See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/245076945

Energy audit and conservation opportunities for pyroprocessing unit of a

typical dry process cement plant

Article  in  Energy · March 2010

DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2009.11.003

CITATIONS READS

96 2,328

3 authors, including:

Kabir Garba Usman A. El-Nafaty

Universiti Sains Malaysia Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University
14 PUBLICATIONS   672 CITATIONS    6 PUBLICATIONS   196 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Development of highly-active and reusable heterogeneous catalyst for the conversion of glycerol as by-product from biodiesel production to value-added glycerol
carbonate View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kabir Garba on 31 December 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 Author's personal copy

Energy 35 (2010) 1237–1243

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Energy audit and conservation opportunities for pyroprocessing unit of a typical

dry process cement plant
G. Kabir*, A.I. Abubakar, U.A. El-Nafaty
Chemical Engineering Programme, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, P. M. B. 0248, Bauchi, Nigeria

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Cement production process has been highly energy and cost intensive. The cement plant requires 8784 h
Received 18 June 2009 per year of the total operating hours to produce 640,809 tonnes of clinker. To achieve effective and
Received in revised form efficient energy management scheme, thermal energy audit analysis was employed on the pyropro-
2 November 2009
cessing unit of the cement plant. Fuel combustion generates the bulk of the thermal energy for the
Accepted 4 November 2009
process, amounting to 95.48% (4164.02 kJ/kgcl) of the total thermal energy input. Thermal efficiency of
Available online 26 November 2009
the unit stands at 41%, below 50–54% achieved in modern plants. The exhaust gases and kiln shell heat
energy losses are in significant quantity, amounting to 27.9% and 11.97% of the total heat input respec-
Keywords:
Cement plant tively. To enhance the energy performance of the unit, heat losses conservation systems are considered.
Clinker Waste heat recovery steam generator (WHRSG) and Secondary kiln shell were studied. Power and
Energy audit thermal energy savings of 42.88 MWh/year and 5.30 MW can be achieved respectively. Financial benefits
Pyroprocessing for use of the conservation methods are substantial. Environmental benefit of 14.10% reduction in
Rotary kiln Greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions could be achieved.
Thermal energy Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Lafarge [11] have demonstrated energy audit to be an effective

Cement production processes are highly energy and cost
intensive operations. Energy accounts for 40–60% of the total
production cost [1–6]. Modern cement plants with state-of-the-art
technology require 2.9 GJ per tonne of cement produced. Plants
with inferior technology, energy consumption could exceed 5.5 GJ
per tonne of cement produced [7–13]. Normal Portland cement is
produced from a ground mixture of clinker, gypsum and pozzolans
materials in appropriate proportions to meet the expected stan-
dards [5,6]. The clinker is produced from pyroprocessing of the raw
materials in a sequence of processes. These include the following
operations: preheating the raw materials; precalcination, burning
inside the kiln; and clinker cooling [7,9]. Typical of cement plants,
pyroprocessing unit is thermal energy intensive, accounts for about
90% of the thermal energy used in cements production process [13].
Increasing competition, higher costs of raw material and fuel, and
general reduction in profit margins are hard felt by cement indus-
tries [12]. The need of the time is to optimise the operations to
overcome these challenges. Plant operational energy audit and
optimisation are regularly carried out to reduce specific energy
consumption and optimise the output [4]. Engin and Ari [10] and
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ234 8039596023; fax: þ234 8023635213.
E-mail address: kbgarba_chep@yahoo.com (G. Kabir).
energy management programme. Moreover, is a key to a systematic
approach for decision making in the management of the energy
requirement of a cement plant. The technique attempts to balance
total energy input with its output, and to quantify the usage for the
individual operations. The energy balance is always performed
around a system boundary, evaluated on good understanding of the
thermodynamic behaviour of the individual processes [14].
However, the energy audit is employed to calculate and assess the
possibility of reducing the energy demand of each individual units
of the process. The demand can be reduce through low cost energy
conservation measures [10,13]. Recent developments in energy
conservation measures for pyroprocessing unit, led to incorpora-
tion of the following technologies: installation of multistage
preheaters with high efficiency low pressure cyclones; low air
primary burners; modern kiln seals with low leakage and main-
tenance cost; improved refractory systems; and use of alternative
fuels [1,14]. In addition, it can provide information towards energy
conservation and opportunities other than the later. For example,
waste heat recovery from kiln exhaust gases, and cooler, preheater
and kiln surfaces hold the potential for improving the unit thermal
efficiency [10,14].
Detailed thermal energy audit of pyroprocessing unit of a typical
cement plant is presented in this report. The objectives are to
evaluate the thermal energy consumption of the individual
equipments; to determine the overall energy performance of the

