340
4, DECEMBER 2001
Budget Constrained Energy Conservation—An
Experience With a Textile Industry
C. Palanichamy, C. Nadarajan, P. Naveen, Natarajan Sundar Babu, and Dhanalakshmi
Abstract—Conservation and efficient use of energy in industry
has for a long time been a priority of the Government of India.
In anticipation of enactment of federal legislation on energy
management for industry, the State of Government of Tamilnadu,
Kerala, and other Southern States, made energy audits mandatory
for large-scale energy-consuming industries. So among industrial
consumers, the aspect of energy conservation is gaining due
importance of the realization that “Energy Saved is Energy
Produced and that too at Economical Cost.” This paper shares
the experiences of the authors on Energy Conservation Projects
carried out in a Textile Industry situated in Tamilnadu State.
Economic and efficient measures of Energy Conservation have
been followed subject to budget constraint and the effect of such
measures were realized through reduction in energy cost with the
added advantage of environmental safety.
Index Terms—Energy audit, energy conservation, environ-
mental benefits, payback period, return on investment, textile
industry.
I. INTRODUCTION
T ODAY, energy and environment are two areas that have
sought the greatest attention at the international level. With
the issue of the global environment [1], [2] becoming as impor-
tant as never before, energy particularly its conservation in in-
dustries [3]–[7], has become the main target for all parts of the
World that has to be achieved as soon as possible. Textile indus-
tries are found to be energy-intensive (4% energy cost in total
input cost) compared to other industries like chemical, food,
computer manufacturing, etc., and hence extensive research has
been focused [8]–[10] on such industries in the past to reduce
the energy cost and the total input cost.
In post-independence India, the industrial sector [11] has
reached to a level of consuming 50% of the total commercial
energy available in the country. Indian manufacturing industries
like fertilizer, cement, sugar, textile, aluminum, paper, etc., are
found to be highly energy-intensive and their energy efficiency
is well below that of industrialized countries. Research [12] on
Indian industrial sector indicates that around 25% of the total
energy consumed by the industrial sector can be saved through
energy conservation means.
Manuscript received May 8, 2000.
C. Palanichamy is with Sultan Saiful Rijal Technical College, Ministry of
Education, Brunei Darussalam (e-mail: drcpc@brunet.bn).
C. Nadarajan and P. Naveen are with Magnum Power, 21, Kumaran
Kudil, Madurai-625006, Tamilnadu, India (e-mail: ernada@pronet.net.in;
nav_p80@yahoo.com).
N. S. Babu and Dhanalakshmi are with Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA
(e-mail: babu@drexel.edu; dhanam@joymail.com).
Publisher Item Identifier S 0885-8969(01)10058-6.
0885–8969/01$10.00 © 2001 IEEE
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 16, NO.
In this paper, the energy conservation experience of the au-
thors with a textile industry is presented. The selection, in par-
ticular, of a textile industry has been considered because of i) the
higher magnitude of electrical energy used in such industries,
and ii) the large number of textile industries in this country.
Since there is a constraint on the investment budget for energy
conservation measures imposed by the Management of the tex-
tile industry considered, projects conserving only electrical en-
ergy have been identified and implemented since the electricity
cost in the total energy cost of the textile industry is found to
be around 65%. All other energy conservation measures are re-
served for next stage of implementation at a higher budget level.
II. STUDY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Industry Considered
A privately owned medium size Spinning and Sewing Thread
industry in Tamilnadu, producing 15 Tons of yarn and 10 Tons
of sewing thread/day, is the site for which energy conservation
measures were carried out during the financial year 1998–1999.
B. Electrical Demand
The textile industry considered is a High-Tension consumer,
receiving electricity from the State Electricity Board (SEB)
under Tariff I. The permitted Maximum Demand is 3250 KVA,
and the Sanctioned Demand is 2600 KVA.
C. Consumption
Energy Consumption: 58 250 kWh/day
Steam Requirement: 0.6 Tons/hr
Furnace Oil Requirement: 1000 Liters/day.
D. Electricity Tariff
The textile industry is situated in a Non-Metropolitan locality
and HT Tariff I is applicable at the following rates:
Maximum Demand (KVA) charges: US $3.75/month.
Energy (kWh) charges: US $0.0875/kWh
(1 US $ IRS 40 approximately.)
