Jiri Klemes, Ferenc Friedler, Igor Bulatov, Petar Varbanov-Sustainability in the Process Industry_ Integration and Optimization (Green Manufacturing & Systems Engineering)-McGraw-Hill Professional (20

Sustainability in the
Process Industry
About the Authors
Ji Kleme, H DSC, is one of the key personalities
of the world-leading Centre of Excellence in Process
Integration at the University of Manchester Institute
of Science and Technology in the United Kingdom.
Ferenc Friedler, DSC, is a leading research figure at
the University of Pannonia in Hungary.

Igor Bulatov is a researcher at the Centre for Process
Integration at the University of Manchester in the
United Kingdom.

Petar Varbanov is a senior lecturer at the Centre for
Process Integration and Intensification (CPI
2
) at the
University of Pannonia in Hungary.
Sustainability in the
Process Industry
Integration and Optimization
Ji Kleme
Ferenc Friedler
Igor Bulatov
Petar Varbanov
New York Chicago San Francisco
Lisbon London Madrid Mexico City
Milan New Delhi San Juan
Seoul Singapore Sydney Toronto
Copyright 2011 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Except as permitted under
the United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed
in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written
permission of the publisher.
ISBN: 978-0-07-160555-7
MHID: 0-07-160555-X
The material in this eBook also appears in the print version of this title: ISBN: 978-0-07-160554-0,
MHID: 0-07-160554-1.
All trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners. Rather than put a trademark symbol after
every occurrence of a trademarked name, we use names in an editorial fashion only, and to the benet
of the trademark owner, with no intention of infringement of the trademark. Where such designations
appear in this book, they have been printed with initial caps.
McGraw-Hill eBooks are available at special quantity discounts to use as premiums and sales
promotions, or for use in corporate training programs. To contact a representative please e-mail us at
bulksales@mcgraw-hill.com.
Information contained in this work has been obtained by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
(McGraw-Hill) from sources believed to be reliable. However, neither McGraw-Hill nor its authors
guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any information published herein, and neither McGraw-Hill
nor its authors shall be responsible for any errors, omissions, or damages arising out of use of this
information. This work is published with the understanding that McGraw-Hill and its authors are
supplying information but are not attempting to render engineering or other professional services. If
such services are required, the assistance of an appropriate professional should be sought.
TERMS OF USE
This is a copyrighted work and The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (McGrawHill) and its licensors
reserve all rights in and to the work. Use of this work is subject to these terms. Except as permitted
under the Copyright Act of 1976 and the right to store and retrieve one copy of the work, you may
not decompile, disassemble, reverse engineer, reproduce, modify, create derivative works based upon,
transmit, distribute, disseminate, sell, publish or sublicense the work or any part of it without McGraw-
Hills prior consent. You may use the work for your own noncommercial and personal use; any other
use of the work is strictly prohibited. Your right to use the work may be terminated if you fail to comply
with these terms.
THE WORK IS PROVIDED AS IS. McGRAW-HILL AND ITS LICENSORS MAKE NO
GUARANTEES OR WARRANTIES AS TO THE ACCURACY, ADEQUACY OR COMPLETE-
NESS OF OR RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED FROM USING THE WORK, INCLUDING ANY
INFORMATION THAT CAN BE ACCESSED THROUGH THE WORK VIA HYPERLINK OR
OTHERWISE, AND EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, IN-
CLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FIT-
NESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. McGraw-Hill and its licensors do not warrant or guarantee
that the functions contained in the work will meet your requirements or that its operation will be
uninterrupted or error free. Neither McGraw-Hill nor its licensors shall be liable to you or anyone else
for any inaccuracy, error or omission, regardless of cause, in the work or for any damages resulting
therefrom. McGraw-Hill has no responsibility for the content of any information accessed through
the work. Under no circumstances shall McGraw-Hill and/or its licensors be liable for any indirect,
incidental, special, punitive, consequential or similar damages that result from the use of or inability to
use the work, even if any of them has been advised of the possibility of such damages. This limitation
of liability shall apply to any claim or cause whatsoever whether such claim or cause arises in contract,
tort or otherwise.
Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxi
1 Introduction and Defnition of the Field . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Energy Effciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Screening and Scoping: Auditing,
Benchmarking, and Good Housekeeping . . . 5
1.4 Balancing and Flowsheeting Simulation
as a Basis for Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.5 Integrated Approach: Process Integration . . . 7
1.6 Optimal Process Synthesis and Combinatorial
Graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.7 How to Apply the Process Integration and
Optimization Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2 Process Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.1 Introduction: The Need for Process
Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2 What Is Process Integration? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3 History and Development of Process Integration 12
2.4 Pinch Technology and Targeting Heat
Recovery: The Thermodynamic Roots . . . . . . 14
2.5 Supertargeting: Full-Fledged HEN Targeting 15
2.6 Modifying the Pinch Idea for HEN Retroft . . 16
2.7 Mass Exchange and Water Networks . . . . . . . 17
2.8 Benefts of Process Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.9 The Role of PI in Making Industry Sustainable 20
2.10 Examples of Applied Process Integration . . . . 20
2.11 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3 Process Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.2 Model Building and Optimization: General
Framework and Workfow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
vv

vi
C o n t e n t s
3.3 Optimization: Defnition and Mathematical
Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.3.1 What Is Optimization? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.3.2 Mathematical Formulation of
Optimization Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4 Main Classes of Optimization Problems . . . . 26
3.5 Conditions for Optimality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.5.1 Conditions for Local Optimality . . . . 28
3.5.2 Conditions for Global Optimality . . . 28
3.6 Deterministic Algorithms for Solving Continuous
Linear Optimization Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Nonlinear Optimization Problems . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.7.1 Search Algorithms for Nonlinear
Unconstrained Problems . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.7.2 Algorithms for Solving Constrained
Nonlinear Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.8 Deterministic Methods for Solving
Discrete Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.9 Stochastic Search Methods for Solving
Optimization Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.10 Creating Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.10.1 Conceptual Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
3.10.2 Mathematical Modeling of Processes:
Constructing the Equations . . . . . . . . 35
3.10.3 Choosing an Objective Function . . . . 37
3.10.4 Handling Process Complexity . . . . . . 38
3.10.5 Applying Process Insight . . . . . . . . . . 40
3.10.6 Handling Model Nonlinearity . . . . . . 41
3.10.7 Evaluating Model Adequacy and
Precision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4 Process Integration for Improving
Energy Effciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4.1 Introduction to Heat Exchange and
Heat Recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4.1.1 Heat Exchange Matches . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4.1.2 Implementing Heat Exchange
Matches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.2 Basics of Process Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.2.1 Process Integration and Heat
Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
C o n t e n t s
vii
4.2.2 Hierarchy of Process Design . . . . . . . . 47
4.2.3 Performance Targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
4.2.4 Heat Recovery Problem Identifcation 48
4.3 Basic Pinch Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.3.1 Setting Energy Targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.3.2 The Heat Recovery Pinch . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.3.3 Numerical Targeting: The Problem
Table Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.3.4 Threshold Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
4.3.5 Multiple Utilities Targeting . . . . . . . . . 61
4.4 Extended Pinch Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
4.4.1 Heat Transfer Area, Capital Cost, and
Total Cost Targeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
4.4.2 Heat Integration of Energy-Intensive
Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
4.4.3 Process Modifcation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
4.5 HEN Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
4.5.1 The Pinch Design Method . . . . . . . . . . 81
4.5.2 Superstructure Approach . . . . . . . . . . 93
4.5.3 A Hybrid Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
4.5.4 Key Features of the Resulting
Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
4.6 Total Site Energy Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
4.6.1 Total Site Data Extraction . . . . . . . . . . 97
4.6.2 Total Site Profles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
4.6.3 Heat Recovery via the Steam System . . 99
4.6.4 Power Cogeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
4.6.5 Advanced Total Site Optimization and
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
5 Mass Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.1 Water Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.2 Minimizing Water Use and Maximizing
Water Reuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
5.2.1 Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
5.2.2 Best Available Techniques . . . . . . . . . . 107
5.2.3 Water Footprint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
5.2.4 Minimizing Water Usage and
Wastewater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
5.3 Introduction to Water Pinch Analysis . . . . . . . 113
5.4 Flow-Rate Targeting with the Material
Recovery Pinch Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

viii
C o n t e n t s
5.5 MRPD Applied to Fruit Juice Case Study . . . . 117
5.6 Water Minimization via Mathematical
Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
5.6.1 Introduction to Mathematical
Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
5.6.2 Illustrative Example: A Brewery Plant 120
5.7 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
6 Further Applications of Process Integration . . . . . 123
6.1 Design and Management of Hydrogen
Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
6.2 Oxygen Pinch Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
6.3 Combined Analyses, I: Energy-Water,
Oxygen-Water, and Pinch-Emergy . . . . . . . . . 126
6.3.1 Simultaneous Minimization of
Energy and Water Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
6.3.2 Oxygen-Water Pinch Analysis . . . . . . 128
6.3.3 Emergy-Pinch Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
6.4 Combined Analysis, II: Budget-Income-Time,
Materials Reuse-Recycling, Supply Chains,
and CO
2
Emissions Targeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
6.4.1 Budget-Income-Time Pinch Analysis . 131
6.4.2 Materials Reuse-Recycle and Property
Pinch Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
6.4.3 Pinch Analysis of Supply Chains . . . . 136
6.4.4 Using the Pinch to Target CO
2

Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
6.4.5 Regional Resource Management . . . . 139
6.5 Heat-Integrated Power Systems:
Decarbonization and Low-Temperature Energy 142
6.5.1 Decarbonization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
6.5.2 Low-Temperature Energy . . . . . . . . . . 143
6.6 Integrating Reliability, Availability, and
Maintainability into Process Design . . . . . . . . 144
6.6.1 Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
6.6.2 Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
6.7 Pressure Drop and Heat Transfer Enhancement
in Process Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
6.8 Locally Integrated Energy Sectors and
Extended Total Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
6.9 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
C o n t e n t s
ix
7 Process Optimization Frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
7.1 Classic Approach: Mathematical Programming 151
7.2 Structural Process Optimization: P-Graphs . . 153
7.2.1 Process Representation via P-Graphs 154
7.2.2 The P-Graphs Signifcance for
Structural Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . 155
7.2.3 The P-Graphs Mathematical Engine:
MSG, SSG, and ABB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
7.3 Scheduling of Batch Processes: S-Graphs . . . . 159
7.3.1 Scheduling Frameworks: Suitability
and Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
7.3.2 S-Graph Framework for Scheduling . . 161
8 Combined Process Integration and Optimization 165
8.1 The Role of Optimization in Process Synthesis 165
8.2 Optimization Tools for Effcient
Implementation of PI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
8.3 Optimal Process Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
8.3.1 Reaction Network Synthesis . . . . . . . . 167
8.3.2 Optimal Synthesis of Heterogeneous
Flowsheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
8.3.3 Synthesis of Green Biorefneries . . . . . 171
8.3.4 Azeotropic Distillation Systems . . . . . 173
8.4 Optimal Synthesis of Energy Systems . . . . . . 176
8.4.1 Simple Heat Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
8.4.2 Optimal Retroft Design . . . . . . . . . . . 177
8.5 Optimal Scheduling for Increased Throughput,
Proft, and Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
8.5.1 Maximizing Throughput and Revenue 179
8.5.2 Heat-Integrated Production Schedules 180
8.6 Minimizing Emissions and Effuents . . . . . . . 183
8.7 Availability and Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
8.8 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
9 Software Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
9.1 Overview of Available Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
9.2 Graph-Based Process Optimization Tools . . . 191
9.2.1 PNS Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
9.2.2 S-Graph Studio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
9.3 Heat Integration Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
9.3.1 SPRINT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

x
C o n t e n t s
9.3.2 HEAT-int . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
9.3.3 STAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
9.3.4 SITE-int . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
9.3.5 WORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
9.3.6 HEXTRAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
9.3.7 SuperTarget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
9.3.8 Spreadsheet-Based Tools . . . . . . . . . . . 200
9.4 Mass Integration Software: WATER . . . . . . . . 201
9.5 Flowsheeting Simulation Packages . . . . . . . . . 202
9.5.1 ASPEN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
9.5.2 HYSYS and UniSim Design . . . . . . . . . 203
9.5.3 gPROMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
9.5.4 CHEMCAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
9.5.5 PRO/II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
9.6 General-Purpose Optimization Packages . . . . 206
9.6.1 GAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
9.6.2 MIPSYN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
9.6.3 LINDO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
9.6.4 Frontline Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
9.6.5 ILOG ODM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
9.7 Mathematical Modeling Suites . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
9.7.1 MATLAB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
9.7.2 Alternatives to MATLAB . . . . . . . . . . . 211
9.8 Other Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
9.8.1 Modelica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
9.8.2 Emerging Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
9.8.3 Balancing and Flowsheeting Simulation
for Energy-Saving Analysis . . . . . . . . . 215
9.8.4 Integrating Renewable Energy into
Other Energy Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
10 Examples and Case Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
10.1 Heat Pinch Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
10.1.1 Heat Pinch Technology: First Problem 219
10.1.2 Heat Pinch Technology:
Second Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
10.2 Total Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
10.2.1 Total Sites: First Problem . . . . . . . . . . . 226
10.2.2 Total Sites: Second Problem . . . . . . . . . 231
10.3 Integrated Placement of Processing Units
and Data Extraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
C o n t e n t s
xi
10.4 Utility Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
10.4.1 Utility Placement: First Problem . . . . 238
10.4.2 Utility Placement: Second Problem . . 243
10.5 Water Pinch Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
10.5.1 Water Pinch Technology: First Problem 247
10.5.2 Water Pinch Technology:
Second Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
11 Industrial Applications and Case Studies . . . . . . . 253
11.1 Energy Recovery from an FCC Unit . . . . . . . . 253
11.2 De-bottlenecking a Heat-Integrated Crude-Oil
Distillation System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
11.3 Minimizing Water and Wastewater in a
Citrus Juice Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
11.4 Effcient Energy Use in Other Food and
Drink Industries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
11.5 Synthesis of Industrial Utility Systems . . . . . . 271
11.6 Heat and Power Integration in Buildings and
Building Complexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
11.7 Optimal Design of a Supply Chain . . . . . . . . . 277
11.8 Scheduling a Large-Scale Paint Production
System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
12 Typical Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them . . . . . . . . 281
12.1 Data Extraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
12.1.1 When Is a Stream a Stream? . . . . . . . . 284
12.1.2 How Precise Must the Data Be at
Each Step? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
12.1.3 How Can Considerable Changes in
Specifc Heat Capacities Be Handled? 286
12.1.4 What Rules and Guidelines Must Be
Followed to Extract Data Properly? . . 287
12.1.5 How Can the Heat Loads, Heat
Capacities, and Temperatures of an
Extracted Stream Be Calculated? . . . . 289
12.1.6 How Soft Are the Data in a Plant or
Process Flowsheet? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
12.1.7 How Can Capital Costs and Operating
Costs Be Estimated? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
12.2 Integration of Renewables: Fluctuating
Demand and Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
12.3 Steady-State and Dynamic Performance . . . . . 292

xii
C o n t e n t s
12.4 Interpreting Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
12.5 Making It Happen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
13 Information Sources and Further Reading . . . . . . 295
13.1 General Sources of Information . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
13.1.1 Conferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
13.1.2 Journals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
13.1.3 Service Providers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
13.1.4 Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
13.2 Heat Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
13.2.1 Conferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
13.2.2 Journals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
13.2.4 Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
13.3 Mass Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
13.3.1 Conference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
13.3.2 Journals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
13.3.4 Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306
13.4 Combined Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306
13.4.1 Conferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306
13.4.2 Journals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307
13.4.4 Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
13.5 Optimization for Sustainable Industry . . . . . . 309
13.5.1 Conferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
13.5.2 Journals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
13.5.4 Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311
14 Conclusions and Further Information . . . . . . . . . . 313
14.1 Further Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
14.1.1 Books and Key Articles . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
14.1.2 Lecture Notes and Online Teaching
Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315
14.2 Development Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316
14.2.1 Top-Level Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316
14.2.2 Maintenance Scheduling,
Maintainability, and Reliability . . . . . 316
14.2.3 Hybrid Energy Conversion Systems . . . 317
14.2.4 Integration of Renewables and Waste 317
C o n t e n t s
xiii
14.2.5 Better Utilization of Low-Grade Heat 319
14.2.6 Energy Planning That Accounts for
Carbon Footprint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319
14.3 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345
This page intentionally left blank
Preface
T
his book describes and analyzes an amalgamation of two
effective ways to considerably improve the efficiency and
sustainability of processing industries: Process Integration
and optimization. It is the result of collaborative efforts by two
groups: researchers at the Centre for Process Integration, the
University of Manchester, UK (a renowned center of excellence in
this field), and the Faculty of Information Technology at the
University of Pannonia, Hungary, as represented by the Centre for
Process Integration and Intensification (CPI
2
) and the Centre for
Advanced Process Optimization. The University of Pannonia centers
are highly regarded for their achievements in optimization, and the
P-graph and S-graph approaches to process optimization originated
at this university.
The book should provide support for graduate and postgraduate
students worldwide as well as for Continuing Professional
Development (CPD) courses and for practitioners from various fields
of the processing industry. Its chapters analyze a number of problems
of practical significance and also suggest various options for solving
them to the benefit of modern society. The book provides a wealth of
material for postgraduate teaching and further professional training.
It is supported by the expertise stemming from the authors work as
well as by a pool of case studies of varying complexity that have been
collected over the years. This wide-ranging material presented here
has been selected and refined over years of postgraduate teaching,
further CPD courses, and training for the industry. It includes eight
industry-based demonstration case studies and nine testing examples
with the solutions developed. An unbiased evaluation and overview
of the software tools available for learning, teaching, and industrial
applications are also included. Text discussions are complemented
by many figures to clarify details and enhance understanding. The
book contains 14 chapters and a comprehensive bibliography.
Chapter 1 is devoted to introducing and defining the field, and it
also includes a basic assessment of energy efficiency. It starts with
screening and scoping, which include auditing, benchmarking, and
recommendations for good housekeeping. Next it describes an
xv

xvi
P r e f a c e
important tool: balancing and flowsheeting simulation as a basis for
optimization. It is on this basis that an integrated approach to
optimization, Process Integration, is introduced. This approach is then
connected to optimal process synthesis and combinatorial graphs.
The important question of how to apply the Process Integration and
Optimization Technology arises and is dealt with. This is further
tackled and analyzed in the following chapters.
Chapter 2 deals with the basic outline and definitions of Process
Integration (PI). It begins with a historical and methodological
introduction, briefly reviewing refinements and extensions of PI over
its years of development. The thermodynamic roots of the Pinch
Technology and of targeting heat recovery are introduced, followed
by one of the key graphical constructions in the PI methodology:
Composite Curves (CCs) for targeting process heat recovery.
Supertargeting, or targeting for a full-fledged Heat Exchanger
Network (HEN), is the next logical step. These tools are used to assess
modifications of the Pinch idea for HEN retrofitting. Although PI
was initially based on Heat Integration, an important spin-off was
the development of integration for mass exchange and water
networks. The chapter concludes with remarks on the role of PI in
making industry sustainable.
Chapter 3 introduces the other key methodology used for
sustainable process design and synthesis: optimization. It presents a
general framework and workflow of model building and follow-up
optimization, including models that incorporate black boxes or
gray boxes. It is critical to understand both the meaning and the
mathematical formulation of optimization. Toward this end, the
following questions are answered: What is optimization? What are
the main classes of optimization problems? How are optimization
problems formulated mathematically? What are the conditions for
local or global optimality? This is followed by introducing
deterministic algorithms for solving continuous linear and nonlinear,
constrained and unconstrained, optimization problems. The most
popular optimization methods and algorithms that employ stochastic
search are also reviewed. The middle part of Chapter 3 is devoted to
model creation. It includes a detailed description of conceptual
modeling: extracting data about the operating units, identifying
network and topology data, constructing equations to represent the
processes, and finally choosing a right objective function. The last
part of this chapter discusses how to handle complexity and
nonlinearity as well as how to apply process insight when evaluating
model adequacy and precision.
Chapter 4 covers the core topic from which the development of PI
began: improving the energy efficiency of individual processes and
the PI extension into Total Sites. The chapter starts by introducing
heat exchange, heat recovery, and heat exchange matches so that
readers will be prepared for the remaining chapter content. The
P r e f a c e
xvii
strategic view of Process Integration is outlined; this includes an
overview of the hierarchy of process design, the meaning of
performance targets, and the practical issue of identifying heat
recovery problems from process flowsheets. These three topics are
closely interrelated. Without properly applying the process design
hierarchy, the performance targets cannot find a practical application
and use. However, the process design hierarchy would be difficult to
apply without employing performance targets and estimating upper
bounds on process performance or lower bounds on total cost.
Meaningful and practically useful heat-integrated designs cannot be
obtained without appropriate identification of the heat recovery
problem, a process referred to as data extraction. The chapter
proceeds to describe the use of Composite Curves to set heat recovery
targets, the Problem Table Algorithm for numerical targeting, and
the Heat Recovery Pinch. These tools and concepts form the basis of
Pinch Technology, defining the thermodynamic capabilities of the
heat recovery problems. The more advanced aspects are discussed
next; these include threshold problems, targeting multiple utilities
via the Grand Composite Curve, and establishing targets for heat
transfer area, capital cost, and total cost. There is a short overview of
options for modifying the core process (which defines the heat
recovery problem) that highlights the usefulness of Pinch Technology
and targeting for improving its energy efficiency. The chapter then
focuses on the synthesis of Heat Exchanger Networks; the approach
mainly follows the Pinch Design Method, but there is discussion of
the superstructure-based and hybrid methods used for HEN
synthesis. The next step is Total Site Integration, which provides the
necessary knowledge for energy recovery over complete industrial
complexes and sites.
Chapter 5 deals with an extension of PI known as Mass Integration,
the most widely used instance of which is Water Integration (WI).
The chapter begins with a description of the methodology and bases
for minimizing water use and maximizing water reuse, and the
importance of legislatively imposed constraints is discussed. Best
available techniques are analyzed and recommended for usage, and
the concept of a water footprint is described. At this point, the stage
is set for the main task: minimizing freshwater usage and wastewater
effluents. For this, the methodology of Water Pinch Analysis is
introduced. Also described is a related Mass Integration and
targeting technique, the material recovery Pinch diagram. The
chapter concludes with water minimization using the mathematical
optimization approach. Both the WI and the mathematical
approaches to optimization are illustrated with case studies.
Chapter 6 addresses further PI opportunities that have arisen as
the methodology was developed. These include: Hydrogen Networks
Design and Management; Oxygen Pinch Analysis; combined analyses
(energy-water, oxygen-water, Pinch-emergy, budget-income-time,

xviii
P r e f a c e
materials reuse-recycling); supply chains; CO
2
emissions targeting;
regional resource management; heat-integrated power systems with
decarbonization and low-temperature energy systems; and the
integration of reliability, availability, and maintainability with
process design. An example is given of a real-life PI problem involving
pressure-drop considerations during heat transfer enhancement.
Several recent applications are mentioned, including a Locally
Integrated Energy Sector and extended Total Sites with multiple
energy carriers.
Chapter 7 presents an overview of process optimization from the
perspectives of Mathematical Programming (MPR) and the P-graph.
The main features of these frameworks are analyzed, and it is shown
that the P-graph is better suited than MPR for solving combinatorial
optimization problems and, in particular, problems involving the
synthesis of process networks. Optimization of process scheduling is
the next topic. The most popular models and representations of
process schedules are analyzed, and an efficient tool for obtaining
them is introduced: the S-graph.
Chapter 8 presents an integrated view of PI and optimization. It
discusses how to efficiently apply them jointly in process synthesis
and how to combine them. The chapter presents a number of examples
of the P-graph and S-graph frameworks applied to combinations of
PI and optimization. These applications are grouped thematically:
(1) optimal process synthesis, including examples on reaction networks,
green biorefineries, and azeotropic distillation; (2) synthesis of
general energy systems involving Heat Integration and optimal
retrofit; (3) optimal scheduling for maximizing throughput and
revenue; (4) minimizing emissions via optimal synthesis of advanced
energy conversion systems using Fuel-Cell Combined Cycles; and
(5) availability and reliability features.
Chapter 9 reviews the software tools for process modeling,
integration, and optimization. The engineering field of sustainable
design is complex in terms of scales and relationships, which makes
information technology and computer software essential for solving
problemspreferably with a user-friendly interface. The chapter
reviews a wide spectrum of tools, as follows: (1) graph-based process
optimization (process network synthesis solutions implementing
P-graphs and the S-Graph Studio software); (2) Energy and Mass
Integration tools designed to optimize the implementation of Heat
Integration (SPRINT, HEAT-int, HEXTRAN, SuperTarget, spreadsheet-
based tools), Total Site Integration (STAR, SITE-int), power generation
and combined heat and power (STAR, WORK), and water systems
integration (WATER); (3) process flowsheeting and simulation
packages developed or supported by the major players (Aspen Plus,
HYSYS and UniSim, gPROMS, CHEMCAD, PRO/II); (4) general-
purpose optimization systems (GAMS, MIPSYN); (5) computer
algebra systems; and (6) other tools.
P r e f a c e
xix
Chapter 10 is a collection of examples and case studies that
support the material presented in previous chapters. This selection
of problems was collected by the authors over decades of teaching
and consulting. Most of the problems have step-by-step solutions
that feature comments and guidance for mastering the methodology.
The examples are organized in several thematic groups: basic Heat
Integration, Total Sites, integrated placement of energy-intensive
processes, placing utilities, and Water Pinch Technology.
Chapter 11 contains advanced examples that are based on
industrial case studies, most of which were performed and published
by the authors. The case studies presented include: (1) retrofit of a
fluid catalytic cracking unit process that featured a large-scale heat
recovery network; (2) de-bottlenecking of a heat-integrated crude-oil
distillation process; (3) water system optimization of a citrus juice
plant; (4) efficient water use in other food industries; (5) synthesis of
industrial utility systems; (6) heat and power integration in buildings
and building complexes; (6) optimal supply chain design; and
(7) scheduling a large-scale paint production system.
Chapter 12 distills some important and rare expertise: typical
pitfalls and how to avoid them. It addresses possible (and probable)
difficulties encountered during problem formulation and data
extraction. The chapter raises seemingly trivial yet fundamental
questions: When is a stream a stream? How precise must the data be
at each step? How can extreme changes in specific

heat capacity be
handled? What rules and guidelines must be followed to properly
extract data? How can the heat loads, heat capacities, and temperatures
of an extracted stream be calculated? How soft are the data in a
plant or process flowsheet? How can capital costs and operating costs
be estimated? The provided answers are based on long-term
experience and could help readers to solve the right problemthat
is, a problem that accurately reflects the reality of the process
under consideration. The chapter also addresses the integration of
renewables that exhibit fluctuating demand and supply rates as well
as steady-state and dynamic performance considerations. The chapter
concludes with recommendations for interpreting results and
suggestions on the successful advocacy and implementation of
sustainable and optimal design.
Chapter 13 consists solely of information on sources for further
reading and information gathering. The various sources of
information about optimization and integration in the process
industry are arranged as follows: (1) general sources of information,
(2) Heat Integration, (3) Mass Integration, (4) combined analysis, and
(5) optimization for sustainable industry. Each topic is subdivided
into sections on conferences, journals, service providers, and
projects.
Chapter 14 presents conclusions and sources of further
information. Suggestions for further reading point to books and

xx
P r e f a c e
lecture notes containing applications and details that could not be
adequately described in a book of this size. The book ends with a
comprehensive bibliography that provides details of works cited in
the text and serves also as a source of information and directions for
further study.
This book is intended to increase awareness of the principal
methodologies that could contribute to improving energy and water
efficiency in processing plants while reducing their environmental
impact. Many additional illustrative examples could well have been
discussed, but space limitations required that the authors select the
most important features from a variety of fields and processing
industries; even so, hundreds of references are included for seekers
of more information. If the authors have managed to raise the interest
and awareness of readers, then this book has fulfilled its intentions.
Ji Kleme
Ferenc Friedler
Igor Bulatov
Petar Varbanov
Acknowledgments
W
e acknowledge the support from the European
Communityfunded project entitled Integrated Waste to
Energy Management to Prevent Global Warming, or
INEMAGLOW. We would like to thank Prof. Robin Smith and
Mr. Simon Perry from the University of Manchester for numerous
discussions about the finer points of PI and optimization
methodology. We also acknowledge with much gratitude the input
of all collaborators who contributed to this book. Their dedication,
timely responses, and willingness to accept editorial comments and
suggestions are greatly appreciated. We received invaluable help
from the staff of the Faculty of Information Technology at the
University of Pannonia in Hungary: Dr. Rozlia Pigler-Lakner,
Dr. Istvn Heckl, Dr. Boton Bertk, Dr. Zoltn Sle, Mr. Mt
Hegyhti, and Ms. Adrienn Sas. Substantial contributions were also
made by Hon Loong Lam and Zsfia Fodor, Ph.D. students
at CPI
2
.
Special thanks go to colleagues and close collaborators
worldwide who shared their latest methodologies and case studies.
It would be impossible to list all those involved, but we should like
to mention a few: Prof. L. T. Fan, Department of Chemical
Engineering, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas, USA; Dr.
Dominic C. Y. Foo, Department of Chemical and Environmental
Engineering, University of Nottingham, Malaysia Campus; Prof.
Zdravko Kravanja, Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering,
University of Maribor, Slovenia; Prof. Valentin Plesu, Centre for
Technology Transfer for the Process Industries, Department of
Chemical Engineering, University POLITEHNICA, Bucharest; and
Prof. Petr Stehlk, Brno University of Technology, Institute of
Process and Environmental Engineering, UPEI VUT Brno, the
Czech Republic.
The authors appreciate the editing and production efforts of the
following people: Taisuke Soda, Michael Penn, Stephen Smith,
Richard Ruzycka, and Michael Mulcahy of McGraw-Hill, and
Aloysius Raj and the staff at Newgen.
It has been a great pleasure for us to work with all of you.
xxi
CHAPTER 1
Introduction and
Definition of
the Field
1.1 Introduction
In recent years there has been increased interest in the development
of renewable, non-carbon-based energy sources in order to combat
the increasing threat of carbon dioxide (CO
2
) emissions and subsequent
climatic change. More recently, the fluctuations and often large
increases in the prices of oil and gas have further increased interest
in employing alternative, lower-carbon or non-carbon-based energy
sources. These cost and environmental concerns have led to increases
in the industrial sectors efficiency of energy use, although the use of
renewable energy sources in major industry has been sporadic at
best. In contrast, domestic energy supply has moved more positively
toward the integration of renewable energy sources; this movement
includes solar heating, heat pumps, and wind turbines. However,
there have been only limited and ad hoc attempts to design a
combined energy system that includes both industrial and residential
buildings, and few systematic design techniques have been marshaled
toward the end of producing a symbiotic system.
This book provides an overview of the Process Integration and
optimization methodologies and its application to improving the
energy efficiency of not only industrial but also nonindustrial energy
users. An additional aim is to evaluate how these methodologies can
be adapted to include the integration of waste and renewable energy
sources.
Industrial production requires a considerable and continuous
supply of energy delivered from natural resourcesprincipally in
the form of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas. The increase
in our planets human population and its growing nutritional
1

2
C h a p t e r O n e
demands have resulted in annual increases in energy consumption.
Furthermore, many nations have accelerated their development in
the last 10 years, and countries (such as China and India) with large
populations have seen significant increases in energy demands.
This growing energy consumption has also resulted in unsteady
climatic and environmental conditions in many areas because of
increased emissions of CO
2
, NO
x
, SO
x
, dust, black carbon, and
combustion process waste (Kleme et al., 2005a; Kleme, Bulatov,
and Cockeril, 2007). It has become increasingly important to ensure
that the production and processing industries take advantage of
recent developments in energy efficiency and in the use of
nontraditional energy sources (Houdkov et al., 2008; Lam,
Varbanov, and Kleme, 2010). The additional cost is related to the
amount of emitted CO
2
and often takes the form of a centrally
imposed tax. A workable solution to this problem would be to
reduce emissions and effluents by optimizing energy consumption,
increasing the efficiency of materials processing, and also increasing
the efficiency of energy conversion and consumption (Kleme et al.,
2005b).
Although major industry requires large supplies of energy to
meet production, it is not the only sector of the world economy that is
increasing its demands for energy. The particular characteristics of
the other sectors (e.g., transport, residential) make optimizing for
energy efficiency and cost reduction more difficult than in traditional
processing industries, such as oil refining, where continuous mass
production concentrated in a few locations offers an obvious potential
for large energy savings (Al-Riyami, Kleme, and Perry, 2001). In
contrast, for example, agricultural production and food processing
are distributed over large areas, and these activities are not continuous
but rather structured in seasonal campaigns. Hence, energy demands
in this sector are related to specific and limited time periods, so the
design of efficient energy systems to meet this demand is more
problematic than in traditional, steady-state industries.
This chapter proceeds by first outlining the field of energy
efficiency, including its scope, actors, and main features. The next
step is to describe energy-saving techniques generally and then to
specify an integrated approach: Heat Integration. An increasingly
prominent issue is assessing and minimizing emissions and the
carbon footprint. The carbon footprint (CFP) is defined by the U.K.
Parliamentary Office for Science and Technology as the total amount
of CO
2
and the other greenhouse gases emitted over the full life cycle
of a process or product (POST, 2006). There have been numerous
studies (see, e.g., Albrecht, 2007; Fiaschi and Carta, 2007) that
emphasize the carbon neutrality of renewable sources of energy.
However, even renewable energy sources make some contribution to
the overall carbon footprint, and assessment studies frequently do
not account for this. The carbon footprint should also be incorporated
I n t r o d u c t i o n a n d D e f i n i t i o n o f t h e F i e l d
3
into any products life-cycle assessment (LCA); see, for example,
Masruroh, Li, and Kleme (2006).
1.2 Energy Efficiency
The task of saving energyespecially at a time of rising energy
costs, demand, and carbon emissionsmust be taken seriously by
all communities and industries. Society is driven by the economics
of individual situations, and no section of society worldwide can
be expected to save energy at any cost. Thus, energy-saving
measures must be considered within the context of such issues
as environmental factors, legislatively imposed constraints, and
pressure from conscientious consumers. The simplest and most
obvious technique involves energy auditing and applying good
housekeeping measures. In many cases even these simple measures
are not fully understood or completed in sufficient detail. To
undertake a worthwhile energy audit, correct measurements are
necessary. Also, because in many cases energy demand is not
constant and instead fluctuates considerably, the monitoring of
energy consumption has to be performed over specific (or extended)
periods of time. Recommended monitoring techniques are described
by various sources: utility companies, such as SEMPRA ENERGY
(2009); governmental agencies, such as the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (2009); and international groups,
such as the International Energy Agency (Mandil, 2005).
Improvements in energy efficiency must often be achieved by
more complex means, such as those associated with improved
design and operation. It is of paramount importance that all
energy-related processes operate with maximum efficiency and
minimum energy input. These systems should also ensure that
they are fueled as much as possible by low-value inputs or recycled
wastes, such as process outputsfor example, off-gases and hot-
water waste (AEA Technology, 2000). To ensure that systems are
designed to be as efficient as best practice allows, optimization
methods are frequently employed for grassroots design, retrofit,
control, and intelligent support systems for processes, plants, and
buildings. One technology that has a strong reputation for
improving energy efficiency through better design is Pinch
Technology (Linnhoff and Vredeveld, 1984), which has been in use
for more than 20 years. This technology, through feedback from
practical applications and industry professionals, has been
continuously developed and expanded (Kleme et al., 1997; Smith,
2005; Kleme, Smith, and Kim, 2008). Details on the successful
applications of Pinch Technology in various industrial sectors are
described in Chapter 11.
The sustainability of energy systems can also be considerably
improved by making use of renewable energy sources (e.g., biofuels,

4
C h a p t e r O n e
wind, water power), which significantly reduce the generation of
greenhouse gases. Implementing Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
systems (AEA Technology, 2000), rather than a separate power system
and heat system, can also substantially improve the efficiency of
energy supply. In addition, the overall situation can be improved by
certain fast-advancing technologies: heat pumps, compact heat
exchangers, fuel cells (FCs), and intensified technologies. Some of
these approaches are not yet fully commercialized but are gradually
becoming available. Some examples discussed in AEA Technology
(2000) are as follows:
Advanced gas turbines for both utility and industrial
applications, including cogeneration (CHP).
Fuel cells are electrochemical devices that may be fueled by
hydrogen, methane, or other organic fuels. High-temperature
FCs (MCFC and SOFC) can also use cleaned and conditioned
synthesis gas directly. These systems produce high-grade
heat (above 500C) in addition to electrical power, and they
are well suited to cogeneration. It is estimated that FCs
typically emit 25 percent less CO
2
than a gas turbine. Yet
further advances are required before their full application
becomes economically practical. One option is to integrate
CHP and FCs (Varbanov et al., 2006).
Dividing-wall distillation technology (Triantafyllou and Smith,
1992; Hernndez and Jimnez, 1999). This technology
involves the separation of three components (or groups of
components) in a mixture. In the past this would have
required two distillation columns, with heating and cooling
provided for each column. The dividing-wall technology
combines the separation process into a single vessel to yield
energy savings of about 30 percent and capital savings of
about 25 percent (MW Kellogg, 1998).
Compact heat exchangers are generally made of thin metallic
plates rather than tubes. The plates form complex and small
flow passages that result in a large surface area for heat
transfer per unit volume. Multistream versions of these
exchangers can incorporate 12 or more streams. Compact
heat exchangers can yield energy savings and also reduce the
costs of capital and installation. In a case study at a U.K.
refinery, potential capital savings ranged from 69 to 84 percent
(EEO, 1993).
Cogeneration is being increasingly applied in most sectors. For
example, many oil refineries satisfy a large portion of their power
demands by on-site generation, with the balance being supplied by
externally purchased electricity. Usually all or almost all heating
5
needs are met by on-site generation of heat carriers (hot oil, steam,
flue gases). CHP generation and even tri-generation (simultaneous
production of heat, power, and cooling) offer an opportunity to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the combined power grid
refinery system by utilizing fuel heat content more completely than
do most existing power generation technologies. The improved
utilization rate is achieved by recovering the heat left in the exhaust
streams of the various power generating facilities (gas turbines,
FCs).
1.3 Screening and Scoping: Auditing, Benchmarking,
and Good Housekeeping
Over the years, screening and scoping tools have had a considerable
effect on reducing the costs of energy and of treating effluents,
thereby improving plant profit margins. For example, energy audits
performed on various food and drink processes have resulted in cost
savings of 1530 percent and in attractive returns on investment
(NRCan, 2007; U.S. DOE, 2007). Because profit margins are generally
small in this sector, efficient management of energy is crucial for
increasing profits while simultaneously reducing the production
plants environmental impacts.
The Carbon Trust (2009) has suggested the following steps for
reducing energy consumption and thus improving energy efficiency.
An analogous approach can be used for optimizing the use of water
and wastewater:
Good housekeeping: (1) improving staff attitude and awareness;
(2) locating heat leakages; (3) preventive maintenance;
(4) insulation; (5) justifying use of heating, cooling, and
lighting; (6) prevention or reduction of fouling; and
(7) monitoring and control.
Energy audits: (1) examining records of energy cost and
consumption; (2) producing an energy balance sheet;
(3) providing high-quality data on energy consumption and
costs; (4) collecting and processing data regularly
(recommended for the analysis and review of energy
information); and (5) establishing a benchmark of energy
consumption based on other organizations or accepted
standards.
Energy Efficiency Environmental Management System, ISO
14001: (1) the management system is a network of interrelated
elements; (2) these elements include responsibilities,
authorities, relationships, functions, processes, procedures,
practices, and resources; (3) the management system