0360-5442/$ – see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2009.11.003
 Author's personal copy

1238 G. Kabir et al. / Energy 35 (2010) 1237–1243

unit. Also, to reveal the potential energy saving opportunities in the Table 1
unit and to propose low cost energy efficient recovery and Kiln feed and clinker composition.

conservation measures. Component Kiln feed (wt %) Clinker (wt %)

SiO2 13.29 19.22
Al2O3 3.83 6.16
1.1. Process description of the plant production line
Fe2O3 1.95 2.79
CaO 43.61 66.53
A Portland cement production plant in the North-east of Nigeria MgO 0.50 0.78
was considered as a case study for the thermal energy audit anal- SO3 0.23 0.23
ysis. The cement plant operates a dry cement process line with K2O 0.79 1.0
Na2O 0.06 –
a total annual installed capacity of 800,000 metric tonne per year. P2O5 – 0.24
The processes consist of limestone quarrying, crushing and mixing Mn2O3 – 0.23
with small proportion of iron ore and siliceous material (River Moisture 0.20 –
sand); stored in stock piles. The mixtures are blended by Loss on ignition 35.45 0.33
a mechanical stocker reclaimer; fed into two identical production Total 100 100
lines, each with 3000 hp raw mills. The raw materials are ground at Total carbonate 77.80 –
the mill into fine powder, blended and stored in silos, prior to
preheating in five staged cyclone preheaters. Then, the raw meals
are cascaded down the preheaters into rotary kiln furnaces (each
instruments required were identified. The kiln systems data were
with installed capacity of 350,000 tonnes per year) to undergo
documented accordingly for twelve months within 2007–2008;
clinkerisation reactions. Low pour fuel oil (LPFO) is burnt in the
used for the audit analysis. The compositions of the kiln feed,
kilns’ combustion chamber to maintain the reactions temperatures
clinker, and fuel were determined using standard procedures; the
at between 800  C and 1450  C. The reactions product leaving the
results are presented in Tables 1 and 2. Energy and material
kilns is rapidly cooled in planetary coolers into a nodular material
balances were carried out on the system, over a control volume
called clinker. The clinker is inter-ground with gypsum and other
shown in Fig. 1. All relevant data used for the analysis were
pozzolans materials to produced cement; packaged into 50 kg
obtained either from the plant control panel or by on site
sacks.
measurement using the relevant instruments. Readings were taken
repeatedly to minimise errors. Average value of each set of data is
2. Methodology used throughout the study. In order to represent normal operating
conditions for a stabilised operation.
2.1. Energy audit methodology

The cement plant has two identical production lines with dry 3. Discussion of results
process kiln systems (pyroprocessing unit). Initial study on the
plant was conducted by the authors through several plant visits and 3.1. Energy audit analysis
induction training on the production processes. Energy consump-
tion data of the pyroprocessing unit (Fig. 1) were obtained In cement industries, pyroprocessing unit has been used to
from plant records and analysed. Major areas of heat losses and facilitate clinkerisation reactions for the formation of cement

Exit gases, Raw material,

97.73tph, 480°C 72.58tph, 50°C

Dust
Preheater group

Control volume

Rotary Kiln
Fuel (LFPO),
4.24tph
Hot clinker

Combustion air, Secondary

air Dust
68.36tph, 30°C
Planetary Cooler Clinker, 41.96tph,117°C

Cooling air

Fig. 1. Flow diagram of pyroprocessing system.

 Author's personal copy

G. Kabir et al. / Energy 35 (2010) 1237–1243 1239

Table 2 Table 4
Fuel data and component composition. Energy balance of the pyroprocessing unit.

Data type Value Component (wt %) Value Equation description Amount (kJ/kgcl) %
Calorific value, (kJ/kg) 40,667 C 88.8 Heat inputs
Entering temperature, ( C) 100 H 11.9 Combustion of fuel (Q1) 4164.02 95.48
Specific heat,(kJ/kg) 1.6736 S 0.32 Sensible heat in fuel (Q2) 17.14 0.39
Flow rate, (litre/hr) 4700 N 0.24 Sensible in raw material (Q3) 74.39 1.71
Density, (kg/m3) 914 – – Organic carbon in the feed (Q4) 56.66 1.30
Sensible heat in entering air (Q5) 49.13 1.13