E. Machineries/Equipments Inventory
The Mill Engineer’s report indicates the availability of the
following machineries and equipments:
Blow Rooms—2 lines
Ring frames—96
Twisting frames—48
Cone and Cheese Winding machines
PALANICHAMY et al.: BUDGET CONSTRAINED ENERGY CONSERVATION—AN EXPERIENCE WITH A TEXTILE INDUSTRY
Sewing Thread machines
Cards, Preparatory machines, Draw frames, Combers, Lap
formers, etc.
Power Transformers: 2 2500 KVA
Power Transformers: 3 1000 KVA
Diesel Generators: 3 900 KVA
Boilers: 1 2 Ton
Boilers: 2 0.5 Ton.
III. ENERGY AUDITING
The Board of Directors of the Textile industry decided to go
for Energy Conservation measures due to the following reasons:
• the Industry has served for more than a decade
• the rise in cost of energy input due to periodic tariff revi-
sions by the SEB and also the frequent diesel price rise in
every year
• the Board of the industry is considering the option of going
for Renewable Energy Sources in the near future for eco-
nomic reasons and also to avail the Government’s incen-
tives, and
• the repeated instructions from the Electricity Board, Elec-
trical Inspectorate and State Pollution Control Board to go
in for Energy Conservation.
A. The Energy Conservation Team (EC Team)
The Energy Conservation team (EC team) consists of i) A
Professor in Electrical and Electronic Engineering with Power
Systems as the area of specialization and Chartered Engineer
status, ii) A field Electrical Engineer with 25 years of experience
and authorized A-Certificate holder of the SEB to work with HT
installations, iii) A Scientist with Post Doctoral qualification de-
veloped interest in inter-disciplinary areas, iv) A Computer Sci-
ence Engineer specialized in Software Development for Engi-
neering Power applications, v) A qualified Business Adminis-
trator with Computer skills, and vi) Three qualified Electricians
with authorized C-Certificate holder of the SEB.
B. Service Agreement
The EC team received a fixed charge on monthly installment
basis during the Energy Conservation period, and 25% of profit
sharing from the profit by way of the Energy Conservation.
The EC Team was responsible for conducting a detailed En-
ergy Audit with the support of the Mill Engineer and the Mill
Maintenance personnel. At the end of the Audit, a detailed re-
port on the Machineries/Equipment inventory, existing condi-
tions, possibility of energy conservation, plan for implementa-
tion, implementation cost and carrying out the plan, payback pe-
riod, and rate of return, was given to the Board of Directors for
its approval. Based on the decision of the Board and the budget
sanctioned, the EC team carried out its responsibility.
C. Software Package
The EC team developed a software package—MAGNUM
SOFT for Energy Conservation purposes, suitable for different
kinds of industries and such an own use package was used for
341
this project too. The details of the package were not given due
to space constraint.
D. Time Span
For This Textile Industry’s Energy Conservation project, the
EC team took 3 months for conducting the detailed Energy
Audit; the Board took two weeks for its approval and budget
sanctioning, and again the EC team took another three months
for the implementation.
E. Criteria Set by EC Team for Energy Auditing
The EC team set the criteria for energy auditing as i) Cross-
checking the Machineries/Equipments Inventory produced
by the industry, ii) Analyzing the Monthly Electricity Bills
from the commencement of the industry, iii) Study of Load
growth, Loading pattern, and Demand control, iv) Analysis
of Distribution Systems, Cables, routing of Wires and Cables,
v) Checking of Indoor and Outdoor lighting, vi) Determining
Motor efficiency, Air Conditioning systems, etc., vii) Ways of
improving internal gains from Equipments, viii) Study of Solar
gain, Heating systems, Thermal Envelopes, Time Clocking
systems, Ventilation levels, etc.
F. Audit Outcome
The EC team identified the following areas (projects) through
which energy conservation could be achieved:
i) Electrical Services and Distribution System, ii) Insulation
and Distribution Losses, iii) Lighting, iv) Motors and Drives,
v) Equipment and Process Modification, vi) Building Envelope,
vii) Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning, viii) Steam Trap
Maintenance, ix) Operation and Maintenance, x) Co-generation
and Energy Management System, and xi) Water Treatment
Program.