6
C h a p t e r O n e
establishes policies and objectives and also develops ways of
applying the policies to achieve the objectives.
Responsible use of energy: in (1) energy procurement,
(2) metering and billing, (3) performance measurement,
(4) policy development, (5) assigning energy management
responsibility, (6) energy surveying and auditing, (7) training
and education, and (8) capital project management.
The steps listed here have been found by the U.K. Energy Efficiency
Best Practice Programme (EEBPp, 2002) to be central to any resource
and waste management program. Energy screening and scoping
audits fall into three main categories whose use (either individually
or in combination) is based on the required depth of the study, the
process to be analyzed, and the plant size: (1) the walk-through audit,
which provides a quick snapshot of certain opportunities; (2) the
detailed audit, which conducts an in-depth analysis of specific
components; and (3) the Process Integration audit, which analyzes the
plant as a whole and takes a systematic look at all processing steps and
their interconnections.
Audits may be performed by plant personnel, by external experts,
or by teams with members from both groups. Although there are
many possible options and levels of detail, typical activities include
the following (NRCan, 2007):
1. Determination of the production base case and the
reference period.
2. Collection of energy total consumption and cost (information
usually available from fuel records, electricity invoices, etc.).
3. Development of a process flow chart that shows materials,
energy inputs, and energy outputs for the main processing
steps.
4. For the largest consumers, collection of energy data from
the plant metering devices, control systems, and process
flow diagrams (if current operating conditions are close to
design data).
In terms of the time required for (and other costs of) identifying
opportunities to save energy, one efficient approach is the top-level
analysis (Varbanov et al., 2004). This procedure accounts for investment
limits or allowances and identifies economically justifiable energy-
saving opportunities, listing them in the order of their expected
economic return. Measurements can be performed using portable
instruments (flow rate, temperature, humidity, etc.) to determine the
overall plant production of steam, refrigeration, compressed air, and
hot water. Interviews with key personnel and operators can also
provide valuable information about plant operations.
7
1.4 Balancing and Flowsheeting Simulation
as a Basis for Optimization
Balancing reconciliation and flowsheeting simulation tools are
frequently used for sustainability design and savings analysis; in
fact, they have become the main tools in a process engineers toolbox.
These tools help engineers to develop complete material and energy
models based on measurements and/or design values and
mathematical models. Consequently, these simulation tools play an
important role in the technical and economic decision-making
activities related to the planning and/or design stage of processes
under development and to the operation of existing equipment.
A number of computer-based systems have been developed to
help process engineers calculate energy and mass balances. However,
ongoing development costs have left only a few of these systems on
the market: those whose positions have been secured by a substantial
number of sales. An early overview of flowsheeting simulation was
presented by Kleme (1977). The balancing, data validation, and
reconciliation technology involves a set of procedures incorporated
into a software tool. Process data reconciliation has become the main
method for monitoring and optimizing industrial processes as well
as for component diagnosis, condition-based maintenance, and online
calibration of instrumentation. According to Heyen and Kalitventzeff
(2007), the main goals of this technology are: (1) to detect and correct
deviations and errors of measured data so that they satisfy all balance
constraints; (2) to use knowledge about the process system and
structure along with measured data to compute unmeasured data
wherever possible, especially key performance indicators (KPIs); and
(3) to determine the postprocessing accuracy of measured and
unmeasured data, including KPIs. More information about available
software tools is provided in Chapter 9.
1.5 Integrated Approach: Process Integration
Heat Integration is the first part of Process Integration, which
provides the design foundation for CHP systems, refrigeration, air
conditioning, and heat-pump systems. Process Integration is equally
applicable to small, medium, and large industrial sites (e.g.,
power stations and oil refineries engaged in the production of
petrochemicals). The technology answers one of the major challenges
in the design of heating and cooling systemsnamely, the complexity
of energy and power integrationvia a mapping strategy based on
thermodynamically derived upper bounds on the systems thermal
and power performance. The efficient use of available heating and
cooling resources for serving complex systems of various sizes
and designations can significantly reduce energy consumption and
emissions. This methodology can also be used to integrate renewable

8
C h a p t e r O n e
energy sources such as biomass, solar photovoltaic (PV), and solar
thermal into the combined heating and cooling cycles. Since 1995, the
energy consumption of European Community (EC) member countries
has risen by 11 percent to the equivalent of 1637 Mt (megatons) of oil
equivalent (Eurostat, 2007). This increase in energy consumption
contrasts with the trend of the EC population, which is growing at
only about 0.4 percent annually (Eurostat, 2007). The overall share of
total energy consumption by industry is declining in most countries.
However, domestic energy consumption is rising. In the United
Kingdom, for example, residential consumption rose from 35.6 Mt
(oil equivalent) in 1971 to 48.5 Mt in 2001an increase of 36 percent
despite increases in energy efficiency (DTI, 2006).
Process Integration Technology (Pinch Technology) has been
extensively used in the processing and power generating industry
for more than 30 years. It was pioneered by the Department of Process
Integration, UMIST (now the Centre for Process Integration, CEAS,
the University of Manchester), in the late 1980s and 1990s. Heat
Integration is introduced in Chapter 2 and is described in more detail
in Chapter 4. Water and mass integration is covered in Chapter 5, and
recent developments in the field are reviewed in Chapter 6.
1.6 Optimal Process Synthesis and
Combinatorial Graphs
Process synthesis is a complex engineering activity that involves
process modeling (e.g., chemical engineering) as well as combinatorial
challenges. Although the basic process modeling has reached a
considerable level of maturity, the combinatorial aspects of the
engineering problem still leave significant room for improvement.
One innovative approach to process synthesis is to exploit the
combinatorial nature of network optimization. This approach is used
by the process-graph (P-graph) framework, which explicitly defines
sets of process materials and operations and then uses efficient
combinatorial algorithms to build a rigorous network superstructure
that can be reduced to the optimal network topology. This is different
from the Mathematical Programming (MPR) approach, where the
combinatorial aspects are modeled by algebraic equations and the
structural features are blended with the underlying process models.
These approaches are covered in Chapters 3, 7, and 8.
The P-graph framework has been successfully applied to and
demonstrated on several cases of energy system design. For example,
Varbanov and Friedler (2008) explored FC-based systems in a case
study that evaluated energy conversion systems to reduce CO
2

emissions via Fuel-Cell Combined Cycle (FCCC) subsystems that
utilize biomass and/or fossil fuels. The combinatorial complexity of
the problem is efficiently handled by using P-graph framework and
9
algorithms. The authors developed a methodology for synthesizing
cost-optimal FCCC configurations that accounts for the system
carbon footprint. Their results show that the high energy efficiency
of such systems when using renewable fuels makes them economically
viable for a wide range of conditions. This study and other case
studies (and guided applications) are provided in Chapters 10
and 11.
1.7 How to Apply the Process Integration and
Optimization Technology
The crucial topic of applications is addressed in Chapter 12, and
Chapters 13 and 14 discuss sources of further information for those
who would like to learn more or who seek qualified help from
leading researchers and providers worldwide. Although every effort
has been made to ensure that the provided information is as
comprehensive as possible, it cannot be fully exhaustive. The field of
Process Integration and optimization is developing rapidly, and
every month brings important advancements. For this reason, the
reader is strongly encouraged to remain up-to-date by reading about
and exploring new developments.
CHAPTER 2
Process Integration
2.1 Introduction: The Need for Process Integration
Energy and water saving, global warming, and greenhouse gas
emissions have become major technological, societal, and political
issues. These issues are of strategic importance because they are all
closely related to energy supply. Numerous studies have been
performed on the subject of improving energy efficiency while
reducing emissions of greenhouse gases, volatile organic compounds,
and other pollutants.
In response to these industrial and societal requirements, several
novel methodologies emerged since 1970. They included process system
engineering (Sargent, 1979; Sargent, 1983) and Process Integration
(Linnhoff et al., 1982; Linnhoff et al., 1994) followed by a number of
works from the UMIST Group. Both disciplines were involved in dedicated
conferences such as ESCAPE (European Symposium on Computer
Aided Process Engineering), which was facilitated by the European
Federation of Chemical Engineering Working Party on Computer
Aided Process Engineering (CAPE, 2009), and PRES (Conference on
Process Integration, Modelling and Optimisation for Energy Saving
and Pollution Reduction; PRES, 2009), which is supported on an annual
basis by chemical and chemical engineering societies (e.g., Hungarian
Chemical Society, Czech Society of Chemical Engineering, Italian
Association of Chemical Engineering, Canadian Society for Chemical
Engineering). It has gradually become evident that resource inputs and
effluents of industrial processes are often connected to each other.
Examples of this connection include the following:
1. Reducing external heating utility is usually accompanied by
an equivalent reduction in the cooling utility demand
(Linnhoff and Flower, 1978; Linnhoff et al., 1982; Linnhoff
et al., 1994); obviously, this also tends to reduce the CO
2

emissions from the corresponding sites.
2. Reducing wastewater effluents usually leads to reduced
freshwater intake (Wang and Smith, 1994; Bagajewicz, 2000;
Thevendiraraj et al., 2003).
11

12
C h a p t e r T w o
Reducing the consumption of resources is typically achieved by
increasing internal recycling and reuse of energy and material
streams instead of fresh resources and utilities. Projects for improving
process resource efficiencies can offer economic benefits and also
improve public perceptions of the company undertaking them.
However, motivating, launching, and carrying out such projects
requires proper optimization studies that are based on adequate
models of the process plants.
2.2 What Is Process Integration?
Process Integration (PI) is a family of methodologies for combining
several processes to reduce consumption of resources and/or to
reduce harmful emissions. It started as mainly Heat Integration (HI),
stimulated by the energy crisis of the 1970s (Hohmann, 1971; Linnhoff
and Flower, 1978; Linnhoff, Mason, and Wardle, 1979; Linnhoff et al.,
1982; Linnhoff and Hindmarsh, 1983; Linnhoff and Vredeveld, 1984).
This energy-saving methodology has been used extensively in the
processing and power generating industry over the last 30 years.
Heat Inetegration examines the potential for improving and
optimizing the heat exchange between heat sources and heat sinks in
order to reduce the amount of external heating and cooling required,
thereby reducing costs and emissions. A systematic, rule-based
design procedure has been developed that yields the maximum
energy-saving design for a given system.
There are several definitions of HI (using Pinch Technology);
most refer to the thermal combination of steady-state process streams
or batch operations for achieving heat recovery via heat exchange.
More broadly, the definition of PI, as adopted by the International
Energy Agency (Gundersen, 2000) is as follows: systematic and
general methods for designing integrated production systems
ranging from individual processes to total sites and with special
emphasis on the efficient use of energy and reducing environmental
effects.
2.3 History and Development of Process Integration
It is remarkable that PI continues to interest researchers even 35 years
after its emergence. The HI, which developed as the first part of PI,
deals with the integration of heat in Heat Exchanger Networks (HENs).
This methodology has been shown to have considerable application
potential for complete chemical processing sites, reducing overall
energy demand and emissions across the site and thus leading to a
more effective and efficient site utility system. The PI and its subset HI
method have also been successfully applied to the cogeneration of
heat and shaft power. Further details are available elsewhere
P r o c e s s I n t e g r a t i o n
13
(Linnhoff et al., 1982; Linnhoff et al., 1994; Shenoy, 1995; Smith, 2005;
El-Halwagi, 2006; Kemp 2007; Kleme, Smith, and Kim, 2008).
One of the first works in this field was Hohmanns (1971) PhD
thesis, which introduced a systematic thermodynamics-based
reasoning for evaluating the minimum energy requirements for a
given HEN synthesis problem. In the late 1970s this work was
continued by Linnhoff and Flower, who used Hohmanns foundation
to develop the basis of Pinch Technologynow considered the
cornerstone of HI. As is often the case with a pioneering innovation,
this work was difficult to publish. Yet the authors strong commitment
eventually led to the publication of their ideas in Linnhoff and
Flower (1978), which has since become the most cited paper in the
history of chemical engineering. Similar work (Umeda et al., 1978;
Umeda, Harada, and Shiroko, 1979) was independently published in
Japan, but it was Linnhoff (supported by teams from UMIST and
later Linnhoff March Ltd.) who pushed the new concept through
academia and industry. The publication of the first red book by
Linnhoff et al. (1982) played a key role in the dissemination of HI
methodology. This users guide to Pinch Analysis detailed the most
common process network design problems, including HEN synthesis,
heat recovery targeting, and selecting multiple utilities.
These methodologies were developed and pioneered by the
Department of Process Integration, UMIST (now the Centre for
Process Integration, CEAS, the University of Manchester) in the late
1980s and 1990s (Linnhoff et al., 1982; Linnhoff and Vredeveld, 1984;
Linnhoff et al., 1994; Kleme et al., 1997; Smith et al., 2000; Smith,
2005). A second edition of Linnhoffs users guide was published by
Kemp (2007). Applications of HI in the food industry were presented
in Kleme and Perry (2007a) and in Kleme, Smith, and Kim (2008).
Tan and Foo (2007) successfully applied the Pinch Analysis approach
to carbon-constrained planning for the energy sector, and Foo, Tan,
and Ng (2008) applied the cascade analysis technique to carbon-
footprint-constrained energy planning.
Another important part in process design and optimization is
the synthesis phase of process flowsheets. From the earliest stages of
PI there have been attempts to combine it with optimization (see, e.g.,
Giammatei, 1994). Such combining is usually performed after the
targeting phase mentioned previously. Ideally, the structure of the
entire processand the configurations of the operating units within
itshould be simultaneously designed and optimized, because the
performance of each unit influences the others. The main source of
complexity in this synthesis is the problems dual nature of being
both continuous and discrete. There are several known methods for
performing the task, including heuristic, evolutionary, and
superstructure-based approaches. Two major classes of methods for
process synthesis are heuristic and algorithmic (or Mathematical

14
C h a p t e r T w o
Programming) methods. Hybrid methods have also been proposed;
these approaches incorporate heuristic rules as well as Mathematical
Programming (MPR). Much as with any decision making, process
synthesis (or design) is an activity for which no past experience can be
ignored, especially when it comes to localized details of the design.
The most popular approach is to create a superstructure for the
network being designed and then choose the best possible solution
network from the superstructure options.
2.4 Pinch Technology and Targeting Heat Recovery:
The Thermodynamic Roots
Furman and Sahinidis (2002) have compiled a comprehensive review
of works tracing the development of the research on HENs in time.
Their study shows that there was only mild interest in heat recovery
and energy efficiency until the early 1970s, by which time just a few
works in the field had appeared. But between the oil crises of 1973
1974 and 1979 there were significant advances made in HI. Although
capital cost remained important, the major focus was on saving
energy and reducing related costs. It is exactly this focus that
resulted in attention being paid to energy flows and to the energy
quality represented by temperature. The result was the development
of Pinch Technology, which is firmly based on the first and second
laws of thermodynamics (Linnhoff and Flower, 1978).
In this way HEN synthesisone of the most important and
common tasks of process designhas become the starting point for
the PI revolution in industrial systems design. HENs in industry are
used mainly to save on energy cost. For many years the HEN design
methods relied mostly on heuristics, as necessitated by the large
number of permutations in which the necessary heat exchangers
could be arranged. Masso and Rudd (1969) is a pioneering work that
defines the problem of HEN synthesis; the paper proposes an
evolutionary synthesis procedure that is based on heuristics. An
alternative HEN synthesis method is described in Zhelev et al.
(1985), one that exploits synergies between heuristics and
combinatorics. In this approach, several suboptimal networks are
synthesized, and in most cases they are less integrated (consist of
more than one subnetwork). A complete timeline and thorough
bibliography of HEN design and optimization works is provided in
Furman and Sahinidis (2002). The paper covers many more details,
including the earliest known HEN-related scientific article: Ten
Broeck (1944).
The discovery of the Heat Recovery Pinch concept (Linnhoff
and Flower, 1978) was a critical step in the development of HEN
synthesis. The main idea behind the formulated HEN design
procedure was to obtainprior to the core design stepsguidelines
15
and targets for HEN performance. This procedure is possible
thanks to thermodynamics. The hot and cold streams for the
process under consideration are combined to yield (1) a Hot
Composite Curve representing, collectively, the process heat
sources (the hot streams); and (2) a Cold Composite Curve
representing the process heat sinks (the cold streams). For a
specified minimum allowed temperature difference T
min
, the two
curves are combined in one plot (see Figure 4.7), providing a clear
thermodynamic view of the heat recovery problem.
The overlap between the two Composite Curves represents the
heat recovery target. The overlap projection on the heat exchange
axis represents the maximum amount of process heat being internally
recovered. The vertical projection of the overlap indicates the
temperature range where the maximum heat recovery should take
place. The targets for external (utility) heating and cooling are
represented by the nonoverlapping segments of the Cold and Hot
Composite Curves, respectively. The methodology is described in
more detail in Chapter 4.
2.5 Supertargeting: Full-Fledged HEN Targeting
After obtaining targets for utility demands of a HEN, the next logical
step is to estimate targets for capital and total costs. Capital costs in
HENs are determined by many factors, of which the most significant
is the total heat transfer area and its distribution among the heat
exchangers. Townsend and Linnhoff (1984) proposed a procedure for
estimating HEN capital cost targets by using the Balanced Composite
Curves, which are obtained by adding utilities to the Composite
Curves obtained previously (see Figure 4.7). The HEN heat transfer
area target is computed from the enthalpy intervals in the Balanced
Composite Curves by using the heat transfer coefficients given in the
HEN problem specification (assuming vertical heat transfer and
spaghetti-type topology). Improvements to this procedure that
have been proposed involve one or more of the following factors:
1. Obtaining more accurate surface area targets for HENs
that exhibit nonuniform heat transfer coefficients (Colberg
and Morari, 1990; Jegede and Polley, 1992; Zhu et al., 1995;
Serna-Gonzlez, Jimnez-Gutirrez, and Ponce-Ortega,
2007).
2. Accounting for practical implementation factors, such as
construction materials, pressure ratings, and different heat
exchanger types (Hall, Ahmad, and Smith, 1990).
3. Accounting for additional constraints such as safety and
prohibitive distance (Santos and Zemp, 2000).

16
C h a p t e r T w o
Cost estimation usually has a significant impact on a projects
predicted profitability. Taal and colleagues (2003) summarized the
common methods used for cost estimation of heat exchange
equipment and the sources of energy price projections. This paper
showed the importance of choosing the right cost estimation method
and a reliable source of energy price forecast when retrofit projects
are evaluated for viability. Both retrofit and grassroots design projects
require accurate cost estimates in the projects early stages so that the
correct choices are made. There are several methods available, most
of which lead to FOB (Free On Board) cost estimates. As for operational
costs, the range of possible future energy prices may prove crucial
when the margins of a proposed design or retrofit project are
analyzed. This is especially true for a large project that has a long
payback period and consumes a lot of energy. Such projects are
typical of plants in the chemical, petrochemical, refinery, and
paper industries. Taal et al. (2003) include a brief review of oil and
natural gas price projections reported by centers of excellence in the
energy economics field. There are numerous forecasts, sometimes
contradictory, but general trends can be observed. Some general
insights in oil and gas price and production behavior are mentioned
and refer to more detailed sources.
2.6 Modifying the Pinch Idea for HEN Retrofit
Bochenek, Jezowski, and Jezowska (1998) compared the approaches
of optimization versus simulation for retrofitting flexible HENs.
This is an important work that should have generated additional
research. Zhu, Zanfir, and Kleme (2000) proposed a heat transfer
enhancement methodology, for HEN retrofit design, from which HI
could benefit substantially. This approach is worthy of wider
implementation, especially in the context of retrofit studies.
Heat Exchanger Network retrofit is a special case of optimization.
In retrofit problems, one must accommodate an existing network
with existing heat exchangers that are already paid for. This
circumstance substantially alters the economics of the problem as
compared with a new design. One example of this approach to
retrofit was the paper of Tjoe and Linnhoff (1986), which suggested
identifying heat exchangers with cross-Pinch heat transfer and,
where appropriate, attempting to replace such heat exchangers with
others that do not transfer heat across the Pinch, thereby reducing
energy consumption.
However, an ideal new design would not account for the existing
HEN equipment and topological constraints. One method for
overcoming these drawbacks is the Network Pinch (Asante,
1996; Asante and Zhu, 1997), which uses continuous nonlinear
optimization to identify the bottlenecking heat exchangers within
17
the existing network. The network bottleneck occurs at a heat
exchanger, which constrains the load shifting to gain further
improvement in heat recovery. At least one of the heat exchanger
sides exhibits the minimum allowed temperature difference between
the involved streams, and the corresponding point in the networks
temperature-load plot is referred to as the Network Pinch. To
overcome this Network Pinch, the network structure must be
modified. Possible modifications include the relocation of an existing
heat exchanger, the addition of a new exchanger, or a change in the
stream splitting arrangement. To identify the most promising
modifications, the Network Pinch method uses MPR guided by
thermodynamic insights. Nonlinear optimization is employed to
evaluate the capital energy trade-offs and to produce a new optimal
structure. This approach allows retrofit to be carried out one step at
a time, leaving the designer in control to accept or reject suggested
modifications at each step.
There have been some successful practical applications of these
targeting and retrofit methodologies. Pleu, Kleme, and Georgescu
(1998) demonstrated the wide applicability of PI in the Romanian
oil refining and petrochemical industry. In one of the first
comprehensive retrofit case studies, Hassan, Kleme, and Pleu
(1999) presented a PI analysis and retrofit suggestions for a fluid
catalytic cracking (FCC) plant. Pinch Technology and its recent
extensions offer an effective and practical method for designing the
HEN for new and retrofit projects. Al-Riyami, Kleme, and Perry
(2001) demonstrated a HI retrofit analysis for the HEN of an FCC
plant. Their study found significant room for improvement in the
heat recovery process, and the new network was designed using
the Network Pinch method.
2.7 Mass Exchange and Water Networks
Water is widely used in the processing industries as an important
raw material. It is also frequently used as a utility (e.g., steam or
cooling water) and as a mass transfer agent (e.g., for washing or
extraction). Large amounts of high-quality water are consumed in
many industries that face strict requirements for product quality and
the associated manufacturing safety issues. The processing industry
is characterized by complex design and operation of storage and
distribution systems for water management. Todays industrial
processes and systems that use water are subjected to increasingly
stringent environmental regulations on the discharge of effluents.
Increases in population and its quality of life have led to increased
demand for freshwater. The rapid pace of these changes has made
more urgent the need for improved water management. Adopting
techniques to minimize both water consumption and wastewater

18
C h a p t e r T w o
discharge can considerably reduce demand for freshwater and also
the amount of effluent generated by processing.
For these reasons, the success of HI has inspired researchers to
apply the Pinch and PI concepts to other areasin particular, to
mass exchange networks (El-Halwagi and Manousiouthakis, 1989).
Wang and Smith (1994) developed a method for industrial water
networks as a special case of mass exchange networks (see Figure 5.1).
Their main objective was to minimize the consumption of freshwater
and the disposal of wastewater simultaneously by maximizing the
reuse of internal water, again exploiting the idea of recycling and
reusing valuable streams and materials in order to save resources
and reduce emissions. Wastewater can be further reduced by
applying additional techniques for water regeneration that enable
further reuse or recycling. For the case of a single contaminant,
translating the method of Pinch Analysis to water minimization is
straightforward: the waters Composite Curve is used to construct a
plot of contaminant concentration versus contaminant load.
Extending the Water Pinch Analysis to multiple-contaminant
problems is a complicated and difficult procedure. The principal
issue concerns determining which contaminant to use on the Y axis
when plotting the Composite Curves. Several approaches have been
proposed. One option is to employ MPR, in which case Water Pinch
serves as a preliminary visualization tool (Doyle and Smith, 1997).
Foo, Manan, and Tan (2005) applied Water Pinch Analysis to
synthesize optimal water recovery networks for batch processes.
These authors introduced a numerical technique (time-dependent
water cascade analysis) that has the advantage of clearly depicting
the time-dependent nature of batch water networks. Majozi (2005)
also employed mathematical modelingthe mixed integer nonlinear
programming (MINLP) approachto devise an effective technique
for wastewater minimization in batch processes. Here, too, wastewater
was minimized via application of reuse and recycle.
2.8 Benefits of Process Integration
Heat recovery targeting for HEN synthesis problems is based on
Composite Curves described in Section 2.4 (Linnhoff, Mason, and
Wardle, 1979). The Composite Curves plot is a visual tool that
summarizes the important energy-related properties of a process in
a single view (see Figure 4.7). It was the resulting recognition of the
thermodynamic relationships and limitations in the underlying
heat recovery problem that led to development of the Pinch Design
Method (Linnhoff and Hindmarsh, 1983), which is capable of
producing maximally efficient heat recovery networks. As already
discussed in this chapter, PI has been considerably expanded in
scope since these initial applications. It is now also used for HEN
19
retrofits, both water and combined water-and-energy minimization,
as well as to minimize total site energy consumptiona process
that includes Combined Heat and Power, locally integrated energy
sectors, integration of renewables and waste-to-energy techniques,
and combinatorial tools (P-graph and S-graph; see Chapter 7). In
addition, recent applications have extended the PI approach to
regional energy and emissions planning, financial planning, batch
processes, and the targeting of other constrained resources, such as
land, renewable energy, and emissions. In the wake of the initial
breakthrough of Pinch Analysis for HEN synthesis, all these new PI
applications follow the same simple logic: target setting should
precede designing. In the most straightforward casessuch as HEN
synthesis for Maximum Energy Recovery (MER) and water network
synthesis for maximum water reusethe targets can be interpreted
as indicators of what a rigorous application could actually achieve.
However, the applicability and benefits of PI are not limited to
these straightforward cases. In fact, the target setting can be applied
in various contexts and still yield enormous benefits in terms of
reduced computational and project development time. Kleme,
Kimenov, and Nenov (1998) described several applications of Pinch
Technology within the food industry, work that was further
developed in Kleme et al. (1999). This research showed that Pinch
Technology can provide benefits far beyond oil refining and
petrochemicals.
The most important property of thermodynamically derived
heat recovery targets is that they cannot be improved upon by any
real system. Composite Curves play an important role in process
design; for HEN synthesis algorithms, they provide strict MER
targets. For process synthesis based on MPR, the Composite Curves
establish relevant lower bounds on utility requirements and capital
cost, thereby narrowing the search space for the following
superstructure construction and optimization.
The preceding observation highlights an important character-
istic of process optimization problems, and specifically those that
involve process synthesis and design. By strategically obtaining
key data about the system, it is possible to evaluate processes based
on limited informationbefore too much time (or other resources)
are spent on the study. This approach follows the logic of oil
drilling projects: potential sites are first evaluated in terms of key
preliminary indicators, and further studies or drilling commence
only if the preliminary evaluations indicate that the revenues
could justify further investment. The logic of this approach
was systematically formulated by Smith in his books on PI for
process synthesis (Smith, 1995; Smith, 2005) and by Daichendt and
Grossmann (1997), whose paper integrated hierarchical decom-
position and MPR to solve process synthesis problems.

20
C h a p t e r T w o
2.9 The Role of PI in Making Industry Sustainable
Sustainability in the design and operation of industrial processes is
becoming a key issue of process systems engineering. There are MPR
tools for designing chemical processes that minimize costs (and thus
maximize profits). These MPR formulations typically are highly
complex; therefore, in practical applications, the original problem is
usually decomposed into smaller problems that are solved
sequentially.
There are several definitions of sustainability. It can be defined as
the capacity to sustain the viability of a given system. In this context,
sustainable development implies that current actions should not harm
future generations and that measurable indicators are needed to
ensure compliance. For industrial processes, the relevant indicators
are the rates of resource intake and effluent emissions. These factors
are usually expressed in terms of footprints (De Benedetto and
Kleme, 2009)for example, the carbon footprint (CFP) and/or water
footprint (WFP) of a process. The sustainability of an industrial process
depends on minimizing these footprints. For synthesis and design
problems, the measured indicators should apply to the proposed
systems complete life cycle as part of a life-cycle assessment (LCA).
In short, PI has a direct impact on improving the sustainability
of a given industrial process. All PI techniques are geared toward
reducing the intake of resources and minimizing the release of
harmful effluents, goals that are directly related to the corresponding
footprints. Hence, employing PI and approaching the targeted
values will help minimize those footprints.
Footprint considerations, however, are only part of an industrys
ultimate indicatorthat is, its economic performance. This metric
takes the form of either cost or profit, depending on the selected system
boundaries. Thus, no matter how environmentally attractive a given
project may be, it will probably not be implemented unless doing so is
economically feasible. There are several ways to merge the objectives
of sustainability and profitability. The two most popular are
(1) expressing footprints in strictly economic terms and then folding
them into the cost or profit objective function; and (2) employing
multiobjective optimization, whereby footprint and economic
indicators are evaluated in parallel as objectives to be achieved.
2.10 Examples of Applied Process Integration
In this section, four examples illustrate the potential of PI to reduce
not only resource demand but also operational and capital costs.
The problem areas vary widely, yet in each case the application of
the PI techniques yields significant benefits. Only the main problem
points and outcomes are described here; see Chapter 11 for more
details.
21
Petrochemicals: Fluid Catalytic Cracking Process
The FCC unit is a major process element in oil refineries, and
improvements in yield and efficiency have been attempted over the
years in response to various external drivers. Retrofitting the HEN
associated with an FCC usually leads to improved energy recovery
and thus to reduced energy use and/or increased throughput. In this
example, the HEN of the FCC process includes a main column and a
gas concentration section (Al Riyami, Kleme, and Perry, 2001). The
particular FCC plant considered had 23 hot streams and 11 cold
streams, and the associated cost and economic data required for the
analysis were specified by the refinery owners. The task was to
analyze the existing process and then propose a HEN retrofit plan for
improving energy recovery. Incremental area efficiency was used for
the targeting stage of the retrofit design, which was carried out using
the Network Pinch method (Asante and Zhu, 1997) consisting of a
diagnosis stage and an optimization stage. In the retrofit, four heat
exchangers were added and one existing exchanger was removed.
The resultant design produced energy savings of 8.955 MW or 74
percent. This translated into a 27 percent decrease in the plants utility
bill for an annual savings of $2,388,600. The modified HEN required
an investment of $3,758,420, so the payback period was less than 19
months.
Energy Integration of a Hospital Complex
Herrera, Islas, and Arriola (2003) studied a hospital complex that
included an institute, a general hospital, a regional laundry center, a
sports center, and some other public buildings. The diesel fuel used
to generate the steam required for the complex amounted to
75 percent of its total energy consumption and 68 percent of its total
energy cost ($396,131 in 1999). The Pinch Analysis that was performed
estimated the minimum need for external heating at 388.64 kW.
Because the actual heating used was consuming 625.28 kW, there
existed a potential energy savings of 38 percent.
Sunflower Oil Production
As reported by Kleme, Kimenov, and Nenov (1998), an oil production
process operated with a minimal temperature difference of 65C at
the Process Pinch has been analyzed. The external heating required
by the system was provided by two types of hot utilities, and the
required external cooling was provided by two cold utilities. The
study resulted in increasing heat recovery and reducing the minimum
temperature difference to 814C. This reduced the hot and cold utility
requirements and eliminated the need for water steam and cooling
water, which considerably simplified the overall design.
A Whisky Distillery
In a study by Smith and Linnhoff (1988), the authors found that steam
was being used below the Process Pinch; this resulted in unnecessarily

22
C h a p t e r T w o
high utility usage by the distillery. The steam in question resulted
from the use of a heat pump, and so the steam below the Process
Pinch was eliminated by reducing the heat pumps size. Although
this approach required that the steam now be used for process
heating above the Process Pinch, overall energy costs were still
reduced owing to the reduced compressor duty.
2.11 Summary
This chapter offered an introduction to and an overview of the field
of PI, its HI roots, the expansion of its application areas, and the
evolution of process optimization methods toward combining
PI techniques and insights with the tools of MPR. The chapter
discussed the philosophy of PI as well as its contribution to
sustainable development and the economic efficiency of projects.
There is a wealth of useful information on these topics, and a
number of excellent sources of further information are described in
Chapters 13 and 14.
CHAPTER 3
Process Optimization
T
his chapter deals with process optimization: its definition,
goals, and application areas within sustainable industrial
process design and integration. The aim is to provide
information on how to formulate sustainability tasks as optimization
problems and on what tools to employ for solving them. The chapter
begins with a brief description of the general framework for model
building and optimization; this is followed by basics of optimization
problems and their classes as well as descriptions of the most common
algorithms for solving optimization problems. Finally, the chapter
discusses how to build models efficiently, how to handle complexity,
and how to ensure model adequacy and sufficient precision. The
details of computational implementations of optimization solvers
and other software tools are given in Chapter 9.
3.1 Introduction
Building and operating industrial processes entail costs and
environmental impacts. Emissions and effluents include: gaseous
waste streams, which may harbor CO
2
, SO
x
and NO
x
; wastewater and
various aqueous streams; and flue gases. When attempting to
improve the environmental and economic performance of process
systems, it is important to keep in mind that the processing paths,
which connect the various system inputs and outputs, usually
interact with each other. Therefore, minimizing resource demands
and environmental impacts is greatly facilitated by properly modeling
the process systems and then deciding which designs and operating
policies to pursuein what priority and to what extent.
Maintaining a balance between model accuracy and simplicity is
necessary in order to derive meaningful results with minimal
computational expense. A system model can be created for different
purposes. A lumped steady-state model (i.e., one that neglects
variations in time and space) will contain only algebraic equations.
To simplify the problem, steady-state models assume that the
operating units are black boxes or gray boxes (a black box is a model
that represents an empirical process in terms of its input, output, and
transfer parameters but does not describe any internal physics; a gray
23

24
C h a p t e r T h r e e
box is a model that incorporates a physical representation, although
some of the physics is approximatedsee, e.g., Hangos and Cameron,
2001). This approach is appropriate for optimizing complex systems.
If time variability has to be accounted for then steady-state modeling
can be applied to a set of operating periods, each of which is charac-
terized by its own fixed parameters.
3.2 Model Building and Optimization: General
Framework and Workflow
A good process model should contain a thorough conceptual
description of the involved phenomena, unit operations, actions,
events, and so forth. Usually this description involves text, flowsheets,
and structural diagrams. Additionally, IT-domain diagramsfor
example, UML diagramscan be used (UML is a specification of
the Object Management Group; UML, 2010). The UML diagrams
include class, object, package, use case, sequence, collaboration,
statechart, component, and deployment diagrams.
A good process model should also contain a sufficiently precise
mathematical description. The mathematical relationships are used to
reflect not only physical laws but also technological constraints and
company rules. Mathematical models include algebraic equations of
some form (i.e., equalities or inequalities) and may be supplemented
with dynamic modeling, which uses differential equations to capture
variations in time, as well as states and actions to express operational
procedures and other dynamic relationships of algorithmic nature.
Structural information is also an essential feature of process network
models. When translated to Mathematical Programming (MPR)
models, such information is expressed by integer (mostly binary)
variables. An efficient alternative to representing superstructures
with binary variables is the P-graph and its related framework
(Friedler et al., 1992b), discussed in Chapter 7.
An efficient computational implementation of the mathematical
description may take the form of a stand-alone compiled application
(e.g., PNS Editor, 2010) or may be modeled within a popular
environment for process and mathematical calculations. Examples
include MATLAB (MathWorks, 2009), Scilab (2009), simulation and
optimization tools tailored for the process industry (AspenTech,
2009c), Modelica (2009a; OpenModelica, 2010), Honeywell UniSim
(Honeywell, 2010), and the open-source DWSIM (2010). All model
components have to be well synchronized to provide appropriate
user interfaces and sufficient visual aids to help understand the
process and the optimization results.
Models often include only the computational implementation
with some mathematical descriptions, but a much better practice is to
start with the concepts before deriving the mathematical relationships
P r o c e s s O p t i m i z a t i o n
25
and then finally implementing the model computationally. In the
course of formulating the mathematical and implementation
components, it may be necessary to make some corrections to the
conceptual and/or mathematical components.
3.3 Optimization: Definition and Mathematical
Formulation
3.3.1 What Is Optimization?
Optimization can be applied to different tasks: new system design,
the synthesis of a new processing network, and the retrofit design
and operational improvements in heat exchanger, reactor, and
separation networks. Optimization is employed to find the best
available option. An objective function consists of a performance
criterion to be maximized or minimized. The system properties that
determine this function are of two types:
1. Parametersa set of characteristics that do not vary with
respect to the choice to be made
2. Variablesa set of characteristics that are allowed to vary
Some of the variables are specified by the decision maker or are
manipulated by the optimization tools; these are referred to as
specifications or decision variables. The remaining variables are termed
dependent variables, and their values are determined by the
specifications and the systems internal relationships. The objective
function can be formulated in terms of a single variable or a
combination of dependent and decision variables. The value of the
objective function can be changed by manipulating the decision
variables.
3.3.2 Mathematical Formulation of Optimization Problems
Optimization tasks in industry include increasing heat recovery,
maximizing the efficiency of site utility systems, minimizing water
use and wastewater discharge, and other tasks. The formulations
that are used to solve such optimization problems are known as
mixed integer nonlinear programs (MINLPs). However, they are
frequently linearized to yield the more tractable mixed integer linear
programs (MILPs), and some can be further simplified and solved
via linear programming (LPR). In general, optimization problems
can be formulated as summarized in Table 3.1.
The continuous and discrete domains, together with the
constraints, define the feasible region for the optimization. This
region contains the set of options from which to choose. The value of
the function F depends on the values of the decision variables.

