Risorse per gli studi di fattibilità in campo energetico: RETScreen

RETSCreen è un potente software di simulazione energetiche creato dall’Università del Canada. Può essere scaricato gratuitamente all’indirizzo: http://www.retscreen.net/it/download.php.

Al classico RETSCreen 4, ottimo per studi di fattibilità tecnico/finanziaria sia nel campo delle fonti rinnovabili che di quelle tradizione, si è aggiunto ultimamente RETScreen Plus, uno strumento software di gestione delle energie basato su Windows che consente a proprietari dei progetti di verificare facilmente il rendimento energetico dei propri impianti. Molto interessante è anche la possibilità di valorizzare la riduzione di emissione di CO2 connessa a un progetto.

RETScreen Plus premette di correlare consumi e fattori energetici (gradi-giorno, pezzi prodotti, ore lavorate, ecc.), di stabilire consumi di riferimento e di impostare obiettivi. In questo senso è un ottimo strumento per chi voglia iniziare a implementare un sistema di gestione dell’energia secondo la norma ISO 50001.

Titoli Efficienza Energetica - nuovo decreto in arrivo

E’ disponibile la bozza del nuovo decreto certificati bianchi (http://www.qualenergia.it/sites/default/files/articolo-doc/DM_Certificati-bianchi_4dic2012_bozza.pdf). Poichè è uno strumento rodato e che l’Europa si appresta a copiarci, le novità sono senz’altro interessanti.

Tra le novità si segnale che si allarga molto la platea di colo che potranno presentare progetti, come ad esempio imprese industriali con consumo >= 1000 TEP/anno e soggetti civili con consumo >=100 TEP/anno. Sono specificatamente individuate le associazioni:
…
c) tramite società terze operanti nel settore dei servizi energetici, comprese le imprese artigiane e loro forme consortili;

…

C’è quindi una volontà di allargare la platea dei soggetti interessati anche ai piccoli e piccolissimi installatori.

Energia rinnovabile: è tutto oro?

Many qualify electricity from solar panels or wind mills, in a poetical mode, as free energy. 
There is no such a thing as free energy. It is renewable, but not free. It requires a large energy investment to produce solar panels or wind mills. It is imperative to use the proper tools to analyze any of the so called renewable sources of energy and dispel the notion that they represent free energy. 

The objective of those renewable sources is to have a positive future flow of output energy, and that flow of renewable energy should be able to pay the initial investment in non renewable energy in a short period of time, say a maximum of 3 years. This standard indicates that we have a real innovation. Any Government financial support does not change the reality of our objective, fast payback of the energy investment. 

This is the only objective we should have for a measure of reasonable sustainability and cut our dependency on foreign oil. 

As you can deduct, this definition of sustainability is independent of the price of oil, as it should be. 

Let’s check the situation of the three most common projects for renewable sources with the standard mentioned above. 

1. Ethanol: The future flow of renewable energy is negative. There is nothing left to pay for the humongous required energy investments-1 Gallon of ethanol, uses 1.85 Gallons of oil- If we do nothing, we will be better off in terms of energy consumption and emissions now and in the future. The government support, with all their financial help, cannot change the negative energy balance and the enormous increase in present emissions. Our goal is not fulfilled. 

2. Wind Mills: The future flow of renewable energy is positive. However the very large investments in energy to engineer and build the units, including power lines, have an energy payback beyond 30 years. 

This investment does not avoid the investment in carbon, gas, or nuclear power plants to cover the ~70% of the time they are not producing electricity. We are increasing dramatically the power consumption and emissions as we build the units now, for a meager yearly renewable volume of power. . Our goal is not fulfilled 

2. Solar panels: The future flow of renewable energy is positive. The pay back for the initial energy consumption is beyond 50 years. Solar panels produce energy in average ~20% of the time. 
Any standard technology, let’s say small generators consuming natural gas, cost 1/30 of the energy cost of a solar panel for an equal total output. 

We seem to be digging our own grave with gusto. None of those projects comply with the most elementary energy objective we have as a country; on the contrary, they produce a considerable spike of energy usage now, that could be avoided, and I doubt that they will ever have a proper pay back in created energy. 

There is no wealth creation in these activities, no energy savings, only an immediate transfer of money from the Taxpayers to somebody else, destroying other Industries in the meantime. 

Due to all kind of government money injected into these projects, and the high price of oil, money could be made. But if the price of oil goes below a certain threshold, boom, the project is no longer viable. See T. Boone Pickens suspending his wind mill project because oil went below US$60. Or the several bankruptcies in ethanol due to the higher price of corn in spite of all the subsidies! Millions of barrels of oil that we cannot afford to loose, thrown to the wind. 

None of those programs complies with cutting CO2 emissions, a suspected objective anyway. 
They make our dependence of foreign oil much worst, not better, using considerable high level engineering resources for naught. 

There are enormous opportunities in energy savings and production in many Industries, with a positive balance of energy consumption and paybacks anywhere from 4 months to one year.

nergia rinnovabile: è tutto oro?

Many qualify electricity from solar panels or wind mills, in a poetical mode, as free energy. 
There is no such a thing as free energy. It is renewable, but not free. It requires a large energy investment to produce solar panels or wind mills. It is imperative to use the proper tools to analyze any of the so called renewable sources of energy and dispel the notion that they represent free energy. 

The objective of those renewable sources is to have a positive future flow of output energy, and that flow of renewable energy should be able to pay the initial investment in non renewable energy in a short period of time, say a maximum of 3 years. This standard indicates that we have a real innovation. Any Government financial support does not change the reality of our objective, fast payback of the energy investment. 

