Developed by The American Society of Power Engineers (ASOPE™)

Nearly everyone involved in the operation of

boilers, from the operator to the owner, realizes the
considerable expense of operating steam
generators and associated auxiliary equipment.
What many do not realize however, is that there
are many seemingly small and insignificant
changes and/or modifications that can be
implemented resulting in considerable savings.

Let‟s explore some methods for

reducing operating expenses:
1. Boiler Efficiency Upgrades
2. Waterside Scale Prevention
3. Adequate Piping Insulation
4. Steam Trap Surveys
5. Limit Boiler Dynamic Operation
6. High Efficiency Motor Utilization
7. Repair Steam Leaks
8. Eliminate Water Losses
9. Install Removable Insulation
10. Train Your Employees

√ Click to continue
By Judy Waive Crist
The formula for realized savings or losses resulting
from changes in boiler efficiency can be expressed
as follows:

New Efficiency - Old Efficiency

Savings
New Efficiency
Example 1:

Existing boiler efficiency is 74%. After a tune-up is

performed on the boiler, efficiency has increased to
80%. Realized fuel savings would be calculated as
follows:

80% - 74%
Fuel Savings 7.50%
80%
Therefore in this example a 6% improvement in
boiler efficiency results in a 7.5% savings in fuel
expenses.

Illustrating practically: Your last annual fuel bill

was $1,000,000. If a 6% efficiency tune-up was
conducted on your boiler, realized fuel savings
would have been:

$1,000,000 x 7.50% or:

$75,000/year
Example 2:
Existing boiler efficiency is 80%. After improper
operation and maintenance, boiler efficiency has
reduced to 73%, directly corresponding to a fuel
efficiency loss of:

73% - 80%
Fuel Loss -9.59%
73%
Therefore, as a result of a 7% decrease in boiler
efficiency; a 9.95% increase in fuel expenses would
be incurred.

Illustrating practically: Your last annual fuel bill

was $1,000,000. If your boiler was not properly
operated and maintained, increased fuel expenses
would have been:

$1,000,000 x 9.59% or:

$95,900/year
 Reference:

Combustion Efficiency Tables

Harry R. Taplin, Jr. P.E., C.E.M.
By James Daugherty
Water Treatment in boilers today remains one of
the most important items of energy conversation
and savings.

Boiler waterside scale is mostly composed of the

minerals calcium and magnesium. These are
insoluble salts in water; meaning that they don‟t
like to be in solution and will drop (plate) out as
temperatures rise. This is what you often see in the
bottom of hot water (tea/coffee) kettles at home.
Deposition, or the „plating out‟ of the calcium and
magnesium on the boiler tube waterside reduces
heat transfer from the boiler tube to the boiler
water, resulting in an increase in tube metal
temperature.
Tube overheating along with potential tube failure
will eventually be the result of prolonged scale
deposition.
The following charts illustrate the increased fuel
expenses caused by scale deposition on the tubes.

Note: There are many other extensive damages which

can be caused by the same scale build-up.
With the presence of scale, there exists a 300ºF heat
loss through the tube.
With no scale present, there exists only a 100ºF
heat loss through the tube.
Effects of waterside deposits on boiler tubes.
 Efficiency
Thickness
Reduction

0 0%
1/64 4%
1/32 7%
1/16 11%
1/8 18%
3/16 27%
1/4 38%
3/8 48%

This chart illustrates efficiency losses as scale

thickness increases.
Example:

Your boiler‟s original efficiency was 80%.

Presently, there exists a scale layer of 3/16“ on the

tubes.

The resulting efficiency change caused by the scale

layer is:

New Efficiency 80% - 27%

53%
Illustrating practically: Your last annual fuel bill
was $30,000; with a layer of 3/16” scale formation,
increased fuel expenses would be:

$30,000 + ($30,000 x 27%) =

$38,100

A loss of $8,100; along with the very real

possibility that the boiler may not meet the steam
production required as well.
Chemical Treatment and Control:
Feedwater Hardness (Calcium & Magnesium) prior to
entering the boiler should typically be less than 1 ppm
Total Hardness.
Hardness reduction is achieved by using RO units, Ion
Exchange systems, and most importantly by
maximizing condensate return recovery.
Typically, the more condensate return that is
recovered, the less chemicals that will be required for
the boiler, along with decreased fuel costs for
preheating.
Chemical Treatment and Control (cont):

Water chemistry testing should be performed at least

daily in order to ensure and maintain proper levels.