26
Continuous variables are used to model properties (e.g., flow rates
and chemical concentrations) that vary gradually within the feasible
region. Integer variables are used to model the status (ON versus
OFF) of operating devices as well as the selection/exclusion of options
for operating units in synthesis problems. Using only the problem
formulations, it is possible to generate many combinatorially infeasible
sets of the integer variable values, which are later analyzed by the
optimization solver. Especially for larger problems, its a good idea to
eliminate these infeasible combinations from the search space or to
build into the optimization solver a mechanism for avoiding them
(Friedler et al., 1996).
The type of the objective function F dictates which extremum
the minimum or the maximumto seek. Common performance
criteria are to minimize the process cost or to maximize the profit.
Because some process subsystems (e.g., water networks) do not usually
generate useful product streams, no revenue is directly realized and
so minimizing the total annualized cost is used instead as an
objective function. For complete production systems and supply
chains the objective is usually to maximize the profit. Thus, additional
variables (reflecting sales and customer behavior) and their
relationships may be added to the formulation.
Equality constraints stem not only from material and energy
balances but also from constitutive relations that normalize the
stream compositions to unity. The balances include those for total
flow rates, balances of the chemical components, and energy balances
of heat exchangers, boilers, and turbines. Inequality constraints stem
from limitations on concentrations, flow rates, temperatures,
pressures, throughput, and so forth. One example of a constitutive
relation is calculation of the fluid heat capacity flow rate from its
mass flow rate and specific heat capacity.
3.4 Main Classes of Optimization Problems
This section discusses methods that can be applied to detect
optimality and solve optimization tasks. Choosing a particular
Minimize (or maximize) F(x, y) Objective function,
performance criterion
where x R
n
(continuous variables)
y Z
n
(integer variables)
Continuous domain
Discrete domain
subject to h(x, y) = 0
g(x, y) 0
Equality constraints
Inequality constraints
TABLE 3.1 Generic Optimization Problem
27
method should be based on a clear understanding, and toward this
end it is useful to bear in mind three aspects of optimization
problems:
1. An optimization problem is convex if it minimizes (or
maximizes) a convex objective function and if all the
constraints are convex (Williams, 1999).
2. An optimization problem is linear if its objective function
and all the constraints are linear; note that all linear
optimization problems are also convex (Williams, 1999).
3. A variable that can assume only integer (whole number)
values is an integer variable; integer variables that are
constrained only to values of 0 or 1 are binary variables.
Optimization problems are classified in terms of the following
specific features:
Objective type: Minimization or maximization problems.
Presence of constraints: Unconstrained versus constrained.
Most practical tasks involve the formulation of constrained
optimization problems.
Problem convexity: Convex versus nonconvex.
Linear and nonlinear problems: This aspect depends on the
nature of the objective function and/or the constraints. Most
process optimization problems are bilinear (i.e., containing
products of two optimization variables), for example, they
feature componentwise mass balances involving products of
mass flow rates and concentration and enthalpy balances
involving products of mass flow rates and enthalpies.
Absence of integer variables: In such cases the entire problem is
continuous and so linear programming (LPR) or nonlinear
programming (NLP) models are employed.
Presence of integer variables: In such cases the problem is
referred to as integer. Integer problems are further
subdivided into pure integer programming (IP) models,
which involve only integer variables; mixed integer linear
programming (MILP) models, which involve linear
relationships with both integer and continuous variables;
and mixed integer nonlinear programming (MINLP)
models, which involve nonlinear relationships with both
integer and continuous variables.
Further details on these classifications and their properties can
be found in Floudas (1995) and Williams (1999). The most important

28
factors are linearity and the existence of integer variables. There are
two main reasons for the significance of these factors:
1. Continuous problems are solved by using simpler methods
that incorporate gradient or other search mechanisms. The
presence of integer variables introduces combinatorial
complexity caused by the need to build search trees that
branch through the integer variables.
2. Nonlinearity introduces a different type of complexity.
Whereas linear problems (LPR and MILP) have been shown
to be convex (Floudas, 1995; Williams, 1999), the convexity of
nonlinear problems (NLP and MINLP) must be evaluated on
a case-by-case basis. Such problems are generally assumed to
be nonconvex until proven otherwise.
3.5 Conditions for Optimality
One of the most popular methods for handling optimization
formulations is the use of MPR solvers. They usually take
standardized input in the form of matrices of variables, parameters,
and equations, after which they explore the search space, using local
search and gradients, to reach an optimal solution.
3.5.1 Conditions for Local Optimality
When employing local search (e.g., gradient-based) algorithms, the
desired extremum (minimum or maximum) needs to be located and
proven. The optimality condition usually employed by solver
algorithms is based on the mathematical definition of an extremum.
For finding a minimum, the definition requires the existence of a
point in the search space such that any small deviation from that
point, in any direction within the search space, will result in an
increase of the objective function value or in keeping it the same:

, , , , vicinity of , F F
* * * *
x y x y x y x y
(3.1)
Further details are given in specialized textbooks on optimization
(see, e.g., Edgar and Himmelblau, 1988; Floudas, 1995; Luenberger
and Ye, 2008). Rigorous definitions can also be found by searching
the Web for KKT optimality conditions (aka KarushKuhnTucker
conditions, an extension of the method of Lagrange multipliers).
3.5.2 Conditions for Global Optimality
Additional conditions are applied to attain global optimality when
using local search algorithms, which in this case require the problem
29
to be convex. For linear problems (e.g., MILP), the locally optimal
solution is guaranteed to be globalin other words, the best possible.
Another advantage of the linear model is that linear solvers, unlike
with nonlinear ones, do not require initialization with a feasible
solution. Nonlinear problems are much more difficult to solve, and
attaining feasibility of the solutions is a significant issue. Any result
obtained guarantees global optimality only if the optimization
problem is shown to be convex (Williams, 1999).
Linear Optimization Problems
The best-known algorithm for LPR problems is the simplex algorithm
(Dantzig, 1951; Dantzig, Orden, and Wolfe, 1954). It solves LPR
maximization problems by constructing a feasible solution at a vertex
of the search polyhedron and then walking along the edges of the
polyhedron to other vertices with successively higher objective
function values. Although this algorithm is efficient in general, in
some cases it may require exponential time to find the optimum.
Khachiyan (1979) proposed a method that, in the worst case, finds a
solution in polynomial time for the worst case. Today, the LPR
problems are usually solved using one of two methods:
1. Revisions of the simplex algorithm: This algorithm has been
developed almost continuously over the years since its initial
formulation, starting with the revised Simplex Method of
Dantzig and Orchard-Hays (1953). A thorough consideration
of the simplex algorithm and its computational techniques is
given in Maros (2003b). Modern LPR solvers use algorithms
that flexibly solve both continuous and integer linear
problems.
2. Interior point methods: In contrast to the simplex algorithm,
which finds the optimal solution by traversing points on the
boundary of the feasible region, interior point methods move
through the interior of the feasible region. One such method
(see Mehrotra, 1992) is used by MATLAB.
Nonlinear Optimization Problems
Nonlinear programming is used to solve continuous nonlinear
problems. A common feature of all deterministic search methods is
that, starting from a current solution point, they perform an iterative
search for a better feasible solution within the vicinity of the current

30
one, repeating this action until no further solution improvement is
possible. This strategy means that the methods find only local
optima, so there is no guarantee of global optimality. Although
modern optimization software packages are capable of solving
constrained problems, they are mostly based on the search techniques
developed for unconstrained optimization.
3.7.1 Search Algorithms for Nonlinear Unconstrained
Problems
Many methods have been developed for performing local search for
the minimum of an objective function (Luenberger and Ye, 2008).
Deterministic search algorithms mainly assume that the objective
function is minimized and use the concept of descent: a series of
iterations are performed that aim reducing the objective function
value at each iteration. A thorough review of the deterministic search
algorithms for optimization and their performance, as applied to
chemical process models has been provided elsewhere, for example,
Kleme and Vaek (1973). Such methods include pattern search, the
Rosenbrock method, and conjugate gradients.
All descent-based algorithms rely on a common general strategy.
First, an initial solution point is chosen. Then, a rule-based direction
of movement and a step size are determined and executed. At the
new point, a new pair of direction and step size are determined, and
the process is repeated until the desired convergence is achieved.
The main difference between the various search algorithms is in the
rule applied for determining the iteration steps.
When the search domain is a given line, the process of determining
the function minimum is known as a line search. Higher-dimensional
problems are solved by executing a sequence of successive line
searches. The two simplest line search algorithms are the Fibonacci
method (e.g., Avriel and Wilde, 1966) and the golden section method
(e.g., Kiefer, 1953). Both algorithms search over a fixed interval and
assume that the function is unimodal within it. The golden section
algorithm has a linear convergence rate of d
k+1
/d
k
= 0.618. Another line
search algorithm is the Newton method, which is based on the
additional assumption of function smoothness; this technique
achieves even faster convergence than the golden section one. There
are also other line search algorithms that are grouped together as
curve-fitting methods.
Another important search algorithmone that is applicable to
multidimensional function domainsis the method of steepest
descent or gradient method. Its update rule derives the new step
based on the gradient information in the current point, identifying
the direction of the fastest decrease of the objective function. This is
one of the oldest and best-known function minimization methods.
Hence it is often used as a benchmark against which the performance
31
of other methods is measured. See Luenberger and Ye (2008) for
additional information.
3.7.2 Algorithms for Solving Constrained Nonlinear Problems
Many algorithms for constrained problems proceed in two main
steps: (1) The constrained problems are transformed into equivalent
unconstrained ones, and then (2) the modified problems are subjected
to unconstrained search algorithms. Groups of such algorithms
include primal methods, penalty and barrier methods, and primal-
dual methods.
The primal algorithms search for the optimal solution directly
through the feasible region. For a problem with n variables and
m equality constraints, primal methods work within the (n m)-
dimensional feasible space. Each point in the process is feasible, and
the value of the objective function constantly decreases. Thus, a
feasible solution is guaranteed even if the search is interrupted before
it finishes. Most primal methods do not rely on special problem
structure (such as convexity), so they are applicable to general NLP
problems. The weaknesses of primal algorithms are their requirement
that an initial feasible solution be found or specified and their
slowness (or even failure) to converge in the case of nonlinear
constraints.
Penalty and barrier methods utilize unconstrained approximations
of the constrained optimization problem. Penalty methods add a
penalty term to the objective function, which results in a high cost if
constraints are violated. Barrier methods instead add a term that
favors points interior to the feasible region over those near the
boundary. There are two major issues with applying these methods.
First, it is important to ensure the accuracy with which the
unconstrained NLP problem being solved approximates the true,
constrained one. Second, it is possible that the penalty or barrier term
may dominate the objective function, skewing the problem to such a
degree that the feasible solutions found are not actually optimal.
3.8 Deterministic Methods for Solving Discrete Problems
All integer programming problems (pure IP, MILP, and MINLP)
possess combinatorial features. The first solution methods used
cutting planes (i.e., added constraints to force integrality), and various
algorithms have been devised on this basis. The effective approach
has been to divide the problem into a number of smaller problems, a
method known as branch and bound. This is a strategy of problem
decomposition: it aims to partition the feasible region into more
manageable subdivisions and then, if required, into further subdivided
partitions. The method was proposed by Land and Doig (1960) for
solving LPR problems and has since evolved to a point where it can

32
be used to solve IP and MIP problems. The original large MIP problem
is divided into a number of subproblems, called nodes, which form an
enumeration tree. The algorithm starts from a main node and
progresses toward the so-called leaves, adding nodes to the current
solution or discarding them as necessary. In this process, an important
role is played by the bounding function, which (in the case of objective
minimization) provides a lower bound on the remaining part of the
problem under the current branch. Thus, if the lower bound on the
current subproblem node is higher than the current best solution,
then the algorithm can safely discard (prune) the node and all its
subnodes. More information on IP solving algorithms can be found
in Nemhauser and Wolsey (1999).
3.9 Stochastic Search Methods for Solving
Optimization Problems
An alternative to deterministic algorithms are those that employ
stochastic sampling of the search space and hill climbing: pushing the
algorithm to lower objective function values (assuming minimization)
by allowing temporary increases in the objective function value. The
main advantage of stochastic search methods is that their search is
not confined in the neighborhood of a given current solution, which
means there is a higher probability of finding the global optimum.
Such techniques have proven to be successful in applicationsfor
example, process design and synthesis studieswhere the
computational requirement for single samplings is modest and the
time frame for producing a solution is more relaxed. Their major
limitation is that many iterations are required in order to assure some
degree of optimality. This is because the algorithms blindly evaluate
even infeasible combinations of variable values, especially for the
simulated annealing variants.
Simulated annealing (SA) is the most prominent stochastic search
method (Kirkpatrick, Gelatt, and Vecchi, 1983). An interesting
application is the GAPinch toolbox for MATLAB (Prakotpol and
Srinophakun, 2004), which implements a genetic algorithm (GA)
search to solve MINLP network synthesis problems involving water
reuse. Another promising development is the use of the GA
framework to optimize schedules and supply chains (Shopova and
Vaklieva-Bancheva, 2006). Ant colony optimization (Zecchin et al.,
2006) and Tabu search (Cunha and Ribeiro, 2004) have been applied to
process design and operation. Other examples of stochastic search
methods include the following:
1. McKay, Willis, and Barton (1997) used genetic programming
(GP) to identify steady-state models of integrated chemical
processes.
33
2. Manolas et al. (1997) applied GA techniques to the optimal
operation of industrial utility systems.
3. Castell et al. (1998) described a novel GA application to
optimize process layout.
4. Genetic algorithms have been proposed for the synthesis of
Heat Exchanger Networks (HENs) and other processing
systems (Ravagnani et al., 2005; Xiangkun et al., 2007; Fieg,
Xing, and Jeowski, 2009); the paper by Xiangkun and
colleagues presents a hybrid GA-SA method.
5. Ahmad et al., (2008) proposed that SA be used for synthesizing
Heat Exchanger Networks. This approach employs a
completely evolutionary strategy, starting from a trivial
network topology that connects all hot streams to coolers
and all cold streams to heaters.
3.10 Creating Models
The procedure for building a process model is illustrated in Figure 3.1.
The modeling begins with accumulating sufficient information
about the processin order to develop an understanding of the
elements and the relationships between themand proceeds to
formulating a mathematical description of the process that is imple-
mented on a computational platform. A distinctive characteristic of
the procedure is its iterative nature. The mathematical modeling
BEGIN
Conceptual
modeling
Mathematical
modeling
END
NO
Need
corrections?
Need
corrections?
NO
YES
YES
Computational
implementation
FIGURE 3.1 Model creation procedure.

34
often leads to changes in the conceptual model; the result is an
iterative feedback loop, as shown in the figure. A similar correction
loop is also present at the output of the implementation block. The
discussion that follows addresses only those activities in Figure 3.1
that involve conceptual and mathematical modeling.
3.10.1 Conceptual Modeling
Conceptual modeling involves collecting and organizing essential
information about the phenomena in the process under consideration.
This step is often referred to as data extraction (Williams, 1999). The
process operating units are described along with the relevant features
of their behavior. The important constraints for the units capacities
and other limitations are identified and added to the description, as
is topological information about the process network. The main
purpose of this description is to serve as an interface between the
process operators and the modelers. Therefore, it is important that
the description be concise enough that modelers can efficiently grasp
the workings of the complete system. That being said, the description
must contain sufficient detail to complete the study.
Extracting Data About the Operating Units
When a production process is modeled for the purpose of Process
Integration, the data extraction involves four main steps:
1. Description of the process operating units and their
interconnections; creation of a flowsheet that reflects this
description.
2. Identification of the heating and cooling needs of the process
through use of the flowsheet and related data about the
operating units.
3. Definition of the Heat Integration process streams: identifying
for each stream the values for its heat load, as well as the
supply and target temperatures. Some process streams may
need to be segmented. This is done if the specific heat capacity
of a given process stream varies significantly within the
interval between its supply and its target temperature.
4. Analysis of the collected data.
If the goal is to minimize water use and wastewater discharge,
then the various water-using operations are analyzed and their
relevant properties are recorded in some standard form. The most
popular way to express the water requirements (Wang and Smith,
1994; Kuo and Smith, 1997) of an operation is in terms of the limitations
on (1) inlet and outlet concentrations of different contaminants and
(2) flow rates of the water to be consumed. This topic is discussed in
more detail in Chapter 12.
35
Network and Topology Data Identification
Obtaining network-related information is needed to account for
constraints that are related to the system topology and to the limits
imposed by operating units on the suitability of various process
streams to serve as inputs or outputs. In water networks, such
considerations include the acceptability (or unacceptability) of using
the water output from some operations as inputs for other operations.
For instance, the final washing of sugar crystals in sugar production
would require pure water, and for this the outputs from other water-
using operations would be unacceptable. On the otherhand, used
water from blanching might be perfectly acceptable for the initial
washing or rinsing of fruits. This type of information is used to
formulate additional constraints on the compatibility of different
process streams. When supplied to automated process optimization
algorithms, these constraints serve to eliminate a number of infeasible
combinations of process units. When building pure MPR models
(Williams, 1999), network-related information is transformed into
explicit mathematical constraints involving expressions with binary
selection variables. When using the graph-theoretic approach and/or
the P-graph framework (Friedler et al., 1993) to construct a process
model, such information is explicitly encoded in the P-graph building
blocks (materials and operations) and is then used by algorithms that
generate only those topologies that are combinatorially feasible.
3.10.2 Mathematical Modeling of Processes:
Constructing the Equations
After the conceptual basis has been established, it is time to begin
constructing the explicit mathematical formulations of the problem.
The standard procedure in this regard is first to build a super-
structureone that incorporates all possible options and combin-
ations of operating unitsand then to reduce the superstructure via
optimization techniques. In this context, a superstructure is the union
of several feasible flowsheets (see Figure 6.2 for an example of a water
reuse network superstructure). When this union includes all possible
flowsheets, the superstructure is called the maximal structure
(Friedler et al., 1993) or the hyperstructure (Papalexandri and
Pistikopoulos, 1996).
There are two basic approaches to formulating the superstructure
and subjecting it to reduction optimization.
1. Explicit formulation of a superstructure by the design engineer,
followed by translation of that structure into an integer programming
model: The generated problem is then solved by the
corresponding MPR algorithm. Popular codes for solving
MILP problems are OSL (GAMS, 2009) and CPLEX (ILOG,
2009); both are included in such commercial optimization
software packages as GAMS (2009). If the model does not

36
involve choices between structural options and involves
decisions on flow rates and capacities only, then continuous
optimizers (LPR or NLP) can be used.
2. Automated generation of the maximal superstructure, followed by
enumeration of all feasible network topologies using the P-graph
framework. The unit operations can be described in terms of
(a) the input to the automated procedure, (b) the compatible
connections between them, and (c) the corresponding process
and cost information. More details are provided in
Chapter 7.
The construction of a process network model begins with
formulation of the mass balances. The following key points should
be kept in mind:
Mass balances can be of two types: overall and component-
wise. Overall balances are performed over the total contents
of the input and output streams of a process unit. For steady-
state models of continuous processes, this content is usually
expressed as a mass-based flow rate (e.g., in units of kg/s,
kg/h, or t/h). Componentwise mass balances reflect the mass
conservation principle between the inlet and outlet streams
for individual chemical components (or pseudocomponents).
For a given operating unit, the set of all componentwise mass
balances is exactly sufficient for completely characterizing
the material flows into and out of the unit (adding the overall
balance could lead to an overspecified system of equations).
However, if using the overall material balance is critical to
the system model, then the overall balance can be used in
place of one of the componentwise balances.
In some cases, tracking all chemical species in various process
streams is not necessary. This is true for water networks in
which mass balances are written for the water flow rates and
for the analyzed contaminants. However, an incomplete list
of the material species contained in the water streams will
naturally result in incomplete mass balances (Smith, 2005).
When complete results are necessary, rigorous simulations of
the optimized system must be performed.
The componentwise mass balances of stream mixers and the
more complex operating units involve bilinear terms that
reflect products of the stream flow rates and the component
concentrations. In this case, the result is an NLP or MINLP
problem. If either the concentrations or the flow rates are fixed
then the model could be linear (an LPR or MILP problem),
which would make for an easier computation that might
guarantee global optimality. Although such an approach is
37
often viable, additional analyses are required to ensure that
the linearization does not result in an inadequate (inaccurate)
model. Similar problems also exist for Heat Exchanger
Networks, where nonisothermal mixing leads to equations
containing bilinear terms: products of mass flow rates and
enthalpies.
Process-specific constraints are also included in the optimization
problem. The mass balances are supplemented in the model by lower
and upper bounds on the stream flow rates and component
concentrations. Another source of constraints is the temperature
feasibility of interequipment connections. For example, water coming
from a blanching operation may be too hot to be used for washing
fresh fruits and so may require cooling (perhaps by mixing with a
colder stream) before this use; alternatively, this may be rejected as an
unacceptable connection, leading to a forbidden match. In MPR, such
constraints usually contain integer variables.
A frequent problem when synthesizing process networks is
obtaining extremely low flow rates for some interconnections. When
the model to optimize accounts for the complete capital costs, this
problem is less likely to appear. However, if capital costs are
underestimated (or disregarded) for some reason, then operating costs
may dominate, resulting in degenerate solutions with impractically
small flow rates. Practical solutions require reasonably accurate
estimates of the capital cost, especially if there are fixed costs. A more
straightforward option is to stipulate a lower bound on all network
flow rates.
Another important part of creating a process model is identifying
the energy needs of various operating units. It is crucial to account
for the heating and cooling needs of the process operations, and these
are established by formulating enthalpy balances (Linnhoff et al.,
1982). Most process streams need to be transported between the
operating units and also moved through them, and such transport
involves overcoming certain pressure drops (for fluids) and
performing mechanical work (for solids). These operations require
mechanical shaft power, which can be supplied by direct-drive
machines or electrical motorselements that define the power
requirements of a process. In many cases, additional equations are
needed (e.g., constitutive relations as well as calculations of reaction
rates and equilibriums).
3.10.3 Choosing an Objective Function
The objective function to choose depends on the goal of the
optimization. It is possible to choose from a number of criteria,
including (1) maximizing profit; (2) minimizing operating cost;
(3) minimizing total annualized cost (TAC); (4) minimizing
consumption of certain resources or consumption per unit of product;

38
and (5) minimizing the systems total environmental footprint or the
footprint per unit of product.
It is frequently necessary to optimize more than one criteria.
There are three main approaches to this task (Ehrgott, 2005):
1. Choose one criterion for formulating the objective function;
then add the other criteria as constraints to the problem.
2. Combine all the criteria into one objective function by
summing them up, where each criterion is weighted with a
given coefficient.
3. Perform a multicriteria optimization, accounting explicitly
for the conflicts between the chosen objectives (criteria).
3.10.4 Handling Process Complexity
Process synthesis and process design taskswhen performed on
real-life, industrial-scale problemstend to involve substantial
number of operating units. Examples can be found in many areas:
Synthesizing Heat Exchanger Networks involves a large
number of possible combinations of potential heat exchangers.
Thermodynamic and process-related constraints usually
reduce this number, but even then the complexity remains
significant.
Water subsystem design is no exception, and problems with
20 or more water-using operations are common (Bagajewicz,
2000; Thevendiraraj et al., 2003). This number leads to high
levels of combinatorial complexity. In a superstructure, each
water-using operation (and each intermediate water main)
defines at least one mixer. If the number of water-using
operations is denoted by N
op
, then there can be no fewer than
N
op
corresponding binary variables in the network super-
structure, and the number of combinations of binary variable
values to be examined by the corresponding MIP solver
would equal 2
Nop
. Thus, for 20 operations there would be more
than a million (10
6
= 1,000,000) possible combinations.
When using MPR superstructure models directly, the number of
binary variables is dictated by the number of the candidate operating
units. In the worst case, the solution algorithm will have to examine
the entire search space, which depends exponentially on the number
of the binary variables. One modeling strategy that reduces the
search space by several orders of magnitude is to use the Maximal
Structure Generation (MSG) and Solution Structures Generation
(SSG) algorithms of the P-graph framework (Friedler et al., 1993).
These algorithms effectively discard all infeasible combinations of
the binary selection variables and retain only the feasible ones.
39
Another popular technique in process design and software
development is modularization or encapsulation. The complexity
management efforts in information technology and process modeling
led to development of the concepts of object-oriented modeling (see,
e.g., Modelica, 2009a; UML, 2010) and object-oriented programming
(e.g., C++, C#, Java, Delphi). With these modeling concepts, a number
of related objects or operations can be grouped together and
represented as a single object or operation. Similarly, flowsheeting
and simulation software may offer the option of representing a
distillation column as a single operating unit at the level of the entire
flowsheet while still allowing simulation of the column at the local
level; such a facility is available, for example, in gPROMS (PSE, 2009)
and HYSYS (HYSYS, 2010).
The key to object-oriented thinking is the principle of information
hiding, according to which every object should conceal as many details
as possible about its own functionality and provide to other objects
only the information relevant to interactions with them. Hence, the
interface describes the bundle of information items that are defined
as being available to an external object. An example of applying
information hiding in water network design is the abstraction of the
detailed information about water-using operations into only three
relevant pieces of information for each operation and contaminant:
the limiting inlet and outlet concentrations and the limiting flow rate
(or contaminant load). This bundle of information thus constitutes the
operations interface to the water minimization problem.
Efficiently managing the model and problem complexity is greatly
facilitated by the practice of documenting the complete modeling
process and optimization results, including their interpretation. It is
best to document all stages, starting from the conceptual modeling
and ending with the computational implementation and obtained
results. All this documentation should be systematic so that the
reasoning and results can be clearly understood and traced back to
their roots. This style of documentation is extremely useful and makes
the work of teams and individual engineers smoother and more
efficient in the long run.
Another important tool for managing complexity is targeting,
which reveals limitations in the underlying design or operation task
to which the optimization is being applied. With proper targeting it
is possible to obtain an upper bound on system performance and/or
a lower bound on system cost. In fact, it is also possible to calculate
practically achievable targets:
For water systems, current targeting practices mainly yield
the first type of estimate: the maximum possible amount of
water reduction.
For HEN synthesis, the Maximum Energy Recovery (MER)
targets can be established, and HENs achieving them also

40
feature reasonable costs. However, this is seldom the global
minimum for the total annualized cost (i.e., the sum of
annual operating costs and annualized investment costs).
The logic behind evaluating a system in terms of the upper bound
on its performance is this: if the best possible system performance is
still insufficient to satisfy the specified requirements, then no further
time and effort should be spent on designing that system. The next
section gives more details on the use of targeting to managing design
problem complexity.
3.10.5 Applying Process Insight
Mathematical tools are absolutely necessary for optimizing the
design and operation of industrial processes. However, meaningful
and applicable results are obtained only when process insight is used
to guide the model building, the optimizing, and the interpretation
of results. Each optimization problem has its own particular features.
For example:
The processing of fruits for canning imposes different water
requirements and practices from those for the processing of
poultry.
When designing HENs, the various underlying process
operations that need cooling or heating should be properly
examined for data extraction. In some cases, process knowledge
may aid in the lumping of different heating/cooling needs,
thereby simplifying the flowsheet. Process knowledge is also
employed when partitioning properly into segments a process
stream whose heat capacity flow rate varies widely.
Every specific requirement discovered in the iterative process of
model improvement should be thoroughly documented and
implemented in the modelfor instance, in the form of constraints
or simplifying assumptions.
A good practice is to perform targeting for the desired application:
a heat recovery problem, water management, a separator network, or
reactor network design. Targeting provides information on potential
performance. Targeting procedures have been developed and well
tested for a number of applications and domains (see Chapter 2 for a
review).
The benefits of using variants of Pinch Analysis or other targeting
are twofold. First, the designer can estimate the best possible
performance of the system by using simple models and calculations,
even before using rigorous design procedures, saving valuable time.
The obtained targets can be used in preliminary sensitivity studies
to determine which operations and units should be included in the
design and which should be left out. This approach can greatly
41
simplify network design if the number of candidate operations is
large and the targets can be used as guides in the network synthesis.
Usually the engineer aims either to achieve the targets exactly or to
approach them closely with the final design. If the targeting model is
too idealized, then the estimates produced will serve as loose
performance or cost bounds, not as tight bounds. Yet in many cases
this strategy results in a simple design procedure and a nearly
optimal outcome.
Second, if the targeting model is exact, as in Pinch Analysis for
Heat Integration (Linnhoff and Flower, 1978), or if it at least captures
all key factors at the corresponding design stage, as with Regional
Energy Clustering (Lam, Varbanov, and Kleme, 2010), then the
targeting procedure also provides a convenient partitioning of the
original design space. This makes it easier to decompose the problem
and to simplify the remaining actions. A good example of partitioning
the design space is the division above/below the Pinch in Heat
Integration (see Chapter 4).
3.10.6 Handling Model Nonlinearity
As discussed in Section 3.5, convex problems are guaranteed to
produce globally optimal results when solved with deterministic
algorithms that employ local search. In contrast, a nonconvex
optimization problem is difficult to solve, and its solution is not
guaranteed to be a global optimum. All linear MP models are convex
(Williams, 1999). With nonlinear models, however, the problem
convexity must be established on a case-by-case basis. Nonlinear
models hinder the computation process of the solvers (e.g., by
requiring that feasible initial solutions be provided), and they often
result in poor numerical convergence. This is why engineers usually
seek ways to obtain linear models in some form. Crucial factors in
this task are preserving the models precision and validity.
Trading Off Precision and Linearization
Sometimes it is possible to linearize relationships that are inherently
nonlinear. This can be done, for instance, by replacing a single
nonlinear relationship with two or more linear ones that, together,
approximate the original function over the required range. This
technique is known as piecewise linearization. For example, it can be
applied when the available cost functions (for piping, distillation
columns, or heat exchangers) are too complex. The result of this
approach is a small reduction in the overall model precision and an
increase in the number of integer variables in the model; thus,
combinatorial complexity is increased but computational complexity
(due to nonlinearity) is reduced. The principal advantage is the
resulting linearity of the model, which almost always makes it easier
to solve than the original one. Caution must be exercised in the
process of linearization: the loss of precision must be kept as small as

42
possible so that the resulting model remains an adequate
representation of the underlying process. Another pitfall is a
potentially unacceptable increase in combinatorial complexity, which
can result if too many linear segments are used to approximate the
original relationship.
Discretization of Continuous Process Variables
Another approach to avoiding nonlinearity is to define a number of
fixed levels for some variables and then to substitute the original
nonlinear variables in the model with linear combinations of integer
variables and parameters (where the parameters are derived from
the original variables). In this way, the bilinear terms in the mass
balances of contaminants can be reduced to purely linear expressions.
In its consequences and pitfalls, this technique is similar to piecewise
linearization.
Other Techniques
There are other approaches and techniques for coping with nonlinear
models. Two of them are of particular interest to practical process
optimization: successive MILP (SMILP), which is used for model
decomposition and solving; and model reformulation.
Successive MILP can be applied to many process engineering
optimization modelsas long as the nonlinearities are not too strong.
One example is the optimization of utility systems, which consist
mainly of a set of steam headers combined with steam turbines, gas
turbines, boilers, and letdowns. Most of the nonlinearities in such
systems are bound to the enthalpy balances of the steam headers, the
steam turbines, and the letdowns. The computational difficulties
imposed by the nonlinearities can be overcome by first fixing the
values of some system properties during optimization (e.g., enthalpies
of steam mains), thereby producing a linear optimization model, and
following this with a rigorous simulation after each optimization
step. The linear optimization steps are repeated, followed again by
simulation, and so on until convergence is achieved; see Figure 3.2.
This procedure converges rapidly when applied to the optimization
of existing utility systems: usually five iterations at most are required
to reach reasonably small error levels.
Model reformulation refers to the symbolic transformation of the
original nonlinear equations into another set of equations that are
equivalent but linear. The resulting set usually contains more
equations than the initial one. One such reformulation technique,
known as the Glover transformation (Floudas 1995), can transform
equations containing the product of a continuous and a binary
variable. The essence of the technique is to replace each term that is a
product of a continuous variable and a binary variable with additional
continuous variables and an additional set of linear inequality
constraints.
43
3.10.7 Evaluating Model Adequacy and Precision
Once the model is built, the next step is validation. This process boils
down to evaluating how precisely the model predicts real-life
phenomena as well as how adequately it represents the modeled
system (Steppan, Werner, and Yeater, 1998; Montgomery, 2005). If the
model turns out to be imprecise or inadequate, then the reasons for
these shortcomings must be discovered and addressed. This iterative
process is similar to debugging during software development.
It is generally accepted that residuals (and their plots) are
sufficient for assessing whether a given model accurately predicts
the underlying process. The residual plots can be used to minimize or
even eliminate stochastic errors. In addition, parity plots are helpful
in exposing any systematic errors in the model.
The final check is to analyze the models variance (Steppan,
Werner, Yeater, 1998; Montgomery, 2005). In essence, this means
determining whether the empirically derived coefficients and the
models predictions have any statistical significance. This is
performed by means of a standard procedure for the Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA).
BEGIN
MILP
YES
END
NO
Simulation
Convergence?
Initialization
(+Simulation)
FIGURE 3.2 SMILP procedure for solving nonlinear optimization problems.
CHAPTER 4
Process Integration
for Improving
Energy Efficiency
H
eat recovery is widely applied in industrial processes and
has an extensive historical record. However, systematic
methods for performing heat recovery are relatively new
when compared with the age of modern industry.
4.1 Introduction to Heat Exchange and Heat Recovery
In industry, large amounts of thermal energy are used to perform
heating. Examples of this can be found in crude oil preheating before
distillation, preheating of feed flows to chemical reactors, and heat
addition to carry out endothermic chemical reactions. Similarly,
some processessuch as condensation, exothermal chemical
reactions, and product finalizationrequire that heat be extracted,
which results in process cooling. There are several options for utility
heating; these include steam, hot mineral oils, and direct fired
heating. Steam is the most prevalent option because of its high
specific heating value in the form of latent heat. Utility cooling
options include water (used for moderate-temperature cooling when
water is available), air (used when water is scarce or not economical
to use), and refrigeration (when subambient cooling is needed). Heat
recovery can be used to provide either heating or cooling to processes.
Heat recovery may take various forms: transferring heat between
process streams, generating steam from higher-temperature process
waste heat, and preheating (e.g., air for a furnace, air or feed water for
a boiler using waste heat).
Heat transfer takes place in heat exchangers, which can employ
either direct mixing or indirect heat transfer via a wall. Direct heat
exchange is also referred to as nonisothermal mixing because the
temperatures of the mixed streams are different. Mixing heat
exchangers are efficient at transferring heat and usually have low
45

46
C h a p t e r F o u r
capital cost. In most industries, the bulk of the heat exchange must
occur without mixing the heat-exchanging streams. In order to
exchange only heat while keeping the streams separate, surface heat
exchangers are employed. In these devices, heat is exchanged through
a dividing wall. Because of its high thermal efficiency, the counter-
current stream arrangement is the most common with surface
heat exchangers. To simplify the discussion, counter-current heat
exchangers are assumed unless stated otherwise. In terms of
construction types, the traditional shell-and-tube heat exchanger is
still the most common. However, plate-type and other compact heat
exchangers are gaining increased attention. Their compactness,
together with significant improvements in their resistance to leaking,
have made them preferable in many cases.
4.1.1 Heat Exchange Matches
A hot process stream can supply heat to a cold one when paired in
one or several physical heat exchangers arranged in parallel or
sequence. Each such pairing is referred to as a heat exchange match.
The form of the steady-state balance equations for heat exchange
matches that is most convenient for Heat Integration calculations is
based on modeling a match as consisting of hot and cold sides, as
shown in Figure 4.1. The hot and cold part each have a simple, steady-
state enthalpy balance that involves just one material stream and one
heat transfer flow.
The main components of the model are (1) calculations of the
heat transfer flows accounted for by the enthalpy balances and
(2) estimation of the necessary heat transfer area. For the latter, both
the log-mean temperature difference and the overall heat transfer
coefficient are employed. The enthalpy balance of the hot and cold
parts, and the kinetic equation of the heat transfer, may be written
as follows:

( )
HE hot in,hot out,hot
Q m h h =
(4.1)
Hot part
m
HOT
h
IN,HOT
m
COLD
Q
HE
Cold part
m
HOT
m
COLD
h
IN,COLD
h
OUT,HOT
h
OUT,COLD
FIGURE 4.1 Process ow diagram of a heat exchange match.
P r o c e s s I n t e g r a t i o n f o r I m p r o v i n g E n e r g y E f f i c i e n c y
47

( )
HE cold out,cold in,cold
Q m h h = (4.2)

HE LM
Q U A T =
(4.3)
where Q
HE
[kW]

is the heat flow across the whole heat exchanger, U
[kW
m
2
C
1
] is the overall heat transfer coefficient, A [m
2
] is the heat
transfer area, and T
LM
[C] is the logarithmic-mean temperature
difference. More information can be found in Shah and Sekuli
(2003), Tovazshnyansky et al. (2004), and Shilling et al. (2008).
4.1.2 Implementing Heat Exchange Matches
The heat exchange matches are often viewed as being identical to
heat exchangers, but this is not always the case. A given heat exchange
match may be implemented by devices of different construction or
by a combination of devicesfor example, two heat exchangers in
sequence may implement a single heat exchange match. The
distinction between the concept of a heat exchange match and its
implementation via heat exchangers is important because of capital
cost considerations.
4.2 Basics of Process Integration
4.2.1 Process Integration and Heat Integration
A historical review of the field was given in Chapter 2. Initially,
attention was focused on reusing any waste heat generated on
different sites. Each surface heat exchanger was described with only
a few steady-state equations, and the thermal energy saved by reusing
waste heat led to reductions in the expense of utility resources. This
approach became popular under the names Heat Integration (HI) and
the more general term Process Integration (PI). In this context, HI
means integrating different processes to achieve energy savings.
Engineers realized that integration could also reduce the consumption
of other resources as well as the emission of pollutants. Heat and
Process Integration came to be defined more widely in response to
similar developments in water reuse and wastewater minimization.
4.2.2 Hierarchy of Process Design
Process design has an inherent hierarchy that can be exploited for
making design decisions. This hierarchy may be represented by the
so-called onion diagram (Linnhoff et al., 1982), as shown in Figure 4.2.
The design of an industrial process starts with the reactors or other
key operating units (the onions core). This is supplemented and
served by other parts of the process, such as the separation subsystem
(the next layer) and the Heat Exchanger Network (HEN) subsystem.

