11 N

ovem

ber 2

015 NOW IS THE TIME FOR ENERGY

MANAGEMENT

STEVE TARALLO, ENV-SP

2

• New Paradigms in the Water Industry• Energy Use at Water Facilities• Opportunities• Select Industry Leaders• Industry Initiatives• Energy Management Planning Methodology• Q&A

AGENDA

3

NEW PARADIGMS

• Resilience• Efficiency and Optimization• Expanded environmental

stewardship• Resource Recovery• Net Zero energy use• Life Cycle Thinking• Triple Bottom Line

Destination: “Utility of the Future”

4Significant opportunities to not just reduce energy use, but to recover energy

• Public Water Supply• 1600-2,100 kWh/MG• 70-80% for Pumping

• Water Resource Recovery Facilities (WRRFs)• 800 - >5,500 kWh/MG• >85% at the plant

• Typically largest energy consumption for municipality

• Approx. 2% of U.S. power generation

ENERGY USE AT WATER FACILITIES

5

STRATEGIC ENERGY MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

3 November 2011

Performance benchmark loop

Create a baseline of energy performance against which to measure improvements over time

OPPORTUNITIES

6

• Process Selection• Biggest opportunity for energy

efficiency and recovery• Carbon diversion

• Equipment Selection• Oversized = inefficient

• Peak Flow/Load Management• Reduce peak demands &

start/stops

DESIGN FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RELIABILITY

7

OPERATING FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RELIABILITY

8

• Operate Equipment Near Design Point

• Turn Off Excess Capacity• Maintain & Clean

Equipment

9

AERATION SYSTEM ENERGY OPTIMIZATION

3 November 2011

• Blowers + Piping/Diffusers + Controls = ONE SYSTEM• High-efficiency diffusers

• Fine bubble; Ultra-fine bubble• High-efficiency blowers

• Single-stage, integrally-geared centrifugal• High-speed turbo gearless centrifugal

• Automatic DO/advanced control systems• Most Open Valve; SRT/DO; BNR simulation

Need all components to work together for overall system energy efficiency

10

FINE BUBBLE DIFFUSER MAINTENANCE3 November 2011

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

or F

0.3

0.6

0.9

1.2

1.5

1.8

2.1

SOT

E / Z o

r FS

OTE /

Z (%/f

t)

N EW U S E D O LD

d iffuser age

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

SOTE / Z or FSOTE / Z (%/m)

O R C LEA N ED (2-24 m o. inoperation)

(>24 m o. inoperation)

11

CARBON DIVERSION

3 November 2011

Improving Primary Tmt.• 13% less oxygen demand (COD)

to aeration basin• 13% more COD to anaerobic

digestion to increase gas production

With CEPT• 36% less COD to aeration basin• >50% more COD to anaerobic

digestion to increase gas production

12

ELECTRICAL INTENSITY (KWH/MG) FOR DIFFERENT TREATMENT LEVELS

3 November 2011

Typical Best-Practice ImprovementTrickling filter 1058 793 25%

Secondary tmt. 1412 973 31%

Nitrification 1934 1249 35%

BNR 2070 1241 40%ENR 1955 1202 39%

MBR 5676 2815 50%

Two-Sludge (A/B)

1981 1277 36%

(from WERF ENER1C12 Net Zero Energy Solutions for WRRFs)

SELECT INDUSTRY LEADERS

13

14

PHILADELPHIA WATER DEPT.

3 November 2011

• Utility-wide strategic energy plan commissioned in 2008/2009• Airport deicing fluid for

co-digestion/improved gas production• 250kWp solar installation• 1 million BTU/hr sewage geothermal

installation• 5.6MW biogas cogeneration facility• Innovative pilot tests and

demonstrations

15

DC WATER

3 November 2011

• From R&D to Implementation• Thermal hydrolysis process (CAMBI)

for biogas augmentation• 14MW CHP facility• Sidestream short-cut nitrogen

removal• Cutting-edge research into

mainstream short-cut nitrogen removal

16

ITHACA, NY

3 November 2011

• High-strength waste processing facility• Additional revenue streams (FOG,

dairy waste, other sludges and high-strength wastes

• Generating approx. 100,000 kWh/month from biogas (4x65 MW microturbines)

INDUSTRY INITIATIVES – TECHNOLOGYWERF ENERGY RESEARCH

LIFT PROGRAM

17

18

WERF ENERGY RESEARCH

19Tools to help utilities develop their technology roadmap towards net zero energy use

WERF ENER1C12 – NET ZERO ENERGY SOLUTIONS FOR WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITIES

Objective: Provide research to develop new approaches that will allow water resource recovery facilities to be energy neutral, and thus able to operate solely on the energy embedded in the water and wastes they treat.

(from WERF Energy Management Challenge Exploratory Team Report, January 2011)

20

3 November 2011

21

ENERGY FLOW (SANKEY) DIAGRAMS FOR >50 WRRF CONFIGURATIONS

3 November 2011

22

WERF PROJECT MODELED INNOVATIVE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RESOURCE RECOVERY TECHNOLOGIES

3 November 2011

Best Practice Configuration

Innovative Technologie

s

Model high-Performance Facilities

23

3 November 2011

LIFT is a WERF-WEF program that accelerates water technology demand and adoption and engages the entire water sector in all phases of the innovation process

Greater collaboration leads to faster adoption

ENERGY MASTER PLANNINGMETHODOLOGY

24

25

• Demand Management• Energy efficiency• Load shifting/shedding• Improve power factor

• Supply Management• Imported organic waste• Renewable energy• Combined Heat and Power

12 AM 7 AM 6 PM 12 AM

$15.00

$10.00

$5.00

0

Dem

and

Cos

t $ p

er k

W

Summer Winter

1 PM 8 PM

ENERGY PLANS OFTEN INCLUDE A PORTFOLIO OF DEMAND AND SUPPLY SIDE MEASURES

Combination of no CAPEX, low CAPEX, and high CAPEX measures. Holistic, integrated analysis.