For each project, i) the annual energy savings, ii) project fu-
ture energy costs and annual cost savings, iii) project capital or
first cost, iv) payback period, return on investment, and v) pri-
orities to projects based on investment merit, were provided to
the Board of Directors for its approval and capital authoriza-
tion. The Board permitted to implement those energy conserva-
tion projects related to Electrical demand and energy costs as
the first phase subject to a budget of US $300 000 with a con-
dition that the savings through such projects should offset the
implementation cost over a short period of time.
IV. ELECTRICAL ENERGY CONSERVATION
Based on the Board’s approval, the EC team decided to go for
the following electrical energy conservation projects:
A. Reducing In-Service Transformers’ Capacity
Findings:
Transformers in service: 1 2500 KVA and 2
1000 KVA
Transformers in standby: 1 2500 KVA and 1
1000 KVA.
For an industrial consumer of Permitted Maximum demand
as 3250 KVA and Sanctioned demand of 2600 KVA, the ca-
pacity of the in-service transformers of 4500 KVA is very high.
342 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 16, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2001
Even in case of total failure of the in-service transformers, the
capacity of the Standby transformers is good enough to service
the Sanctioned demand.
Team Recommendation: The EC team recommended, as one
of the Energy conservation measures, to disconnect one of the
1000 KVA transformers from service with the written permis-
sion of the SEB. In case of future expansion of the industry,
the disconnected transformer will be put back in service; until
then the disconnected transformer shall be maintained without
energizing.
Benefits: As per the norms of the SEB, where metering of
the High Tension service connection is on the Low Tension side,
i.e., on the secondary side of the transformer of capacity above
50 KVA,
i) average losses in the transformer will be calculated as
(720 1.0 divided by 100) kWh per month where
is the KVA rating of the transformer and added to the
energy consumption indicated by the meter. The trans-
former loss arrived shall be added to the energy consump-
tion, even when the recorded energy consumption is nil.
ii) 1% of the transformer capacity for transformers above
50 KVA will be added to the recorded maximum demand
on the Low Tension side to arrive at the equivalent High
Tension demand. The transformer loss so arrived shall be
added to the demand even when the recorded demand is
nil.
Therefore, monthly saving due to disconnected transformer
loss @ $0.0875/kWh $0.0875 (720 1.0 1000)/100
$630. Monthly reduction in demand charges $3.75 (1000
1/100) $37.5. Total monthly savings due to transformer
disconnection equals $667.5 and hence an annual savings of
$8010.
Total expenditure (or investment) for disconnection and
off-line annual maintenance of the transformer is found to be
$1325.
Therefore, Payback period (Expenditure/Total savings)
12 (1325/8010) 12 1.985 say 2 months.
Return on investment 1/Payback 1/2 50% per month.
B. Running of Parallel Cables
Findings: Two Aluminum Armored, 3 core, 1.1 KV,
335 A, 400 square mm, 0.0915 resistance/core/km, PVC
Under-ground cables are running from the sub-station; one
cable of length 100 meter to Air conditioning control panel
and another of 75 meter to the Departmental over-head bus
bars. Considering the reliability of supply and the magnitude of
cable power losses, it is not advisable to go for a single cable
feeding system to essential floors.
Recommendations: The EC team recommended, as one of
the energy conservation measures, to run a similar cable in par-
allel with the existing one. Since the existing cables were found
to be in sound working conditions, it was decided to retain the
cable as it was. Instructions were given to mark the changes in
the Blue print for future reference.
Benefits: Total length of both existing cables was 175 m.
Total resistance of the cable, 3 0.0915 175/1000
0.048 037 5 . For a load current of 300 A, the cable
power losses for a total load current of 300 A was worked
out as: 300 0.048 037 5 4.3234 KW. Assuming
8000 hours of operation/year, the energy loss in the cables was
8000 4.3234 34 587 kWh.
For parallel cables:
Assuming equal load sharing, the current in each cable
is 300/2 150 A. The power loss in each cable is 150
0.048 037 5 1.0808 KW. Total power loss for both cables is
2 1.0808 2.1616 KW and total energy loss is 17 293 kWh.
Saving in energy loss/year is (34 587 17 293) kWh
17 294 kWh (50% saving as expected). Annual saving in energy
cost due to parallel cables @ $0.0875/kWh $1513.23. Cost of
3 400 square mm cable per meter length $20. Expenditure
on additional 175 m cable $20 175 $3500. Labor on
running additional cable is $140, and hence total expenditure
on running additional cable is $3640.