48
The remaining heating and cooling duties, as well as the power
demands, are handled by the utility system.
4.2.3 Performance Targets
The thermodynamic bounds on heat exchange can be used to estimate
the utility usage and heat exchange area for a given heat recovery
problem. The resulting estimates of the process performance are a
lower bound on the utility demands and a lower bound on the
required heat transfer area. These bounds are known as targets for
the reason that heat recovery estimates are achievable in practice and
usually minimize the total cost of the HEN being designed.
4.2.4 Heat Recovery Problem Identification
For efficient heat recovery in industry, the relevant data must be
identified and presented systematically. In the field of Heat
Integration, this process is referred to as data extraction. The heat
recovery problem data are extracted in several steps:
1. Inspect the general process flowsheet, which may contain
heat recovery exchangers.
2. Remove the recovery heat exchangers and replace them with
equivalent virtual heaters and coolers.
3. Lump all consecutive heaters and coolers.
4. The resulting virtual heaters and coolers represent the net
heating and cooling demands of the flowsheet streams.
5. The heating and cooling demands of the flowsheet streams
are then listed in a tabular format, where each heating
Feed + Product
Reactor
Feed
Product
Steam Turbine
Boiler
S
e
p
a
r
a
t
o
r

R
e
acto
r
S
e
para
to
r
H
e
a
t

E
x
c
h
ange
r
N
e
t
w
o
r
k
Utilities
A
mbient
FIGURE 4.2 The onion diagram.
49
demand is referred to as a cold stream and, conversely, each
cooling demand as a hot stream.
This procedure is best illustrated by an example. Figure 4.3 shows a
process flowsheet involving two reactors and a distillation column.
The process already incorporates two recovery heat exchangers. The
utility heating demand of the process is H = 1760 kW, and the utility
cooling demand is C = 920 kW.
The necessary thermal data has to be extracted from the initial
flowsheet. Figure 4.4 shows the flowsheet after steps 1 through 4. The
heating and cooling demands of the streams have been consolidated
by removing the existing exchangers, and the reboiler and condenser
duties have been left out of the analysis for simplicity (although these
duties would be retained in an actual study). It is assumed that any
process cooling duty is available to match up with any heating duty.
Applying step 5 to the data in Figure 4.4 produces the data set in
Table 4.1. By convention, heating duties are positive and cooling ones
are negative. (The subscripts S and T denote supply and target
temperatures for the process streams.)
The last column of Table 4.1 gives the heat capacity flow rate (CP).
For streams that do not change phase (i.e., from liquid to gas or vice
versa), CP is defined as the product of the specific heat capacity and
the mass flow rate of the corresponding stream:

stream , stream
CP
p
m C = (4.4)
Condenser
C
o
l
u
m
n
52C
182C
Reactor 2
Reactor 1
78C
120C
120C
30C
100C
34C
C
H
138C
920 kW
Reboiler
2080 kW
1760 kW
3240 kW
FIGURE 4.3 Data extraction: Example process owsheet (after CPI, 2004 and
2005).

50
The CP can also be calculated using the following simple equation:
CP
T S
H H
T T T

= =
(4.5)
When phase transition occurs, the latent heat is used instead of
CP to calculate the stream duties. Some more problems related to
data extraction are discussed in Chapter 12.
4.3 Basic Pinch Technology
The main strategy of Pinch-based Process Integration is to identify
the performance targets before starting the core process design
activity. Following this strategy yields important clues and design
guidelines. The most common hot utility is steam. Heating with
steam is usually approximated as a constant-temperature heating
FIGURE 4.4 Data extraction: Heating and cooling demands (after CPI, 2004
and 2005).
Condenser
C
o
l
u
m
n
52C
182C
Reactor 2
Reactor 1
78C
120C
120C
30C
100C
138C
34C
Reboiler
Cooling
4160 kW
Heating
3840 kW
Heating
3240 kW
Cooling
2080 kW
TABLE 4.1 Data Set for Heat Recovery Analysis
Stream Type T
S
[C] T
T
[C] H [kW] CP [kW/C]
H1 Hot 182 78 2080 20
H2 Hot 138 34 4160 40
C3 Cold 52 100 3840 80
C4 Cold 30 120 3240 36
51
utility. Cooling with water is nonisothermal because the cooling
effect results from sensible heat absorption into the water stream and
thus leads to increasing the temperature.
4.3.1 Setting Energy Targets
Heat Recovery between One Hot and One Cold Stream
The Second Law of thermodynamics states that heat flows from
higher-temperature to lower-temperature regions. As shown in Eq. (4.3),
in a heat exchanger the required heat transfer area is proportional to
the temperature difference between the streams. In HEN design, the
minimum allowed temperature difference (T
min
) is the lower bound
on any temperature difference to be encountered in any heat
exchanger in the network. The value of T
min
is a design parameter
determined by exploring the trade-offs between more heat recovery
and the larger heat transfer area requirement. Any given pair of hot
and cold process streams may exchange as much heat as allowed by
their temperatures and the minimum temperature difference.
Consider the two-stream example shown in Figure 4.5(a). The
amount of heat recovery is 10 MW, which is achieved by allowing
T
min
= 20C. If T
min
= 10C, as in Figure 4.5(b), then it is possible to
squeeze out one more megawatt of heat recovery. To obtain the
heat recovery targets for a practical HEN design problem, this
principle needs to be extended to handle multiple streams.
Evaluation of Heat Recovery for Multiple
Streams: The Composite Curves
The analysis starts by combining all hot streams and all cold
streams into two Composite Curves or CCs (Linnhoff et al., 1982).
For each process there are two curves: one for the hot streams (Hot
Composite Curve, HCC) and another for the cold streams (Cold
Composite Curve, CCC). Each Composite Curve (CC) consists of a
(a)
Steam
200
T [C]
20C
CW
150
100
50
0
2 10 4
10 20
H [MW]
(b)
10C
CW
Steam
200
T [C]
150
100
50
0
1 11 3
10 20
H [MW]
Heat recovery at T
MIN
= 20C Heat recovery at T
MIN
= 10C
FIGURE 4.5 Thermodynamic limits on heat recovery.

52
temperature-enthalpy (T-H) profile, representing the overall heat
availability in the process (the HCC) and the overall heat demands
of the process (the CCC). The procedure of HCC construction is
illustrated in Figure 4.6 on the data from Table 4.1. All temperature
intervals are formed by the starting and target temperatures of the
hot process streams. Within each temperature interval, a composite
segment is formed consisting of (1) a temperature difference equal
to that of the interval and (2) a total cooling requirement equal to
the sum of the cooling requirements of all streams within the
interval. This is achieved by summing up the heat capacity flow
rates of the streams crossing the interval. Next, the composite
segments from all temperature intervals are combined to form the
HCC. Construction of the CCC is entirely analogous.
The Composite Curves are combined in the same graph in order
to identify the maximum overlap, which represents the maximum
amount of heat that could be recovered. The HCC and CCC for the
example from Table 4.1 are shown together in Figure 4.7.
Both CCs can be moved horizontally (i.e., along the H axis), but
usually the HCC position is fixed and the CCC is shifted. This is
equivalent to varying the amount of heat recovery and (simultaneously)
the amount of required utility heating and cooling. Where the curves
overlap, heat can be recuperated between the hot and cold streams.
More overlap means more heat recovery and smaller utility
requirements, and vice versa. As the overlap increases, the temperature
differences between the overlapping curve segments decrease. Finally,
at a certain overlap, the curves reach the minimum allowed temperature
difference, T
min
. Beyond this point, no further overlap is possible. The
closest approach between the curves is termed the Pinch point (or
simply the Pinch); it is also known as the heat recovery Pinch.
It is important to note that the amount of largest overlap (and
thus the maximum heat recovery) would be different if the minimum
182
138
78
34
2080
C
P
1

=

2
0

k
W
/
C
C
P
2

=

4
0

k
W
/
C
4160
6240
T [C]
H [kW]
(a) (b)
3600 1760
6240
880
182
138
78
34
T [C]
H [kW]
CP
2
= 40 kW/C
CP
1
= 20 kW/C
C
P1
+

C
P2

=

6
0

k
W
/
C
The hot streams plotted separately The composite hot stream
FIGURE 4.6 Constructing the Hot Composite Curve.
53
allowed temperature difference is changed for the same set of hot
and cold streams. The larger is the value of T
min
, the smaller is the
possible maximum heat recovery. Specifying the minimum utility
heating, the minimum utility cooling, or the minimum temperature
difference fixes the relative position of the two Composite Curves
and hence the maximum possible amount of heat recovery. The
identified heat recovery targets are not absolutethey are relative
to the specified value of T
min
. If that value is increased, then the
minimum utility requirements also increase and the potential for
maximum recovery drops; see Figure 4.8.
T [C]
200
Pinch
T
min
= 10C
Q
c,min
= 328 Q
rec
= 5912 Q
h,min
= 1168
150
100
50
0
H [kW]
FIGURE 4.7 The HCC and CCC at T
min
= 10C.
Q
c,min
= 328 Q
rec
= 5912
H [kW]
Q
h,min
= 1168
Q
c,min
= 728 Q
rec
= 5512 Q
h,min
= 1568
T
min
= 20C
T
min
= 10C
Pinch
200
150
100
50
0
T [C]
FIGURE 4.8 Variation of heat recovery targets with T
min
.

54
The appropriate value for T
min
is determined by economic trade-
offs. Increasing T
min
results in larger minimum utility demands and
increased energy costs; choosing a higher value reflects the need to
reduce heat transfer area and its corresponding investment cost.
Conversely, if T
min
is reduced then utility costs go down but
investment costs go up. This trade-off is illustrated in Figure 4.9.
4.3.2 The Heat Recovery Pinch
The heat recovery Pinch has important implications for the HEN
being designed. As illustrated in Figure 4.10, the Pinch sets the
absolute limits for heat recovery within the process.
Total
COST
Energy
Capital
2
Optimum T
MIN
1
FIGURE 4.9 Trade-off between investment and energy costs as a function of
T
min
.
H
PINCH
Q
c,min
Q
H,min
T
FIGURE 4.10 Limits for process heat recovery set by the Pinch.
55
The Pinch point divides the heat recovery problem into a net heat
sink above the Pinch point and a net heat source below it (Figure 4.11).
At the Pinch point, the temperature difference between the hot and
cold streams is exactly equal to T
min
, which means that at this point
the streams are not allowed to exchange heat. As a result, the heat
sink above the Pinch is in balance with the minimum hot utility
(Q
H,min
) and the heat source below the Pinch is in balance with the
minimum cold utility (Q
C,min
), while no heat is transferred across the
Pinch via utilities or via process-to-process heat transfer.
No heat can be transferred from below to above the Pinch,
because this is thermodynamically infeasible. However, it is feasible
to transfer heat from hot streams above the Pinch to cold streams
below the Pinch. All cold streamseven those below the Pinch
could be heated by a hot utility; likewise, the hot streams (even above
the Pinch) could be cooled by a cold utility. Although these
arrangements are thermodynamically feasible, applying them would
cause utility use to exceed the minimum, as identified by the Pinch
Analysis. This is a fundamental relationship in the design of heat
recovery systems.
What happens if heat is transferred across the Pinch? Recall that
it is possible to transfer heat only from above to below the Pinch. If,
say, XP units of heat are transferred across the Pinch (Figure 4.12),
then Q
H,min
and Q
C,min
will each increase by the same amount in order
to maintain the heat balances of the two problem parts. Any extra
heat that is added to the system by the hot utility must then be taken
away by the cold utility, in addition to the minimum requirement
Q
C,min
.
Cross-Pinch process-to-process heat transfer is not the only way
by which a problems thermodynamic Pinch partitioning can be
Pinch
Q
H,min
T
H
T
min
Q
C,min
Zero cross-
pinch transfer
FIGURE 4.11 Partitioning the heat recovery problem.

56
violated. This could also happen if the external utilities are placed
incorrectly. For example, any utility heating below the Pinch will
create a need for additional utility cooling in that part of the system
(Figure 4.12). Conversely, any utility cooling above the Pinch will
create a need for additional utility heating. The implications of the
Pinch for heat recovery problems can be distilled into the following
three conditions, which must hold if the minimum energy targets for
a process are to be achieved.
1. Heat must not be transferred across the Pinch.
2. There must be no external cooling above the Pinch.
3. There must be no external heating below the Pinch.
Violating any of these rules will lead to an increase in energy utility
demands. The rules are applied explicitly in the context of HEN
synthesis by the Pinch Design Method (Linnhoff and Hindmarsh,
1983) and also before a HEN retrofit analysis to identify causes of
excessive utility demands by a process. Other HEN synthesis
methodsif they achieve the minimum utility demandsalso
conform to the Pinch rules (though sometimes only implicitly).
4.3.3 Numerical Targeting: The Problem Table Algorithm
The Composite Curves are a useful tool for visualizing heat recovery
targets. However, they can be time-consuming to draw for problems
that involve many process streams. In addition, targeting that relies
solely on such graphical techniques cannot be very precise. The
process of identifying numerical targets is therefore usually based
on an algorithm known as the Problem Table Algorithm (PTA). Some
T
H Q
UC,above
Q
C,min
Q
UH,below
Q
UH,below
Q
UC,above
Q
H,min
XP
XP
XP
PINCH
FIGURE 4.12 More in, more out.
57
MPR-oriented authors employ the equivalent transshipment model
(Cerd et al., 1990). The steps are as follows:
1. Shift the process stream temperatures.
2. Set up temperature intervals.
3. Calculate interval heat balances.
4. Assuming zero hot utility, cascade the balances as heat
flows.
5. Ensure positive heat flows by increasing the hot utility as
needed.
The algorithm will be illustrated using the sample data in Table 4.2.
Step 1
Because the PTA uses temperature intervals, it is necessary to set up
a unified temperature scale for the calculations. If the real stream
temperatures are used, then some of the heat content would be left
out of the recovery. The problem is avoided by obtaining shifted
stream temperatures (T*) for PTA calculations. The hot streams are
shifted to be colder by T
min
/2 and the cold streams are shifted to be
hotter by T
min
/2. If the shifted temperatures (T*) of a cold and a hot
stream (or their parts) are the same, then their real temperatures are
still actually T
min
apart, which allows for feasible heat transfer. This
operation is equivalent to shifting the Composite Curves toward
each other vertically, as illustrated in Figure 4.13. The last two
columns in Table 4.2 show the shifted process stream temperatures.
Step 2
Temperature intervals are formed by listing all shifted process
stream temperatures in descending order (any duplicate values are
Shifter Composite Curves
T*
T
T*
T
T
min
H
+
2
T
min
2
C
o
l
d
H
o
t
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
FIGURE 4.13 Temperature shifting to ensure feasible heat transfer.

58
considered just once). This action creates temperature boundaries
(TBs), which form the temperature intervals for the problem. For the
example in Table 4.2, the TBs are 245C, 235C, 195C, 185C, 145C,
75C, 35C, and 25C.
Step 3
The heat balance is calculated for each temperature interval. First,
the stream population of the process segments falling within each
temperature interval (the first two columns of Table 4.3) is identified.
Interval
Temp.
[
o
C]
Stream
Population
T
interval
[
o
C]
CP
H
CP
C
[kW/
o
C]
H
interval
[kW]
Surplus/
Deficit
245
235
10 15 150 Surplus
40 15 600 Deficit
195
10 10 100 Surplus
185
40 10 400 Deficit
145
70 20 1400 Surplus
75
40 5 200 Deficit
35
10 20 200 Deficit
25
1
C
P

=

2
0
2
C
P

=

1
5
3
C
P

=

3
0
4
C
P

=

2
5
TABLE 4.3 Problem Table Algorithm for the Streams in Table 4.2
No.
Type
T
S
[C] T
T
[C] CP [kW/C] T
S
*
[C] T
T
*
[C]
1 Cold 20 180 20 25 185
2 Hot 250 40 15 245 35
3 Cold 140 230 30 145 235
4 Hot 200 80 25 195 75
TABLE 4.2 Problem Table Algorithm Example: Process Streams Data (T
min
= 10C)
59
HOT UTILITY (a)
HOT UTILITY
(a) Initial cascade
HOT UTILITY
(b) Feasible cascade
0 kW
H = 150 kW
H = 600 kW
H = 100 kW
H = 400 kW
H = 1400 kW
H = 200 kW
H = 200 kW
150 kW
450 kW
350 kW
750 kW
650 kW
450 kW
250 kW
235 C
195 C
185 C
145 C
75 C
35 C
25 C
245 C
HOT UTILITY (b)
H = 150 kW
H = 600 kW
H = 100 kW
H = 400 kW
H = 1400 kW
H = 200 kW
H = 200 kW
900 kW
750 kW
300 kW
400 kW
0 kW
T
PINCH
T
HOT PINCH
= 150C
T
COLD PINCH
= 140C
1400 kW
1200 kW
1000 kW
235 C
195 C
185 C
145 C
75 C
35 C
25 C
245 C
*
FIGURE 4.14 Heat Cascade for the process data in Table 4.2.
Next, the sums of the segment CPs (heat capacity flow rates) in each
interval are calculated; then that sum is multiplied by the interval
temperature difference (i.e., the difference between the TBs that
define each interval). This calculation is also illustrated in Table 4.3.
Step 4
The Problem Heat Cascade shown in Figure 4.14 has a box allocated
to each temperature interval; each box contains the corresponding
interval enthalpy balances. The boxes are connected with heat flow
arrows in order of descending temperature. The top heat flow
represents the total hot utility provided to the cascade, and the
bottom heat flow represents the total cold utility. The hot utility flow
is initially assumed to be zero and this value is combined (summed)
with the enthalpy balance of the top cascade interval to produce the
value for the next lower cascade heat flow. This operation is repeated
for the lower temperature intervals and connecting heat flows until
the bottom heat flow is calculated, resulting in the cascade shown in
Figure 4.14(a).
Step 5
The resulting heat flow values in the cascade are examined, and a
feasible heat cascade is obtained; see Figure 4.14(b). From the
cascading heat flows, the smallest value is identified; if it is
nonnegative (i.e., positive or zero), then the heat cascade is
thermodynamically feasible. If a negative value is obtained then a
positive utility flow of the same absolute value has to be provided at

60
the topmost heat flow, after which the cascading described in Step 4
is repeated. The resulting heat cascade is guaranteed to be feasible
and provides numerical heat recovery targets for the problem. The
topmost heat flow represents the minimum hot utility, the bottommost
heat flow represents the minimum cold utility, and the TB with zero
heat flow represents the location of the (heat recovery) Pinch. It is
often possible to obtain more than one zero-flow temperature
boundary, each representing a separate Pinch point.
4.3.4 Threshold Problems
Threshold problems feature only one utility typeeither hot or
cold. They are important mostly because they often result in no utility
capital trade-off below a certain value of T
min
, since the minimum
utility demand (hot or cold) becomes invariant; see Figure 4.15.
Typical examples of threshold Heat Integration problems involve
high-temperature fuel cells, which usually have large net cooling
demands but no net heating demands (Varbanov et al., 2006;
Varbanov and Kleme, 2008). An essential feature that distinguishes
threshold problems is that, as T
min
is varied, demands for only one
FIGURE 4.15 Threshold HEN design cases.
T
min
= 20C
CW
Heat recovery, hot and
cold utilities
Steam
T (a)
H
T
min
= 14C
CW
More heat recovery, no hot utility
T
(b)
H
T
min
= 10C
CW
CW
No increase in heat recovery
T (c)
H
T
min
= 10C
CW
Steam
Generation
Utility substitution
T (d)
H
61
utility type (hot or cold) are identified over the variation range; in
contrast, pinched problems require both hot and cold utilities over
this range. When synthesizing HENs for threshold problems, one
can distinguish between two subtypes (see Figure 4.16):
1. Low-threshold T
min
: Problems of this type should be treated
exactly as Pinch-type problems.
2. High-threshold T
min
: For these problems, it is first necessary
to satisfy the required temperature for the no-utility end
before proceeding with the remaining design (using the tick-
off heuristic; see Figure 4.53).
4.3.5 Multiple Utilities Targeting
Utility Placement: Grand Composite Curve
In many cases, more than one hot and one cold utility are available
for providing the external heating and cooling requirements after
energy recovery and it is necessary to find and evaluate the
Utilities
[MW]
(a)
Low Threshold T
min
High Threshold T
min
CW
CW
ST
ST
ST
T
T
T
min
T
min
= 10C
T
min
= 10C
H [MW]
H [MW]
10C
Utilities
[MW]
(b)
ST
CW
T
min
10C
FIGURE 4.16 Threshold problems.

62
cheapest and most effective combination of the available utilities
(Figure 4.17).
To assist with this choice and to enhance the information
derived from the HCC and CCC, another graphical construction
has been developed, known as the Grand Composite Curve (GCC)
(Townsend and Linnhoff, 1983). The heat cascade and the PTA
(Linnhoff and Flower, 1978) offer guidelines for the optimum
placement of hot and cold utilities, and this allows one to determine
the heat loads associated with each utility. For the previous sections,
the assumption has been that only one cold and one hot utility are
availablealbeit with sufficiently low and high temperatures to
satisfy the cooling and/or heating demands of the process. However,
most industrial sites feature multiple heating and cooling utilities
at several different temperature levels (e.g., steam levels, refrigeration
levels, hot oil circuit, furnace flue gas). Each utility has a different
unit cost. Usually the higher-temperature hot utilities and the
lower-temperature cold utilities cost more than the ones with
temperatures closer to the ambient. This fact underscores the need
to choose a mix that results in the lowest utility cost. The general
objective is to maximize the use of cheaper utilities and to minimize
the use of more expensive utilities. For example, it is usually
preferable to use low-pressure (LP) instead of high-pressure (HP)
steam and to use cooling water (CW) instead of refrigeration. The
Composite Curves plot in Figure 4.7 provides a convenient view for
evaluating the process driving force and the general heat recovery
targets. However, the CCs are not useful for identifying targets
when multiple utility levels are available; the GCC is used for
this task.
Boiler House and Power Plant
Processes, building complexes
Heating Heating Heating
Steam
turbine
Gas
turbine
Heating
Power
Power
Power
(Q+W)
Power
(W)
Heat
pump
Heating
Heating
HP
MP
LP
Heating
Refrigeration
Cooling
Cooling
Cooling (Q)
Furnace
Air
preheat
Fuel
Fuel
Fuel
Steam
Levels
BFW
preheat
FIGURE 4.17 Choices of hot and cold utilities (amended after CPI 2004 and
2005).
63
Construction of the Grand Composite Curve
The GCC is constructed using the Problem Heat Cascade (Figure 4.14).
The heat flows are plotted in the T-H space, where the heat flow at
each temperature boundary corresponds to the X coordinate and the
temperature to the Y coordinate (Figure 4.18).
The GCC can be directly related to the Shifted Composite Curves
(SCCs), which are the result of shifting the CCs toward each other by
T
min
/2 so that the curves touch each other at the Pinch; see Figure 4.19.
At each temperature boundary, the heat flow in the Problem Heat
Cascade and GCC corresponds to the horizontal distance between
the SCCs.
The GCC has several fundamental properties that facilitate an
understanding of the underlying heat recovery problem. The parts
with positive slope (i.e., running uphill from left to right) indicate
that cold streams dominate (Figures 4.18 and 4.19). Similarly, the
parts with negative slope indicate excess hot streams. The shaded
areas in the GCC plot, which signify opportunities for process-to-
process heat recovery, are referred to as heat recovery pockets.
Utility Placement Options
The GCC shows the hot and cold utility requirements of the process in
terms of both enthalpy and temperature. This allows one to distinguish
between utilities at different temperature levels. There are typically
Hot Utility
Cold Utility
PINCH
1400 C
1200 kW
0 kW
300 kW
900 kW
750 kW
400 kW
1000 kW
75 C
145 C
185 C
195 C
235 C
245 C
35 C
25 C
500 1000 1500
Q (kW)
T* (C)
H= 150 kW
H= 600 kW
H= 100 kW
H= 400 kW
H= 1400 kW
H= 200 kW
H= 200 kW
FIGURE 4.18 Constructing the GCC for the streams in Table 4.2.

64
utilities at several different temperature levels available on a sitefor
example, there may be a supply of both high-pressure (HP) and
medium-pressure (MP) steam. As indicated previously, it is desirable to
maximize the use of cheaper utilities and to minimize the use of more
expensive ones. Utilities at higher temperature and/or pressure are
usually more expensive; see Figure 4.20. Therefore, MP steam is used
first: ranging from the Y axis until it touches the GCC (resulting in T
min

in this point), which maximizes its usage. Only then is HP steam used.
When a utility line or profile touches the GCC, a new Pinch point
is created, termed a Utility Pinch (the MP steam line touching the
GCC in Figure 4.20). Each additional steam level creates another
Utility Pinch and increases the complexity of the utility system.
T* [C] T* [C]
HP steam
MP
steam
HP steam
Cooling Water
Cooling Water
500 1000
Multiple steam levels Single steam level
1500 500 0
100
PINCH
200
0
100
PINCH
200
1000 1500
Q [kW]
Q [kW]
(a) (b)
FIGURE 4.20 Using the GCC to target for single and multiple steam levels.
T* [C] T* [C]
300
200
100
300
200
100
1400 1400
400
300
900
750
400
H [kW] Q [kW]
300
900
750
1200 1200
1000
1000
0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 4000 6000 8000
FIGURE 4.19 Relation between the GCC (left) and the SCC (right) for the
streams in Table 4.2.
65
Higher complexity has several negative consequences, including
increased capital costs, greater potential for leaks, reduced safety,
and more maintenance expenses. Therefore limits are typically
placed on the number of steam levels.
Higher-temperature heating demands are satisfied by
nonisothermal utilities. These include hot oil and hot flue gas, both
of which maintain their physical phase (liquid and gaseous) across
a wide range of temperatures. The operating costs associated with
such utilities are largely dependent on furnace efficiency and on the
intensity and efficiency of the pumping or fan blowing. When
targeting the placement of a nonisothermal hot utility, its profile is
represented by a straight line,
1
which runs from the upper right to
the lower left in the graph of Figure 4.21. The lines starting point
corresponds to the utility supply temperature and also to the
rightmost point for the utilitys heating duty. The utility use endpoint
corresponds either to the zero of the H axisin which case all
utility heating is covered by the current nonisothermal utilityor
to the rightmost point on the H axis for other, cheaper hot
utilities.
1
This linear representation assumes an approximately constant specifc heat
capacity of the corresponding stream.
T
*
CP
1
CP
1
> CP
2
H
loss,1
H
loss,2
H
CP
2
T
*
T
*
ambient
supply
FIGURE 4.21
Properties of
nonisothermal hot
utilities.

66
As plotted in the figure, the nonisothermal utilitys termination
point corresponds to the ambient temperature. The distance from
this point to the zero of the H axis represents the thermal losses
from using the utility. The heat capacity flow rate of the nonisothermal
utility target is determined by making the utility line as steep as
possible, thereby minimizing its CP and the corresponding losses
(Figure 4.21). Its supply temperature is usually fixed at the maximum
allowed by the furnace and the heat carrier composition; the
remaining degree of freedom corresponds to the utilitys exact CP.
Smaller CP values result in steeper slopes and smaller losses.
The placement for a nonisothermal utility (e.g., hot oil) may be
constrained by two problem features: the process Pinch point and a
kink in the GCC at the top end of a heat recovery pocket; see
Figure 4.22 for an example.
When fuel is burned in a furnace or a boiler, the resulting flue
gas becomes available to heat up the corresponding cold-stream
medium (for steam generation or direct process duty). Transferring
heat to the process causes the flue gas temperature to drop as it moves
from the furnace to the stack. The stack temperature has to be above
a specified value: the minimum allowed stack temperature, which is
determined by limitations due to corrosion. If flue gas is used directly
for heating, then the Pinch point, if it is higher, may become more
limiting than the minimum allowed stack temperature. If the
analyzed process features both high-temperature and moderate-
temperature utility heating demands, then flue gas heating may not
be appropriate for satisfying all those demands. If steam is cheaper,
T
*
Process Pinch limitation Heat recovery pocket limitation
T
*
290
290
120
H H
T
min
= 20
Tsupply = 300
T
Return, min
= 150
T
Return, min
=130
C
P
m
i
n
C
P
m
i
n
120
Pinch
Pinch
Minimizing
the CP
Minimizing
the CP
The Pinch does not
need to be limiting
(b) (a)
FIGURE 4.22 Constraints for placing hot oil utilities, T
min
= 20 C.
67
160
140
120
100
80
Superheat
Evaporation
Preheat
Pinch
Point of closest
approach. Not
necessarily at the
boiling point
Cooling Water
60
40
20
0 H
Q
C,min
T*
FIGURE 4.23 Generating steam below the Pinch.
then combining it with flue gas reduces the latters CP and the
corresponding stack heat losses.
Another option for utility placement is to use part of the cooling
demand of a process for generating steam. This is illustrated in
Figure 4.23, in which steam generation is placed below the Pinch.
The GCC can reveal where utility substitution may improve
energy efficiency; see Figure 4.24. The main idea is to exploit heat
recovery pockets that span two or more utility temperature levels.
The technical feasibility of this approach is determined by both the
temperature span and the heat duty within the pocket, which should
be large enough to make utility substitution worthwhile when
weighed against the required capital costs.
Utility cooling below ambient temperatures may be required, a
need that is usually met by refrigeration. Refrigerants absorb heat by
evaporation, and pure refrigerants evaporate at a constant
temperature. Therefore, refrigerants are representedon the plot of
T (or T*) versus Hby horizontal bars, similarly to the steam levels.
On the GCC, refrigeration levels are placed similarly to steam levels;
see Figure 4.25.
When the level of a placed utility is between the temperatures of
a heat recovery pocket, the Utility Pinch cannot be located by using

68
T*
T
CW
5C
40C
70C
H
FIGURE 4.25 Placing refrigeration levels for pure refrigerants.
T*
CW
H H
CW
HP Steam
Generation
T*
HP Steam
Generation
LP Steam use
FIGURE 4.24 Exploiting a GCC pocket for utility substitution.
the GCC. In this case, the Balanced Composite Curves (BCCs) are
used. Figure 4.26 shows how the data about the placed utilities can be
transferred from the GCC to the BCCs, enabling the correct location
of the Utility Pinch associated with LP steam.
The BCCs create a combined view in which all heat sources and
sinks (including utilities) are in balance and all Pinches are shown.
69
BCCs are a useful additional tool for evaluating heat recovery,
obtaining targets for specific utilities, and planning HEN design
regions.
4.4 Extended Pinch Technology
4.4.1 Heat Transfer Area, Capital Cost, and
Total Cost Targeting
In addition to maximizing heat recovery, it is also possible to estimate
the required capital cost. The expressions for obtaining these
estimates are derived from the relationship between heat transfer
area and the efficiency of a heat exchanger. Methods for targeting
capital cost and total cost were initially developed by Townsend and
Linnhoff (1984) and further elaborated by others (e.g., Ahmad,
Linnhoff, and Smith 1990; Colberg and Morari, 1990; Linnhoff and
Ahmad, 1990; Zhu et al., 1995).
The HEN capital cost depends on the heat transfer area, the
number of the heat exchangers, the number of shell-and-tube passes
in each heat exchanger, construction materials, equipment type, and
operating pressures. The heat transfer area is the most significant
factor, and assuming one-pass shell and tube exchangers it is
possible to estimate the overall minimum required heat transfer
area; this value helps establish the lower bound on the networks
capital cost. Estimating the minimum heat transfer area is based on
the concept of an enthalpy interval. As shown in Figure 4.27, an
enthalpy interval is a slice constrained by two vertical lines with fixed
values on the H axis. This interval is characterized by its H
T* (a) (b)
HP steam
LP steam
T
HP steam
LP steam
LP steam Pinch
LP steam
Pinch
Process Pinch
Grand Composite Curve Balanced Composite Curve
Process Pinch
CW
H
CW
H
FIGURE 4.26 Locating the LP-steam Utility Pinch.

70
difference, the corresponding temperatures of the CCs at the interval
boundaries, its process stream population, and the film heat transfer
coefficients of those streams.
The minimum heat transfer area target can be obtained by
estimating it within each enthalpy interval of the BCCs and then
summing up the values over all intervals (Linnhoff and Ahmad,
1990):
EI NS
,
HEN, min
LM, ,
1 1
1
s i
i s i
i s
q
A
T h
= =
(
=
(
(

Here EI and NS denote the number of enthalpy intervals and the
number of streams; i denotes ith enthalpy interval; s, the sth stream;
T
LM,i
, the log-mean temperature difference in interval i (from the
CC segments); q
s
, the enthalpy change of the sth stream; and h
s
, the
heat transfer coefficient of sth stream. The area targets can be
supplemented by targets for number of shells (Ahmad and Smith,
1989) and for the number of heat exchanger units, thus providing a
basis for estimating the HEN capital cost and the total cost. This
approach is known as supertargeting (Ahmad, Linnhoff, and Smith,
1989). With supertargeting it is also possible to optimize the value of
T
min
prior to designing the HEN. Proposed improvements to the
capital cost targeting procedure of Townsend and Linnhoff (1984)
mainly involve: (1) obtaining more accurate surface area targets for
HENs with nonuniform heat transfer coefficients (Colberg and
Morari, 1990; Jegede and Polley, 1992; Zhu et al., 1995; Serna-
Gonzlez, Jimnez-Gutirrez, and Ponce-Ortega, 2007); (2) accounting
for construction materials, pressure rating, and different heat
exchanger types (Hall, Ahmad, and Smith, 1990); or (3) accounting
for safety factors, including prohibitive distance (Santos and
Zemp, 2000). Further information can be found in the paper by Taal
and colleagues (2003), which summarizes the common methods
used to estimate the cost of heat exchange equipment and also
provides sources of projections for energy prices.
T
Enthalpy interval
H
A
min
1
q
stream
h
stream
streams T
LM
=
FIGURE 4.27 Enthalpy intervals.

71
4.4.2 Heat Integration of Energy-Intensive Processes
Heat Engines
Particularly important processes are the heat enginessteam and gas
turbines. They operate by drawing heat from a higher-temperature
source, converting part of it to mechanical power; then (after some
energy loss) they reject the remaining heat at a lower temperature
(see Figure 4.28). For targeting purposes the energy losses are usually
neglected.
Integrating a heat engine across the Pinch, which is equivalent
to a Cross-Pinch process-to-process heat transfer, results in a
simultaneous increase of hot and cold utility, which usually leads to
excessive capital investment for the utility exchangers. If a heat
engine is integrated across the Pinch, then the hot utility requirement
is increased by Q and the cold by Q W (in the notation of Figure 4.28).
Heat engines should be integrated in one of two ways.
1. Above the Pinch (Figure 4.29a): This increases the hot utility
for the main process by W, but this extra heat is converted
into shaftwork.
2. Below the Pinch (Figure 4.29b): This offers a double benefit. It
saves on a cold utility, and the process heat below the Pinch
supplies Q to the heat engine (instead of rejecting it to a
cooling utility).
Different heat engines differ in their placement. On the one hand,
steam turbines may be placed either below or above the Pinch because
they draw and exhaust steam. Figure 4.30 shows steam turbine
integration above the Pinch, which has the benefit of cogenerating
T*
T*source
T*sink
Source
Q
QW
Sink
W
FIGURE 4.28 Heat engine conguration.

72
HP Steam
Q
FUEL
Q
LP
Q
HP
CW
H
Q
HP
T* T*
Q
LP
Q
C,min
Boiler
PINCH
Condensate
LP Steam
W
FIGURE 4.30 Integrating a steam turbine above the Pinch.
A + W
(a) (b)
A(QW)
QW
QW
BQ
A
T*
Q
HE
W
PINCH
PINCH
Integration above the pinch Integration below the pinch
100% conversion
HeatWork
100% conversion
HeatWork
B
T*
Q
HE W
FIGURE 4.29 Appropriate placement of heat engines.
extra power. In contrast, gas turbineswhich use fuel as inputare
typically used only as a utility heat source for the processes and can
be placed only above the Pinch.
Heat Pumps
Heat pumps present another opportunity for improving the energy
performance of an industrial process. Their operation is the reverse
of heat engines. That is, heat pumps take heat from a lower-
temperature source, upgrade it by applying mechanical power, and
then deliver the combined flow to a higher-temperature heat sink
(Figure 4.31).
An important characteristic of heat pumps is their coefficient of
performance (COP). This metric for device efficiency is defined as the
73
ratio between the heat delivered to the heat sink and the consumed
shaftwork (mechanical power):

sink source
Q Q W = + (4.6)

sink source
Q Q W
COP =
W W
+
= (4.7)
The COP is a nonlinear function of the temperature difference
between the heat sink and the heat source (Laue, 2006); this difference
is also referred to as temperature lift. Figure 4.32(a) shows the
appropriate integration of a heat pump across the Pinch, with the
heat source located below the Pinch and the heat sink above it.
The GCC facilitates sizing of the heat pump by evaluating the possible
temperatures of the heat source and heat sink, and their loads; see
Figure 4.32(b). Integrating entirely above the Pinch results in direct
conversion of mechanical power to heat. This is a waste of resources
because most of the power is generated at the expense of two to three
times the amount of fuel energy. The second alternativeplacing the
heat pump entirely below the Pinchresults in the power flow
consumed by the heat pump being added to the cooling utility
demand below the Pinch.
The procedure for sizing heat pumps to be placed across a
(process or utility) Pinch is illustrated in Figure 4.33. First, tem-
peratures are chosen for the heat source and the heat sink. Then the
horizontal projections spanning from the temperature axis to the
GCC provide the maximum values for the heat source and sink loads.
Recall that the GCC shows shifted temperatures. Because real
temperatures are used when calculating the heat-pump temperature
lift, the GCC values must be modified by subtracting or adding
T
min
/2 (see Section 4.3.3). The COP value can be derived from the
calculated T
pump
and can be then used to calculate the necessary
duties.
Sink
Source
T*
T*
T*
Q+W=125 kW
W=25 kW
Q=100 kW
sink
source
FIGURE 4.31 Heat-pump
conguration.

74
Q
HP
+W
Q
HP
+W
W
Q
HP
W
H
T
PUMP
T
PUMP
MAX
MAX
T*
T*
SINK
T*
SOURCE
2
3
1
4
4
3
6
5
COP
T
min
FIGURE 4.33 Procedure for heat-pump sizing.
Q
cmin
Q
HP
Q
Hmin
(Q
HP
+W)
Q
HP
Q
HP
+W
Q
HP
+W
W
Q
HP
CW
H
Load and temperature lift on the GCC
W
Appropriate placement
Steam
T
*
T
*
PINCH
HEAT
PUMP
(b) (a)
FIGURE 4.32 Heat pump placement against a heat recovery problem.
As a specific example, assume that the GCC in Figure 4.34 reflects
an industrial process with T
min
= 20C and that a heat pump is
available, described as follows:

0.874
pump
COP 100.18 T

=
(4.8)
Focusing on the Pinch nose (a sharp nose provides a better
integration option) allows choosing a shifted temperature for the
heat source, in this example: T
*
source
= 85C; see Figure 4.35. Using this
value allows extracting a maximum of 6.9 MW from the GCC below
the Pinch. Setting T
*
sink
= 100C results in an upper bound of 2.634
MW for the sink load. Transforming to real temperatures and taking
the difference yields a temperature lift of T
pump
= 35C. By Eq. (4.8),
the COP is thus equal to 4.4799. Given the upper bounds on the sink
75
and source heat loads, the smaller one is chosen as a basis. Here the
sink bound is smaller, so the sink is sized to its upper
bound: Q
sink
= Q
sink,max
= 2.634 MW. From this, the required pump
power consumption is computed to be 0.588 MW. As a result, the
actual source load for the heat pump is 2.046 MW. Comparing this
value with the upper bound of 6.9 MW, it is evident that the source
heat availability is considerably underutilized.
A different selection of source and sink temperatures is needed if
the source availability is to be better utilized. As a second attempt,
the sink temperature is increased from 100C to 110C. The maximum
source heat remains 6.9 MW, but the maximum sink capacity
increases from 2.634 to 7.024 MW. This results in the desired
Maximum
Q
SINK
Q
SOURCE
H [MW]
20
0 5 10 15 20 25
40
60
80
100
120
140
T
*

[
C
]
FIGURE 4.35
Heat-pump sizing
example: Attempt 1.
T
MIN
= 20C
H[MW]
H [MW]
21.90
29.40
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 10 20 30 40
23.82
18.00
1.80
0.00
4.30
11.50
15.00 30
79
91
94
115
118
131
410
440
T*[C]
T*[C]
FIGURE 4.34 Heat-pump sizing example: Initial data of the GCC.