Total 4361.34 100

clinker. Combustion of low pour fuel oil (LPFO) provides the heat Heat outputs
required for the reactions in the rotary kilns. Desirably, should be Moisture associated with air 35.64 0.82
Moisture in the raw material 8.24 0.19
operated on low fuel consumption, without affecting the quality of
Heat of formation of clinker (Q6) 1788.42 41.00
clinker produced. This could be achieved through an understanding Sensible heat in clinker (Q7) 86.00 1.98
on how the fuel is burnt and how efficient is utilised during Sensible heat from exit gases (Q8) 1216.75 27.90
burning. However, energy audit is the technique used to evaluate Radiation from kiln surface (Q9) 317.27 7.27
the thermal energy performance of the pyroprocessing unit (kiln Convection from kiln surface (Q10) 204.65 4.69
Radiation from preheater surface (Q11) 51.93 1.19
systems). The kiln systems energy performance can be determined
Natural convection from preheater surface (Q12) 116.05 2.66
from energy balance over the control volume shown in Fig. 1. Heat Radiation from cooler surface (Q13) 147.00 3.37
energy to and fro the control volume are equated using simple Convection from cooler surface (Q14) 94.82 2.17
steady state assumption. Therefore, relative distributions of Heat lost in making dust (Q15) 63.80 1.46
outgoing materials and thermal energy can be computed accord- Heat unaccounted for 230.77 5.29

ingly, when internal heat transfer is neglected. Total 4361.34 100

Material and heat balances around the control volume are per-
formed on a basis of 1 kgcl. Datum temperatures of 0  C is taken, the the total heat input to the unit. Therefore, total heat input of
quantity of energy and sensible heat of the different streams into 4361.34 kJ/kgcl is required to maintain clinkerisation reactions
and from the control volume are calculated. For the balances, the temperatures for the clinker formation. The total heat input is
following streams data are required: Feed rate of raw material; Fuel generated from combustion heat and total sensible heat with the
and air entering the system; Clinker discharge rate; and Kiln exit
gases leaving the system. The data can be obtained from the plant
records, while other relevant data for the analysis can be evaluated. Table 5
Energy balance equations, operation data and parameters.
The following are assumed for carrying out the energy audit
analysis: Descriptiona Operation data and
Parameters
- The operating conditions are at steady state; _ C
Q1 ¼ M (1) M_ ¼ 0:102393ðkg=kg Þ,
f vf f cl