Discretionary energy projects involve a wider set of stakeholders and less certainty of costs and benefits 26

BUSINESS CASE EVALUATIONS

Decision

Decision

• Internal• Financial (20-yr NPV)• Costs and Benefits

easier to measure

TraditionalCompliance; Capacity

• Internal & External• Triple Bottom Line• Costs and Benefits

more difficult to measure

Energy projectsDiscretionary

HOLISTIC ENERGY EFFICIENCY RECOVERY PLAN APPROACH MAXIMIZES VALUE

27

OrganizationalInitiatives, KPIs

Energy RateProjections

Energy RateAnalysis

Energy Master Plan

Ener

gy D

ecisi

on C

ash

Flow

Mod

elBenchmarking &System Eff. Review

Tech. EvaluationsProcessMechanicalElectrical/Gas

Renewable EnergyAlternatives

EvaluationsBiogas UtilizationThermal EnergySolar and Other

Business Case EvaluationsProject Screening & Prioritization

Projected EnergyDemand Profile

AlternativeDemand Profile

Project Initiation /Visioning and GoalsWorkshop

ProgressWorkshops

Capital Projects

TECHNOLOGY ROADMAP

Best Practices & Operations

Energy Management Dashboard

Performance Management

Strategy Technical Business

Portfolio of projects toimplement over time

Informed decision-makingthat mitigates risk

Alignment withUtility’s Vision

TBL

& B

CE P

roce

ss

28

Energy RateProjections

CashFlowModel

Projected EnergyDemand Profile

AlternativeDemand Profile

A S S E S S E N E R G Y E F F I C I E N C Y A N D R E S O U R C E R E C O V E R Y P R O J E C T S O N A P O R T F O L I O B A S I S

O P T I M I Z E D E N E R G Y P R O J E C T C I P T H R O U G H R I S K - B A S E D P R O J E C T I M P L E M E N TAT I O N S C H E D U L E S

P L A N N I N G C R I T E R I A T H AT I S I N L I N E W I T H S T R AT E G I C O B J E C T I V E S O F T H E U T I L I T Y

FA C I L I TAT E S B U S I N E S S C A S E D E V E L O P M E N T F O R D I S C R E T I O N A R Y E N E R G Y P R O J E C T S

ENERGY DECISION CASH FLOW MODEL

29

ENERGY PROJECT PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT

3 November 2011

CONCLUSION

30

31

• The value of energy efficiency and resource recovery is becoming widely recognized

• Energy efficiency and recovery projects can result in significant cost savings, but can also require significant capital investment• It is important to make a sound Business Case

• To date, most utilities have taken a fragmentary approach (isolated projects) to energy management.

• To extract sustained value from energy management, an integrated project portfolio approach is beneficial

• Numerous tools, manuals, research reports are available to help guide you towards achieving your energy management objectives

IN CONCLUSION

THANK YOU!

QUESTIONS?

32

• Shift to value based management• Value vs. cost

• Revenue generation vs. regulatory compliance alone or cost savings alone

• Risk• Higher risk acceptance

• Stakeholders• More of them• More diverse

• Opportunity identification / Innovation

STRATEGIC CHALLENGES

33

• Culture• Key Performance Indicators / Incentives

• Energy efficiency (e.g. kWh or MMBTU per MG

• Net Present Value• Business Partners

• Buyer / Seller• Alternative delivery (e.g. Energy

Performance Contracting)• Business Process realignment• Training of O&M personnel

ORGANIZATIONAL CHALLENGES

34

• Maximize utilization of existing assets• Process “fit”• Alignment with Asset Management

• “New” technologies• Pilot studies• Demonstrations• WERF LIFT program

• Technology Roadmap• Set future course• Phased implementation towards achieving

a future performance goal (e.g. “net zero energy use”)

TECHNOLOGICAL CHALLENGES

35

FINANCIAL CHALLENGES

36

• Discretionary spending• Competition for limited capital funds

• Volatile Energy market conditions• Will low natural gas prices continue?• Strong dependence on energy policy /

strategic directions in the energy industry

INDUSTRY INITIATIVES – PLANNINGWEF ENERGY ROADMAP

37

38

39

SIX TOPICSTHREE LEVELS OF PROGRESSION

40

PRIORITIZE EFFORTS BASED ON IMPORTANCE AND CURRENT LEVEL OF ACHIEVEMENT

Highest Priority

41

MOST SIGNIFICANT SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES

3 November 2011

Maintaining or expanding asset life

Customer water rates

Long-term financial viability

Energy efficiency

Maintaining service with declining budgets

Reducing sanitary sewer overflows

Distribution system water loss

Energy recovery/generation

Chemical use

58.7%

34.2%

39.1%

26.4%

30.4%

25.8%

8.2%

12.2%

7.1%

53.2%

31.8%

31.3%

27.1%

21.9%

18.4%

15.7%

11.2%

9.7%

Trends: 2014 and 2015

20152014

Source: 2015 Strategic Directions: U.S Water Industry Report (Black & Veatch)