76
temperature lift of T
pump
= 45C; the COP is now 3.5964, W = 2.657
MW, and the sink load Q
sink
= 9.557 MW; see Figure 4.36.
However, the heat sink is oversized in this case (Figure 4.36), so
the heat source temperature has to be shifted upward. An increase of
2.28C (see Figure 4.37) yields the following values: T
*
source
= 87.28C;
T
pump
= 42.72C; a maximum source load (also taken as the selected
source load) of 5.152 MW; a maximum sink load equal to the selected
sink load of Q
sink
= 7.016 MW; COP = 3.7637; and W = 1.864 MW. Better
results can be obtained by optimizing the two temperatures
simultaneously while using the overall utility cost as a criterion.
The sink is oversized
Q
SINK
Q
SOURCE
H [MW]
20
0 5 10 15 20 25
40
60
80
100
120
140
T
*

[
C
]
FIGURE 4.36 Heat-pump sizing example: Attempt 2.
Q
SINK
Q
SOURCE
H [MW]
20
0 5 10 15 20 25
40
60
80
100
120
140
T
*

[
C
]
FIGURE 4.37 Heat-pump sizing example: Attempt 3.
77
CW
LP
IP
MP
HP
H
T*
FIGURE 4.38 Heat-pump placement across the utility Pinch.
HEAT
PUMP
R
cond
R
1
R
2
H
CW
W
0
T*
FIGURE 4.39 Refrigeration systems.
Once utility levels are chosen, the heat pump can be placed also
across a Utility Pinch (Figure 4.38). A special case of integration
involves the placement of refrigeration levels (Figure 4.39).
Refrigeration facilities are heat pumps whose main value is that their
cold end absorbs heat. Utilizing their hot ends for process heating
can save considerable amounts of hot utility, especially when
relatively low-temperature heating is needed.
Distillation Processes and Other Separations
The simplest distillation column includes one reboiler and one
condenser, and these components account for most of the columns

78
energy demands. For purposes of Heat Integration, the column is
represented generally by a rectangle: the top side denotes the reboiler
as a cold stream, and the bottom side denotes the condenser as a hot
stream; see Figure 4.40.
There are three options for integrating distillation columns:
across the Pinch, as shown in Figure 4.41(a); and entirely below or
entirely above the Pinch, as shown in Figure 4.41(b). Integrating
across the Pinch only increases overall energy needs, so this option
is not useful. The other two options result in net benefits by
eliminating the need to use an external utility for supplying the
distillation reboiler (above the Pinch) or the condenser (below the
Pinch). The GCC is used to identify the appropriate column integration
options. Figure 4.42 illustrates two examples of appropriately placed
distillation columns.
PINCH
Across the pinch
Q
DIST
Q
DIST
A + Q
DIST T*
(a)
B + Q
DIST
PINCH
Below or above the pinch
Q
DIST
Q
DIST
Q
DIST
A
T*
(b)
B
Q
DIST
FIGURE 4.41 Distillation column: Integration options.
Condenser
Reboiler A
A, B
B
H
T
*
FIGURE 4.40 Distillation column: TH representation.
79
When the operating conditions of a column result in placing it
across the Pinch, there are several degrees of freedom that can be
utilized to facilitate appropriate placement. It may be possible to
change the operating pressure, which could shift the column with
respect to the temperature scale until it fits above or below the Pinch.
Varying the reflux ratio results in simultaneous changes of the column
temperature span and the duties of the reboiler and condenser.
Increasing the reflux ratio (the ratio between the reflux flowrate
returned to the column and the distillate product flowrate) yields a
smaller temperature span and larger duties, whereas reducing the
ratio has the opposite effect. It is also possible to split the column into
two parts, introducing a double effect distillation arrangement. In
this approach, one of the effects is placed below and the other above
the Pinch; this prevents internal thermal integration of the column
effects.
Additional options are available, such as interreboiling and
intercondensing. When using available degrees of freedom, it is
important to keep in mind that the energycapital trade-offs of the
column and the main process are combined and thus become more
complicated than the individual trade-offs. Another important issue
is controllability of the integrated designs: unnecessary complications
should be avoided, and disturbance propagation paths should be
discontinued. It is usually enough to integrate the reboiler or the
condenser. If inappropriate column placement cannot be avoided,
then condenser vapor recompression with a heat pump can be used
to heat up the reboiler.
Evaporators constitute another class of thermal separators.
Because they, too, feature a reboiler and a condenser, their operation
is similar to that of distillation columns and so the same integration
principles can be applied to them. Absorber-stripper loops and
T*
H
FIGURE 4.42 Appropriate placement
of distillation columns against the
GCC.

80
T
H
+
+
FIGURE 4.43 The plusminus principle.

dryers are similarly integrated. This subject has been extensively
studied by Kemp (2007, sections 6.3 to 6.5).
4.4.3 Process Modifications
The basic Pinch Analysis calculations assume that the core process
layers in the onion diagram (Figure 4.2) remain fixed. However, it is
possibleand in some cases beneficialto alter certain properties of
the process. Properties that can be exploited as degrees of freedom
include: (1) the pressure, temperature, or conversion rate in reactors;
(2) the pressure, reflux ratio, or pump-around flow rate in distillation
columns; and (3) the pressure of feed streams in evaporators.
Such modifications will also alter the heat capacity flow rates and
temperatures of the related process streams for Heat Integration; this
will cause further changes in the shapes of the CCs and the GCC,
thereby modifying the utility targets. The CCs are a valuable tool for
suggesting beneficial process modifications (Linnhoff et al., 1982).
Figure 4.43 illustrates this application of the CCs in terms of the plus-
minus principle. The main idea is to alter the CCs slope in the proper
direction in order to reduce the amount of utilities needed. This can
be achieved by changing CP (e.g., by mass flow variation). According
to Smith (2005), such decreases in utility requirements can be brought
about by (1) increases in the total hot stream duty above the Pinch,
(2) decreases in the total cold stream duty above the Pinch,
(3) decreases in the total hot stream duty below the Pinch, and/or
(4) increases in the total cold stream duty below the Pinch.
Another guide to modifying processes is the principle of keep hot
streams hot (KHSH) and keep cold streams cold (KCSC). As illustrated in
Figure 4.44, increasing the temperature differences by process
81
modification allows for more overlap of the curves and results in
improved heat recovery. In particular, energy targets improve if the
heating and cooling demands can be shifted across the Pinch. The
principle suggests (1) shifting hot streams (cooling demands) from
below to above the Pinch and/or (2) shifting cold streams (heating
demands) from above to below the Pinch. See Chapter 12 (and
Figure 12.7) for more details.
4.5 HEN Synthesis
Most industrial-scale methods synthesize heat recovery networks
under the assumption of a steady state.
4.5.1 The Pinch Design Method
The Pinch Design Method (Linnhoff and Hindmarsh, 1983) became
popular owing to its simplicity and efficient management of
complexity. The method has evolved into a complete suite of tools for
heat recovery and design techniques for energy efficiency, including
guidelines for changing and integrating a number of energy-intensive
processes.
HEN Representation
The representation of HENs by a general process flowsheet, as in
Figure 4.45, is not always convenient. The reason is that this
representation makes it difficult to answer a number of important
questions: Where is the Pinch? What is the degree of heat recovery?
How much cooling and heating from utilities is needed?
The so-called conventional HEN flowsheet (Figure 4.46) offers a
small improvement. It shows only heat transfer operations and is
based on a simple convention: cold streams run horizontally and hot
H H
Hot streams Cold streams
T
(a)
T
(b)
FIGURE 4.44 (a) Keep hot streams hot; (b) keep cold streams cold.

82
250C
140C
181.7C
205C
203.3C
150C
40C
20C
230C
180C
150C
106.7C
52.5C
140C
80C
10.0 MW
7.5 MW
17.5 MW
7.0 MW
8.0 MW
6.5 MW
2
3
1
4
H
C
200C
12.5 MW
Above the
Pinch
FIGURE 4.46
Conventional HEN
owsheet.
Feed 2
Feed 1
3
4
1
2
140C
230C
Reactor 1
Reactor 2
Product 2
250C
40C
40C
80C
Product 1, 40C
180C
20C
Off-Gas
FIGURE 4.45 Using a general process owsheet to represent a HEN.
streams vertically. Although the Pinch location can be marked for
simple cases, it is still difficult to see. This representation makes it
difficult to express the proper sequencing of heat exchangers and to
represent clearly the network temperatures. Furthermore, changing
83
HOT 1
HOT 2
HOT 1
HOT 2
H
H
C
COLD 1
COLD 2
COLD 1
COLD 2
CW
Simplified view
Showing the utility streams explicitly
Hot utility
Heat exchange
between streams
H
C
Cold utility
(a)
(b)
MP Steam
FIGURE 4.47 The grid diagram for HENs.
the positions of some matches often results in complicated path
representations.
The grid diagram, as shown in Figure 4.47, provides a convenient
and efficient representation of HENs by eliminating the problems
just described. The grid diagram has several advantages: the
representation of streams and heat exchangers is clearer, it is more
convenient for representating temperatures, and the Pinch location
(and its implications) are clearly visible; see Figure 4.48. As in the
conventional HEN flowsheet, only heat transfer operations are shown
in the grid diagram. Temperature increases from left to right in the
grid, which is intuitive and in line with CC diagrams, making
(re)sequencing heat exchangers are straightforward.
The Design Procedure
The procedure for designing a HEN follows several simple steps:
1. Specification of the heat recovery problem.

84
2. Identification of the heat recovery targets and the heat
recovery Pinch, as explained in Section 4.3.
3. Synthesis
4. Evolution of the HEN topology
The first two steps were discussed in previous sections. The synthesis
step begins by dividing the problem at the Pinch and then positioning
the process streams as shown in Figure 4.49.
The engineering practice suggests starting the network design
from the Pinch (the most restricted part of the design owing to
temperature differences approaching T
min
) and then to place
heat exchanger matches while moving away from the Pinch
(Figure 4.50). When placing matches, several rules have to be followed
in order to obtain a network that minimizes utility use: (1) no
exchanger may have a temperature difference smaller than T
min
;
PINCH
150C
150C
250C
CP
[kW/C]
2
15
25
20
30
4
1
3
200C 80C
40C
20C 140C 180C
140C 230C
Q
Hmin
= 750 kW Q
Cmin
= 1000 kW
FIGURE 4.49 Dividing at the Pinch for the streams in Table 4.2.
A cross-Pinch heat transfer match No cross-Pinch heat transfer
C
H
H
C
FIGURE 4.48 The grid diagram and implications of the Pinch.
85
(2) no process-to-process heat transfer may occur across the Pinch;
and (3) no inappropriate use of utilities should occur.
At the Pinch, the enthalpy balance restrictions entail that certain
matches must be made if the design is to achieve minimum utility
usage without violating the T
min
constraint; these are referred to as
essential matches. Above the Pinch, the hot streams should be cooled
only by transferring heat to cold process streams, not to utility
cooling. Therefore, all hot streams above the Pinch have to be matched
up with cold streams. This means that all hot streams entering the
Pinch must be given priority when matches are made above the
Pinch. Conversely, cold streams entering the Pinch are given priority
when matches are made below the Pinch.
Now recall the example from Table 4.2. Figure 4.49 shows the
scaled grid diagram, indicating the hot and cold Pinch temperatures.
The part above the Pinch requires essential matches for streams 2
and 4, since they are entering the Pinch. Consider stream 4. One
possibility is to match it against stream 1, as shown in Figure 4.51.
Stream 4 is the hot stream, and its CP is greater than the CP for cold
stream 1. As shown in the figure, at the Pinch the temperature
distance between the two streams is exactly equal to T
min
. Moving
away from the Pinch results in temperature convergence because the
slope of the hot stream line is less steep owing to its larger CP. Since
T
min
is the lower bound on network temperature differences, the
proposed heat exchanger match is infeasible and thus is rejected.
Another possibility for handling the cooling demand of stream 4
is to implement a match with stream 3, as shown in Figure 4.52. The
CP of stream 3 is larger than the CP of stream 4, resulting in divergent
PINCH
H
T
FIGURE 4.50 Pinch design principle.

86
temperature profiles in the direction away from the Pinch. Thus, the
rule above the Pinch may be expressed as follows:

hot stream cold stream
CP CP s
(4.9)
The logic below the Pinch is symmetric. This part of the design is
a net heat source, which means that the heating requirements of the
cold streams have to be satisfied by matching up with hot streams.
The same type of reasoning as before yields the following requirement:
the CP value of a cold stream must not be greater than the CP value
PINCH
H
T
min
4
T
3
30
20
25
15
2
4
1
3
250C
200C 150C
140C 180C
HEAT
EXCHANGER
MATCH
140C 230C
150C
PINCH CP
[kW/C]
The match is feasible
FIGURE 4.52 A feasible heat exchanger match above the Pinch.
PINCH
PINCH
150C
150C
250C
2
4
1
3
15
25
20
Temperature difference smaller
than T
min
INFEASIBLE!
30
CP
[kW/C]
200C
180C 140C
140C 230C
HEAT
EXCHANGER
MATCH
4
1
CP
HOT
> CP
COLD
H
T
T
min
FIGURE 4.51 An infeasible heat exchanger match above the Pinch.
87
of a hot stream if a feasible essential match is to result. Generalizing
Eq. (4.9) shows that the CP of the stream entering the Pinch must be
less than or equal to the CP of the stream leaving the Pinch:
entering pinch leaving pinch
CP CP s
(4.10)
The Pinch Design Method incorporates a special tool for handling
this stage: CP tables (Linnhoff and Hindmarsh, 1983). Here the
streams are represented by their CP values, which are sorted in
descending order. This facilitates the identification of promising
combinations of streams for candidate essential matches. Sizing the
matches follows the so-called tick-off heuristic, which stipulates that
the heat exchange match should be as large as possible so that at least
one of the involved streams will be completely satisfied and then
ticked off from the design list; see Figure 4.53.
Completing the Design
The HEN design above the Pinch is illustrated in Figure 4.54. The
design below the Pinch follows the same basic rules, with the small
difference that here it is the cold streams that define the essential
matches.
Figure 4.55 details the design below the Pinch for the considered
example. First the match between streams 4 and 1 is placed and sized
to the duty required by stream 4. The other match, between streams 2
and 1, formally violates the Pinch rule for placing essential matches.
However, since stream 1 already has another match at the Pinch, the
current match (between 4 and 1) is not strictly termed essential. Up
203.3C 250C
2
CP
[kW/C]
Q
STREAM
[kW]
15 1500
1250
800
2700
4 25
20
30
200C
180C
800 kW
1250 kW
T
X
= 181.7C
T
X
=140+
230C
=181.7C
1250
30
150C
150C
140C
140C
1
3
FIGURE 4.53 The tick-off heuristic.

88
to the required duty of 650 kW, this match does not violate the T
min

constraint, which is the relevant one. The completed HEN topology
is shown in Figure 4.56.
It is not always possible to follow the basic design rules described
previously, so in some cases it is necessary to split the streams so that
heat exchange matches can be appropriately placed. Splitting may be
required in the following situations:
1. Above the Pinch when the number of hot streams is greater
than the number of cold streams (N
H
> N
C
); see Figure 4.57.
2. Below the Pinch when the number of cold streams is greater
than the number of hot streams (N
C
> N
H
); see Figure 4.58.
3. When the CP values do not suggest any feasible essential
match; see Figure 4.59.
40C
80C
20C
52.5C
140C
1750 kW 650 kW
106.7C 150C
2
4 25
15
1750
20 2400
1650
CP
[kW/C]
Q
STREAM
[kW]
150C
1000 kW
C
1
FIGURE 4.55 The HEN design below the Pinch.
150C
150C 200C
250C
2 15
CP
[kW/C]
Q
STREAM
[kW]
25
20
1500
1250
800
30 2700
4
H
203.3C
205C 230C
180C
140C
1
3
140C
800 kW
T
X
= 181.7C
1250 kW 700 kW 750 kW
FIGURE 4.54 The HEN design above the Pinch.
89
PINCH
PINCH
CP
[kW/C]
CP
[kW/C]
12
20
7
100C
100C
100C
100C
100C
100C
90C
90C
90C
90C
4
5
4
5
1
2
3
1
2
3
T > 90
T > 90
15
30
12
20
7
15
30
(a)
(b)
More Hot Streams than Cold Streams
Split a cold stream
I ?
FIGURE 4.57 Splitting above the Pinch for N
H
> N
C
.
203.3C
250C
200C
CP
[kW/C]
2 15
25
20
30
4
180C
PINCH
40C
C
106.7C
150C
150C
1000 kW
80C
20C
1
650 kW
1750 kW
1250 kW
800 kW
700 kW 750 kW
205C
230C
52.5C 140C
140C
3 H
T
x
=181.7 C
Q
Hmin
=750 kW
Q
Cmin
=1000 kW
FIGURE 4.56 Completed HEN design.

90
The loads of the matches involving stream branches are again
determined using the tick-off heuristic. Because each stream splitter
presents an additional degree of freedom, it is necessary to decide
how to divide the overall stream CP between the branches. One
possibility is illustrated in Figure 4.60. The suggested split ratio is 4:3.
This approach would completely satisfy the heating needs of the cold
stream branches.
The arrangement in Figure 4.60 is actually trivial and can be
improved upon. Unless the stream combinations impose some severe
constraints, there is a large number of possible split ratios. This fact
can be exploited to optimize the network. In many cases it is possible
to save an extra heat exchanger unit by ticking off two steams with a
PINCH
PINCH
CP
[kW/C]
CP
[kW/C]
35
60
24
30
20
35
60
24
30
20
100C
100C
100C
100C
90C
90C
90C
90C
90C
90C
4
5
1
2
1
2
3
4
5
3
T<100
T<100
(a) More Cold Streams than Hot Streams
(b) Split a Hot Stream
?
FIGURE 4.58 Splitting below the Pinch for N
C
> N
H
.
91
PINCH
PINCH
CP
[kW/C]
CP
[kW/C]
100C
100C
90C
30C
100C
30C
40C
100C 40C
15C
90C 15C
1
1
2
2
4
4
4
3
7
5
5
3
3
(a)
(b)
Split the cold Stream
CP rules are not satisfied
Rules: CP
H
CP
C
; N
H
N
C
Rules: CP
H
CP
C
; N
H
N
C
? ?
FIGURE 4.59 Splitting to enable CP values for essential matches.
PINCH CP
[kW/C]
90C
100C
100C
30C
15C
1
2
3
Q
1
= 4 (9015) =300 kW Q
2
=3 (915) =225 kW
T
2
=100225/4
T
2
=43.75C
T
1
=100300/5=40C
5
4
4
3
C1
C2
1
2
40C
FIGURE 4.60 Splitting and trivial tick-off.

92
single match, as illustrated in Figure 4.61. This satisfies both hot
stream 2 and the corresponding cold branch of stream 3, thereby
eliminating the second cooler.
The complete algorithm for splitting streams above the Pinch is
given in Figure 4.62. The procedure for splitting below the Pinch is
symmetrical, with the cold and hot streams switching their roles.
Network Evolution
Any HEN obtained using the design guidelines described previously
is optimal with respect to its energy requirements, but it is usually
away from the total cost optimum. Observing the Pinch division
PINCH
CP
[kW/C]
90C
100C
100C
30C
15C
3
Step 1: Q
2
= 4 (100 40) = 240 kW
Step 3: Q
1
= 3.8 (90 15) = 285 kW
Q
1
Q
2
Step 2: CP
C2
= 240(90 15) = 3.2
T
1
= 100 285/5
T
1
= 43C
40C
C1 1
1
1
2
2
2
3.2
3.8
5
4
FIGURE 4.61 Splitting and advanced tick-off.
CP
H
CP
C
?
N
H
CP
C
?
Place
Matches
Yes Yes
No
No
Stream Data
at Pinch
Split Cold
Stream
Split Hot
Stream
FIGURE 4.62 Splitting procedure above the Pinch.
93
typically introduces loops into the final topology and leads to larger
number of heat exchanger units. The final step in HEN design is
evolution of the topology: identifying heat load loops and open heat
load paths; then using them to optimize the network in terms of heat
loads, heat transfer area, and topology. During this phase, formerly
rigorous requirementsfor example, that all temperature differences
exceed T
min
and that cross-Pinch heat transfers be excludedare
usually relaxed. The resulting optimization formulations are typically
nonlinear and involve structural decisions, so they are MINLP
problems. Different approximations and simplifying assumptions
can be introduced to obtain linear and/or continuous formulations.
The design evolution step can even be performed manually by
breaking the loops and reducing the number of heat exchangers.
Eliminating heat exchangers from the topology is done at the expense
of shifting heat loads (from the eliminated heat recovery exchangers)
to utility exchangers: heaters and coolers. Topology evolution
terminates when the resulting energy cost increase exceeds the
projected savings in capital costs, which corresponds to a total cost
minimum.
Network evolution is performed by shifting loads within the
network toward the end of eliminating excessive heat exchangers
and/or reducing the effective heat transfer area. To shift loads, it is
necessary to exploit the degrees of freedom provided by loops and
utility paths. In this context, a loop is a circular closed path connecting
two or more heat exchangers, and a utility path connects a hot with a
cold utility or connects two utilities of the same type. Figure 4.63
shows a HEN loop and a utility path. A network may contain many
such loops and paths.
4.5.2 Superstructure Approach
As presented so far, the Pinch Design Method is based on a sequential
strategy for the conceptual design of HENs. It first develops an
UTILITY PATH
U
U
W +U
+U
+W
W +W
5
H
2
4
250 40
20
C 1
3
1
2
80
140
LOOP
200
180
230
4
3
FIGURE 4.63 Loop and path in a Heat Exchanger Network.

94
understanding of the thermodynamic limitations imposed by the set
of process streams, and then it exploits this knowledge to design a
highly energy-efficient HEN. However, another approach has also
been developed: the superstructure approach to HEN synthesis,
which relies on developing a reducible structure (the superstructure)
of the network under consideration. An example of the spaghetti-
type HEN superstructure fragments typically generated by such
methods (Yee et al., 1990) is shown in Figure 4.64.
Typically, this kind of superstructure is developed in stages (Yee
et al., 1990) or blocks (Zhu et al., 1995), each of which is a group of
several consecutive enthalpy intervals (discussed previously). Within
each block, each hot process stream is split into a number of branches
corresponding to the number of the cold streams presented in the
block, and all cold streams are split similarly. This is followed by
matching each hot branch with each cold branch. Once developed,
the superstructure is subjected to optimization. The set of decision
variables includes the existence of the different stream split branches
and heat exchangers, the heat duties of the exchangers, and the split
fractions or flow rates of the split streams. The objective function
involves mainly the total annualized cost of the network, although
the function may be augmented by some penalty terms for dealing
with difficult constraints. Because the optimization procedure makes
structural as well as operating decisions about the network being
designed, it is called a structure-parameter
2
optimization. Depending
2
This should not be confused with the parameter entities from Mathematical
Programming.
Hot
Streams
Cold
Streams
Enthalpy Interval
FIGURE 4.64 Spaghetti superstructure fragment.
95
on what assumptions are adopted, it is possible to obtain both MILP
and MINLP formulations. Linear formulations are usually derived
by assuming isothermal mixing of the split branches and then using
piecewise linearization on the heat exchanger capital cost functions.
With the superstructure approach it is possible to include other
heat exchange optionsfor example, direct heat transfer units (i.e.,
mixing) and different heat exchanger types (e.g., double-pipe, plate-
fin, and shell-and-tube). Sorak and Kravanja (2004) presented a
method incorporating different heat exchanger types into a
superstructure block for each potential heat exchange match. Some
other interesting works in this area are by Daichendt and Grossmann
(1997), Zamora and Grossman (1998), Bjrk and Westerlund (2002),
and Frausto-Hernndez et al. (2003).
4.5.3 A Hybrid Approach
It is clear that the superstructure methodology offers some
advantages in the synthesis of process systems and, in particular, of
HENs. Among these advantages are: (1) the capacity to evaluate a
large number of structural and operating alternatives simultaneously;
(2) the possibility of automating (to a high degree) the synthesis
procedure; and (3) the ability to deal efficiently with many additional
issues, such as different heat exchanger types and additional
constraints (e.g., forbidden matches).
However, these advantages also give rise to certain weaknesses.
First, the superstructure approaches, in general, cannot eliminate the
inherent nonlinearity of the problem. Hence they resort to
linearization and simplifying assumptions, such as allowing only
isothermal mixing of split streams. Second, the transparency and
visualization of the synthesis procedure are almost completely lost,
excluding the engineer from the process. Third, the final network is
merely given as an answer to the initial problem, and it is difficult to
assess how good a solution it represents or whether a better solution
is possible. Fourth, the difficulties of computation and interpreting
the result grow dramatically with problem size; this is a consequence
of the large number of discrete alternatives to be evaluated. Finally,
the resulting networks often contain subnetworks that exhibit a
spaghetti structure: a cluster of parallel branches on several hot and
cold streams with multiple exchangers between them. Because of
how superstructures are constructed, these subnetworks often
cannot be eliminated by the solvers.
All these considerations highlight the fundamental trade-off
between applying techniques that are based on thermodynamic
insights, such as the Pinch Design Method, and relying on a
superstructure approach. It would therefore be useful to find a
combination of both approaches and, if there is, to see whether it
offers any advantages. One such middle way is the class of hybrid
synthesis methods described next. A method of this class first

96
applies Pinch Analysis to obtain a picture of the thermodynamic
limitations of the problem; but then, instead of continuing on to
direct synthesis, it builds a reduced superstructure. At this point
the method follows the route of the classical superstructure
approaches, including structure-parameter optimization and
topology simplifications. The cycle of optimization and simplification
is usually repeated several times before the final optimal network
is obtained. All resulting networks feature a high degree of heat
recovery, though rarely the maximum possible. A key component
of this technique is avoiding the addition of unnecessary features
to the superstructure, and this is an area where Pinch Analysis can
prove helpful. A good example of a hybrid method for HEN
synthesis is the block decomposition method (Zhu, 1997).
4.5.4 Key Features of the Resulting Networks
The networks obtained by the different synthesis methods have
distinct features, which influence their total cost and their properties
of operation and control. Because the Pinch Design Method
incorporates the tick-off heuristic rule (Figure 4.53), the networks
synthesized by this method tend to have simple topologies with
few stream splits and feature minimum number of units (Linnhoff
et al., 1982). Both the tick-off rule and the Pinch principle dictate
that utility exchangers be placed last, so they are usually located
immediately before the target temperatures of the streams.
However, the tick-off rule may also result in many process streams
not having utility exchangers assigned to them, which may reduce
control efficiency. The Pinch Design Method may reduce network
flexibility because it relies on the Pinch decomposition of the
problem (Figure 4.50) and so, to a large degree, fixes the network
behavior.
Both the pure superstructure approach and the hybrid approach
tend to produce more complex topologies. Their distinctive feature is
the greater number of heat exchangers and stream splits, a result of
how the initial superstructure is built. Spaghetti-type subnetworks
also present a significant challenge to control.
4.6 Total Site Energy Integration
The concept of the Total Site was introduced by Dhole and Linnhoff
(1993b). Figure 4.65 shows a typical industrial Total Site. Refinery and
petrochemical processes usually operate as parts of large sites or
factories. These sites have several processes serviced by a centralized
utility system involved in steam and power generation. The two
major components of Total Site integration are closely related: heat
recovery (through the steam or utility system) and power
cogeneration.
97
4.6.1 Total Site Data Extraction
The heating and cooling requirements of the individual processes
are represented by their respective GCCs (see Section 4.3.5). The
GCC represents the process-utility interface for a single process.
These individual GCCs can be used to identify the potential heat
recovery via steam mains. When a site houses several production
processes, the GCC of each process may indicate certain steam levels
that are suitable for the given process. This suggests that trade-offs
need to be made among energy demands of the various processes
on a Total Site, since each process usually needs utility heating or
cooling at levels different from the other processes.
4.6.2 Total Site Profiles
It is possible to set utility targets for sites involving several processes
(Dhole and Linnhoff, 1993b; Linnhoff and Dhole, 1993; see also
extensions by Kleme et al., 1997). The procedure is based on
thermal profiles for the entire site that are called, naturally enough,
Total Site Profiles (TSPs). These profiles are constructed from the
GCCs of the individual processes on the site. The first step (see
Figure 4.66) is to extract the net heating and cooling demands. Two
options are possible: restricting the Heat Integration to each process
(so that heat recovery pockets are not considered for Total Site
analysis) or to allow extended integration across processes by
including the GCC segments forming the pockets. When the scope
of site integration is extended, however, some design possibilities
Emissions
Emissions
Fuel 1
Fuel 2
Fuel 3
Emissions
Power
HP Steam
MP Steam
LP Steam
Plant C
Cooling
Plant B Plant A
Condensing
FIGURE 4.65 Schematic of an industrial Total Site.

98
become impracticalfor instance, the analysis may try to integrate
streams that are distant, or there may be control and start-up
problems. Note that the parts of each GCC that are directly satisfied
by local utilities (e.g., furnaces within the processes) are also
excluded from the analysis; the remaining curve parts are those
representing the net heat source and sink demands to be satisfied
by the central utility system. As shown in the figure, subseqent
steps include the rotation of heat source segments (for purely
graphical reasons), the thermal combination of stream segments
(much as in the construction of process CCs), and alignment of the
resulting Total Site source profile and Total Site sink profile.
As shown in Figure 4.66, the source and sink elements extracted
from the GCCs are shifted by T
min
/2: the temperatures of the heat
source segments are reduced while those for the sinks are increased
This operation ensures that all temperatures in the picture remain in
the scale of the true utility temperatures so that, if a utility profile
touches the process-derived profiles, then there will be just enough
temperature driving force to effect the heat transfer. The composite
of the heat sources elements is the Site Source Profile and that of the
sinks is the Site Sink Profile.
Site Source Profiles and Site Sink Profiles derive primarily from
the process GCCs. Other steam requirements (mostly for process
use not directly related to heating) are usually not represented in
the GCC; examples include steam for ejectors and reactors as well
Shifed T
**
T
**
T
**
Shifed T
**
1. Extract segments
H
3. Combine segments
H 0
4. Align profiles
H 0
2. Rotate source segments
H
1.1. Remove the pockets
1.2. Shift
PINCH
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
T
*
T
*
T
**
FIGURE 4.66 Construction of the Total Site Proles when the heat recovery
pockets are excluded from site integration.
99
as unaccountable steam usage. These additional requirements have
to be considered when analyzing or designing the sites utility
system. Such steam demands are considered to be sink elements
and are added to the Site Sink Profile without any temperature
correction.
4.6.3 Heat Recovery via the Steam System
The maximum possible heat recovery through a utility system can be
targeted by using the Site Sink and Source Profiles in combination
with the steam header saturation temperatures. Source CCs for utility
generation and usage are constructed that account for feasible heat
transfer from the Site Source Profile to the site source CC and from
the site sink CC to the Site Sink Profile. The site CCs are analogous to
the individual process CCs. The source CC is built starting from the
highest feasible steam level. The steam generation at each level is
maximized before the next lower levels are analyzed. This ensures
maximum utilization of the heat sources temperature potential. The
remainder of the Site Source Profile (i.e., the part that does not overlap
the newly built source CC) is served by CW. Building the sink CC
follows a symmetrical procedure only starting from the lowest
possible steam level. The use of this level is maximized before moving
up to the next higher temperature level, and so forth until steam with
the highest possible level is usedincluding boiler-generated
steam.
Figure 4.67 illustrates the procedure for building the Total Site
CCs; here, the TSPs from Figure 4.66 were reused. There are several
250
200
150
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

[
C
]
100
50
25 20 15 10 5 0
Enthalpy [MW]
5 10 15 20 25
LP
MP
HP
VHP
CW
4
3
2
2
1
1
3
4
From boilers
FIGURE 4.67 Constructing Total Site Composite Curves.