- The plant is under equilibrium conditions during the study Cvf ¼ 40,667 (kJ/kg)
_ C q
Q2 ¼ M (2) M_ ¼ 0:102393ðkg=kg Þ,
f pf f cl
period; Cpf ¼ 1.6736 kJ/kg  C,
- The ambient temperature is constant throughout the period q ¼ 100  C
of the study; _ rm hrm
Q3 ¼ M (3) M_ rm ¼ 1:73 kg=kg ,
cl
- The air leakage is negligible; hrm ¼ Cq, CPrm ¼ 0.86 kJ/kg
 C, q ¼ 50  C
- The raw material, fuel and clinker compositions are constant; _ ogc Cvogc _ ogc ¼ 0:004613ðkg=kg Þ,
Q4 ¼ M (4) M cl
and Cvogc ¼ 32,752 (kJ/kg)
- The kilns, preheaters, and clinker coolers average surface _ Cp q
Q5 ¼ M air air
(5) M_
air ¼ 1:629451ðkg=kgcl Þ,
temperatures are constant. Cpair ¼ 1.005 kJ/kg  C,
" # q ¼ 30  C
2:22 A þ 6:48 M
Q6 ¼ þ7:646 Cc  4:184ðkJ=kgcl Þ (6) A ¼ 6.19, C ¼ 66.53, F ¼ 2.79,
The results of the material and energy balance for the pyro- 5:116 Ss  0:59 F MS ¼ 19.22, M ¼ 0.78
processing unit are presented in Tables 3 and 4 respectively. The _
Q7 ¼ M cl hcl (7) M_ ¼ 1:0ðkJ=kg Þ,
cl cl
pertinent equations used in evaluating the different heat transfer hcl ¼ 86 kJ/kg
_ eg Cpeg qeg
Q8 ¼ M (8) M_ eg ¼ 2:329473ðkg=kg Þ,
components of the systems energy balance are shown in Table 5. cl
Cpeg ¼ 1.088 kJ/kg  C,
The relevant data and constants are obtained from on site 
q ¼ 480 C
measurements, plant records, Perry et al. [15], and Peray [16]. The 4 4
Q9 ¼ sSkiln 3kiln ðqsh  qamb Þ=1000 m
_ cl (9) 3 ¼ 0.9, Skiln ¼ 995 m2,
results presented in Table 4, shows that fuel combustion generate s ¼ 5.67  108W/m2 K4,
95.48% (4164.02 kJ/kgcl) of the total heat input to the unit. The m_ cl ¼ 11:654 kg=s
sensible heats with the raw materials, fuel, air entering the coolers, Q10 ¼ hconv Skiln ðqsh  qamb Þ (10) h conv ¼ 0.0.0102 kJ/S.m2. C,
qsh ¼ 260  C ¼ 533K,
and organic carbon (feed component) heat content are relatively qamb ¼ 30  C (303K)
small. The total sensible heats with the streams are about 4.52% of 4 4
Q11 ¼ sSprh 3prh ðqprs  qamb Þ (11) Sprh ¼ 1566 m2,
qprs ¼ 110  C ¼ 383K,
3prh ¼ 0.5
Q12 ¼ hconv Sprh ðqcs  qamb Þ (12) hconv ¼ 0.01016 kJ/S.m2. C
Table 3 4 4
Q13 ¼ sScs 3cs ðqcs  qamb Þ=1000 m
_ cl (13) 3cs ¼ 0.9, Scs ¼ 461 m2,
Material balance of the pyroprocessing unit.
qcs ¼ 533K
Mass input (kg/kgcl) Mass output (kg/kgcl) Q14 ¼ hconc Scs ðqcs  qamb Þ=1000 m
_ cl (14)
Q15 ¼ M_ Cp q (15) q ¼ 480  C,
Kiln feed 1.73 Clinker 1.00 ds
M_
ds ¼ 0:13273 kg=kgcl ,
Fuel (LPFO) 0.10 Exit gases 2.33
Cpcl ¼ 1.00416 kJ/kg  C
Total air entering 1.63 Dust 0.13
Total 3.46 Total 3.46 a
Q1–Q15 are defined in Table 4.
 Author's personal copy
1240 G. Kabir et al. / Energy 35 (2010) 1237–1243
material streams. During clinker formation, 1758 kJ/kgcl of heat of
heat is released, about 41% of the total heat input. This percentage
gives a measure of the thermal efficiency of the kiln systems. The
systems efficiency turns out to be less than 50%–58% that of modern
cement plants in USA, India and China, reported by Sattari and
Avami [9]. The unit efficiency revealed the extent of heat losses to
the surrounding, which can lead to environmental degradation, if
not conserved. Thermal energy recovery and saving technologies
reported by Worell and Galistky [1], and Engin and Ari [10],
demonstrates how the heat losses can be recovered. The effec-
tiveness of the conservation measures are has been demonstrated
elsewhere [12]. That is, toward improving thermal efficiency and
environmental worthiness of kiln systems.
3.2. Energy saving opportunities for pyroprocessing unit of dry kiln
cement plant
The low energy efficiency establishes the potential energy
saving opportunities in the unit. Relevant thermal energy recovery
and conservation concepts for the kilns system are proposed and
studied. Successes for using the concepts are expressed in terms of
financial and environmental benefits. The following recovery and
conservation measures are considered: Raw material drying at the
raw mills; Waste heat recovery from kilns exit gases using steam
generator; and Kiln shell heat losses reduction. These topical
energy recovery and conservation measures are discussed and
analysed under:
3.2.1. Grinding mills heat conservation technique
Preheating raw materials at the raw mills with exit gases has
been the effective waste heat conservation concept practiced in the
plant. The benefits are to vapourise water content of the raw
materials to effect drying and enhance grinding efficiency of the
mills. The mills heat conservation scheme is shown in Fig. 2. The
kiln exit gases are conditioned in the gas conditioning tower to
leaves at 250  C, to preheat and dry the feeds to the raw mills. The
water content in the feed vapourises at 100  C, and estimated to
leave the mills at 8.07 kg/s flow rate. The quantity of heat energy
lost or gained at the raw mills are related using steady state energy
balance, defined as:
Qegin þ Qmoistrm ¼ Qwater þ Qegout þ Qdryrm
The amount of heat energy conserved from the exit gases at the
mills are estimated using equation (17) below:
Qconserved ¼ Meg CPeg ðqin  qout Þmcl
Using the relevant data, a total of 7.70  104 kW is estimated to
be conserved at the mills of the identical production lines.
Given that the kiln systems and mills are operated simulta-
neously for 4229 h/annum, a total power of 3.07  107 kWh/year
Water (30°C)
FWater = 16000tph
Exit gases,
Exit gases Gas
250°C
conditioning
in = 480°C tower
Steam
Fig. 2. Flow and operating conditions of grinding mills and Gas conditioning tower.
could be conserved. Consider unit cost of energy as 0.05 USD/kWh,
1,536,020.56 USD/year would be saved.
Fraction of the useful heat energy with the exit gases is lost by
radiation, convection, and as sensible heat at the conditioning
tower. However, contributes to the low energy performance of the
plant.
The amount of useful heat energy lost can be determined from
equation (18):
Quseful ¼ Meg CPeg ðqin  qout Þmcl (18)
4
Thus, the useful heat energy of 1.25  10 kW can be recovered,
which could improve the thermal efficiency of the unit.
When the mills are down, raw materials stored in the silos are
used for the clinker production. Raw materials conditioning ceases
for the period the mills are out of operation. For this case, the
amount of useful heat energy with the exit gases can be defined
using equation (19):
 