Calibration of all water chemistry meters is extremely

important as well to ensure correct readings.

Proper chemistry levels in boilers under 300 psi

include:
 TDS < 3500 ppm after neutralization
 Silica < 150 ppm
 Phosphate 20-40 ppm
 Sulfite 30-60 ppm
 Hydroxide 300-600 ppm
Chemical Treatment and Control (cont):

Scale forming conditions in the boiler can also be a

significant contributing factor for Carryover
(moisture in steam) to occur.

Carryover can cause down stream scaling in

process piping, equipment, or on steam turbine
blading.
Cooling system scaling is a little different than
boiler scaling in that hot areas do not need to be
present for scale deposition to occur. Cooling
system scale typically occurs when the solubility of
the water is exceeded (concentration cycles too
high).
As in boilers, heat transference is inhibited along
with proper flow.
Unlike boilers, microbiological growth can cause
the same problems.
Cooling systems are ideal for microscopic life due to the
temperatures as well as food sources in the air.

Bacteria:
 Can attack both once-through systems and recirculating
systems.
 Can be aerobic (air breathing) or anaerobic (non air
breathing).
Algae:
 There are many types of algae. Algae is a plant that
requires sunlight for growth.
 Like bacteria, different types of algae will live in
different pH‟s and temperatures.
Fungi:
 Has 2 forms, Mold and Yeast.
 Yeast will form slime in abundance.

Biofilms formed by microbiological growth are 25 to

200 times more resistant to conduction than many
metals.

1mm of Biofilm on mild carbon steel is equivalent to a

wall thickness of 80 mm.
By Carroll Hooper
Energy losses from both insulated and uninsulated
piping can be gathered, calculated, and quantified
using standard industry tables, charts and
software.
The number of hours that the piping is in service is
multiplied by the condensation rate in pounds per
hour (lb/hr) to derive the total Steam Loss.
Since the cost of the steam is normally given in
dollars per thousand pounds of steam, the loss per
year is then divided by 1000 and multiplied by the
cost of steam. This determines the cost of the heat
loss and may be used to justify the cost of
insulating the pipe.
Example:

A plant has identified 100 feet of uninsulated 6”

steam piping used for 180 psig steam. The piping
is in service 24 hr/day, 365 days/yr. The piping is
inside a building and is surrounded by still air at
70ºF.

The amount of condensation can be determined

from the following table:

NOTE: (Charts and tables are available from The American Society of
Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers and the
National Insulation Association).
The number 1.85 is found at the intersection of row 6” piping and the
column for 180 psig steam.

UNINSULATED PIPE CONDENSATION RATE*

Pipe Size 15 30 60 125 180 250 450 600

Pipe Size Area* Pounds of Steam Condensed per Hour Per Linear Foot

1 0.344 0.19 0.22 0.26 0.33 0.37 0.41 0.51 0.57

2 0.622 0.32 0.40 0.47 0.59 0.66 0.74 0.91 1.04

3 0.916 0.47 0.58 0.70 0.87 0.97 1.09 1.35 1.52

4 1.178
0.56 0.75 0.90 1.11 1.25 1.40 1.73 1.96

6 1.735 0.82 1.10 1.32 1.64 1.85 2.06 2.55 3.89

8 2.260 1.04 1.44 1.72 2.14 2.40 2.69 3.32 3.76

* Carrying saturated steam in still air at 70ºF

This means that 1.85 lb of steam will condense per
hour per foot of uninsulated pipe due to loss of
radiant heat from the piping. Since the uninsulated
section of piping is 100‟ in length, the steam loss
will be 185 lb/hr (1.85 X 100 = 185).