This is the only objective we should have for a measure of reasonable sustainability and cut our dependency on foreign oil. 

As you can deduct, this definition of sustainability is independent of the price of oil, as it should be. 

Let’s check the situation of the three most common projects for renewable sources with the standard mentioned above. 

1. Ethanol: The future flow of renewable energy is negative. There is nothing left to pay for the humongous required energy investments-1 Gallon of ethanol, uses 1.85 Gallons of oil- If we do nothing, we will be better off in terms of energy consumption and emissions now and in the future. The government support, with all their financial help, cannot change the negative energy balance and the enormous increase in present emissions. Our goal is not fulfilled. 

2. Wind Mills: The future flow of renewable energy is positive. However the very large investments in energy to engineer and build the units, including power lines, have an energy payback beyond 30 years. 

This investment does not avoid the investment in carbon, gas, or nuclear power plants to cover the ~70% of the time they are not producing electricity. We are increasing dramatically the power consumption and emissions as we build the units now, for a meager yearly renewable volume of power. . Our goal is not fulfilled 

2. Solar panels: The future flow of renewable energy is positive. The pay back for the initial energy consumption is beyond 50 years. Solar panels produce energy in average ~20% of the time. 
Any standard technology, let’s say small generators consuming natural gas, cost 1/30 of the energy cost of a solar panel for an equal total output. 

We seem to be digging our own grave with gusto. None of those projects comply with the most elementary energy objective we have as a country; on the contrary, they produce a considerable spike of energy usage now, that could be avoided, and I doubt that they will ever have a proper pay back in created energy. 

There is no wealth creation in these activities, no energy savings, only an immediate transfer of money from the Taxpayers to somebody else, destroying other Industries in the meantime. 

Due to all kind of government money injected into these projects, and the high price of oil, money could be made. But if the price of oil goes below a certain threshold, boom, the project is no longer viable. See T. Boone Pickens suspending his wind mill project because oil went below US$60. Or the several bankruptcies in ethanol due to the higher price of corn in spite of all the subsidies! Millions of barrels of oil that we cannot afford to loose, thrown to the wind. 

None of those programs complies with cutting CO2 emissions, a suspected objective anyway. 
They make our dependence of foreign oil much worst, not better, using considerable high level engineering resources for naught. 

There are enormous opportunities in energy savings and production in many Industries, with a positive balance of energy consumption and paybacks anywhere from 4 months to one year.

La diagnosi energetica domestica: how-to

La diagnosi energetica si pone l’obiettivo di capire in che modo l’energia viene utilizzata, quali sono le cause degli eventuali sprechi ed eventualmente quali interventi possono essere suggeriti all’utente, ossia un piano energetico che valuti non solo la fattibilità tecnica ma anche e soprattutto quella economica delle azioni proposte. I Paesi membri dell’Unione Europea hanno da tempo avviato procedure per la certificazione energetica degli edifici atte a correggere gli sprechi energetici e promuovere azioni successive che portino ad una riduzione dei consumi. 

UNI ha stabilito i requisiti minimi di una diagnosi energetica nella norma UNI CEI/TR 11428:2011. Per un audit indicativo e “fa-da-te” sono molto utili le indicazione del Department of Energy:

http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/do-it-yourself-home-energy-audits

Different industries, different ISO 50001?

A lot of energy managers say to me, “ISO 50001 is expanding fast but it’s new to me. I have to get ISO 50001 for my company. Where can I go to see an ISO 50001 implementation near to me in my industry sector?”

For example, an automotive component manufacturer might want to see ISO 50001 in another automotive company. The problem is that there are only a few hundred ISO 50001 certifications in the world so far. It is therefore unlikely that you will find an ISO 50001 certificate in your sector close to you.

Normally, I recommend the energy manager set aside the issue of industry sector and visit any local organization that has ISO 50001. Why do I recommend that?

Management Practices Are Common across All Sectors

In more than 30 years of energy management across industrial and building sectors in North America and Western Europe, I have found the same management issues determine whether or not you have good energy practices. It is the same whether you are a food company, a paper company or a metal manufacturing company. ISO 50001 focuses on ensuring good management practice on topics such as:

• Management commitment to energy efficiency
• Project prioritization
• Clear energy plans
• Motivation and training of staff
• Auditing of energy and management practices
• Clear processes and work practices
• Monitoring & targeting
• Employee suggestion schemes

Overcoming Technical Differences between Sectors

As you go from one industry sector to another, the key differences are on technical topics such as:

• Energy review
• Significant energy users (SEUs)
• Energy performance indicators (EnPIs)

A technical energy analysis in an automotive plant is very different from a paper processing operation. Good sector specific knowledge of energy balancing is required here. However, in your role as energy manager, you have already carried out energy efficiency projects. The good news is that you (or your energy consultant) already have the required technical knowledge which is immediately transferable to an ISO 50001 program.

For an experienced energy manager, the introduction of ISO 50001 probably requires about 20 percent effort in technical energy matters and about 80 percent in management system effort. It is therefore very valuable to visit any site that has ISO 50001 – even if they are not in your industry sector. You can learn from their experience of management systems and add that to your existing knowledge of the technical aspect of energy management. Food companies can learn from energy supply companies, paper companies can learn from automotive companies, and so on.

DoE: risorse web per l'implementazione di ISO 50001

L’US Department of energy ha messo online una pagina molto interessante sulle opportunità portate dallo standard ISO 50001 alle aziende:

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/energymanagement/

Tra le altre si segnala la DoE eGuide for ISO 50001, con i suoi 7 passi per l’ìmplementazione di un Ems:

https://save-energy-now.org/EM/SPM/Pages/Home.aspx