Quseful ¼ Meg CPeg qeg mcl (19)
Therefore, useful heat of 3.88  104 kW could be lost to the
surroundings. The useful heat lost is substantial, higher than when
the mills are in operation. These two scenarios have indicated that
the conservation technique at the raw mills cannot be effectively
practiced. Additional process modifications should be used to
augment the existing conservation method practiced. To achieve
this, the following conservation techniques are considered and
studied:
3.2.2. Waste heat recovery for electricity generation
Electricity can be generated from the useful waste heat recov-
ered from kiln exit gases and clinker cooler exit gas [10,14]. The
performance of the cogeneration plant could be evaluated using the
procedures presented by Kanoglu and Dincer [17]. The use of
coolers exit gas is restricted, because planetary coolers recirculated
the hot secondary air into the kilns to aid combustion. The gases
enter the conditioning tower at 480  C, exchanges heat with water
to produce high pressure steam. Sensible heat with the steam
generated is mostly lost to the surroundings, but can be recovered
using waste heat recovery technique. The useful heat energy to be
(16) recovered is 7.64  104 kW when the mills are in operation.
Otherwise, 2.62  104 kW useful heat with the kiln exit gases would
be recovered when the mills are down. The total heat energy losses
with the exit gases is enormous for the two scenarios. The heat
energy lost can be recovered to generate electricity on site to
(17)
improve the energy performance of the plant. Waste Heat Recovery
Steam Generator (WHRSG) reported and studied by Engin and Ari
[10] and Shaleen et al. [14] (shown in Fig. 3) is considered. The
waste heat can be recovered as steam at the high pressure boiler
(HPB); used in replace of the gas conditioning tower.
Kiln feed
(30°C)
Exhaust gases: out = 120°C
Grinding mills
(To dust control devices):
Kiln feed (To raw mills
or silos), (100°C)
 Author's personal copy

G. Kabir et al. / Energy 35 (2010) 1237–1243 1241

Exit
gases
Prh Kiln Col
G

HPB
EP Mill Esp Atmosphere

Legend
CO – Condenser
CO

Col – Clinker Cooler

FP
TK EP- Expander
Esp – Dust control device
FP – Feed pump
G – Power generator
HPB – High pressure boiler
Kiln – Rotary kiln
Mill – Raw material mill
Prh – Preheater
TK– Tank

Fig. 3. Waste heat recovery steam generator (WHRSG) system for power generation.

The steam generated can drive the steam turbine to generate The heat transfer by radiation (Qrad) across the gap (b) can be
electricity at the required output. To determine the quantity of determined using equation (22) (Richard and David [18]) below.
electricity generated and effective cost saving, an efficiency of 91%  
4 4
is assumed. The temperature of the exit gases streams leaving the Skiln s qkiln  qsh
HPB is specified as 250  C, to avoid capital intensive modifications Qrad ¼   (22)
1 Rkiln 1
on the existing plant. þ 1
Therefore, energy transferred to WHRSG in the form of work is
31 Rsh 32
defined as: Valid for kiln systems as Rki ln/Lki ln approaches zero.
Light oxide stainless steel is considered as the secondary shell
QWHRSG ¼ Quseful  h (20) material. The material is selected for its low relative emissivity and
4
A total of 1.20  10 kW can be transferred to the WHRSG. thermal conductivity.
Assuming 40% of the QWHRSG could be converted to electricity at Substituting the following data (Peray [16]) in equation (22):
suitable turbine and condenser pressures. s ¼ 5.67  108 W/m2 K4, q1 ¼ 533 K, q2 ¼ 575 K, 31 ¼ 0.9(Kiln
Thus, electric energy generated is 5.0  106 kW, determined Surface), and 32 ¼ 0.35(Light oxide stainless steel). Then, heat lost
from equation (20). by radiation from the kiln shell surface (Qrad) to the surroundings is
Given that the plant annual operating hours is 8784 h, 217 kW. Using an insulating material layer on the secondary shell,
4.3  107 kWh/year of power can be generated. Total cost savings of Qrad can be conserved. Glass wool insulation material with 0.05
2,143,843.60 USD/year would be achieved. W/m.K thermal conductivity (Kins) Peray [16] is considered.
To ascertain the insulating layer effectiveness to conserve Qrad
3.2.3. Kiln shell energy losses reduction from the shell surface, critical insulating radius (Rcr) is estimated
Heat losses from the kiln surface are due to convection and using equation (23) (Holman [19]).
radiation heat transfer. Local burning on the kiln surface caused by
Kins
kiln’s refractory lining cut is another source of heat losses. The kilns Rcr ¼ (23)
surface heat losses to the surroundings is 11.81% of the total heat
lins
input. This indicates that substantial quantity heat is being lost to
Kiln Surface
the surrounding from the kiln surface. This waste heats should be
conserved to improve the thermal efficiency of the pyroprocessing
unit to save cost. Secondary shell and insulation layer heat lost Observation
conservation concept is considered [10]. The arrangement is shown Window
in Fig. 4. The gap (b) between the kiln surface and secondary shell is ins
assumed to be air tight. The convective heat transferred across the Rsh
gab would be negligible, but radiation heat transfer remains note-
worthy. Given that the kiln radius is 2.20 m, and b is taken as
sh R kiln
4.0  103 m for a shell radius of 2.60 m [10]. Temperature gradient
(4grad) across the gap is evaluated to be 45  C/cm. Hence, temper- kiln