100
steam pressure levels, which are represented by their corresponding
saturation temperatures. The main distribution levels are high-
pressure (HP) steam at a saturation temperature of 200C , medium-
pressure (MP) steam at 170C, and LP steam at 115C. In addition,
very-high-pressure (VHP) steam at 250C is generated by the steam
boilers, and CW is also available.
The Site Source Profile in Figure 4.67 can generate at most 2 MW
of HP steam, another 2 MW of MP steam, and 15 MW of LP steam.
The rest of the heat sources will need to be served by the CW, which
completes the Site Source CC. The Site Sink CC, indicates needs for 1
MW of LP steam, 6.5 MW of MP steam, 2.5 MW HP steam, and the
remaining 5 MW demand to be satisfied by VHP steam. The two site
CCs can be overlapped in the same way as were the process CCs,
thereby illustrating the Total Site heat recovery possible through the
steam system. Figure 4.68 shows the corresponding site CCs
overlapped. The amount of heat recovery for the Total Site is indicated
by the amount of overlap between the CCs. Heat recovery is
maximized when the two Site Composite Curves touch and cannot
be shifted further. The area where the curves touch, which is usually
confined between two steam levels (here, the MP and LP levels), is
the Total Site Pinch. The steam mains located at the Site Pinch feature
opposite net steam loads; in other words, the steam main above the
Site Pinch is a net steam user while the one below the Site Pinch is a
net steam generator. Just as with the Process Pinch, the site Pinch
divides an overall heat recovery problem into a net heat source and a
net heat sink.
250
200
150
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

[
C
]
100
50
25 20 15 10 5 0
Enthalpy [MW]
5 10 15 20 25
LP
MP
HP
VHP
CW
Heat recovery via steam
FIGURE 4.68 Targeting heat recovery.
101
4.6.4 Power Cogeneration
The factors that control the economics of utility systems are fuels and
their properties, the ratio of fuel prices to power prices, efficiency of
the utility system, and the amount of power to be imported/exported.
Depending on these factors and the Total Site power demand, the site
may be a net power importer or exporter or be in power balance.
Most industrial processes require steam at different pressure
levels up to about 30 bar. Central utility boilers usually generate steam
at higher pressure (40100 bar). Back-pressure steam turbines are used
to expand the steam from higher- to lower-level steam headers, thus
generating power while delivering steam to processes. Another
method of cogeneration employs a gas turbine, which is in itself a
power generating equipment. A gas turbine produces large amounts
of waste heat along with the powerthe ratio of heat to power is
about 1.52. This is high-temperature (450600C) waste heat capable
of generating even VHP steam. The heat from a gas turbines exhaust
stream can be utilized by heat recovery steam generators with or
without supplementary firing. The generated steam is expanded
through steam turbines to produce additional power.
The work of Dhole and Linnhoff (1993b) has been further
developed by Raissi (1994) and Kleme et al. (1997). The latter paper
describes the development of a tool called the Site Utility GCC
(SUGCC). The area enclosed by this curve is proportional to the
power cogeneration potential of the site steam system; Kleme et al.
(1997) also defined a simple proportionality coefficient, whose value
is usually evaluated for each industrial site separately. This
cogeneration targeting model is referred to as the T-H model
because it is based on heat flows through the steam system.
Using SUGCCs allowed Kleme and colleagues (1997) to set
thermodynamic targets for cogeneration of power along with targets
for site-scope heat recovery that would minimize the cost of utilities.
Satisfying the goal of maximum heat recovery leads to a minimum
boiler VHP steam requirement, which in turn can be achieved by
maximizing steam recovery. Here the power generation by steam
turbines is also minimal, which has the effect of maximizing
imported power. This scenario can be represented by the Site CCs
that are shifted to a position of maximum overlap (i.e., pinched). This
target represents the thermodynamic limitation on system efficiency,
but this is not a specification that must be achieved. The case of
minimizing the cost of utilities is handled by exploring the trade-off
between steam recovery and power cogeneration by steam turbines.
If design guidelines are thus based on minimizing cost, then the
resulting network design is usually different from that produced
when aiming to minimize fuel consumption.
Mavromatis and Kokossis (1998) proposed a simple model of
back-pressure steam turbine performance. In this model, the
performance of a steam turbine is related to its size (in terms of

102
maximum shaft power) and to part-load performance; the shaft
power is modeled as a function of the steam mass flow that is known
as the Willan line. This model was extended to condensing steam
turbines by Shang (2000). All these works follow the same model
structure and employ the same equations; however, they use different
values for the turbine regression coefficients.
The intercept of the Willan line was mapped by Mavromatis and
Kokossis (1998) and by Shang (2000) as identical to the turbine energy
losses, also assuming a fixed loss rate. Varbanov, Doyle, and Smith
(2004) introduced improvements to those models by (1) recognizing
that the Willan line intercept has no direct physical meaning and is
simply the intercept of a linearization, and (2) accounting for both
inlet and outlet pressures of the steam turbines. These improved
steam turbine models have been incorporated into methodologies for
simulating and optimizing steam networks; they have also been
used to target heat and power cogeneration by assuming a single
large steam turbine for each expansion zone between two consecutive
steam headers.
4.6.5 Advanced Total Site Optimization and Analysis
A model for optimizing the utility system serves as a tool for reducing
site operating costs related to energy and for analyzing the
thermodynamic limitations of energy conversions. An advanced
approach to these concepts, known as top-level analysis, is one that
allows scoping which site processes to target for Heat Integration
improvement (Varbanov, Doyle, and Smith, 2004). Consider the utility
system shown in Figure 4.69 (Smith and Varbanov, 2005), whose
operating properties have been optimized for the given steam and
power demands.
Suppose it were possible to reduce the HP steam demandfor
example, by improving the energy efficiency within the processes
that use HP steam. What, then, would such a saving in steam actually
be worth? Reducing HP steam demand means that less steam needs
to be expanded from the VHP level, which could lead in turn to less
power cogeneration and increased import of power. As a support
tool for deciding how best to utilize the potential steam excess and
estimate the value of potential steam savings, Varbanov, Doyle, and
Smith (2004) introduced the concept of marginal steam price. This
characteristic captures the change in a utility systems energy cost
per unit change in steam demand, and it is specific to a given
combination of steam header and operating conditions. By
optimizing the utility system at gradual successive reductions of
potential steam demand on the headers, it is possible to obtain a
curve of the marginal steam price versus the savings that could be
obtained. The marginal price curve for the utility system in
103
Figure 4.69 is shown in Figure 4.70. The plot indicates that the most
potential for improvements is in the HP steam using processes,
followed by MP users; the potential for LP steam savings is evidently
quite modest.
Natural Gas
Fuel Oil
Current: 55.4
[40.0; 180.0]
Current: 208.4
[115.0; 335.0]
Current: 59.5
[15.0; 65.0]
Current: 40.9
[30.0; 70.0]
Current: 108.0
[60.0; 150.0]
Current: 75.0
[40.0; 75.0]
Current: 105.0
[60.0; 165.0]
Current: 15.0
[15.0; 75.0]
Current: 90.0
[30.0; 9.0]
Current: 20.0
[20.0; 20.0]
HRSG
Boiler 2
T4
T5
0.0
LP Vent
T7
CW
0.073 bar abs.
All flowrates are in [t/h]. The lower and upper bounds are shown in the format [min;max].
Coal
Boiler 1
Current: 250.0
[50.0; 250.0]
GT
18 MW
Air
0.0
T6
0.0
0.0
Current: 28
20.0
54.5
55.9
128.0
VHP (101 bar abs.)
HP (41 bar abs.)
MP (15 bar abs.)
LP (3 bar abs.)
FIGURE 4.69 Optimized utility system.
0
0
1
2
3
4
M
a
r
g
i
n
a
l

P
r
i
c
e
,

$
/
t

5
6
7
8 HP Steam MP Steam
10 20 30
Steam Savings, t/h
40 50 60 70
FIGURE 4.70 Marginal
steam prices for the
utility system shown in
Figure 4.69.
CHAPTER 5
Mass Integration
T
he two main branches of Process Integration are energy
integration and mass integration. Mass integration is a
systematic methodology that provides a fundamental
understanding of the global flow of mass within the process and
then employs this understanding to identify performance targets
and to optimize the allocation, separation, and generation of streams
and species. In the context of wastewater minimization, a mass
integration problem involves transferring mass (contaminant load)
from rich process streams to lean process streams in order to achieve
their target outlet concentration and simultaneously minimizing
waste generation and the consumption of utilitiesincluding
freshwater and external mass separating agents (Rakovi, 2006).
5.1 Water Integration
Water is widely used in various industries as an important raw
material. It is also frequently used in the heating and cooling utility
systems (e.g., steam production, cooling water) and as a mass
separating agent for various mass transfer operations (e.g., washing,
extraction). Strict requirements for product quality and associated
safety issues in manufacturing contribute to large amounts of
high-quality water being consumed by the industry. Stringent
environmental regulations coupled with a growing human population
that seeks improved quality of life have led to increased demand for
quality water. These developments have increased the need for
improved water management and wastewater minimization.
Adopting techniques to minimize water usage can effectively reduce
both the demand for freshwater and the amount of effluents generated
by the industry. In addition to this environmental benefit, efficient
water management reduces the costs for acquiring freshwater and
treating effluents.
A number of different methodologies have been applied to
minimizing water use and effluents. These include
Minimizing water consumption through efficient management
and control of process operations
105

106
C h a p t e r F i v e
Optimizing the material and energy balances of processes by
applying advanced optimization strategies that aim to reduce
waste
Integrating optimization and production planning techniques
in conjunction with real-time plant measurements to control
for product quality and minimize losses
Increasing the use of enhanced intelligent support to operators
by applying knowledge-based decision-making procedures
to select options that best protect the environment
Employing Process Integration techniques that are based on
Pinch Analysis
Each processing industry has its own unique and specific
features. In all cases, however, it is advisable to progress from the
simplest measuressuch as good housekeeping based on efficient
management, control, and maintenanceto more advanced
methodologies. Some processes are continuous and run seven days a
week for the whole year; others are intermittent and/or highly
dependent on availability of the feed stock. Typical of such campaign
production are plants that process sugar, fruit juice, and cereal. In
contrast, breweries operate on a nearly continuous basis, although
the processing is performed in batches. All these factors influence
investments in processing plants and the technologies adopted,
including those that involve water.
5.2 Minimizing Water Use and Maximizing Water Reuse
5.2.1 Legislation
Water use and wastewater discharge are both subject to national and
international standards.
For the United States, the most significant water-related federal
legislation includes: (1) the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit program (1972); (2) the Clean Water Act
(Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972), as amended
by the Clean Water Act of 1977; (3) the Safe Drinking Water Act of
1974; (4) the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976; and (5) the Water
Quality Act of 1987. Individual states also legislate regarding water
for example, the comprehensive water legislation passed in California
and signed by the governor in 2009.
Legislation in member countries of the European Union (EU)
follows the directives of the European Commission (EC), which is
the executive body of the EU. The most relevant of these directives
are published on the official EU web site (EUROPA, 2009). Selected
topics and titles include:
The new European water policy: river basin management
M a s s I n t e g r a t i o n
107
Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Strategies to prevent chemical pollution of surface water
under the Water Framework Directive
Priority substances under Article 16 of the Water Framework
Directive
A European action program on flood risk management
Discharges of Dangerous Substances Directive (76/464/EEC)
Water pollution stemming from urban wastewater and
certain industrial sectors; Urban Waste Water Treatment
Directive (91/271/EEC)
Water pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources;
Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC)
Bathing water quality of rivers, lakes, and coastal waters;
Bathing Water Quality Directive (76/160/EEC) and proposed
revisions
Drinking water quality; Drinking Water Directive (98/83/EC)
Most of these items directly (or indirectly) concern the water used
and wastewater discharged by processing industries.
5.2.2 Best Available Techniques
The Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive
(96/61/EC) introduced a framework within which EU member states
are required to issue operating permits for industrial installations
performing certain activities. These permits must prescribe
conditions that are based on best available techniques (BATs). Best
available techniques are those with the best overall environmental
performance that can be introduced at a reasonable cost, and their
purpose is to ensure a high level of protection for the environment as
a whole. A key aim of the IPPC Directive is to stimulate an intensive
exchange of information on BAT between the European member
states and affected industries. The European IPPC Bureau (eippcb.
jrc.es) organizes this exchange of information and produces BAT
reference documents (BREFs), which member states must take into
account when establishing permit conditions. The bureau carries out
its work through technical working groups (TWGs) consisting of
nominated experts from industry, EU member states, countries in
the European Free Trade Association, and nongovernmental
organizations concerned with the environment. Because the
European IPPC Bureau is located in Seville, Spain, activities carried
out within the framework of the IPPC Directive are often referred to
as the Seville process.
Several BAT-oriented studies have been made in food processing
industries. A good example comes from the Flemish Centre for Best
Available Techniques (BAT-CENTRE, 2009). This document contains

108
an overview of available information on the fruit and vegetable
processing industry. Using BAT as guidance, the study proposes:
To Flemish authorities: Permit conditions and techniques for
which investment support may be offered because they are
less detrimental to the environment
To Flemish companies: Guidelines for implementing the
concept of BAT
As described in the study, the fruit and vegetableprocessing
industry comprises the sectors of frozen fruits and vegetables, canned
fruits and vegetables, processed potatoes, peeled potatoes, and fruit
juices. The most important environmental problems are the use of
large volumes of ground water and the production of wastewater
polluted with organic carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus. Information
on BAT candidates was obtained mostly from expertise present in
Belgium and neighboring countries. More than a hundred different
techniques were selected and examined in terms of technical and
economical feasibility. Best available techniques in wastewater
treatment incorporate, for example, primary and aerobic wastewater
treatment for small potato-peeling enterprises as well as primary,
anaerobic, and aerobic wastewater treatment for large-scale
processing sites. The BAT concept was the basis for concluding that
Flemish wastewater discharge limits on surface water were
technologically and economically feasible, although new limits
(2550 mg/L) on total phosphorus discharge were suggested. Annual
wastewater treatment costs for an average enterprise were estimated
to be 2.53.5 million. For small potato-peeling companies,
wastewater discharge into the sewer system was found to be most
appropriate.
Water-saving measures and the reuse of water may reduce
groundwater consumption by as much as 2530 percent. A good
source for BAT practices is ENVIROWISEa U.K. government
program managed by Momenta (a division of AEA Technology Plc)
and TTI (a division of Serco Ltd.)which offers practical
environmental advice for business. Their web site (ENVIROWISE,
2009) provides a wide range of information including news and best
practice examples.
5.2.3 Water Footprint
Hoekstra (2008) defined the water footprint (WFP) as an indicator of
direct and indirect water use, which is measured in terms of water
volumes consumed, evaporated, and/or polluted. The WFP includes
consumptive use of virtual green, blue, and gray water. The virtual
green water content of a product is the volume of rainwater that
evaporated during the production process. For the food industry,
this volume is consumed mainly by agricultural products and
109
represents the total rainwater evaporation from the fields during a
crops growing period. The virtual blue water content of a product is
the volume of surface water or groundwater that evaporates as a
result of productionfor example, the evaporation of irrigation water
from fields, irrigation canals, and storage reservoirs. The virtual grey
water content of a product is the volume of water required to dilute
pollutants in order to meet water quality standards for reuse or
discharge to the environment. A water footprint can be calculated for
any product or activity that has a well-defined group of producers
and consumers. The water footprint is a geographically and
temporally explicit indicator: it reflects not only volumes of water
consumption and pollution but also the type of water use as well as
where and when the water was used.
The idea of water life-cycle assessment has gained more interest
since the concept of a water footprint was introduced (Hoekstra and
Chapagain, 2007; Hoekstra, 2008). In food supply chains, the actual
water content of the final product is usually negligible when
compared with the virtual water content, which is the total fresh
water used during the various steps of supply and production. Aside
from the water that appears as an ingredient in prepared foods, most
water use in the food industry consists of the virtual water described
in the previous paragraph (Casani, Rouhany, and Knchel, 2005).
The most common water-using operations are as follows:
Heating: Boilers, heat exchangers, etc.
Process water: Cooling towers
Potable uses: Offices, canteens, etc.
Washing: Equipment, bottles, floors, vehicles, etc.
Rinsing: Equipment, bottles, food materials, final products
Firefighting
Transport medium
The food industry consumes a large amount of water: its
consumption was estimated to be 347.2 Mm
3
in Canada (Dupont and
Renzetti, 1998) and 455 Mm
3
in Germany (Fahnich, Mavrov, and
Chmiel, 1998). Other studies (Hoekstra and Chapagain, 2007; Water
Footprint Network, 2009) have reported figures for use of virtual water
in the production of some common food products; see Table 5.1.
Just as in the case of heat recovery, for water recovery it is best to
start with simple measures based on efficient management (e.g., good
housekeeping) before moving on to more advanced methodologies
(e.g., Process Integration techniques). Industrial operations are not
always run in continuous mode, since they depend to a great extent
on the availability of feed stock and the need to control quality. As
mentioned before, sugar, fruit juices, and cereal are typically
processed intermittently, and breweries operate continuously. These

110
factors will affect the choice of technologies to be adopted, including
those that involve water and wastewater.
A comprehensive survey of water and wastewater applications
for the processing industry can be found in the books of Smith (2005)
and Kleme, Smith, and Kim (2008). Most of these techniques for
water minimization fall into one of two groups:
1. Process changes: This category groups fundamental changes
in unit operations that consume fresh water. Examples
include increasing the number of stages in an extraction
process to reduce its consumption of water, changing from
wet cooling towers to air coolers, improving energy efficiency
to reduce steam demand, increasing the condensate return
from steam systems, and improved housekeeping. Good
housekeeping practices include analyzing and measuring
water use and wastage, reducing water wastage, regular
cleaning operations, and equipment maintenance.
2. Reuse, recycling, and regeneration: These options enable the
reuse of wastewater between water-consuming operations. Of
course, the presence of pollutants in wastewater streams
Product Virtual water (L)
1 glass of beer (250 mL) 75
1 glass of milk (200 mL) 200
1 cup of coffee (125 mL) 140
1 cup of tea (250 mL) 35
1 slice of bread (30 g) 40
1 slice of bread (30 g) with cheese (10 g) 90
1 potato (100 g) 25
1 apple (100 g) 70
1 glass of wine (125 mL) 120
1 glass of apple juice (200 mL) 190
1 glass of orange juice (200 mL) 170
1 bag of potato crisps (200 g) 185
1 egg (40 g) 135
1 hamburger (150 g) 2400
1 tomato (70 g) 13
1 orange (100 g) 50
TABLE 5.1 Virtual Water Consumed while Processing Selected Food
Industry Products (after Hoekstra and Chapagain, 2007)
111
must be considered so that subsequent water-using processes
will not be adversely affected. This aspect is discussed in
more detail in Section 5.2.4.
Several particular methodologies for water minimization are
listed in the chapter by Kleme and Perry (2007b):
Water Pinch Analysis techniques
Mathematical optimization techniques
Efficient management and control of process operations
Integrating optimization and production planning techniques
in conjunction with real-time plant measurements to control
for product quality and minimize losses
5.2.4 Minimizing Water Usage and Wastewater
Overview of the Measures
The task of minimizing water usage and wastewater discharge has
received considerable attention during the last few years as water has
become more costly and an environmentally strategic concern. Smith
(2005) summed up the measures applied to minimizing water usage
and wastewater as follows:
1. Process changes: These include all the measures described
under item 1 of the listing in Section 5.2.3. Water quality can
also be improved by reducing the use of certain processing
components, such as hazardous cleaning agents, chemicals,
and additives. Additional process changes may be driven
through inspection or through process optimization via
developed technologiesfor instance, Process Integration
(Pinch Technology). Reduced consumption and increased
efficiency may be achieved either by upgrading equipment
or adopting new technologies.
2. Reuse: This is a viable strategy when wastewater from a given
operation is used directly in other operations, provided that
the pollutants in the reused water do not disturb the processes
in the downstream operations. Methods for maximizing
water reuse are detailed in Section 5.3, along with a discussion
on the use of recycled water in food processing.
3. Regeneration reuse: This is the process of purifying wastewater
from one operation and then reusing it in another operation
or process.
4. Regeneration recycling: Here the contaminants in the
wastewater are only partly eliminated before the water is
returned for use in the same process.

112
The paper by Blomquist and Brown (2004) offers a useful review
of wastewater minimization. The authors examined a large number
of preassessment and assessment techniques for respectively
identifying waste minimization focus areas (opportunities) and
options (solutions) during a waste minimization audit. Blomquist
and Brown critically reviewed these techniques and assessed their
relative merits. The preassessment techniques were analyzed in
terms of their ease and speed of implementation; the assessment
techniques were evaluated in terms of their usefulness and
applicability.
Wastewater Treatment
Methodologies for wastewater handling can be subdivided into
different stages of treatment, as follows:
Pretreatment: Mechanical separation of coarse particles (e.g.,
sticks, plastics).
Primary treatment: Removal of suspended solids by physical
or physical-chemical treatment. This process may consist of
natural sedimentation or may be assisted via adding
coagulants and/or flocculants or via centrifugation. Primary
treatment also includes neutralization, stripping (e.g.,
elimination of ammonia, NH
3
), and the removal of oils and
grease by flotation.
Secondary treatment: The removal of colloids and similar
matters from the wastewater. This treatment, which may
include chemical and biological processes, minimizes the
wastewaters organic load. Processes commonly used include
activated sludge treatment and anaerobic digestion, both of
which lead to the critical removal of phosphate, ammonia,
and oxygen-depleting contaminants.
Tertiary treatment: This stage comprises physical and chemical
processes that eliminate such pollutants as phosphate,
ammonia, minerals, heavy metals, and organic compounds.
The processes are viewed as a polishing phase and are
usually more expensive than conventional techniques. The
necessity of applying this type of treatment is largely dictated
by the following two factors:
(i) Meeting discharge conditions established by environ-
mental quality standards (EQS), which may be stricter
than BAT requirements. Subject contaminants include
ammonia, so-called List I and List II (BAT-CENTRE,
2009) substances, and suspended solids.
(ii) Recycling the wastewater for further use in the factory
as either process water or washing water.
113
Tertiary treatment is especially important in environmentally
sensitive areas where effluent has to have low concentration levels
and loads of nitrogen and phosphorus.
5.3 Introduction to Water Pinch Analysis
Pinch Analysis was first developed for Heat Exchanger Network
synthesis and subsequently extended to yield other energy integration
applications (El-Halwagi, 1997; Kleme et al., 1997; Smith, 2005). The
analogous characteristics of heat and mass transfer allowed the
application of Pinch Analysis to the synthesis of mass exchange
networks and a series of other mass integration problems (El-Halwagi,
1997). Water Pinch Analysis emerged as a special case of mass
integration following the seminal work of Wang and Smith (1994).
However, that papers targeting technique was limited to the fixed
load problem, where water-using processes are modeled as mass
transfer operations. Later work on Water Pinch Analysis has focused
mainly on the fixed flow-rate problem, where flow-rate requirements
are viewed as the important constraints for water-using processes
(Dhole et al., 1996; Hallale, 2002; El-Halwagi, Gabriel, and Harell, 2003;
Manan, Foo, and Tan, 2004; Prakash and Shenoy, 2005).
In the context of Water Pinch Analysis, reuse means that the
effluent from one unit is used in another unit and does not reenter
the unit where it was previously used; in contrast, recycling means
that the effluent will reenter the unit where it was previously used,
usually after certain purification. In addition, one may also use a
regeneration unit (e.g., filter, stripper) to partially purify the water
stream prior to reuse or recycling (Wang and Smith, 1994).
A typical Pinch Analysis study proceeds in two stages. The first is
targeting, whereby minimum freshwater and wastewater flow rates
are set; this is followed by network design to achieve the targeted flow
rates. It is worth emphasizing that the targeting step is the primary
focus in Water Pinch Analysis. The target is needed in order to
determine how well a reuse or recycle system can actually perform in
terms of thermodynamic constraints. Establishing targets in advance
of design provides a clear picture of the mass exchange limitations of
the design problem, indicating the smallest achievable freshwater
intake and wastewater discharge. Once the targets are established, a
water network can be designed using any network design tools.
Wang and Smith (1994) described a methodology for determining
the amount of water required by a set of operations when water is
reused. They showed that significant water savings can be achieved
compared with the case when only freshwater is used. The authors
employ a simple example that makes use of the limiting Composite
Curve (CC) and incorporates four water-using operations. The
problem data is presented in Table 5.2.

114
The table lists the maximum inlet and outlet concentrations of a
single contaminant for four operations. The last column gives the
limiting water flow rate, which is the flow rate required by the
operation if the contaminant mass is taken up by the water between
the inlet and outlet concentrations. Note, however, that for an
operation whose inlet concentration is greater than zero, using
uncontaminated freshwater enables a lower flow rate than the
limiting water flow rate for that operation. A straightforward analysis
of the problem data, assuming that each operation uses freshwater,
reveals that the total (uncontaminated) freshwater required by the
operations is 112.5 t/h, with the four operations requiring 20, 50, 37.5,
and 5 t/h.
However, if water reuse is allowed, then an analysis that makes
use of the limiting CC produces a target for the minimum water flow
rate of 90 t/h. The limiting CC of the four water-using operations is
plotted in Figure 5.1. The water supply linewhich satisfies the water-
using operations represented by the limiting CChas its origin at zero
concentration and lies below the curve. The slope of the line is such
that it touches the CC at one point, which is termed the Water Pinch.
Other water supply lines with the same origin could be drawn, but
these would not touch the CC and thus would indicate flow rates
greater than the (preferred) minimum. If the water supply line were
drawn with a steeper slope to indicate a smaller flow rate, then the line
would actually cross the limiting CC and so could be part of an
infeasible design.
Wang and Smith (1994) provided a methodology for calculating
the minimum flow rate of water (including reuse) required to remove
contaminants from water-using operations. In addition, this paper
provided a methodology for designing a water reuse system. Figure 5.2
displays the final system design for the water operations described
in Table 5.2. The figure shows that, of the original targeted freshwater
amount of 90 t/h, 20 t/h is fed to operation 1 and 50 t/h is fed to
operation 2. The remaining 20 t/h is fed to operation 3 along with
Operation
number
Contaminant
mass flow
[kg/h]
C
in
[ppm]
C
out
[ppm]
FL
[t/h]
1 2 0 100 20
2 5 50 100 100
3 30 50 800 40
4 4 400 800 10
TABLE 5.2 Problem Data for Wang and Smiths (1994)
Water-Using Operations
115
800
400
100
0
1 9 21 41
C [ppm]
MINIMUM
WATER SUPPLY
FLOWRATE 90 t/h
PINCH
MINIMIZE
FLOWRATE
m [kg/h]
FIGURE 5.1 Limiting Composite Curve and the Water Pinch.
Feedwater
Operation 2
Operation 1
Operation 4
Operation 3
20 t/h
20 t/h
90 t/h
Wastewater
90 t/h
40 t/h
50 t/h 5.7 t/h
44.3 t/h
FIGURE 5.2 Water treatment system designed using Water Pinch methodology.
20 t/h from operation 1. Of the original 50 t/h fed to operation 2,
5.7 t/h is fed to operation 4 and the remaining 44.3 t/h goes directly
to wastewater. The authors acknowledge that this design could be
evolved further to produce alternative networks.
To set the flow-rate targets for water reuse or recycling, various
graphical and tabulated targeting techniques may be employed. In
addition to the limiting CCs (Wang and Smith, 1994) mentioned
previously, the following methods have been used: the water surplus
diagram (Hallale, 2002), the material recovery Pinch diagram
( El-Halwagi, Gabriel, and Harell, 2003; Prakash and Shenoy, 2005),

116
the cascade analysis technique (Manan, Foo, and Tan, 2004), and the
source CC (Bandyopadhyay, Ghanekar, and Pillai, 2006). Once the
flow-rate targets have been identified, numerous techniques can be
used to design a water network that achieves those targets. The works
just cited were developed for continuous processes, but there have
been several reported efforts to apply Water Pinch Analysis to batch
processes; these include the works of Wang and Smith (1995), Liu,
Yuan, and Luo (2007), Foo et al. (2006), and Majozi, Brouckaert, and
Buckley (2006).
5.4 Flow-Rate Targeting with the Material
Recovery Pinch Diagram
This section illustrates the targeting technique of Material Recovery
Pinch diagramMRPD (El-Halwagi, Gabriel, and Harell, 2003;
Prakash and Shenoy, 2005). Constructing an MRPD requires knowledge
about the material flow rates and loads of each process sink and
source. Given this information, one may construct an MRPD as
follows:
1. Arrange the individual water sources (SRi) and demands
(SKj) into two lists, in ascending order of concentration
level (C).
2. For each source and demand, calculate the load given by the
product of its flow rate and concentration level (i.e., F C).
3. Plot the cumulative sources and demands, on a diagram of
load versus cumulative flow rate, in ascending order of their
concentration levels to form the sink and source CCs. In
order to render the problem feasible, the cumulative water
source CC must lie below the cumulative water demand CC,
ensuring that the water purity requirements are satisfied.
4. For pure fresh resources (zero concentration of impurities),
the sink and source CCs are separated horizontally until
they barely touchwith the source composite lying below
and to the right of the sink compositeas shown in
Figure 5.3(a).
5. For impure fresh resources, the source CC is shifted along an
impure fresh locus until it lies below and to the right of the
sink CC; this is shown in Figure 5.3(b).
The overlap area of the sink and source CCs represents the
maximum recovery among all sink and source streams within the
network. The point where the two composites touch is called
the Material Recovery Pinch, which is the bottleneck for maximum
recovery. The segment where the sink CC extends to the left of the
117
source CC represents the minimum feed needed for fresh resources
(to be purchased); the region where the source CC extends to
the right of the sink CC represents the minimum waste discharge
from the network (for final treatment before releasing into the
environment).
Both the minimum fresh resources needed and the minimum
waste generated by the network are network resource targets, and
they are determined before the recovery network is designed. In the
next section, the MRPD is used to establish flow-rate targets for a
case study in the production of fruit juice.
5.5 MRPD Applied to Fruit Juice Case Study
Table 5.3 shows the limiting water data for a case study involving
the production of fruit juice (Almat, Espua, and Puigjaner, 1999;
Li and Chang, 2006). The water amounts are expressed in cubic
meters (m
3
) per each batch. There is a start time (t
S
) and an end time
(t
T
) for each water sink and source. Prior to water recovery, freshwater
Load
Pinch point
Source
composite
Sink composite
Minimum
fresh source
Maximum
recovery
Minimum waste
discharge
Load
Pinch point
Source
composite
Minimum
fresh source
Maximum
recovery
Minimum waste
discharge
Sink composite
Impure fresh
locus
(a) (b)
Flowrate Flowrate
FIGURE 5.3 MRPD for (a) pure fresh resource and (b) impure fresh resource.
SKj F
SKj

[m
3
]
C
j

[ppm]
t
j
S

[h]
t
j
T

[h]
SRi F
SKi

[m
3
]
C
i
[ppm]
t
i
S
[h]
t
i
T

[h]
SK1 20 0 0.5 2.5 SR1 20 5 2.5 4.5
SK2 20 6 5.0 7.0 SR2 20 14 7.0 9.0
SK3 20 15 9.5 11.5 SR3 20 20 11.5 13.5
SK4 16 5 17.0 19.0 SR4 8 25 17.0 19.0
SK5 20 7 6.0 8.0 SR5 16 10 10.5 14.5
TABLE 5.3 Fruit Juice Production: Limiting Water Data

118
and wastewater amounts are calculated to be 96 m
3
and 84 m
3
,
respectively (these values are given by the sum of the individual
water flows).
For this case study, three assumptions are made in order to
simplify the analysis:
1. The batch process is operated repeatedly on a yearly basis.
Therefore, the process behaves as if it is operated in
continuous mode. It has been shown elsewhere (Foo, Manan,
and Tan, 2005) that a repeated batch operation achieves the
same flow targets as for equivalent continuous operation.
2. An unlimited water storage tank is always available. Thus, water
can be stored for later use.
3. Water recovery is always carried out between two consecutive
batches. In other words, water sources in an earlier batch will
be sent to water storage tanks before being reused or recycled
to the water sinks of the next batch operation. A similar
assumption was made in the paper by Shoaib and colleagues
(2008).
Given these assumptions, any established targeting technique for
continuous processes can be used to identify rigorous water targets
for the case study. For purposes of this example, the MRPD is used.
The MRPD is illustrated in Figure 5.4(a), and the network that
achieves the MRPD-derived water targets is shown in Figure 5.4(b).
As shown in the figure, the minimum freshwater demand (F
FW
) is
determined to be 35 m
3
; the wastewater flow (FWW), 23 m
3
. When
compared with the total water flow prior to water recovery, this
represents a significant reduction of 63.5 and 72.6 percent for
freshwater and wastewater, respectively.
5.6 Water Minimization via Mathematical Optimization
5.6.1 Introduction to Mathematical Optimization
Besides Water Pinch Analysis, water minimization problems have
also been solved using mathematical optimization techniques.
Various mathematical optimization approaches have been developed
to complement Water Pinch Analysis in dealing with more complex
problemsfor example, multicontaminant systems (Takama et al.,
1980; Alva-Argez, Kokossis, and Smith, 1998; Huang et al., 1999);
complex operational constraints, which include limiting the number
of pipeline connections (Hul et al., 2007); and forbidden/compulsory
matches between water-using processes (Bagajewicz and Savelski,
2001; Kim and Smith, 2004; Li and Chang, 2006). New research results
119
[kg] (a)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
SK1
SK4
SK2
SK5
SK3
SR1
SR5
SR2
SR3
SR4
F
ww
=23m
3
F
FW
=35m
3 [m
3
]
20 40 60
MRPD
Network design
All water amounts are in m
3
80 100 120
F
Fw
35m
3
F
ww
23m
3
SK1 SR1
SK1
SK1
ST2
ST1
SK14
ST3
SK5
SR1
SR1
SR4
SR5
20
6
0.7
8.3
5.7
14.3
20
16
4 10
5
15
16
8
6
0 5 10 15 20 t [h]
(b)
FIGURE 5.4 Fruit juice production: (a) MRPD; (b) network design.
and case studies have recently been published by authors from South
Africa (Gouws and Majozi, 2008a; Gouws and Majozi, 2008b), Asia
(Chen, Chang, and Lee, 2008; Ng et al., 2008; Chen et al., 2009), and
Europe (Tokos and Novak Pintari, 2009).

120
5.6.2 Illustrative Example: A Brewery Plant
This section discusses the case study of a brewery plant (Tokos and
Novak Pintari, 2009) as a means to illustrate how mathematical
optimization is used to solve water minimization problems. In the
brewery studied, the ratio (by volume) of process water consumed to
product beer sold was 6.04 : 1; this translated into 653,300 m
3
/y of
water consumed. In terms of the ratio set by BREF (2006), this
freshwater consumption exceeded the upper limit by 144,900 m
3
. In
light of these figures, the company undertook to improve its process
by retrofitting modifications to its existing water network so that the
plants usage of freshwater would be minimized.
Production at the brewery plant involves a mixture of water-
using batch and semicontinuous processes. Water-using operations
in the packaging area are operated mainly in batch mode, with the
exception of rinsers for nonreturnable glass bottles and cans.
Wastewater stream from semicontinuous processes can be reused in
batch processes with a lower purity requirement. Hence, the basic
formulation first proposed is designed to enable the efficient
integration of semicontinuous and batch water-using processes.
The continuous wastewater streams are treated as limited
freshwater sources, and the unused wastewater is discharged. In the
next step, the model is extended by including options for installing
intermediate storage tanks for the collection of unused wastewater
streams for reuse over subsequent time intervals. This particular
design modification is motivated by differences in the operating
schedules of the filling lines. The superstructure representation for
water reuse and regeneration reuse (as defined in Section 5.2.4) is
depicted in Figure 5.5.
Opportunities for regeneration reuse were analyzed in the
brewhouse and in the cellar (see Figure 5.6), since these processes
were characterized by a high concentration of contaminants. Here
the basic model is extended by installing a local (on-site) wastewater
treatment unit that can operate in either batch or continuous mode,
thereby enabling water regeneration reuse and recycling. The
scheduling of batch wastewater treatment units is performed
simultaneously so that the treatment schedule will coincide with the
fixed schedule of the batch process. The design includes the option to
install storage tanks before and after treatment; this enables
wastewater and/or purified water to be stored until required by the
treatment schedule.
As reported in Tokos and Novak Pintari (2009), the integration
of the water network in the packaging area made it possible for
wastewater from the can rinser to be reused in the pasteurization
processes. In this way, freshwater consumption could be reduced by
23 percent and the common costs of freshwater and wastewater
treatment by 22 percent. These improvements do not require the
121
addition of any storage tanks. The net present value of the proposed
water network reconstruction is positive (at a 15 percent discount
rate), and the payback period is 0.29 years (about 15 weeks).
In the brewhouse and the cellar, the continuous water treatment
unit (nanofiltration) was selected for wastewater purification in the
optimum water network. Purification allows the water from batch
material pouring to be reused in the clean-in-place (CIP) system, and
wastewater from filtration could be reused directly for pouring the
batch material. All told, freshwater consumption could be reduced
Purified water Freshwater
Operation n
Storage n
Storage ww
Wastewater from continuous operation
Local treatment unit
Purified water
Wastewater
Freshwater
Wastewater from central
storage tank for continuous
operation
FIGURE 5.5 Superstructure for water reuse and regeneration reuse in a
brewery plant (Tokos and Novak Pintari, 2009).
Filtration
Fresh water
for batch processes
Wastewater
Cleaning in-place
system
Water for pouring
Cellar Brewhouse
Wort boiling
Cleaning in-place
system
TR
Water for pouring
FIGURE 5.6 Water reuse opportunities in a brewery plant.

122
by 28 percent and the joint cost of freshwater and wastewater
treatment by 27.9 percent. Investment costs for the modifications,
which require a membrane area of 83 m
2
, amount to 117,205. The net
present value of the optimal water network is positive at a 15 percent
discount rate, and the payback period is 1.3 years. The price of
freshwater has a significant impact on the optimal water network.
Increasing freshwater prices result in the identification of additional
opportunities for reuse and regeneration reuse. Examples include
water reuse between the rinser for nonreturnable bottles and the
bottle washer, water reuse between the pasteurizer and the bottle
washer, and regeneration reuse between wort boiling and the CIP
system.
Complete implementation of the proposed design could allow
the brewery to reduce its current freshwater demand by about
25 percent and to reduce its costs for freshwater and for wastewater
treatment by about 27 percent. Furthermore, the brewerys ratio of
water consumed to beer sold would decrease to 4.53 : 1 (from 6.04 : 1),
which is important for cleaner production and sustainable
development within the company.
5.7 Summary
Water is used in most process industries for a wide range of
applications. Today, industrial processes and systems that use water
are subject to increasingly stringent environmental regulations
concerning the discharge of effluents. Moreover, the demand for
fresh water continues to increase.
The pace of these trends has increased the need for improved
water management and wastewater minimization. Adopting water
minimization techniques can effectively reduce overall freshwater
demand in water-using processes and also reduce the amount of
effluent generated. These reductions bring reductions also in costs
incurred to acquire freshwater and treat effluents.
The field has been developing rapidly, and every year brings a
number of new and more efficient approaches. This chapter has
reviewed and demonstrated, through selected case studies, current
methodologies that have been applied to minimize water use and
wastewater in the processing industry.
CHAPTER 6
Further Applications of
Process Integration
P
rocess Integration, also called Pinch Technology, was initially
developed for energy and specifically for Heat Integration.
Details of the origin and development of Heat Integration were
given in Chapters 2 and 4. Its further development resulted in a
methodology for integrating mass transfer and water integration in
particular; this technology was described in Chapter 5. This chapter
(chapter 6) focuses on the additional applications and especially
recent developments that have expanded the generic Process
Integration ideas in various other directions. Given the rapid
development of this methodology, it is not possible to cover all recent
achievements. Nonetheless, this chapter explores several interesting
directions that have considerable potential for future development.
6.1 Design and Management of Hydrogen Networks
The evolution of Pinch Technology has allowed mass integration to
be extended to hydrogen management systems. In one of the earliest
works in this field, Alves (1999) proposed a Pinch approach to
targeting the minimum hydrogen utility. This method was based on
an analogy with process heat recovery. Just as the distribution of
energy resources in a plant can be analyzed and designed via using
Pinch Technology, so can the distribution of hydrogen resources be
handled in refineries, which typically have several potential sources
(each capable of producing a different amount of hydrogen) and
several hydrogen sinks (with varying requirements). However, the
designer has more flexibility in determining the hydrogen loads of
individual units by varying the throughput of units and operating
many processes over a range of conditions. As a result, there is
considerable potential for optimizing refinery performance.
A liquid hydrocarbon feed stream is mixed with hydrogen-rich
gas, heated, and then fed to a reactor. Part of the hydrogen is
consumed by reaction with the feed. Light hydrocarbon compounds
(methane, ethane, and propane), hydrogen sulfide (H
2
S), and
123

124
C h a p t e r S i x
ammonia are usually formed as part of the reaction products. The
effluent from the reactor is then cooled down and sent to a high-
pressure flash separator. The gas released in the separator is often
treated in an amine scrubber that removes H
2
S. Part of the gas is
vented from the process through a high-pressure purge to prevent
any buildup of hydrocarbons in the recycle. The remaining hydrogen-
rich gas is recompressed and then returned to the reactor with a
fresh hydrogen makeup stream. The liquid stream removed from the
bottom of the high-pressure separator contains some hydrogen, light
hydrocarbon gases and H
2
S in the solution, which is lost from the
hydrogen system. This liquid stream is sent to a low-pressure
separator, from which off-gases are taken and typically sent to a flare
or to the fuel gas system.
A two-dimensional plot of total gas flow rate versus purity
represents the mass balance of each sink and source in the hydrogen
network. A plot that combines the profiles for hydrogen demand
(dashed line) and hydrogen supply (solid line) yields the hydrogen
Composite Curve (CC) (Figure 6.1). The sink and source profiles start
at zero flow rate and proceed to higher flow rates with decreasing
purity. The circled plus signs in the figure indicate the surplus
where sources provide more hydrogen than is required by sinks.
Where the sources do not provide enough hydrogen to the sinks, a
circled minus sign appears on CCs to indicate a deficit of supply.
The area beneath the entire Sink Curve is the flow rate of pure
hydrogen that the system should provide to all the sinks. The area
beneath the Source Curve is the total amount of pure hydrogen
available from the sources.
For the hydrogen network to be feasible, there should be no
hydrogen deficit anywhere in the network; otherwise, the sources
will not be able to provide enough hydrogen to the sinks. The
hydrogen utility can be reduced by horizontally moving the curve
toward the vertical (purity) axis until the vertical segment between
the purities of the sink and the source touches the vertical axis,
FIGURE 6.1 Composite Curves and hydrogen surplus diagram (after Alves, 1999).
0.4
0.5
P
u
r
i
t
y

[
]
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
(a)
Source Composite Curve
Sink Composite Curve
(b)
0
0 1 2 3 4
Gas flowrate [10
6
standard m
3
/d] Hydrogen surplus [10
6
standard m
3
/d]
5 6 7 8
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
P
u
r
i
t
y

[
]
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0
0 0.5 1
0.1
0.2
0.3
F u r t h e r A p p l i c a t i o n s o f P r o c e s s I n t e g r a t i o n
125
thereby forming the Hydrogen Pinch. Separating the hydrogen
source and sink parts then determines the target value for the
hydrogen utility minimum flow rate.
The procedure for calculating the supply target requires varying
the flow rate of gas supplied to the system until a Hydrogen Pinch
is found. The sources from hydrogen-consuming processes or
from processes generating hydrogen as a secondary product
(dehydrogenation plants) have flow rates that are determined by
normal process operation; these rates are assumed to be fixed for the
purposes of designing a hydrogen network. However, process
hydrogen sources with variable flow rates can be regarded as
imports from external suppliers and from processes (i.e., steam
reformers or partial oxidation units) that generate hydrogen as a
main product. Those sources are hydrogen utilities.
One approach to minimizing hydrogen utility consumption is to
increase the purity of one or more sources. A hydrogen purification
system introduces an additional sink (feedstock for purification) and
two sources (purified stream and residue stream), resulting in new
targets. By employing Hydrogen Pinch Analysis, an engineer can
make the best use of hydrogen resources in order to meet new
demands and improve profitability.
6.2 Oxygen Pinch Analysis
Another extension of Process Integration is Oxygen Pinch Analysis
(Zhelev and Ntlhakana, 1999). The idea is to analyze the problem so
that targets are derived prior to designing a system for minimizing
oxygen consumption of the micro-organisms used for waste
degradation. The next step is to design a flowsheet that achieves the
targets. In most cases, oxygen is supplied through agitation.
Aeration requires energy, so an analysis based on the Oxygen Pinch
eventually leads back to the original application of energy
conservation. Using the chemical oxygen demand or COD (Monod,
1949) as the baseline range for organic contaminants allows one to
set quantitative targets (for oxygen solubility, residence time, and
oxidation energy load) as well as additional qualitative targets
namely, the growth rate that is a direct indicator of the age and
health of micro-organisms (Zhelev and Bhaw, 2000). Analyzing the
information in Figure 6.2 and then matching the oxygen supply line
to the CC (so they touch at the Pinch point) yields targeting information
on the growth rate of micro-organisms, oxygen solubility, residence
time, and oxidation energy load.
In the Oxygen Pinch approach, the method recurs to energy but
also incorporates extra information concerning environmental
issues. An important contribution of this method is its ability to
targetin parallel with the concentration of oxygen and the total

126
C h a p t e r S i x
energy requireda quality characteristic: the micro-organisms
health as assessed by their rate of reproduction.
6.3 Combined Analyses, I: Energy-Water, Oxygen-Water,
and Pinch-Emergy
6.3.1 Simultaneous Minimization of Energy and Water Use
Water savings can be achieved through the strategic implementation
of water reuse between water-using operations. Further minimization
of freshwater usage is possible by regenerating water, which is then
recycled. The design methodology developed by Smith and colleagues
(Wang and Smith, 1994; Kuo and Smith, 1997; Gunaratnam et al.,
2005) has proven to be effective in process industries because it
provides a systematic means of establishing realistic minimum water
requirements for a site as well as conceptual design guidelines for
de-bottlenecking water systems.
In some process industry sectors (e.g., the food industry), water
use is closely linked to energy systems. The diagram shown in
Figure 6.3 explains the basic concept and the importance of
considering water and energy systems concurrently. In Figure 6.3(a),
freshwater is supplied to two water-using operations and then is
discharged in a parallel arrangement. The necessary heating or
cooling (usually through a heat exchanger) is provided according to
process requirements. This conventional practice can be significantly
improved by implementing a design for simultaneous water reuse
and heat recovery, as shown in Figure 6.3(b). Water reuse between
operations reduces water consumption, and the proposed heat
recovery between streams will reduce the need for utilities (e.g.,
steam, cooling water).
When the problem is considered jointly, finding the best energy
recovery options and water reuse schemes is an extremely complex
task because there are strong design interactions between systems
Process
stream
Dissolved
O
2
stream
D
C
O
D

Process
stream
Dissolved
O
2
stream
Pinch
Substrate
supply line
Slope =
m
/S
m
-Specific growth
S-Saturation
D-Diluation
Slope ~ growth rate, O
2
solubility,
residence time, oxidation energy load
Intercept = I/S
I/D I/D
C
O
D

I
/
C
O
D

FIGURE 6.2 Oxygen Pinch method (after Zhelev, 2007).
127
for water and energy. Both the Water Pinch and the Energy Pinch
concepts have been accommodated in separate design frameworks.
However, the methodological procedure is changed when the
interactions between water reuse and energy recovery must be
considered; see Savulescu, Kim, and Smith (2005a, 2005b). Further
interesting applications have been published (Leewongtanawit and
Kim, 2009; Manan, Tea, and Alwi, 2009).
The energy-water methodology of Savulescu and Kim (2008)
follows a two-step approach: targeting and design. During the
targeting phase, theoretical minimum requirements for freshwater
and thermal utilities (hot and cold) are obtained via graphical
manipulation of streams data (i.e., water flow rate, contaminant
levels, and temperature). The purpose of the design phase is to create
a water and heat recovery network that can achieve the established
target. A useful design tool is the two-dimensional grid diagram
(Figure 6.4), which exploits the network arrangement of water
streams subject to energy recovery constraints (Savulescu, 1999;
Leewontanawit, 2005). An industrial case study conducted recently
(Leewongtanawit and Kim, 2008) showed an 18 percent reduction in
annualized cost resulting from the integrated approach (when
Freshwater
(a)
(b)
Wastewater
Freshwater
Heat recovery
Water reuse
Wastewater
Operation 1
Operation 2
Operation 1
Operation 2
Conventional practice: non-integrated
Improved design with water reuse and heat recovery
Legend Utility Heater Utility Cooler
FIGURE 6.3 Simultaneous energy and water minimization (after Savulescu,
Kim, and Smith, 2005a).