The steam loss number may now be multiplied by

the cost of steam at the facility to determine the
value of the lost steam. As an example, if the cost
of steam is $9.00/1000 lb, the cost of the lost steam
can be calculated as follows:
 Ww
Cost x steam cost
1000
where
cost cost of lost heat (in $)
Ww weight of steam lost (in lb/hr)
steam cost cost of steam (in $/lb)
185
cost x 9.00
1000
cost 0.185 x 9.00
cost $1.66/hr

$1.66/hr x 24 hr/day x 365 day/yr = $14,542 / yr

 Reference:

American Technical Publishing (ATP)

Boiler Operator’s Workbook
3rd Edition
By Carroll Hooper
Steam Traps, like all other pieces of mechanical
equipment, will fail in time. They may fail closed,
restricting the flow; or they may fail open, freely
passing steam. In order to fully appreciate the cost
consequences of malfunctioning steam traps one
must first go through some basic arithmetic.

Consider a plant with 2000 steam traps and a

reasonably good maintenance program.
Experience dictates a conservative assumption that
at least 10% have failed in the „open‟ position and
are „blowing through‟, wasting steam.
Example:
200 steam traps, losing 20 pounds of steam per hour
per unit, for twenty-four hours, are losing 96,000 lbs of
steam each day. While steam generating costs vary
from plant to plant, a conservative estimate of $9.00
per 1000 lbs. can be used for today‟s energy climates.

2000 traps x 10% = 200 failed traps

200 failed traps x $9.00/1,000 lb = 96,000 lb/day
96,000 lb/day x $9.00/1,000 lb = $864/day

$864/day x 365 day/year = $315,360 per year!

Note that it is not necessary to have several
thousand steam traps in order to have very large
steam and dollar losses. Several failed large
capacity traps can also significantly contribute to
costly steam losses.
Costs resulting from steam traps that have failed in
the closed position are not considered in the
preceding example. These types of failures are
much more difficult to quantify but are no less
real. Losses from closed traps typically result from
reduced productivity or quality as well as higher
rates of equipment damage due to corrosion, water
hammer, and freeze ups.
An article on Steam Trap Maintenance as a Profit
Center for Strategic Planning from Energy and the
Environment Vol. 16, No 3-1997 sums what we have
been saying in the preceding slides:

The article describes a survey where, out of 260,000

steam traps in 40 large steam using industrial
plants, an average of only 58% were working
correctly. If steam costs were $9.00 per thousand
lbs. in today's energy climate, the average
manufacturing facility with 2000 steam traps can
be throwing away $750,000 per year and never be
aware of these losses.
 References:

The Industrial Steam Trapping Handbook

The Strategic Planning for Energy and the

Environment

Mr. Carroll Hooper’s Private Library on

Industrial Engineering
By Larry Tarvin
The following describes two types of dynamic
(cycling) boiler operation:

1. On/Off Cycling: Boiler will come on for a few

minutes and then be off for several minutes.

2. “Hunting”: Boiler stays on, but firing rate is

continually adjusted to satisfy a stringent
requirement to maintain boiler pressure.
On/Off Mode:
There are large energy losses due to purging, free
convection through the boiler, and skin heat
transfer losses. All of these remove useful heat
from the boiler.
Hunting Mode:
This figure shows that excess air levels are much
higher while the boiler is “hunting” than in steady
operation. Of course, high excess air means low
efficiency.
Any boiler which either stays off a significant
amount of time or continually varies in firing rate
can be changed to improve efficiency.
For boilers which operate on and off, it may be
possible to leave it on and reduce the firing rate
instead. If so, excess air must be maintained at the
same or lower level.
Another approach is to not allow the boiler to
move to high fire, but rather, fire at an
intermediate rate. This will allow the boiler to stay
on longer. However, excess air must be carefully
controlled. Usually, the economic action is to
purchase a small boiler for when limited amounts
of steam are required.
For Boilers that “hunt”, control system
potentiometers (sets the sensitivity of firing rate to
boiler pressure) can be adjusted so that the boiler
changes firing rate only under relatively large
deviations from boiler pressure setpoint.
This will result in large steam pressure
fluctuations. However, typical “hunting” modes of
operation do not require exact control of pressure.
Typical annual savings of ~10% on some boilers:
$23,000 on 100 HP
$266,666 on 40,000 lb/hr
 References:

David F. Dyer, Glennon Maples, and

Timothy T. Maxwell

Professors of Mechanical Engineering

Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama
By Byron Nichols
When new motors are identified for purchase or when
older motors require replacement, it is wise to
consider the purchase of high efficiency motors.