ature of the secondary shell surface (qsh) can be estimated from: Secondary
  Shell
qsh ¼ qkiln  b  fgrad (21) Insulation

For a mean kiln surface temperature (qkiln) of 260  C, qsh is

determined to be 242  C from equation (21). Fig. 4. Kiln secondary shell and insulation layer heat conservation concept.
 Author's personal copy
1242 G. Kabir et al. / Energy 35 (2010) 1237–1243
A critical radius (Rcr) of 0.68m would be required. Given that the
kiln radius (Rkiln) is 2.0m however, Rcr is many folds less than Rkiln.
This indicates that resistance to heat flow by conduction increases
across the thickness of the insulating layer. Therefore, heat lost by
radiation from the kiln surface, transferred by conduction across the
insulation layer would be negligible. This resulted from the high
resistance to heat flow by conduction across the insulating material.
Hence, the heat transfer by conduction across the insulating
layer can be defined using equation (24) Rohsenow et al. [20]:
2pLkiln ðqsh  qins Þ
Qcond ¼   (24)
In RRins
sh
Kins
The insulating layer thickness (d) on the secondary shell is
estimated using equation (24) as follows:
The insulating layer outer surface temperature (qins) is taken to
be 77  C, 40  C higher than the surrounding temperature (qN) of
37  C.
Then, (qsh  qins) ¼ 183  C.
Steady state condition for heat transfer from the secondary shell
surface across the insulating layer is assumed. This implies that
Qcond ¼ Qrad ¼ 217 kW. Substituting for the relevant parameters
into equation (24) and that Rins ¼ Rsh þ d, thickness (d) is estimated
to be 0.05 m. This is the thickness of the insulating layer required on
the secondary shell to conserve Qrad.
Furthermore, radiation and convective heat losses conserved
using secondary shell are estimated as follows:
Radiation heat conserved ¼ ð330 kJ=kgcl  11:654 kg=sÞ
217 kW ¼ 3628 kW; andConvective heat conserved
¼ ð142:20 kJ=kgcl  11:654 kg=sÞ ¼ 1657 kW:
Total heat energy of 5.30 MW is conserved, amounting to 10.4%
of the total heat input to the kiln systems. Consequently, the fuel
consumption and cost of clinker production would be reduced, but
thermal efficiency of the unit would increase by 5%.
The kiln is fired with 4700 L/hr (4295.8 kg/h) of LPFO without
the secondary shell. The major component of the exit gases is CO2
produced from combustion and decarbonation reactions. SO2 is in
trace concentration, produced from combustion of sulphur in the
fuel. Total yield of the products can be evaluated from reactions
stoichiometric. Complete combustion of carbon and sulphur, and
complete decarbonation reaction are assumed. Then, the reactions
stoichiometric are written as follows:
C þ O2 /CO2 (25)
S þ O2 /SO2 (26)
CaCO3 þ O2 /CaO þ CO2 (27)
Total yield of CO2 and SO2 can be determined using the basis of
1 kg clinker, 0.1024 kgLPFO/kgcl,1.73 kgf/kgcl, and stoichiometric mass
ratio. The total yield of 0.93 kgCO2/kgcl and 0.66  103 kgSO2/kgcl
would be determined.
In this report, it was determined that fuel consumption
decreases by 10.4% for using secondary shell. Also, CO2 and SO2
with the exit gases would be reduced by the same proportion. To
ascertain the percentage reduction, a new fuel to clinker ratio of
0.092 kgLPFO/kgcl is used. Total yields of CO2 and SO2 decreases by
3.7% and 10.4% respectively. The decrease in fuel consumption and
GHG emission are the major advantages for using the technique.
Thus, it can be seen that the conservation concept can improve the
environmental performance of the kiln systems.
3.3. Cost savings on reduction of fuel consumption
From the energy balance, heat realised during fuel combustion
is 4164.08 kJ/kgcl, which is required to produce 640,809 tonne
clinker. At fuel to clinker ratio of 0.1024 kg/kgcl (Table 1), fuel
savings on consumption is estimated as follows:
 