128
C h a p t e r S i x
compared with operations when only water minimization is
performed). This case study clearly demonstrated the necessity of a
holistic approach to designing water and energy systems, since there
are significant benefits to simultaneous integration.
6.3.2 Oxygen-Water Pinch Analysis
The link between Water Pinch Analysis and Oxygen Pinch Analysis
is the use of COD as the concentration variable in Water Pinch
Analysis. Here two configurations of wastewater treatment are
investigated, centralized and distributed. The analyzed system
includes the centralized biological treatment unit and several
satellite factories (sites) in the surrounding area that send some
portion of their wastes to the centralized treatment unit. The
variables of interest when analyzing wastewater treatment are the
quantity of wastewater treated and the quantity of oxygen required.
The quantity of treated wastewater gives an indication of how
much freshwater is used and thus of the water management level.
The quantity of required oxygen gives an indication not only of the
wastewater quality but also of the energy required by the wastewater
treatment process. Both the quantity and the quality of the
wastewater treated are related to the cost of the treatment process.
Freshwater main
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
Process water main
Process
water users
Process
water users
Overflow
Water quality
Wastewater main
- Water source
- Water demand/sink
FIGURE 6.4 Two-dimensional diagram of a water quality network (after
Savulescu and Kim, 2008).
129
The configuration of wastewater treatment serves as an aid in
establishing whether or not wastewater treatment costs that are
based on quality and quantity differ significantly from costs based
on quantity only.
The effluent wastewater conditions obtained via the Water Pinch
method are used to plot concentration versus COD flow rate on one
set of axes. The oxygen required is then calculated using Zhelevs
(1998) method of the limiting oxygen supply line, which is constructed
as shown in Figure 6.5. First, the CC must be constructed. This is
done by plotting all the site streams on the same set of axes. These
streams are then summed within each concentration interval, and the
resulting curve is the limiting CC. The limiting oxygen supply line is
then constructed as a line drawn between the origin and the Pinch
Point. The inverse of the gradient of the limiting oxygen supply line
is the flow rate of oxygen required.
Concentration vs Flowrate
Curve for Site 1
Mass Flowrate [kg COD/d]
(a)
8000
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
g

C
O
D
/
I
]

4000
12000 10000
5000
0 0
0
Composite Curve and Minimum
Oxygen Supply Line
(d)
8000
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
g

C
O
D
/
I
]

4000
12000
Site 3
Site 2
Site 1
Composite
Curve
Minimum
O
2
Supply
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
4000 8000
Curve for Site 2
(b)
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
g

C
O
D
/
I
]

5000 10000 0 15000
10000
5000
0
Curve for Site 3
(c)
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
g

C
O
D
/
I
]

4000 0 8000
FIGURE 6.5 Construction of the oxygen limiting supply line (after Zhelev and
Bhaw, 2000).

130
C h a p t e r S i x
6.3.3 Emergy-Pinch Analysis
The concept of emergy (embodied energy) was first developed by
Odum in the late 1980s (Odum, 1996). Along with other definitions
referring to life cycle, it may be defined in terms of solar transformity
(Brown and Ulgiati, 2004). Solar emergy is the solar energy directly
or indirectly necessary to obtain a flux of energy in a process. The
unit of emergy is the solar emergy Joule (seJ), an extensive quantity,
which denotes the available energy of a certain type (heat, electrical,
etc.) that undergoes transformations. Transformity, an intensive
quantity, is defined as the emergy input per unit of exergy (available
energy) output: seJ/J.
The first step in the practical process of emergy analysis is
collecting information for the calculation of solar transformities
ST [seJ/unit] of the chain of activities involved in making a resource
available to the process. This is the most difficult part of the
methodology because transformity databasesalthough rapidly
growing and continuously updated by researchersare not
comprehensive. The second step is the calculation of solar emergy
SE [seJ/y] followed by calculation of the solar emergy investment
SEI [seJ/g]:
SE [seJ/y] = ST [seJ/unit] Amount [units/y] (6.1)
SEI [seJ/g] = SE [seJ/y]/Amount [g/y] (6.2)
The combined Pinchemergy analysis is used in the preliminary,
conceptual design stage. The Emergy Composite Curve (ECC) is
analogous to the Pinch CCs. In the ECC, solar transformity is plotted
against solar emergy; the CC is then matched up with the total
emergy investment (TEI) supply line, which is restricted by the ECC
at the Pinch point. Analyses are based on ECC benefit from using
both emergy and Pinch features.
Each stream in the ECC carries three pieces of information:
1. Transformity: the past emergy investment or history of the
stream
2. The market potential of the stream in terms of usability:
the heat (temperature) potential of a thermal stream or the
concentration limits of a water stream
3. The streams future in terms of further usability (regenerative
reuse)
In the case of Heat Pinch Analysis, the hot and cold streams will have
different signs for this component of final emergy investment. The
sign on the required emergy investment to heat the cold streams will
be the opposite of the one for available emergy. Hence, at this level of
131
analysis, it is possible to relax certain constraints (e.g., T
min
) that can
lead to minimization of the usage of expensive hot utilities.
With Emergy-Pinch analysis, as with classical Pinch Analysis,
the processes overlap on the vertical axis (temperature range,
concentration range) or, as here, the transformities range. The emergy
loads (investments) for the different processes are characterized by
relative values, which allows their graphical representation to be
freely shifted left and right in the ST/SE plot; see Figure 6.6.
The TEI is targeted by drawing the line touching the CC and
then calculating its slope. The greater the slope of the TEI line, the
smaller the rate of TEI. This minimizes the supply of combined
resources and their corresponding costs while lifting the emergy
supply line to its maximum. This limit is represented by the point
where the supply line and the CC meetthat is, the Pinch point. The
slope and the Pinch point of the emergy supply line can be used to
help compare alternative design or operational options. Transformity
is viewed as a quality parameter; when plotted against emergy
investment, it allows targeting of TEI and determination of the
maximum total transformity needed to run a given process.
6.4 Combined Analysis, II: Budget-Income-Time,
Materials Reuse-Recycling, Supply Chains,
and CO
2
Emissions Targeting
6.4.1 Budget-Income-Time Pinch Analysis
There are substantial benefits to be derived from applying the process
design concept to financial management. The timing, extent, and
allocation of Process Integration for minimizing the financial risk is
Pinch
Composite Curve
Total Energy
supply line
SE [seJ]
S
T

[
s
e
J
/
J

o
r

$
]
FIGURE 6.6
Composite Curve in
emergy-transformity
coordinates (after
Zhelev and Ridol,
2006).

132
C h a p t e r S i x
the primary goal of such investigations, which also account for
possible uncertainties in model parameters. The concept of combined
resources management can lead to more realistic design solutions
while helping decision makers account for financial investments.
Because time runs in only one direction, the direction of individual
vectors and both CCs is to the right; this is illustrated in Figure 6.7
and Figure 6.8.
Zhelev (2005a, 2005b, 2005c) reports on two aspects of this broad
area: using Pinch principles to choose alternative designs, and
amalgamating financial considerations with the management of
energy and water. Several different stages can be identified in the
processes of investment, design, commissioning, and operation. By
applying traditional targeting procedures to the management of
financial resources, the following data can be obtained prior to
design: maximum investment level, minimum payback period, and
maximum benefit.
As shown in the upper part of Figure 6.9, this targeting is
analogous to other Pinch applications, such as the Water Pinch. First
a CC is constructed, after which a capital (investment) supply line
is drawn against the CC. The steeper the investment supply line,
the shorter the payback period. The steepest slope is constrained by
the CC, which meets the supply line at the Pinch point. Lifting the
Time [y]
B
u
d
g
e
t

[
$
/
5

y
]
FIGURE 6.8
Composite Curves for
project budget and
income (after Zhelev,
2007).
Time [d]
B
u
d
g
e
t

[
$
]
Time [d]
I
n
c
o
m
e

[
$
]
Time [d]
B
u
d
g
e
t

[
$
]
I
n
c
o
m
e

[
$
]
FIGURE 6.7 Project budget and income versus time (after Zhelev, 2007).
133
capital supply line up to the maximum allows one to target both the
investment level and the expected annual benefit (Figure 6.9).
6.4.2 Materials Reuse-Recycle and Property Pinch Analysis
The composition of a substance is only one of several chemical and
physical properties that are essential in a chemical process. Other
common properties include acidity and alkalinity (as measured by
pH), density, viscosity, reflectivity, turbidity, color, and solubility.
The process network synthesis associated with these chemical
properties cannot be addressed by conventional mass integration
techniques, so another generic approach has been developed to deal
with this problem (Shelley and El-Halwagi, 2000; El-Halwagi et al.,
2004). For systems that are characterized by one key property,
Kazantzi and El-Halwagi (2005) introduced a Pinch-based graphical
targeting technique that establishes rigorous targets for minimum
usage of fresh materials, maximum recycling, and minimum waste
discharge.
Foo and colleagues (2006) focused on developing an algebraic
technique to solve the problem of identifying rigorous targets for
property-based recycling and reuse of materials. A key element of
these techniques is the concept of material surplus, which generalizes
the analogous concept developed for tasks of synthesizing hydrogen
and water networks (Alves and Towler, 2002; Hallale, 2002). Foo et al.
(2006) developed an algebraic approach called property cascade analysis
(PCA) to identify various performance targets for a maximum
resource recovery (MRR) network. This paper also introduced
network design techniques for the synthesis of an MRR network as
I
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t

[
$
]20
15
10
20 40 60 80
Savings [$]
Separate stage of design
Composite Curve
Capital (investment) Supply Line
G
r
i
d
F
1
2
3
4
FIGURE 6.9 Targeting and project management (after Zhelev, 2007).

134
C h a p t e r S i x
well as a systematic procedure for identifying optimum process
modification strategies. The problem of designing a property-based
material reuse network is formulated as follows (see Figure 6.10):
A process is described as having a number N
SK
of process sinks
(units) and a number N
SR
of process sources (e.g., process and/or
waste streams) that can be considered for possible reuse and/or to
replace the use of fresh material. The aim is to design a network of
interconnections among the property sinks and sources such that the
overall flow rates of fresh resource and waste discharge are
minimized without depriving the sinks of adequate quality resources.
Each sink j requires a feed with flow rate F
j
as well as an inlet property
p
j
in
that satisfies the following constraints:

min in max
SK
for 1, 2, ,
j j j
p p p j N (6.3)
where p
j

min
and p
j

max
are the specified lower and upper bounds on
admissible properties of streams to unit j. Likewise, each source i has
a given flow rate F
i
and a given property p
i
. Also available for service
is a fresh (external) resource, with property p
F
, that can be purchased
to supplement the use of process sources in sinks. Each process
source may be intercepted via design and/or operating changes in
order to modify the flow rate and property of what each sink accepts
and discharges.
The Pinch diagram shown in Figure 6.11 is a convenient tool,
developed by Kazantzi and El-Halwagi (2005), that avoids the
drawbacks of traditional iterative procedures (Alves and Towler,
2002; Hallale, 2002): low visualization insight for targeting and
Sources Segregated
sources
Processed
sources
(back to process)
Sinks
i=1
i=2
j=2
j=1
i=N
SK
j=N
SR
Property
Interception
Network
FIGURE 6.10 Graphical formulation of designing a property-based material
reuse network (after Foo et al., 2006).
135
network design. Another graphical targeting tool that can be used to
determine minimum resource targets is the Material Surplus
Composite Curve (MSCC). The MSCC was developed by Saw et al.
(2009) based on hydrogen and water surplus diagrams (Alves and
Towler, 2002; Hallale, 2002), but it eliminates the latters iterative
steps; see Figure 6.12.
The drawbacks of the graphical approach can be resolved by
using an equivalent numerical tool, the PCA. This technique is
discussed in detail by Foo et al. (2006) for a case study on solvent
recycling in metal degreasing (Kazantzi and El-Halwagi, 2005).
Applying the PCA makes it possible to use the targeted fresh solvent
flow rate to construct a balanced material sink and source composite
diagram. Foo et al. (2006) also suggested a technique for using the
Property Pinch Analysis (graphical or algebraic) to synthesize a
property network that achieves previously established resource
targets. In addition, their paper discusses applicability of the PCA
procedure to process modifications.
Unused Materials or
Discharged Waste
Source 2
Source 1
U
1
U
1
+ U
2
U
1
+ U
2
+ U
3
L
o
a
d

[
k
g
/
s
]
Minimum
Fresh Usage
Flowrate [kg/s]
FIGURE 6.11 Property-based material reuse Pinch diagram that combines
fresh usages to determine minimum fresh consumption (after Kazantzi and El-
Halwagi, 2005).

136
C h a p t e r S i x
6.4.3 Pinch Analysis of Supply Chains
The power of Pinch Analysis, which combines quality (e.g.,
temperature, concentration) with quantity (e.g., heat duty, mass flow),
has been successfully applied to analyze supply chains. In this case,
(reduced) time is the quality and the amount of material (e.g.,
number of units, mass) is the quantity.
The objective of the aggregate planning is to satisfy demand in a
way that maximizes profit. Demand must be anticipated and
forecasted, and production must be planned in advance for that
demand. Aggregate planning is particularly beneficial to plants
whose products encounter significant fluctuations in demand. Such
planning determines the total production level in a plant for a given
time period, rather than the quantity of each stockkeeping unit
produced.
Singhvi and Shenoy (2002) formulated the aggregate planning
problem as follows. Given the demand forecast D
t
for each period t in
a planning horizon that extends over T time periods, maximize the
profit over the specified time horizon (t = 1, . . . , T) by determining
the optimum levels of the following decision variables:
Production rate P
t
= number of units produced in-house in
time period t
Overtime O
t
= amount of overtime worked in time period t
Subcontracting C
t
= number of units subcontracted
(outsourced) in time period t
Workforce W
t
= number of workers needed for production in
time period t
Machine capacity M
t
= number of machines needed for
production in time period t
Surplus Composite Curve
Pinch
Deficit Composite
Curve
Minimum fresh
resource
Flowrate Flowrate
Resource Surplus
Resource Deficit
(a) (b)
P
u
r
i
t
y
P
u
r
i
t
y
Minimum waste
discharge
FIGURE 6.12 Construction of (a) interval ow rate diagram and (b) the MSCC
(after Saw et al., 2009).
137
Inventory I
t
= inventory at the end of time period t
Stock out S
t
= number of units stocked out (backlogged) at
the end of time period t
Figure 6.13 illustrates how material is accumulated at the end of a
time period t.
The accumulation of material balances can be expressed
mathematically as

1 1 t t t t t t t
I S P C D I S

(6.4)
or
Previous inventory + Total production = Demand
+ Current inventory (6.5)
These equations are reflected in the Supply Chain CCs used for Pinch
analysis, as shown in Figure 6.14.
Singhvi, Madhavan, and Shenoy (2004) extended the initial
methodology to the case of planning for multiple product scenarios.
Singhvi (2002) proposed the following algorithm for minimizing
inventory cost:
1. List all the products in order of increasing production rates
and produce the products in that order.
2. For products that have the same production rate, first produce
the one whose inventory holding cost is lower.
3. For products that have the same production rate and the
same inventory holding cost, first produce the one for which
demand is lower.
Time Period t
In-house P
t
Subcontract C
t
Demand D
t
I
r1
I
t
S
t1
OUT IN
Previous Net Inventory
ACCUMULATOR
Current Net Inventory
PRODUCTION
S
t
FIGURE 6.13 Material balance in aggregate planning (after Singhvi and Shenoy,
2002).

138
C h a p t e r S i x
6.4.4 Using the Pinch to Target CO
2
Emissions
Emission targeting via Pinch analysis was investigated in the 1990s
by Linnhoff and Dhole (1993), Dhole and Linnhoff (1993b), and
Kleme et al. (1997). The applications, which employ the Total Site
concept, address optimization within industrial facilities, not within
extended sites as regional or national energy sectors. However, a later
work (Perry, Kleme, and Bulatov, 2008) included the regional
dimension in a Total Site Analysis of integrating renewable sources
of energy.
Tan and Foo (2007) presented a further application of Pinch
Analysis to energy-sector planning under carbon emission
constraints: the Carbon Emission Pinch Analysis (CEPA). The main
problems addressed by the proposed methodology are (1) identifying
the minimum quantity of zero-emission energy resources needed to
meet the specified energy requirements and emission limits of
different sectors or regions in a system and (2) designing an energy
allocation scheme that meets the specified emission limits while
minimizing use of the energy resources. The sequence of the
proposed Pinch Analysis is as follows (Tan and Foo, 2007):
Tabulate the energy source and demand data. The resulting
table must contain the quantity of the energy sources (S
i
) and
demands (D
j
) and their respective emission factors (C
out,i

and C
in,j
).
Arrange the energy sources and demands in order of
increasing emission factors.
I
0
5000
P
k
t + c
k
d
k
t
I
k
Demand
Composite Curve
Production
Composite Curve
Pinch point
Ending inventory
I
t1
0
1
2
3
T
i
m
e

[
m
o
n
t
h
s
]
4
5
6
10000
Material quantity [units]
15000 20000
FIGURE 6.14 Supply chain Composite Curves (after Singhvi, Madhavan, and
Shenoy, 2004).
139
Calculate the emission levels (S
i
C
out,i
) and limits (D
j
C
in,j
),
respectively, of the energy sources and demands.
Plot the Demand CC with the energy quantity (D
j
) as the
horizontal axis and the emissions limit (D
j
C
in,j
) as the
vertical axis. Hence the slope of the CC at any given point
corresponds to the emissions factor (C
in,j
).
Plot the Source Composite Curve in the same manner as with
the Demand Composite Curve, but use instead the quantities
S
i
and S
i
C
out,j
. In this curve, the slope at any given point
corresponds to the emissions factor S
i
C
out,j
.
Superimpose the two CCs on the same graph.
Shift the source CC horizontally to the right so that it does
not cross the demand CC. In final position, the former should
lie diagonally below and to the right of the latter. The two
curves must touch each other tangentially without crossing;
their point of contact is the Pinch point.
Note the distance from the origin of the graph to the leftmost
end of the Source Composite Curve. This distance gives the
minimum amount of zero-carbon energy needed to meet the
systems specified emissions limits.
Finding the Pinch point yields valuable insights to decision
makersin particular, it identifies the system bottleneck.
The golden rule of Pinch Analysis can then be applied to
the problem: in order to meet all the specified emission limits
for the system, the zero-carbon energy resource is supplied
only to those energy demands below the Pinch point. Any
allocation of this resource above the Pinch point will either
lead to an infeasible solution or require more zero-carbon
energy than the minimum quantity established by Pinch
Analysis.
6.4.5 Regional Resource Management
Regional Resource Management Composite Curve
A novel approach to regional resource management has been
developed that tackles simultaneously the two most important issues
with biomass supply chains: transportation and land use. The
biomass supply chain problem is complex because of the distributed
nature of biomass resources and their low energy density,
which necessitates large transportation capacities. Growing biomass
requires considerable land areas, often leading to competition with
food production. To address these problems, a two-level approach to
biomass supply chain synthesisbased on a novel Regional Energy
Clustering (REC) approachwas proposed by Lam et al. (2009). The

140
C h a p t e r S i x
first level of regional resources management consists of forming
clusters of zones for biomass management. The second level involves
building the regional energy transfer cascade (RETC) and the
Regional Resources Management Composite Curve (RRMCC).
The clusters of zones formed in the first level of the methodology
are designed to minimize the environmental impact of biomass
energy exchanges among the zones within the overall supply chain
network (Lam et al., 2009). The carbon footprint (CFP) is used as a
criterion for comparing various magnitudes of this impact; cost is
another obvious criterion. The main goal of clustering is to partition
the area of the considered region into smaller subareas (the clusters)
in order to form more coherent entities. Within each cluster, stronger
and more efficient interactions and biofuel exchanges result in
minimizing the environmental impact of the whole region. Figure 6.15
presents an REC algorithm, whose steps are discussed next:
Step 1. Specify energy sources and demands based on available
system data.
Step 2. Optimize biomass exchange fows between the zones. In this
step, linear programming is used to formulate an objective
function that minimizes total CFP within the overall region.
Begin
Step 1. Specification of energy sources
and demands
Step 2. Optimize biomass
exchange flows between zones
Step 3. Display the optimal
biomass exchange flows
Step 4. Cluster formation
Output: Clusters and
their properties
End
FIGURE 6.15
Flowchart of
algorithm for
Regional Energy
Clustering.
141
Step 3. Display the optimal biomass exchange fows. A visual mapping
of interzone biomass exchanges provides critical feedback for
the decision maker. The zone centroids are plotted in two-
dimensional Cartesian coordinates.
Step 4. Form the clusters. Mixed integer linear programming (MILP)
has proven to be a convenient tool for this task.
Regional Energy Surplus-Deficit Curves
The formed clusters should be presented visually to help document
and explain the proposed solution. For this purpose, the use of
Regional Energy Surplus-Deficit Curves (RESDCs) (see Figure 6.16
for an example) is suggested.
Regional Resources Management Composite Curve
The RRMCC can be developed based on results obtained from the
REC algorithm. In this graphical method, the main idea of Grand
Composite Curve has been translated to the problem of regional
resource management. Figure 6.17 illustrates two ways of presenting
the RRMCC, where panels (a) and (b) employ different directions of
cascading.
The RRMCC combines information about energy surpluses and
deficits as well as land use, allowing one to assess possible trade-offs.
The quantity of the energy demand and supply (cumulative energy
balance [PJ/y]) is shown on the X axis, and the cumulative zone area
[km
2
] is shown on the Y axis. The RRMCC reveals several options for
tackling the problem of resources management in a region in terms
of managing land use and energy surpluses and deficits. A
demonstration case study on constructing and using the RRMCC is
presented in Chapter 11.
Cumulative supply curve
Cumulative demand curve
Total
Imbalance
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

E
n
e
r
g
y

[
P
J
/
y
]
0
2
4
6
8
10
20 40
Cumulative Area [km
2
]
60 80
C
lu
s
te
r
2
C
lu
s
t
e
r

1
C
l
u
s
t
e
r

3
FIGURE 6.16 Regional Energy Supply-Decit Curves (after Lam et al., 2009).

142
C h a p t e r S i x
6.5 Heat-Integrated Power Systems: Decarbonization
and Low-Temperature Energy
6.5.1 Decarbonization
Conventional utility systems focus on how to produce and utilize the
steam in a steam distribution network (Varbanov, Doyle, and Smith,
2004). Unlike conventional steam-based utility systems, however,
power-dominated energy systems exhibit different characteristics
because the provision of shaft (driver) power, rather than steam, is of
paramount importance. For such power systems (e.g., in natural gas
liquefaction), a key issue is selection of the most appropriate drivers
to satisfy mechanical shaft demands. The decision factors in driver
selection include the optimal number, type, and size of the drivers,
helper motors or generators, and power plantssubject to a set of
mechanical and electricity demands and relevant economic scenarios.
Zheng, Kim, and Smith (2008a) developed a holistic approach to
account for design interactions in power systems, given that driver
selection entails unique implications for the overall design; these
factors include overall cost, fuel consumption, performance, plant
availability, carbon emissions, and so forth.
Synthesis complexity increases significantly when steam systems
are considered together with power-dominated systems. This case
arises when a process requires a large amount of heat (steam) or
when a steam turbine is preferable (as a direct driver) to a gas turbine
or electric motor. In such cases, additional information is required
about the on-site power supply and the way drivers interact with
generating facilities. Implementation of a CO
2
(carbon dioxide)
capture process in the plant requires extra compression duty for the
Zone 1
Cumulative Area [km
2
] Cumulative Area [km
2
]
A
B
C
D
E
F
H
H
(a) (b)
G
F
E
D
C
B
A
Cumulative energy balance [PJ/y] Cumulative energy balance [PJ/y]
G
Zone 2
Zone 3
Zone 4
Zone 5
Zone 1
Zone 2
Zone 3
Zone 4
Zone 5
FIGURE 6.17 Regional Resources Management Composite Curve.
143
CO
2
separation as well as a considerable amount of steam for the
stripper.
The synthesis of power-dominated energy systems is envisaged
with the aid of superstructure-based mathematical optimization.
The proposed superstructure (Figure 6.18) includes all possible
design options, and the optimization involves (1) the systematic
screening and evaluation of possible flowsheets and (2) assessing
economic trade-offs between capital costs and operating costs. As
usual, the optimization objective is to minimize the overall cost (i.e.,
capital and operating costs) while accounting for the models
constraints (Zheng, Kim, and Smith, 2008b). This task is typically
formulated as an MILP problem in which piecewise linearization is
used to capture the capital costs.
6.5.2 Low-Temperature Energy
The levels of power required for compression constitute a major
component of energy consumption when cryogenic cooling is applied
to process streams. Thus, the efficient use of such cold energy
contributes to the cost-effectiveness of low-temperature processes.
Heat Integrationin particular, one of its most powerful tools, the
Grand Composite Curvehas a long history of application to saving
energy in cryogenic plants (Linnhoff et al., 1982; Linnhoff and Dhole,
1992; Smith, 2005); see Chapter 4 for details.
Pure refrigerant systems cannot avoid some degree of
thermodynamic inefficiency, since otherwise the heat exchanger(s)
would exhibit large temperature differences and this would push
the system away from thermodynamic reversibility. However, if
mixed refrigerants are used then the refrigeration cycles structure is
simplified, considerably reducing the duty requirements for
compression. The advantage of mixed refrigerants is that they
C
N
.
.
.
.
.
C
1
HG/HM GT-1 HRSG
BO-1 BO-N
VHP
HP
MP
P
r
o
c
e
s
s

S
t
r
e
a
m
LP
CON
DR/EG ST
DR/EG ST
DR/EG ST
DR/EG ST
HG/HM
EM-1
GT-N HRSG
PP-1
EM-N PP-N
ExE
FIGURE 6.18 Superstructure for energy system used in a low-temperature
process (after Zheng, Kim, and Smith, 2008a).

144
C h a p t e r S i x
facilitate a closer match between hot process and cold refrigeration
streams. Del Nogal et al. (2008) described a methodology for mixed
refrigerant system design based on a superstructure arrangement.
The problem is highly nonlinear and features many local optima, which
behave as unwanted traps for traditional deterministic optimization
methods. This paper therefore suggests that a genetic algorithm (GA)
be used to solve the optimization problem; see Figure 6.19.
The interactions between the GA and the simulator result in a set
of the best solutions found over a discretized solution space. The
preliminary solutions so obtained then serve as starting points for
standard nonlinear programming (NLP) optimization techniques to
fine-tune the results and, finally, report the optimal solution. One of
the important aspects of this model is that it ensures the feasibility of
heat recovery in every exchanger. The design produced during
optimization is then simulated, and cold and hot Composite Curves
are produced. Finally, the CCs are rigorously checked against the
stipulated T
min
.
6.6 Integrating Reliability, Availability, and
Maintainability into Process Design
6.6.1 Integration
Current practice often views reliability as a mere afterthought to the
design process. As a result, systems go through repeated design and
redesign in search of greater process reliability, availability, and
maintainability (RAM). An alternative approach, as described by
Yin and colleagues (2009), is illustrated in Figure 6.20. This new
Genetic
Algorithm
Set of operating
condition with structural
options
Refrigeration
simulator
Updated power
demands
Objective
function
Driver selection
Integrated design
FIGURE 6.19 Integrated
design for low-temperature
energy systems (after Del
Nogal et al., 2008).
145
methodology incorporates the simultaneous consideration of flexible
process design and reliability, and optimal solutions are obtained by
Process Integration.
To integrate RAM into process conceptual design, the optimal
preventive maintenance (PM) interval must be embedded into the
superstructure. The superstructure accommodates a number of
different designs, each with a different operating mode. Each so-
called available design is linked to its associated financial penalty
through its asset usage during the designs life cycle, which is
calculated as the ratio of real throughput to ideal throughput. This
ratio is equal to the sum of the availability across all operating modes.
Thus, Yin et al. (2009) defined the superstructure system availability
(SSA) as

Real throughput
SSA
Ideal throughput
i i
j i
Ax
(6.6)
Plan preventive maintenance
interval and tasks to maximize
process availability while
meeting risk criteria
Start
Process
Synthesis Stage
Reliability and Risk
Analysis
Is the life cycle cost
minimized?
No
Yes
A process with the best life cycle cost
FIGURE 6.20 New process design methodology with integrated RAM stage.

146
C h a p t e r S i x
Here A
i
is the system availability in operation mode i for the jth
design, and x
i
is the mode is ratio of actual to maximum capacity for
the jth design.
6.6.2 Optimization
Within the optimization framework for integrating RAM into process
synthesis, the mathematical model aims to minimize the life-cycle
cost. In its general form (Yin and Smith, 2008), the optimization
problem can be summarized as follows:
Minimize: the objective function (expected cost)
Subject to: process model constraints, preventive maintenance
constraints, process system availability constraints
The objective function is usually formulated as
Annual cost = Annualized capital cost + Annualized
operational cost + Annual lost production
penalty + Other costs (6.7)
6.7 Pressure Drop and Heat Transfer Enhancement in
Process Integration
Various factorsincluding flow rate, composition, temperature, and
phasecan affect heat capacity C
p
. Another factor that should be
taken into account is pressure. Polley, Panjeh Shahi, and Jegede (1990)
extended the Heat Exchanger Network (HEN) targeting procedure
by considering pressure drop. They used the following relationship
between the pressure drop P, the heat transfer coefficient h, and the
heat transfer area A:

m
P KAh (6.8)
where K is a pressure-drop relationship constant and m reflects the
heat exchangers tube- and shell-sidespecific coefficients. The
allowable pressure drop (rather than the heat transfer coefficient) is
specified for each stream. Then the heat transfer coefficients are
calculated iteratively to minimize the total area. Thus, when
approaching area targets the design is modified based on the fixed
pressure drops rather than fixed film coefficients.
Ciric and Floudas (1989) suggested a Mathematical Programming
based, two-stage approach to HEN retrofits that includes a match
selection stage and an optimization stage. The match selection
stage uses an MILP transshipment model to select process stream
matches and match assignments. The optimization stage uses an NLP
formulation to optimize the match order and flow configuration of
matches.
147
Nie and Zhu (1999) developed a strategy for considering pressure
drop in HEN retrofits. They assumed that any additional area would
involve only a few heat exchange units in order to minimize the
piping and civil engineering work. The optimization procedure
consists of two stages. The first stage involves selecting a small
number of units that require additional area; the second stage
considers series or parallel shell arrangements for those units. The
topology change options are initially established by applying the
Network Pinch method (Asante and Zhu, 1997). Then a two-stage
optimization procedure is used to determine area distribution and
shell arrangement under pressure-drop constraints. Area distribution
and shell arrangement are the design properties that have the greatest
effect on pressure drop.
Vclavek, Novotn, and Dedkov (2003) analyzed in more detail
the circumstances under which pressure plays a significant role in
Heat Integration. The authors formulated some heuristic heat recovery
rules for combinations of process streams (tracks), not merely
individual streams.
Aspelund, Berstad, and Gundersen (2007) described a new
methodology, called extended Pinch Analysis and Design (ExPAnD),
to account for pressure drops in process synthesis that extends the
traditional Pinch Analysis to incorporate exergy calculations. The
authors focus on the thermo-mechanical exergy, which is the sum of
pressure- and temperature-based exergy. Compared with traditional
Pinch Analysis, the problem that Aspelund, Berstad, and Gundersen
(2007) consider (a subambient process) is much more complex; there
are many alternatives for the manipulation and integration of
streams. The authors also provide a number of (general and specific)
heuristics that complement the ExPAnD methodology. In a further
development, Aspelund and Gundersen (2007) used the concept of
an attainable region in proposing a graphical representation of all
possible CCs for a pressurized, subambient cold stream along with
the cooling effect of the stream expanding to its target pressure. The
attainable region is a new tool for process synthesis, extending Pinch
Analysis by explicitly accounting for pressure and including exergy
calculations. The methodology shows great promise for minimizing
total shaft work in subambient processes.
For designing a de-bottlenecking retrofit (as distinguished from
an energy-saving retrofit), Panjeshahi and Tahouni (2008) suggested
a method for optimizing pressure drop. The technique proceeds in
two main stages as follows. (1) Simulation of the existing process
operating at the desired increased throughput: additional utility is
used to maintain required temperatures in the process. (2) Area
efficiency specification for the existing network after the areaenergy
plot is used to increase throughput: a new virtual area, a pseudonetwork,
is introduced.
Zhu, Zanfir, and Kleme (2000) suggested a heat transfer enhance-
ment procedure for HEN retrofits. The methodology features a

148
C h a p t e r S i x
targeting stage and a selection stage. The approach uses the Network
Pinch Analysis to determine whether and where enhancements
should be applied in the conceptual design. One limitation of this
technique is that heat transfer enhancement is used only for taking
the place of additional area.
6.8 Locally Integrated Energy Sectors and
Extended Total Sites
Total Site targeting has established a method for analyzing the heat
sources and sinks of multiple processes and how heat can be
transferred from one process to another via a carrying medium,
such as steam (Kleme et al., 1997). This methodology has also been
used to demonstrate the concept of a locally integrated energy sector
for distributing heat among small-scale industrial plants and
domestic, business, and social premises while integrating renewable
energy sources (Perry, Kleme, and Bulatov, 2008). A conceptual
overall design for an energy sector that involves both heat and power
is illustrated in Figure 6.21. In this scenario, demands for heating/
cooling and electricity in units (e.g., dwellings, offices, hospitals,
schools) can be met locally by renewable energy sources such as
wind, solar cells, heat pumps, and/or excess heat and power from
the local industry. Locally installed boilers that consume traditional
fossil-based fuels, biomass, or waste can also be used to help meet
these requirements when demand is high or other sources are
unavailable. Heating or cooling and power that is not required by
one unit can be fed to a grid system and then passed to another unit
Steam
turbine
Fossil Fuels
Fossil fuels
Fossil
fuels
Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 5 Unit 6 Unit 7
Fossil
fuels
Fossil fuels
Bio-fuels
(including
waste)
Bio-fuels
(including waste)
Electricity Grid
Nuclear Renewables
Gas
turbine
Wind Sun Heat pump
Electricity
Steam
Hot water
Cooling utility
FIGURE 6.21 Locally integrated energy sector with heat and power.
149
that is unable to meet its demands locally. The grid system can
distribute power (electricity) and heating in the form of hot water or
steam. In geographic locations where air conditioning is required, a
cooling distribution main could also be provided. If local sources
are unable to provide for the demands of all units in the system,
then district renewable sources can be provided. These would
include larger-scale wind turbines, solar-cell systems, heat pumps,
and combustors fed by waste from the units or by biofuels or fossil
fuels. The sources at this level would include power-generating
equipment such as turbines driven by steam or gas.
Varbanov and Kleme (2010) presented a further extension of the
Total Sites methodology that covers industrial, residential, service,
business, and agricultural customers; incorporates renewable energy
sources; and accounts for variability on both the supply and demand
sides. The challenge of increasing the share of renewables in the
energy mix can be met by integrating solar, wind, biomass, and
geothermal energy as well as by integrating some types of waste
with the fossil fuels. The availability of renewables and the energy
demands of the considered sites all vary significantly with the time
of day, period of the year, and location. Some of these factors are
unpredictable and can change quickly. Total Site Combined Heat and
Power energy systems are optimized by minimizing heat waste and
carbon footprint while maximizing economic viability. This
methodology incorporates state-of-the-art techniques of Total Site
Integration (Kleme et al., 1997), batch Heat Integration (Kemp and
Deakin, 1989), HEN sensitivity analysis (Kotjabasakis and Linnhoff,
1986), and time Pinch Analysis (Wang and Smith, 1995); it also applies
the concept of Time Slices (see Figure 6.22) to account for the
variabilities just described.
6.9 Summary
Every attempt has been made to include in this chapter the most
recent research results, but the field is developing so rapidly that
Embed into the source profile
Time Slice 1: 617 h
T [C]
200
Source SCC
Steam
(shifted)
Sink SCC
Solar
Solar
Storage
Storage
Excess heat
Retrieved
Excess
heat
MP Steam
LP Steam
MP Steam
LP
100
HW
CW
0
T [C]
200
100
HW
CW
0
1000 0 1000
1000 0 1000
H [kW]
H [kW]
Time Slice 2: 1720 h
FIGURE 6.22 Time Slice and Site targets for solar heat capture and storage
(CW = cooling water, HW = hot water, SCC = Site Composite Curve).