The efficiency of a motor is the ratio of the energy

output (mechanical power produced) vs. the energy
input (electricity required).

It may be expressed simply as:

EFFICIENCY = OUTPUT/INPUT
Design changes, better materials, and
manufacturing improvements reduce motor
losses, making premium or energy efficient
motors more efficient than standard motors.

Reduced losses basically mean that an energy

efficient motor produces a given amount of
work using less energy than a standard motor.
Assuming a constant motor speed; the formula to
calculate cost savings is expressed as:

S = hp x 0.746 x L x C x N x [(100/E std) – (100/E ee)]

Where:
S = $ Savings (annual)
Hp = Motor horsepower
L = % Load
C = Energy Cost ($/kWh)
N = Operating hours (annual)
E std = % Efficiency of standard motor
E ee = % Efficiency of high efficiency motor
Example:
A 100 hp boiler feedwater pump runs continuously at 85%
load with an electrical cost of $0.065/kWh. What would be
the annual savings when replacing this standard efficiency
(90.2%) motor with a high efficiency (93%) motor?

S = hp x 0.746 x L x C x N x [(100/E std) – (100/E ee)]

S = 100 x 0.746 x 0.85 x 0.065 x 8760 x [(100/90.2) – (100/93.0)]
S = $1,205 / year

Extending this figure out by projecting a 10 year motor life,

we can expect a savings of $12,050 by replacing the
standard efficiency motor with a high efficiency for the ten
year period.
By Larry Tarvin
Steam is a high-value commodity; the higher the
pressure, the higher the equipment expenses.
Make every effort to repair steam leaks as soon as
they occur.

In addition to wasting energy, steam leaks waste

boiler water and chemicals, and can be dangerous
to people and equipment. The longer the steam
leaks the bigger the leak will get.
Example:
A sharp edge orifice leak of 9.5/1000 lb pressure
@ 150 psig @ 500ºF:
Monthly Energy
Leak Size Total Cost per Year
Cost

1 in $26,083.00 $312,996.00

3/4 $14,668.00 $176,016.00

1/2 $6,519.00 $78,228.00

1/4 1,630.00 $19,560.00

1/8 $409.00 $48,108.00

 Reference:

Steam System Survey Guide

ORNL/TM-2001-263. P 6-2
By Ron Nuoffer
Water and steam leaks are a major source of
hidden costs. Each valve, piping flange, or drain
that leaks, impacts the facility by increasing make-
up water expenses.
A pipe flange or a valve‟s packing that leaks 1
drop of water per second will lose 6 ounces of
water per hour and 34 gallons per month. Initially,
that may not sound like much, but if there are 10
valves or pipe connections dripping; water losses
add up to 340 gallons per month.
If the leak increases from a drop to a 1/16” steady
stream, the result will be 84 gallons of lost water
each day. Accordingly, every month that the leak
continues, 2,520 gallons of water are lost.

Not only is lost water expensive to replace directly,

but the facility will also incur „indirect‟ expenses in
the form of equipment and metal erosion in valves
and piping. Additional expenses will also be
realized in water chemistry treatment for the
replacement water.
Drain valve leak-through is another major source
of water loss. Most drains discharge to flash or
blowdown tanks; so if a valve is leaking by, this
water is lost from the overall steam/water cycle.
By monitoring the amount of makeup water added
to the steam/water cycle, water loss rates can be
determined.
Pay back for proper packing adjustment or valve
and pipe fitting replacement would be a few days
and will keep the facility running efficiently.