Fuel saving ¼ ð0:1024 kg=kgcl Þ  640 809  103 kgcl =year
¼ 65:60  106 kgLPFO =year:
In terms of volume, the fuel saving would be 71.79  106 L LPFO/
year.
Taken average market value of fuel oil to be 0.13 USD/litreLPFO,
cost saving on fuel consumption would be:
Cost saving ¼ 94; 508; 607:59 USD=year:
The use of the conservation measures highlighted, an annual
cost saving of 4,053,165.20 USD on energy use would be achieved.
Additional cost saving could be realised at optimised cost of labour
and maintenance.
3.4. Operational approach for thermal energy saving opportunities
Potential opportunities for improving energy efficiency of the
pyroprocessing unit could be achieved from the following opera-
tional approach:
- Upgrading existing equipments in the pyroprocessing unit;
- Combustion system improvement;
- Adding multistage preheater with pre-calciner;
- Complete tightening of the pyroprocessing unit equipments to
prevent air leakages;
- Adopting new pyroprocessing technologies;
- Utilizing alternative fuel such as harvesting energy from
biomass and waste fuel for kiln firing;
- Replacing high carbon fuel with low carbon fuel (i.e. swiching
from coal to natural gas); and
- Applying a low clinker to final cement mixture ratio (i.e.
increasing the ratio of cement additives that do not require
pyroprocessing).
Evidences on the efficacy and effectiveness of these measures on
energy saving potential are reported by Worell and Galistky [1],
Dumas [2] and Worell et al. [5]. Financial and environmental
benefits for reducing the total energy demand are revealed to be
feasible, should the measures be implemented appropriately.
4. Conclusion
A detailed thermal energy audit analysis of a pyroprocessing
unit for dry process kiln systems is studied in this report. The
results revealed that fuel combustion provides 95.48% (4164.02 kJ/
kgcl) of the total energy input to the unit. Fuel consumption and
energy cost are crucial for the clinker production energy manage-
ment. The kiln exist gases and kiln shell are the major sources of
thermal energy losses, amounting to 27.9% (1216.75 kg/kgcl) and
10.84% (472.56 kg/kgcl) respectively. The thermal efficiency of the
unit is 41%, low enough to consider implementing thermal energy
conservations measures. Therefore, the energy audit is emphasised
to be a medium for identifying areas of energy saving opportunities.
 Author's personal copy

