K. Gernaey,et al.  Good modeling practice for PAT applications: Propagation of input uncertainty and sensitivity analysis , 2009, Biotechnology progress.

[31]  E. B. Nauman,et al.  Static Mixers in the Process Industries—A Review , 2003 .

[32]  Amit Kumar,et al.  Evaluation of uncertainty in the well-to-tank and combustion greenhouse gas emissions of various transportation fuels , 2016 .