Payback period (3640/1513.23) 12 28.87 say
29 months.
Return on investment 1/29 3.45% per month.
C. Change of Motor Connections
Findings: The EC team identified 21 numbers of 7.5 KW,
three phase Induction Motors in the Spinning floor and 15 num-
bers of 3.75 KW, three phase Induction Motors of the Polishing
machines, as of over capacity. These motors were connected in
Delta and the torque developed by them was very high, such a
high torque was not essential.
Recommendations: The EC team recommended to connect
the said Induction motors in Star. The torque developed was
measured and found sufficient to drive the connected systems
and also the temperature rise was measured to be normal. The
change in connection resulted in a power reduction of 0.670 KW
for a 7.5 KW motor, and 0.400 KW for a 3.75 KW motor.
Benefits: Assuming 8000 hours of operation/year, energy
saving by 21 7.5 KW motors is 8000 21 0.670
112 560 kWh, and 48 000 kWh by 15 3.75 KW motors.
Therefore total energy saving is 160 560 kWh and annual
saving in cost is $0.0875 160 560 $14 049. Labor cost for
connection changes $100 (practically nil).
Payback period (100/14 049) 12 0.085 say a month.
Return on investment 1/1 100% per month.
D. Power Factor Improvement
Findings: The average power factor of the industry varies be-
tween 0.91 and 0.93 since its commencement, which was well
above the requirement of the SEB. The average power factor of
the industry was 0.92 and the Maximum demand reached has
been read as 2600 KVA from the Load duration curve. The load
level reached above the sanctioned demand of 2600 KVA on cer-
tain short period of time was not considered for the power factor
improvement project. So, at the average power factor, the load
in KW was found to be 2600 0.92 2392 KW. 1000 KVAR
Capacitors were already installed at the sub-station to improve
the power factor to 0.92 (average), which was not sufficient to
reduce the energy input of the industry to a great extent.
Recommendations: The EC team decided to improve the
power factor to an average value of 0.98. The best locations
PALANICHAMY et al.: BUDGET CONSTRAINED ENERGY CONSERVATION—AN EXPERIENCE WITH A TEXTILE INDUSTRY
for the capacitors were identified as i) at the sub-station itself
to compensate the base load and ii) at the loads supply side as
per the KW capacity, so that only when the load is on, the ca-
pacitors will be on. The 1000 KVAR capacitors available at the
sub-station were just sufficient to compensate the base load to a
power factor of 0.92. Additional capacitors of 500 KVAR were
installed to improve the power factor to 0.98. (Calculations not
shown.)
Benefits: For a load of 2392 KW, the KVA demand at 0.98
power factor is (2392/0.98) 2441.
Therefore, saving in KVA is (2600 2441) 159.
Annual saving in cost due to KVA reduction $3.75 159
12 $7155. Cost on additional capacitors @ $12.5 per KVAR
$(12.5 500) $6250.
Payback period (6250/7155) 12 10.48 say 11 months.
Return on investment 1/11 9.1% per month.
E. Saving Through Peak Shaving
As per the norms of the SEB, the maximum demand charges
for any month at the point of supply shall be based on the highest
KVA demand recorded during any consecutive thirty minutes
in that month or 100% of the sanctioned demand, whichever
is higher. In addition, for exceeding the sanctioned maximum
demand, the charges per exceeded KVA shall be at double the
normal rate (say penalty).
Findings: The Maximum Demand during the financial
years 1995–1996, 1996–1997, 1997–1998 and 1998–1999 has
exceeded the Sanctioned Demand in March and April, due
to the early summer peak loads, and the production target
initiative at the beginning of the financial year. During the
EC project period (1998–1999), the peak demand was found
to be 2750 KVA. The industry did not want to apply for
increased Sanctioned demand since for the rest of the period of
10 months, the load was well within the Sanctioned demand. It
was noticed that the available Diesel generators were used only
at the time of power-cut and at grid failure cases.
Recommendations: The EC team recommended for the use
of one 900 KVA Generator at the time of peak loads during
1998–1999 and to transfer the excess loads to the generator
supply so as to avoid the excess KVA penalty charges. If critical
loads also contribute to facility peaks, consider shifting these
loads to generator power during peak periods. In case, if emer-
gency back up power is needed, the remaining two Diesel Gen-
erators shall be put in service even during peak periods. Note:
For the present project, the concept of Peak shaving was applied
only for the loads exceeding the Sanctioned demand and not for
all the loads above the base load.