G. Kabir et al. / Energy 35 (2010) 1237–1243 1243

These are areas of serious energy losses, which led to drop in d or b Gap (separating surfaces), cm or m
thermal performance of the kiln systems. The different component 4 Temperature gradient,  C/cm
of energy losses are realistic and consistent with the findings in the
report of Worell et al. [5]. The arduous approach to balance energy Subscripts
and environmental problems as an effective mechanism for energy amb Ambient conditions
management is used. Conservation techniques for improving cl Clinker
specific energy utilisation efficiency and reducing GHG emissions cond Conduction
are proposed. WHRSG and secondary shell energy conservation conv Convection
measures are studied. WHRSG can generate up to 4.4 MW of cs Cooler surface
electricity, which could lead to annual power savings of eg Exhaust gases
42.88 MWh/year. The secondary shell concept, can save up to f Feed
5.30 MW of thermal energy, which is equivalent to 10.4% of the total in Inlet
input energy. Fuel consumption is reduced by an equivalent ins Insulation
percentage margin and energy efficiency of the unit increases by ogc Organic content
5%. Total cost saved for the use of WHRSG and secondary shell out Outlet
concept is 2318.18 USD/year, and 14.10% reduction in GHG emission pr Preheater
is achieved. The economic and environmental benefits agree with prs Preheater surface
the conclusions made in the work of Fang and Zang [21] and Li et al. rad Radiation
[22]. Renovating the kiln systems using the conservation tech- rm Raw material
niques owns the capacity to improve the energy performance of the sh Shell
cement plant. It was shown that fuel consumption falls by
a substantial proportion. The proportion agrees with that reported References
by Liu et al. [8] for vertical kiln systems fuel efficiency. Furthermore,
the use of other effective energy conservation concepts practiced in [1] Worell E, Galistky C. Energy efficiency opportunities for cement making. See also.
Environmental Energy and Technology Division: U.S. Department of Energy,
cement plant elsewhere (e.g. United State of America, China and http://www.climatevision.gov/sectors/cement/pdfs/final_lbnl.pdf; 2004.
India) are viable to be adopted for the unit studied. These could [2] Dumas J. Engineering and energy saving: energy efficiency in the cement
include the following: Process upgrade; product formulation; industry. Appl Sci 1990:109–17.
[3] COWIconsult Inc. Energy technology in the cement industrial sector, report
Waste fuel usage; and others.
prepared for CEC – DG-XVII. Brussels: March Consulting Group and MAIN;
1993.
[4] Lowes TM, Bezant KW. Energy management in the UK cement industry. Appl.
Acknowledgement Sci.. In: Sirchis J, editor. Energy efficiency in the cement industry. London,
England: Elsevier; 1990
The authors gratefully acknowledged the support provided by [5] Worell E, Martin N, Price L. Potential for energy efficiency improvements in
the United States cements industry. Energy 2000;25(12):189–1214.
Chemical Engineering Programme, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa [6] Choate TW. Energy and emissions reduction opportunities for the cement
University in Nigeria and AshakaChem Cement Company of Nigeria industry, report on energy efficiency and renewable energy. See also. U.S
for providing technical information and equipment for carrying out Department of Energy, http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/product.biblio.
jsp?osti_id¼751775; 2003.
this analysis. [7] United Nations Industrial Development organization (UNIDO). Cement
industry: seminar on energy conservation in cement industry, Japan: Energy
Conservation Centre (ECC). See also, www.unido.org/fileadmin/import/
Nomenclature userfiles/puffk/cement.pdf; 1994.
[8] Liu F, Ross M, Wang S. Energy efficiency in China’s cement industry. Energy
1995;20(7):669–81.
[9] Sattari S, Avami A. Assessment of energy saving opportunities of cement
W_ Power, kWh or MWh industries of Iran: 3rd IASME WISEAS International Conference on Energy,
_ Environment, Ecosystem and Sustainable Development, Agios Nikoaous,
m Mass flow rate, kg/s
Greece: 2007, p. 585–593.
M_ Mass ratio, kg/kgcl [10] Engin T, Ari V. Energy auditing and recovery for dry type cement rotary kiln
A Mass of Al2O3, g/100 gcl systems: a case study. Energy Convers Manage 2004;46:551–62.
C Specific heat, kJ/kg  C [11] Lafarge Canada Inc. Pyroprocessing of cement processing engineering. Canada:
VADE-MECUM; 2002.
Cc Mass of CaO, g/100 gcl [12] Barta VK, Mittal PK, Kumar K, Chlangani PN. Modern processing techniques to
F Mass of Fe2O3, g/100 gcl minimize cost in cement industry. See also. Gurgaon: Holtec Consulting
h Specific enthalpy, kJ/kg Private Limited, http://www.holtecnet.com/web/content/references/
TechnicalPapers/p_2005_2.pdf; 2008.
K Thermal conductivity, W/m.K [13] Holderbank Inc. Heat balance of kiln and coolers and related topics, Cement
L Kiln length, m seminar: comminution engineering, process technology; 1993.
M Mass of MgO, g/100 gcl [14] Shaleen, K, Rangam B, Uday G. Energy balance and cogeneration for a cement
plant. 2002.
Q Heat transfer or Energy, kJ/kgcl, kW, MW [15] Perry RH, Green DW, Maloney YO. Chemical engineers handbook. New York:
R Radius, m McGraw-Hill; 1997.
SS Mass of SiO2, g/100 gcl [16] Peray KE. Cement manufacturers hand book. New York: Chemical Publishing
Company Inc.; 1979.
S Surface area, m2
[17] Kanoglu M, Dincer I. Performance assessment of cogeneration plants. Energy
USD United States Dollar Convers Manage 2008;50:76–81.
[18] Richard AD, David JE. Model and simulation of a ported kiln for iron oxide
pellet induration. Can J Chem Eng 2003;81:86–93.
Greek symbols [19] Holman JP. Heat transfer. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2002.
l Coefficient of convective heat transfer, W/m2 [20] Rohsenow WM, Hartnett JP, Cho YI. Handbook of heat transfer. New York:
McGraw-Hill; 1998.
h Efficiency, %
[21] Fang Y, Zang Y. Balancing energy and environment: the effect and prospective
3 Emissivity, of management instrument in China. Energy 2007;32(12):2247–61.
q Temperature,  C or K [22] Li H, Bao W, Xiu W, Zhang Y, Xu H. Energy conservation and circular economy
s Stefan Boltzmann constant, W/m2 K4 in China’s process industries. See also. Energy, doi:10.1016/j.energy.2009.04.
621 2009.

View publication stats