NOTE: A pound of water equals a pound of steam, and a pound of steam

equals a pound of water. There are 8.33 pounds of water in a gallon.
By Larry Tarvin
During maintenance, insulation that covers pipes,
valves, and fittings is often damaged or removed
and not replaced. Pipes, valves, and fittings that
are not insulated can be safety hazards and major
sources of heat loss.
Removable and reusable insulating pads are
available to cover almost any surface. Pads are
made of noncombustible outer layers with
insulating material inside. The outer layers are
made to resist tears, abrasion, oil, and water. Pads
also come with straps and buckles hold them in
place.
Reusable insulating pads are commonly used for
insulating flanges, valves, expansion joints, heat
exchangers, pumps, turbines, tanks, and other
irregular surfaces.
These pads are flexible, are vibration resistant, and
can be used with equipment that is horizontally or
vertically mounted or is difficult to access. All
high-temperature piping or equipment should be
insulated to reduce heat/energy loss, to reduce
emissions, and to ensure personnel safety.
As a general rule, any surface that reaches
temperatures above 120°F should be insulated to
protect personnel. Insulating pads can be easily
removed for periodic inspection or maintenance, and
are replaced as needed. Insulating pads may also
contain built-in acoustical barriers to help control
noise.
The following table illustrates insulating valve cover
energy savings for various valve sizes and operating
temperatures. These values were calculated using a
computer program meeting the requirements of ASTM
C 680-Heat Loss and Surface Temperature Calculations.
*Based on a 1-inch thick insulating pad on an ANSI 150-pound class flanged
valve, with an ambient temperature of 65ºF and zero wind speed.
Energy savings are defined as the difference in
heat loss between uninsulated and insulated
valves operating at the same temperature.

Example:
Using the table, calculate annual savings from
installing a 1” thick insulating pad on an
uninsulated 5” gate valve in a steam line operating
at 300°F (about 50 PSI saturated steam). Assume
continuous operation with natural gas at a boiler
efficiency of 80% and a fuel price of $6 per million
British thermal units (MMBtu).
Annual Fuel Savings:
3,300 Btu/hr X 8,700 hours/year x 1/0.80 =

36.1 MMBtu/year

Annual Dollar Savings:

36.1 MMBtu/year x $9.50/MMbtu =

$216 per 5-inch gate valve

 References:

US Department of Energy, Energy

Efficiency and Renewable Energy
By Dave Preston
It‟s people, not just equipment or processes that
make the difference between a well run facility
and one with never ending problems.

Whether it‟s how they respond to abnormal

operating conditions, how careful they are with
plant chemistry, how well they test and maintain
critical components, or how they operate the
boiler; it‟s training that makes the difference.
According to industry statistics, power generation
facilities will lose between 30% and 50% of their
most experienced workers over the next five years.

Employees who leave take valuable experience

and knowledge with them and, according to an
EPRI survey of 21 power companies, only 30
percent have a formal plan to capture the
knowledge lost.
The power generation industry has changed
significantly over the past several years and there
is little doubt the industry will continue to evolve
as the benefits and challenges of deregulation are
further debated.

Over the past decade, most power generation

companies have transformed themselves into
leaner and more competitive companies. Further
aggravating the situation has been the purchase
and sale of generation assets, creating mixed
employee unions, corporate cultures and operating
philosophies.
Industry keeps saying a major issue for many power
companies is the challenge to locate, hire and train a
well-qualified workforce. To meet this challenge,
leading power companies are offering their employees
various types of “blended learning”.
Blended learning simply means the combining of
multiple training methods (for example, OJT from
retired workers being hired back, classroom training,
self study training, Web-based training, and others).
This type of learning tends to produce a more effective
training program. The blended approach has shown
that costs are reduced, levels of knowledge
comprehension are higher, and time required to
complete training is shorter.
For facilities in the market for new equipment, don‟t
forget to include personnel training in the RFP
(Request for Proposal). The most cost effective time to
train employees on new items purchased is when
these items are installed and tested.

So if you want to save “Thousands in your Boiler

Room”, stop and take a good hard look at how your
employees operate and maintain the equipment you
have. Operating Procedures, System Descriptions,
Lesson Plans, JPMs (Job Performance Measures) are all
training tools in your operating tool kit that need to be
“sharpened” (reviewed and updated) periodically.
Effective and efficient use of your
employees is your #1 cost savings
tool.
ASOPE, Inc.
420 Third Street
Suite 3
Aurora, Indiana 47001

Toll-Free: (866) 926-1821

Fax: (812) 926-1804
Email: [email protected]
http://www.asope.org