Benefits: Considering the peak demand during March–April
of the financial year 1998–1999, i.e., 2750 KVA exceeding the
Sanctioned demand by 150 KVA for duration of 3 hours/day:
SEB Supply: Maximum demand charges payable to
SEB/month $3.75 (2750 2 150) = $11 437.5. Energy
consumption charges/month for a load of 2750 KVA at 0.92
power factor @ $0.0875/kWh $159 390. Total charges
payable/month is $170 827.5.
Generator Supply for a Load of 150 KVA: Maximum
Demand charges $3.75 2600 $9750. Energy con-
sumption charges/month for the energy fed by SEB for a
343
load of 2600 KVA at 0.92 power factor @ $0.0875 per kWh
$150 696. Energy generated by the generator/month @
3 hours/day for the peaking load of 150 KVA at 0.92 power
factor lagging 150 0.92 3 30 12 420 kWh.
Considering the capital investment, life time, the load factor,
the annual operation and maintenance cost, the labor cost, the
depreciation and the diesel fuel cost, the average energy cost
for the Diesel generator supply is worked out to be $0.19/kWhr.
Therefore, energy cost for the generator supply is $0.19
12 420 $2359.8 and hence total charges incurred/month for
the peak shaving option is $162 805.8. The EC team suggested
the Board that more saving in energy cost could have been
obtained through Renewable energy sources compared to the
Diesel generator supply due to reduced generation cost.
Net saving by peak shaving per month is $8021.7 and
$96 260.4 for the whole year if peak shaving is applied for the
entire 12 months @ 3 hours/day.
F. Changing Air Conditioned Environment
Findings: The textile industry under our investigation has
27 numbers of 1.5 Ton capacity air conditioners. Except 7, re-
maining 20 were used for the Computer room environment.
The general purpose air conditioned rooms and Computer room
were maintained at an operating temperature of 24 C always
irrespective of the changing seasons.
Recommendations: Recent research [13] indicates that
Computers are working well even at 30 C. By raising the
computer room environment to a higher temperature of 28 C,
an energy saving of 3% has been noticed for every raise in
room temperature by 1 C. Further it has been proved that,
blowing the cold air from the bottom of the air conditioner
instead from the top and sucking the warm air through the top
instead through the bottom, can save energy to a level of 15%.
Ducts are connected to the cold air outlet and the warm air
suction inlet of the air conditioner, and the locations of the cold
air outlet and warm air inlet are switched between upper and
lower portions to achieve the new method of airflow. Based on
the research, the EC team decided to maintain the controlled
temperature only in the computer rooms at 28 C and to modify
the airflow by adding ducts for 20 air conditioners as said.
Benefits: The energy consumption/air conditioner/hour to
maintain a room temperature of 24 C is found to be 3.85 kWh
with conventional airflow. Assuming 8000 hours/year
of working, energy consumed by 20 air conditioners is
616 000 kWh. The corresponding energy consumption/air
conditioner/hour to maintain a room temperature of 28 C is
found to be 2.90 kWh with modified airflow. The total energy
consumed by 20 air conditioners 464 000 kWh. Therefore,
energy saved per annum is 152 000 kWh. Annual saving in cost
due to change in air-conditioned environment $0.0875
152 000 $13 300. Material and Labor cost for providing the
ducts for 20 air conditioners $2700.
Payback period (2700/13 300) 12 2.44 months say
3 month.
Return on investment 1/3 33.33% per month.
344 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 16, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2001

G. By Energy Efficient Motors TABLE I

SPECIFIC ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION
Replacing standard efficiency motors with premium or high
efficiency motors is a valuable energy conservation program.
Total energy required to operate the motor is equal to the me-
chanical load on the motor and the mechanical and electrical
losses in the motor.
Findings: There were 96 Induction Motors of capacities
each ranging from 13 KW to 15 KW for driving the Ring
frames. By load test, their full load efficiency was found
to be around 86% and an average energy consumption of
12 kWh/hour/Motor. The energy consumption of these motors
alone formed a major portion of 45% in the total electrical
energy requirement of the industry.
Recommendations: It is recommended to go for Energy effi-
cient motors of capacity 13 KW with 91% efficiency, uniformly
for all the frames.
Benefits: The standard motors were disposed of at a price
TABLE II
of $300 per motor and energy efficient motors were bought at ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
a price of $1150 per motor. The additional cost involved for
procuring the energy efficient motors was $850 per motor.
For a load factor of 80% and annual working hours of 8000,
the annual saving in energy 13 96 8000 0.80 (1/0.86
1/0.91) 1 428 837 kWh. Annual saving in energy cost is
$0.0875 1 428 837 $125 023. The additional total cost in-
volved for procuring all the 96 energy efficient motors @ $850 not be expected. However, different electrical energy saving
per motor $81 600. Therefore, the simple Payback period measures ranging from 2 kWh/Ton to 172 kWh/Ton was carried
(81 600/125 023) 12 7.83 months say 8 months and the re- out with the approval of the Board. After the implementation
turn on investment is 12.5% per month. of the conservation projects, a total saving in electricity con-
sumption of 3.536 21 Million kWh/annum has been achieved.
H. Through Lighting The electricity charges/annum were brought down to a value of
1.387 841 Million Dollars from 1.697 260 Million Dollars with
Findings: Already energy conservation in lighting has been
a saving of 0.309 419 Million Dollars. Such a saving was found
carried out by the Electrical team of the industry, which re-
to be 18.23% on the annual electricity charges and 11.85%
sulted in a saving of around 15% according to their records. The
on the total energy cost of the textile industry. The average
lighting installation consisted of 1255 twin lamp industrial re-
specific electricity consumption/Ton of the textile product
flector luminaries, each luminaire was fitted with two 38 mm
before conservation was found to be 2330 kWh/Ton and due to
(T12) diameter each rated at 85 watts.
the implementation of the measures, it was brought down to
Recommendations: The EC team installed a voltage control
1905.23 kWh/Ton through a reduction of 424.77 kWh/Ton as
system for the lighting system in the industry, which made use
shown in Table I. In other words, 18.23% reduction or saving
of one autotransformer for every lighting control zones, and fi-
in specific electricity consumption charges has been achieved.
nally connected to a central control panel. The voltage control
The total investment for the energy conservation projects
system has reduced energy consumption in two ways: firstly,
and the saving in electricity cost per annum were found to be
following start-up, the supply voltage was reduced by 12.5%,
0.309 411 and 0.189 633 Million Dollars, respectively. Though
and secondly, using a photocell to monitor the daylight level in
the energy conservation measures exceeded the sanctioned
the industry, the supply voltage was reduced by up to a further
budget of 0.3 Million Dollars by 3%, the Board was very much
5%. The total power rating, including control gear was found to
pleased by the overall saving/investment ratio of 61.29% during
be 240 KW.
the first year itself.
Benefits: For 7000 hours of annual operation, due to the
Apart from the economical benefits, environmental benefits
voltage control system, a 30% reduction in energy consumption
are also achieved through the present EC projects. The Carbon
(504 000 kWh) by the lighting installation has been measured,
dioxide, Sulfur dioxide and Nitrous oxide emissions, in India,
resulting in an annual energy cost saving of $44 100. The cost
from Fossil-fuel generation [1] of electricity per kWh are found
of the control system and its installation was $65 700; so the
to be 0.22 Kg, 6.80 gm and 2.63 gm, respectively. The reduc-
simple payback period is worked out to be 18 months and the
tion in these emissions due to the present energy conservation
return on investment is 5.6% per month.
measures are calculated and shown in Table II. An appreciable
reduction in all the pollutants are noticed which helps not only
V. BENEFITS OVERVIEW
in safeguarding the environment and but also gets benefits from
Since the conservation measures carried out were budget con- reduced environmental penalty cost. The Board’s interest on
strained, a higher magnitude of saving in energy and cost could going for the Renewable Energy Sources will result in added
PALANICHAMY et al.: BUDGET CONSTRAINED ENERGY CONSERVATION—AN EXPERIENCE WITH A TEXTILE INDUSTRY
benefits since the direct renewable energy or renewable energy
through storage systems can be used for the Peak shaving option
to a great extent due to the economic cost of generation with en-
vironmental benefits.
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, the energy conservation experiences of the
authors with a textile industry were presented. Since there was
a constraint imposed by the Management of the Textile industry
on the investment budget for energy conservation measures,
projects conserving only electrical energy have been considered
and a saving of 18.23% on the electricity cost, i.e., 11.85% on
the total energy cost of the textile industry was achieved. An
attractive benefit/investment ratio of 61.29% during the first
year itself has been achieved along with an annual reduction
of 777.97 Tons of Carbon, 24.05 Tons of SO and 9.30 Tons
of NO through energy conservation. It has been pointed out
to the Board that Peak shaving option could be applied to a
great extent even to meet the loads above the base load through
renewable energy sources. The successful first stage energy
conservation measures encouraged the industry and made them
to grant permission to proceed with the next phase of energy
conservation at a higher budget capacity.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors sincerely thank the Management of the Textile
Industry and Mrs. Meena and Mrs. Loga, the Directors of
Magnum Power, India for the permission given and their
uniform support.
REFERENCES
[1] S. Rahman and A. de Castro, “Environmental impacts of electricity gen-
eration: A global perspective,” IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 10,
no. 2, pp. 307–314, June 1995.
[2] J. B. Gaskell, “How green is your plant?,” IEE Power Engineering
Journal, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 49–57, Apr. 1999.
[3] A. Z. Khan, “Electrical energy conservation and its application to a sheet
glass industry,” IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, pp. 666–671, Sept.
1996.
[4] IEEE Bronze Book on Recommended Practice for Energy Conservation
and Cost Effective Planning in Industrial Facilities. New York: IEEE,
1993.
[5] C. Palanichamy et al., “Refresher course on recent trends in mainte-
nance of industrial electrical equipments and energy conservation,” in
TCE Proc., Feb. 23–24, 1991.
[6] B. Cook, “High-efficiency lighting in industry and commercial build-
ings,” IEE Power Engineering Journal, pp. 197–206, Oct. 1998.
345
[7] S. Nadel and N. Elliott, “Overview of programmes to promote energy
efficient motor systems in the United States,” in Energy Efficiency Im-
provements in Electric Motors and Drives: Springer, 1997, pp. 365–376.
[8] J. W. Tester et al., Energy and the Environment in the 21st Cen-
tury. Cambridge, England: The MIT Press, 1991.
[9] Textile Industry, “Handy manual. Output of a seminar on energy conser-
vation in textile industry UNIDO,”, 1992.
[10] “The textile industry and the environment technical report no. 16,”
United Nations Environmental Programme, 1993.
[11] C. Palanichamy, N. S. Babu, and C. Nadarajan et al., “Restructuring the
Indian power sector with energy conservation as the motive for economic
and environmental benefits,” IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 14,
no. 4, pp. 1589–1596, Dec. 1999.
[12] V. K. Garg and S. Paul. Energy conservation programme in rayon plant.
[Online]. Available: http://www.exicom.org/cew/mar97/garg.htm
[13] M. Yamamoto and T. Abe, “The new energy saving way achieved by
changing computer culture,” IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 9, no. 3,
pp. 1563–1568, Aug. 1994.
C. Palanichamy was born in December 1953 in Tamilnadu, India. He received
the B.E., M.Sc. Engg. and the Ph.D. degrees of electrical and electronic engi-
neering in 1976, 1979, and 1991, respectively, all from Madurai Kamaraj Uni-
versity, India. He started his academic career in 1979; he served in India, Iraq
and Malaysia and at present he is with the Ministry of Education, Brunei Darus-
salam. His areas of interest include economic operation of power systems, re-
newable sources of energy, energy conservation and environmental impacts.
C. Nadarajan was born in June 1948 in Tamilnadu, India. After his engineering
graduation in electrical engineering, he joined with the Tamilnadu Electricity
Board, India. He served in India, Saudi Arabia and Malaysia for more than two
decades. He is the recipient of the Best Engineer Award consecutively for two
years from the Hyundai Company.
P. Naveen was born in January 1980 in India. After her graduation, she is
working with Magnum Power, an electrical consultancy company in India. She
developed software packages for power system applications.
N. Sundar Babu was born in January 1972 in Tamilnadu, India. He received
the B.Sc. degree in 1992 and the M.Sc. degree in applied chemistry in 1994,
all from Madurai Kamaraj University, India and the Ph.D. degree from Univer-
sity Malaya, Malaysia. He is currently with Drexel University, Philadelphia as
a Scientist.
Dhanalakshmi was born in February 1977 in India. After her graduation, she
is working as a Software Engineer and Networking Consultant.