150
C h a p t e r S i x
hardly a month passes without several new and relevant research
results being published. The most frequent publishers of novel
research results are journals covering energy and cleaner technology
for example, Chemical Engineering Transactions, Applied Thermal
Engineering, Energy, the Journal of Cleaner Production, Cleaner Technologies
and Environmental Policy, and Resources, Conservation and Recycling.
New developments in Process Integration are often published by
leading chemical engineering journals, including Computers &
Chemical Engineering, Chemical Engineering Science, and the AIChE
Journal. A conference dedicated exclusively to dealing with related
topics is the Conference on Process Integration, Modelling and
Optimisation for Energy Saving and Pollution Reduction (PRES). The
Thirteenth PRES is scheduled for autumn of 2010 in Prague; the
Fourteenth PRES will be held in Italy during 2011.
CHAPTER 7
Process
Optimization
Frameworks
7.1 Classic Approach: Mathematical Programming
Process system engineering problems, including process synthesis,
are typically considered as optimization problems. The solution or
solutions of these problems are usually generated by solving the
corresponding mathematical models. However, a review of recent
publications reveals various failures in modeling process synthesis
(Friedler and Fan, 2009). An inappropriate mathematical model may
result in a nonoptimal or even an infeasible solution or the model
may be unsolvable because of its complexity. A mathematical model
should be a valid representation of the process, taking into account
all its significant features, and still be solvable.
Process optimization problems are formulated as mathematical
models, where variables correspond to decisions (e.g., the flow rate of
a stream, the amount of heat provided by high-pressure steam) and
constraints correspond to the conceptual model of the system (e.g.,
material balance). Optimization (or Mathematical Programming)
aims to find appropriate values for the variables in such a way
that (1) constraints involving these variables are satisfied and (2) a
specific functionthat is, the objective functionof these variables
is minimized (or maximized). The constraints define the search
space, while the objective function is to determine the most favorable
point or points in this space.
Mathematical models are classified according to the types of
variables (continuous or integer) and constraints (linear or nonlinear).
Therefore, a mathematical model can be linear in constraints and
objective function with continuous variables (i.e., linear programming,
LPR). Similarly, a mathematical model is viewed as a nonlinear
151

152
C h a p t e r S e v e n
programming (NLP) problem if any of the constraints or the objective
function is nonlinear with continuous variables. Models that include
both continuous and integer variables are classified as mixed integer
programming ones; these include mixed-integer linear programming
(MILP) and mixed-integer nonlinear programming (MINLP).
Also, linear optimization (LO) problems are usually referred to as
linear programming or LP. Similarly, NLO, MILO, and MINLO cor-
respond to NLP, MILP, and MINLP.
Linear programming problems appear in a wide range of
applications, including transportation, distribution from sources to
sinks, and management decisions (Kleme and Vaek, 1973; Kleme
et al., 1975; Kleme, 1986; Jeowski, 1990; Williams, 1999; Jeowski,
Shethna, and Castillo, 2003; El-Halwagi, 2006). LPR problems are easily
solved by the simplex method (Dantzig, 1968) and its improvements
(see, e.g., Maros, 2003a; Maros, 2003b). In most cases, NLP is difficult
to solve, and certain limitations on the constraints and objective
function may be necessary for such problems to be practically solvable
by specific methods (Seidler, Badach, and Molisz, 1980; Banerjee and
Ierapetritou, 2003; Sieniutycz and Jeowski, 2009). A general technique
for solving NLP and mixed-integer programming problems is applied
by the branch-and-bound framework (Land and Doig, 1960), where the
original complex problem is solved via systematic generation and
solution of a set of simpler subproblems.
Process synthesis is a creative activity. In fact, it is one of the
earliest actions taken by the process designer when creating the
structure, network, or flowsheet of a process to satisfy the given
requirements in terms of constraints and specifications while attaining
the prescribed objectives.
The relationships among the mathematical model, the process
being modeled, and the solver being deployed are usually complicated,
which makes it difficult to establish the most effective and valid
model. There is only limited discussion of generating mathematical
models in the literature, and the topic is treated in only a few
publications (see, e.g., Grossmann, 1990; Kovacs et al., 2000)
concerning specific areas.
In general, a process synthesis problem is defined by specifying
the available raw materials, candidate operating units, and desired
products. Each of these is given by an individual mathematical
model. The models cannot, by themselves, directly constitute the
Mathematical Programming model for the synthesis problem.
Construction of the mathematical model from these model elements
is not evident with the risk of failure. The major steps of process
synthesis are illustrated in Figure 7.1.
The main emphasis in this chapter is on an integrated framework
for model generation and solutionthat is, the P-graph framework.
Another class of methods for process synthesis is based on
heuristic rules. Implementing heuristic methods is relatively
P r o c e s s O p t i m i z a t i o n F r a m e w o r k s
153
straightforward, and only moderate computational effort is required.
Yet by their nature, heuristics are effective only at the local level.
This is because human experiences are almost always localized:
they are gained from an often limited number of encounters with (or
observations of) specific instances. For this reason, solutions that
are globally optimal are seldom obtainable via heuristic methods
alone (Feng and Fan, 1996).
7.2 Structural Process Optimization: P-Graphs
There are four good reasons to employ graph-theoretic methods:
(1) the unambiguous representation of decision alternatives, (2) the
algorithmic generation of a mathematical model, (3) the reduced
complexity of the solution procedure, and (4) the derivation of multiple
alternative solutions. The P-graph or process graph framework, as
applied by Friedler and Fan (Friedler et al., 1992a; Friedler et al., 1992b;
Friedler, Varga, and Fan, 1995) to process synthesis, involves novel
structural representations of complex processes coupled with
combinatorial algorithms for generating the superstructure, the
mathematical model, and the models optimal solution.
The P-graph framework is robust, and its algorithms have been
validated as mathematically rigorous in that they are based on a set
of axioms (Friedler et al., 1992b). These axioms express the necessary
Cost data and constraints for the
operating units.
Prices and constraints for the
products and raw materials.
Generation of the model
Mathematical Programming model
(MILP, MINLP, NLP)
Solution of the
Mathematical Programming model
Optimal network
(flowsheet)
FIGURE 7.1 Major steps of
process synthesis.

154
structural properties for process networks to be feasible. The
algorithms are able to guarantee the resultant mathematical models
validity, reduce the search space, and generate the optimal solution.
7.2.1 Process Representation via P-Graphs
In a P-graph, one class of nodes is assigned to operating units or
activities and the other is assigned to their inputs and outputs. Raw
materials, resources (precursors), and preconditions (activating
entities) are inputs to the operating units; products, effects (resulting
entities), and targets are outputs from the operating units. Table 7.1
shows the P-graph representation of process structure elements.
In a process network, functional units that perform operations
(e.g., mixing, reacting, separating) are termed operating units. These
operating units, which correspond to the blocks in a process
flowsheet, alter the physical and/or chemical states of materials being
processed or transported. Such transformations are carried out by
one or more unit operations, and the overall process converts raw
materials into the desired product(s). A process may also generate
by-products, which are either to be recovered for further use or to be
treated as waste.
In process network synthesis, a material is uniquely defined by
its components and their concentrationsin other words, by its
composition, which is identified by a symbol used to mark the
material. Associated with any operating unit are two classes of
materials (or material streams): input materials and output materials.
For example, operating unit O
2
in Figure 7.2 consumes raw materials
E and F while producing intermediate material C and by-product B.
Note that a material may consist of more than one component.
The P-graph provides not only a formal description of the process
but also an unambiguous representation of the possibilities for
structural decisions. If an operating unit requires multiple inputs,
TABLE 7.1 P-Graph Symbols That Represent Process Elements
Process element P-graph representation
Raw material or precursor
Final product or final target
Intermediate material or entity
By-product
Operating unit
155
each provided by a single operating unit, then structural alternatives
cannot be defined. In contrast, if multiple operating units are capable
of providing a particular input, then any combination of these units
may eventually be used. In Figure 7.2(a), for example, materials C and
D are necessary inputs to operating unit O
1
. Material C can only be
produced by operating unit O
2
, and material D can only be produced
by operating unit O
3
. For unit O
1
to operate it is necessary that units
O
2
and O
3
both be included in the process structure. In Figure 7.2(b),
however, material C can be produced by unit O
1
, unit O
3
, or both. In
addition to unambiguous structural representation, the P-graph
framework also provides a set of rigorous and effective algorithms
for the synthesis and optimization of process networks.
7.2.2 The P-Graphs Significance for Structural Optimization
The extreme complexity of process network synthesis is due mainly
to the problems combinatorial nature. This complexity grows
exponentially with the number n of candidate operating units,
because the optimal network must be found among 2
n
possible
combinations of the units (i.e., alternative networks) unless some
possibilities can be eliminated (e.g., by heuristics) in advance. The
factor 2
n
is derived by simple induction. First observe that a single
additional decision (regarding the inclusion or exclusion of an
operating unit) doubles the number of potential design alternatives:
2
n
2 = 2
n+1
. This means that a designer contemplating a system with
a total of 35 operating units is faced with more than 34 billion
(2
35
= 3.436 10
10
) alternative arrangements!
Reducing such large numbers of alternatives requires robust
decision-making tools that are mathematically rigorous (preferably
axiomatic) and effectively implementable on computers. These ends
E (a) (b)
B C D
A
O
2
O
3
O
1
F E
B
C
A
O
2
O
3
O
1
F
FIGURE 7.2 P-graphs
representing the
process structure of
three operating
units.

156
have been met largely by employing the well-established mathematics
of graph theory, which can be regarded as a branch of combinatorics.
Thus was developed the graph-theoretic, algorithmic method
described in this section. The method is based on using P-graphs to
extract the universal combinatorial features (properties) inherent in
feasible processes. Such properties can be expressed mathematically
as a set of axioms that characterize the combinatorial feasibility of
processing networks.
A given process network is said to be combinatorially feasible (or to
be a solution structure) if it satisfies the following five structural
axioms:
(S1) Every final product and target is represented in the
structure.
(S2) An entity represented in the structure has no input if and
only if it represents a raw material or precursor.
(S3) Every operating unit represented in the structure is
defined in the problem.
(S4) Any operating unit represented in the structure has at
least one path leading to a final product or a final target.
(S5) An entity belongs to the structure if and only if it is either
an input entity to or an output entity from at least one
operating unit already represented in the structure.
Figure 7.3 illustrates the extreme reduction in the search space
that results from this approach. The universe of all possible networks
is reduced to a much smaller space containing only those networks
that satisfy the axiomsin other words, the combinatorially feasible
(CF) networks. Clearly this reduction will drastically reduce the
required computational effort. Search-space reductions by a factor of
nearly a billion have been reported in some of the real-life process
synthesis tasks performed to date using this axiomatic approach.
Note that each feasible network, including the optimal network, is an
element of the set of combinatorially feasible networks.
Figure 7.4 depicts two process structures that are not combina-
torially feasible. The P-graph in Figure 7.4(a) shows a process structure
in which material F is consumed as an input. Yet because material F is
not a raw material and was never produced, the structure is not
combinatorially feasible according to Axiom (S2). In the P-graph of
Figure 7.4(b), operating unit O
3
produces only by-product B. Here O
3

does not output any final product or material that is later used to yield
a final product, so the process structure violates Axiom (S4). In short,
the structural properties expressed by Axioms (S1)(S5) are necessary
conditions for process structures to be feasible. This means that
reducing the search space to combinatorially feasible structures does
not result in the loss of any practically feasible or optimal processes.
157
7.2.3 The P-Graphs Mathematical Engine: MSG,
SSG, and ABB
When combined with the structural axioms, P-graph representation
makes it possible to implement effective algorithms for structural
analysis, synthesis, and optimization of process structures. The
maximal structure generation (MSG) algorithm (Friedler et al., 1992a)
generates a superstructure that can be rigorously proved to
incorporate each combinatorially feasible process structure. Then the
solution structures generation (SSG) algorithm (Friedler, Varga, and Fan,
Potential networks
(search space)
Optimal network
F
CF
FIGURE 7.3 Reduction in the search space effected by combinatorial axioms
(F = feasible networks, CF = combinatorially feasible networks).
E (a) F
C
A
B D
O
3
O
2
O
1
E (b) F
C
A
B
O
3
O
2
O
1
FIGURE 7.4 P-graphs
representing process
structures that violate
(a) Axiom (S2) or
(b) Axiom (S4).

158
1995) is used to enumerate all the combinatorially feasible process
structures that satisfy Axioms (S1)(S5) or the accelerated branch and
bound (ABB) algorithm (Friedler et al., 1996) is used to generate the
optimal process structure together with a ranked, finite list of near-
optimal structures.
Figure 7.5 illustrates the connections among the three
algorithms. Algorithm MSG generates the maximal structure, and
it can be followed either by algorithm SSG to generate all
combinatorially feasible process structures or by algorithm ABB to
generate the optimal and near-optimal processes. Algorithms MSG
and SSG require as input the list of candidate operating units, each
defined by the set of its input materials (preconditions) and
products (effects). Algorithm ABB requires, in addition to these
data, quantitative information (e.g., prices of raw materials, costs
and capacity constraints of operating units) relevant to assessing
network optimality.
These algorithms and their description are available online
(www.p-graph.com). The methodology has been demonstrated via
typical engineering decision problems (see Chapter 8 for details). A
considerable advantage of the P-graph framework is its potential for
solving large industrial problems, as indicated by its application in
solving various process systems engineering problems (see, e.g., Liu
et al. 2004; Halasz, Povoden, and Narodoslawsky, 2005; Liu et al.,
2006; Fan et al., 2008; Varbanov and Friedler, 2008).
Process Synthesis Problem
Algorithm MSG
Algorithm SSG Algorithm ABB
Maximal Structure
Combinatorially Feasible
Structures
(for further evaluation)
Optimal Process
(n-best Processes)
FIGURE 7.5 Inputs to and outputs from the three P-graph algorithms.
159
7.3 Scheduling of Batch Processes: S-Graphs
7.3.1 Scheduling Frameworks: Suitability and Limitations
Scheduling problems arise in many various areas, including chemical
engineering, supply chain management, operating systems design,
or train timetable design. The terminology and details vary among
the different types of applications, but the core of scheduling remains
the same: assigning tasks to resources at time intervals that satisfy
predefined conditions. The goal is usually to find a feasible schedule
that performs betterin terms of a particular objectivethan any
alternative.
One of the first contributions to scheduling of chemical processes
by Mathematical Programming was the paper by Kondili, Pantelides,
and Sargent (1993). These authors developed the state task network
(STN) representation in order to formulate production scheduling
in multipurpose plants as a MILP problem. Pantelides (1993) also
developed the resource task network (RTN) representation, which
employs a uniform treatment for all available resources. Originally,
the time representation in the formulations are discretein other
words, a certain number of predefined times on the time horizon can
be considered in the schedule. Zhang and Sargent (1996) extended the
formulation to accommodate continuous-time representation, where
the time points may vary, their number still have to be predefined.
Ierapetritou and Floudas (1998a) employed the concept of unit-specific
event points. Majozi and Zhu (2001) reformulated the problem to reduce
the number of variables in certain applications. Cerd, Henning,
and Grossmann (1997) and Mndez and Cerd (2003) developed
precedence-based models suitable for cases where sequence-dependent
changeovers must be considered.
The rest of this section addresses some issues associated with
conventional approaches to scheduling. These issues motivated the
development of a novel, graph-theoretic approach: the S-graph
framework (Sanmart, Friedler, and Puigjaner, 1998; Sanmart et al.,
2002), which is introduced in Section 7.3.2.
In most MILP formulations, the time horizon is divided into time
intervals by so-called time points, which denote the possible starting
and ending times of tasks. The number of time points is one of the
models parameters, so it must be specified prior to optimization.
Even though the quality of the solution depends strongly on this
parameter, the minimum number required for the optimal solution
is not known in advance. Therefore, an iterative approach is applied
to determining the number of time points. First the model is solved
using a small number of time points, after which each subsequent
iteration increases that number by 1 until the same objective value is
obtained for, say, two consecutive steps. However, it is not certain
that this initial convergence necessarily yields the optimal solution.

160
Castro, Barbosa-Pvoa, and Matos (2001) published a case study in
which the objective function value increased after this convergence,
as illustrated in Figure 7.6. A serious shortcoming of this approach is
that it may generate a suboptimal solution.
Another modeling issue may arise when one attempts to solve an
MILP model of scheduling with no intermediate storage: according
to Hegyhti and colleagues (2009), the optimal solution that is
generated may be infeasible. In particular, the Gantt chart of a
schedulewhich was reported in two independent journal articles
(Kim et al., 2000; Mndez et al., 2003) as the optimal solution for a
case studyis not a feasible solution; see Figure 7.7.
The figure reveals that, at 30 hours into production, three units
(U2, U3, and Storage) attempt to exchange materials. However, this
is infeasible because there is no intermediate storage and so the
optimal schedule cannot be implemented in practice. The true
optimal solution of the problem is obtained (Hegyhti et al., 2009)
by using the S-graph framework (Holczinger et al., 2002); see
Figure 7.8.
Number of time points
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
FIGURE 7.6 Increase in value of the objective function after initial convergence
for a maximum throughput problem.
U1
U2
U3
U4
Storage
B
B
B
B
D
D
D
D
A
A
A
A
C
C
C
C
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
FIGURE 7.7 Infeasible solution generated by an MILP approach as optimal
(Kim et al., 2000).
161
7.3.2 S-Graph Framework for Scheduling
The problems discussed in Section 7.3.1 motivated the development
of an alternative methodology, the S-graph or schedule graph
framework (Sanmart, Friedler, and Puigjaner, 1998; Sanmart et al.,
2002), which has been successfully applied to the minimization of
time required to complete all tasks (the makespan; see Sanmart
et al., 2002, and Romero et al., 2004) and also to problems of
maximizing throughput (Majozi and Friedler, 2006). Basics of the
S-graph framework are explained in this chapter; Chapter 9
describes a demonstration program for this framework that is
available online (www.s-graph.com). Once all processing tasks
have been represented in the recipe, the S-graph can be used to
generate an optimal schedule.
A recipe defines the order of tasks in the process, the material
transfers among them, and the set of plausible equipment units for
each task. The recipe is represented as an S-graph by assigning a
node to each task (task node) and one node to each product (product
node). An arc is established between nodes of the consecutive tasks
defined by the recipe, and there is an arc also from each product-
generating task node to the corresponding product node. The weight
of an arc is given as the processing time of the task that corresponds
to the arcs initial node assuming a single equipment unit is available
for the task. If more than one equipment unit can perform this task,
then the arcs weight is given as the shortest processing time of all the
feasible units. In the graph representing the recipe, the set of plausible
units capable of performing the given task is shown in the task node;
see Figure 7.9.
Suppose that two batches of product A and one batch of product
B are to be produced, where product A is produced in two consecutive
steps. Task 1 can be performed by equipment unit E1 and task 2 by
either E2 or E3. Product B is produced in three consecutive steps that
can be performed by any of the elements in sets {E1, E3}, {E1}, and {E1,
E2}, respectively. The recipe is shown in Figure 7.9.
U1
U2
U3
U4
Storage
B
B
B
B
D
D
D
D
A
A
A
C
C
C
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
FIGURE 7.8 Optimal solution generated by the S-graph algorithm (Hegyhti
et al., 2009).

162
The equipmenttask assignments and the order of tasks to be
performed by an equipment unit defines the solution of a
scheduling problem. The schedule is given with an S-graph
containing arcs additional to the S-graph representing the recipe.
Moreover, a single equipment unit is assigned to each task. As an
example, Figure 7.10 depicts an S-graph representing a recipe and
Figure 7.11 a corresponding solution.
FIGURE 7.9 S-graph representing the recipe for two batches of product A and
one batch of product B.
1
{E1}
2
{E2,E3}
3
{E1}
4
{E2,E3}
5
{E1,E3}
6
{E1}
7
{E1,E2}
6
6
9
A
A
B
9
9
14
10
16 8
8
1
{E1}
2
{E3}
3
{E2}
4
{E2}
5
{E3}
6
{E1}
7
{E1}
8
{E2}
9
{E3}
6 9 7
9 15 17
14 16 8
Schedule #1
10
11
12
FIGURE 7.10 Example recipe.
1
{E1}
2
{E3}
3
{E2}
7
{E1}
8
{E2}
9
{E3}
4
{E2}
5
{E3}
6
{E1}
10
12
Schedule #1
11
FIGURE 7.11 Solution for
the recipe under NIS policy.
163
The algorithm generating the optimal schedule depends on the
storage policy to be considered: nonintermediate storage (NIS), finite
intermediate storage (FIS), or unlimited intermediate storage (UIS).
In this chapter we assume a NIS policy, so an equipment unit
becomes available only after finishing a task and transferring its
intermediate product to the subsequent task in the recipe. On an
S-graph representing a schedule under NIS policy, an arc leads from
the node subsequent in the recipe to the node of the task to be
performed next by the same equipment unit. For example, equipment
E1 first performs task 6, then moves to task 1 and finally to task 7,
which is represented by arcs drawn from node 11 (subsequent to
task 6) to node 1 and from node 2 (subsequent to node 1) to node 7 in
Figure 7.11.
The advantage of the S-graph framework over conventional
Mathematical Programming lies in its ability to exploit the problems
structure to effect a drastic reduction on computational intensity
without requiring unknown information, such as the number of time
points. (Visit www.s-graph.com for further information.)
CHAPTER 8
Combined
Process Integration
and Optimization
8.1 The Role of Optimization in Process Synthesis
Process Integration (PI), as defined in Chapter 2, is a family of
optimization methodologies for reducing resource or emissions
intensity of the analyzed processes and Total Sites. As such, it is
tightly related to optimization. In fact, PI and optimization
complement each other by their functionality. First, PI sets out the
strategy for designing and/or operating industrial processes. This
gives engineers some direction regarding how processes can be
designed or changed, answering the questions of where we can go?
and what is to be done? in order to achieve the business goals at
hand. In addition, PI provides quantitative targets for designers and
engineers; it does this by exploiting the physical (in the case of Heat
Integration, thermodynamical) background to answer the question
how much is it possible to improve or achieve? The targets in most
cases are upper bounds on the process performance or lower bounds
on the extent of resource use or emissions. In many cases the targets
are practically achievable, as in the case of designing Heat Exchanger
Networks (HENs) or water networks. The most obvious example is
heat recovery targets established by the Pinch point when analyzing
HEN problems. Since they are based on the Second Law of
Thermodynamics, it is proven that better heat recovery cannot be
achieved by any feasible system. If a realistic value for T
min
is
specified for their evaluation, the targets will be also practically
achievable. Of course, the additional factor of the capital costs for
implementing the heat exchangers generally tends to shift the
economic optimum of the designed HEN away from the maximum
recovery network.
165

166
C h a p t e r E i g h t
The issues tackled by PI are essentially complex optimization
problems. As a result, optimization is used by PI to answer the
question of how should the task be performed? The general goals
and specific targets are usually achieved by employing optimization
tools at various stages. For instance, process performance targets are
typically evaluated by employing a numerical technique that involves
a cascade of some sorta heat cascade in the case of heat recovery
targeting. One way to implement such cascades is by using the
transshipment optimization formulations, where the external utility
use, resource intake, or emissions rate is set as the objective function
to be minimized. Once the PI goals are established, engineers strive
to achieve the best possible performance. In the case of grassroots
design or network synthesis, the criterion is minimization of the total
annualized cost; in the case of a retrofit, the main criterion may be
minimizing the investments necessary to achieve a certain
performance improvement or minimizing the payback period for a
given investment. For operational improvements, the criteria include
minimizing operating costs or maximizing marginal financial or
performance gains. In all cases, a certain system modelincluding
the appropriate objective functionis formulated. The model is then
subjected to optimization toward the end of achieving (or maximally
approaching) the PI targets. Another function of targets is to partition
complex optimization problems into sets of simpler problems that are
easier to solve. This approach exemplifies the problem decomposition
principle, applied for decades in the world of software development,
also known as the divide and conquer strategy.
8.2 Optimization Tools for Efficient Implementation of PI
For optimizing process models, a wide variety of linear programming
(LPR), nonlinear programming (NLP), and mixed-integer programm-
ing (MIP) methods can be used, depending on the nature of the
problem being solved. Some of these methods were described in
Chapters 3 and 7. Special tools and software (see Chapter 9)
incorporating optimization methods have been developed to exploit
PI possibilities when performing process synthesis, accounting for
the interactions between process operating conditions and the
networks for resource recovery (energy and water). There are four
main groups of optimization tools applied for PI. First, the Pinch
Analysis (Linnhoff et al., 1982) enabled industrial engineers to
obtain better results with the simple Pinch Design Method than
with Mathematical Programming methods in applications to
industrial Heat Integration; see Chapter 4. Second, the graph-
theoretic method is based on process graphs (P-graphs), which were
originally developed for Process Network Synthesis (PNS) (Friedler
et al., 1992b; Friedler, Fan, and Imreh, 1998); see Chapter 7. Third,
Papoulias and Grossmann (1983) introduced linear constraints in
C o m b i n e d P r o c e s s I n t e g r a t i o n a n d O p t i m i z a t i o n
167
their transshipment model for Heat Integration within a mixed-
integer linear programming (MILP) formulation for structural
process optimization. This work had been further extensively
developed (Duran and Grossmann, 1986; Floudas and Grossmann,
1987a; Floudas and Grossmann, 1987b). Fourth, stochastic optimization
has become popular in recent years, applying genetic optimization
(Shopova and Vaklieva-Bancheva, 2006) and especially simulated
annealing (Kirkpatrick, Gelatt, and Vecchi, 1983; Faber, Jockenhvel,
and Tsatsaronis, 2005; Hul et al., 2007; Tan, 2007).
Optimization methods can be classified according to the
characteristics of the objective function, the decision variables, and
the problem constraints (Guinand, 2001). A simplified classification
scheme for optimization methods is illustrated in Figure 8.1.
8.3 Optimal Process Synthesis
A process network uses a given set of operating units to create desired
products from specific raw materials. The objective of PNS is to
identify the most favorable (optimal) network for accomplishing the
given tasks. The P-graph methodology is a graph-theoretical approach
to solve PNS problems.
8.3.1 Reaction Network Synthesis
Every reaction is a material transformation, which corresponds to an
operating unit when mapped on a P-graph. Similarly, the maximal
Constraints and Objectives Decision Variables
Integer Programming
(IP)
Nonlinear
Programming
(NLP)
Linear Programming
(LPR)
Integer Linear
Programming (ILP)
Mixed-Integer Linear
Programming (MILP)
Mixed-Integer Nonlinear
Programming (MINLP)
LINEAR
STATIC
STOCHASTIC
Incorporation of
Probability Functions
Incorporation of
Time Domain
DETERMINISTIC
DYNAMIC
NONLINEAR CONTINUOUS INTEGER
FIGURE 8.1 Classication of optimization methods (after Guinand, 2001).

168
reaction network can be generated using the Maximal Structure
Generation (MSG) algorithm. From that, all feasible reaction networks
can be generated as solution structures. Historically, it has been
extremely difficult to construct an exact maximal reaction network.
The problem has become solvable only since the arrival of the
combinatorial approach based on P-graphs. Reaction network
synthesis is completely combinatorial in nature because all chemical
species participating in the reactions are defined discretely.
The application of PNS to Reaction Network Synthesis (RNS) is
illustrated by a chemical process for the manufacturing of vinyl
chloride (C
2
H
3
Cl). Because of its structural simplicity, the balanced
synthesis of vinyl chloride (C
2
H
3
Cl) leads to only a single complex
route containing one loop. It is a trivial example from the standpoint
of constructing the maximal reaction network and the feasible
reaction networks, but it will serve to illustrate the RNS methodology.
The balanced process aims to produce vinyl chloride (C
2
H
3
Cl) and
water (H
2
O), where the former is the desired product and the latter is
the by-product, from the three starting reactants: ethylene (C
2
H
4
),
chlorine (Cl
2
), and oxygen (O
2
). This process involves the following
three unit reactions: R
1
, R
2
, and R
3
.
R
1
: 2C
2
H
4
+ 2Cl
2
= 2C
2
H
4
Cl
2
R
2
: 2C
2
H
4
+ 4HCl + O
2
= 2C
2
H
4
Cl
2
+ 2H
2
O
R
3
: 4C
2
H
4
Cl
2
= 4C
2
H
3
Cl + 4HCl
The unit reactions yield the following overall reaction:
4C
2
H
4
+ 2Cl
2
+ O
2
= 4C
2
H
3
Cl + 2H
2
O
Note that C
2
H
3
Cl is the final target and that C
2
H
4
, Cl
2
, and O
2
are the
starting reactants. From the perspective of materials (M), we have:
Starting reactants Final products

Intermediates
2 4 2 2 2 3 2 2 4 2
By-product
Product Raw materials Intermediate materials
M { C H , Cl , O , C H Cl , H O , C H Cl , HCl }

One or more of the feasible paths and valid vertices in the input
structure may disappear if some of the invalid vertices are eliminated.
Thus, the final maximal structure is composed (or reconstructed)
from the remaining skeleton of the input structure after the
elimination. This is accomplished step by step, linking alternately
the vertices of the M-type (for materials) to the vertices of the O-type
(for operating units) and vice versa. At each step, the vertices linked
are assessed in view of the appropriate axioms (see Section 7.2.2):
vertices of the M-type must satisfy axioms (S1), (S2), and (S5); and
vertices of the O-type must satisfy axioms (S3) and (S4). The execution
is initiated from the structures shallowest layerthat is, the final,
desired product end. The stepwise procedure for the composition is
illustrated in Figure 8.2.
169
The maximal reaction network serves as the input to algorithms
SSG and Accelerated Branch-and-Bound (ABB). Algorithm SSG
generates all combinatorially feasible reaction networks, and algorithm
ABB identifies a set of the most favorable reaction networks.
8.3.2 Optimal Synthesis of Heterogeneous Flowsheets
Synthesis of Optimal Workflow Structures
Workflow technology has become a general tool for a wide range of
business and management applications (Tick, Kovcs, and Friedler,
Cl
2
C
2
H
4
O
2
R
2
H
2
O
H
2
O H
2
O
R
1
C
2
H
4
Cl
2
C
2
H
4
Cl
2
C
2
H
4
Cl
2
C
2
H
4
Cl
2
C
2
H
3
Cl
C
2
H
3
Cl
C
2
H
3
Cl
C
2
H
3
Cl
C
2
H
3
Cl
HCl
HCl HCl
Step 5
Step 3 Step 4
Step 2 Step 1
HCl
HCl
R
2
R
2
R
1
R
1
R
3
R
3
R
3
R
3
R
3
FIGURE 8.2 Steps for the composition of the maximal structure representing
the maximal reaction network for the manufacture of vinyl chloride.

170
2006), which is mainly due to its ability to increase the efficiency of
business and management systems. The mathematical foundation of
this technology has been developed mainly based on Petri net theory
(Kiepuszewski, ter Hofstede, and van der Aalst, 2003; van der Aalst
and ter Hofstede, 2005). Even though this mathematical methodology
provides a basis for determining the optimal operation of workflows,
it cannot be used to derive an optimal workflow structure.
The structural component of a workflow synthesis problem can
be identified by the sets of products, resources, and (plausible)
activities on materials. The cost of a workflow process that generates
a particular quantity of product is given as the sum of (1) the cost of
the raw materials and (2) the cost related to the activities appearing
in the synthesized workflow process. The cost of an activity is the
sum of its running cost and the investments assigned to the period of
time examined. Both the running cost and investment cost depend
on the size of the activitythat is, its output volume. The common
objective for synthesizing workflow processes is to minimize the
total cost under the assumption of unlimited intermediate storage
capacities for any activity.
Example 8.1: Workfow Synthesis (after Tick, Kovcs, and Friedler, 2006)
As an example, a set of activities is given by its inputs and outputs in Table 8.1
and represented by P-graph in Figure 8.3.
The P-graph contains the interconnections among the activities. Each feasible
activity network corresponds to a subgraph of the P-graph in Figure 8.3.
A product document represented by A and B can be generated by an appropriate
network of the activitiesprovided that the problem has at least one feasible
solution. It is important to note that a product can usually be generated by
different types and numbers of activities. When determining the optimal
network for a workflow, all possible networks of each product must be taken
into account.
Activities Input Output
1 C A, F
2 D B
3 E, F C
4 F, G C
5 G, H D
6 H B
7 J F
8 K G
9 K G
10 L H
TABLE 8.1 Plausible Activities for a
Workflow
171
The number of feasible networks is usually large, so a systematic procedure
is needed to determine the optimal network. For this purpose, the P-graph
framework is proposed. Algorithm MSG verified that the P-graph in Figure 8.3
corresponds to the maximal structure, and algorithm ABB provided an optimal
set of several alternative structures containing the strict optimum and other
mathematically suboptimal networks. One of the 50 solution networks for this
problem is given in Figure 8.4.
8.3.3 Synthesis of Green Biorefineries
P-graph is also employed to examine the contribution that process
synthesis can offer to the development of production based on
renewable resources (Halasz, Povoden, and Narodoslawsky, 2005).
These resources face formidable competition from fossil raw materials.
Because their production is usually decentralized, viable processes
can result only if the structure of the complete value chain is optimized.
In contrast to conventional chemical processes, those using renewable
resources have to account for logistic operations affecting the value
chains structure. Hence, using process synthesis in this application
calls for using the highest-quality method for synthesis. The P-graph
method, as described in Chapter 7, has proven to be extremely efficient
and flexible, so it is well suited for this purpose.
Example 8.2: Green Biorefnery Synthesis (Kromus, 2002)
The components of this example are summarized by the flowsheet shown in
Figure 8.5. The goal of the considered system is the (decentralized) production
7 8 9 10
H G F
E
3 5 6
D
2
A
1
C
4
B
J K L
FIGURE 8.3 P-graph, where A, . . . , L are the materials and 1, . . . , 10 are the
activities.

172
of silage on farms. By starting from silage, two crucial steps are combined:
storage (thus enabling the downstream processes to operate continuously) and
conversion of the carbohydrates in green biomass to lactic acid. In addition,
silage production transforms many proteins into amino acids or peptides
(Povoden, 2002; Koschuh et al., 2004).
The synthesis method requires a comprehensive list of raw
materials, intermediates, and possible products. Note that transport
is treated like a processing step: it uses trucks (or tractors), together
with the raw materials (or partially processed juice or press cake) and
available time, in order to derive a realistic logistics pattern.
Consequently, there has to be a plant-specific intermediate material
flow that leaves this process step. The steps listed in Table 8.2 reflect
the necessary logistical handling (i.e., the local and central
converters for various materials) involved in the process.
Once the cost function (including investment and operating
costs) is defined, the synthesis yields the optimal solution to process
silage as a part of the maximal structure; see Figure 8.6 (black lines
show the optimal solution, while the other options are grayed).
One major advantage of process synthesis is that it allows the
designer to apply sensitivity analysis not only to the process itself but
also to the entire value chain. In this example, sensitivity analysis
reveals a remarkable stability of the central biorefinery structure
7 9
10
H
G
F
5
D
2
A
1
C
4
B
J K L
FIGURE 8.4 A solution network for the workow synthesis problem.
173
Double Pressing
5289 t/y Water added
for second pressing
Presscake
Feed Matter
Dry Matter
Dry Matter
Lactic Acid
Raw Fibre
Org. Dry Matter
Flux-out
Silage Juice
Feed Matter
Dry Matter
Dry Matter
Lactic Acid
Org. Dry Matter
Flux-out
Fibres
Feed Matter
Dry Matter
Dry Matter
Lactic Acid
Raw Fibre
Org. Dry Matter
Flux-out
Lactic Acid
Conc.
Feed Matter Product
Dry Matter
Org. Dry Matter
Pure Lactic Acid
Flux-out
Amino Acids
Feed Matter
Dry Matter
Dry Matter
Lactic Acid
Crude Prot.
Flux-out
Crude Protein
Heat:
183442
kWh/y
Drying:
603924
kWh/y
Heat to increase
concentration:
167033 kWh/y
Energy for Drying:
6451609 kWh/y
Silage
Feed Matter
Dry Matter
Dry Matter
Lactic Acid
Raw Fibre
Org. Dry Matter
13825 t/y
6636 t/y
48 %
215 t/y
2824 t/y
6483 t/y
1.9 t FM/h
7373 t/y
6636 t/y
90 %
215 t/y
2824 t/y
6483 t/y
1 t/h
80% D/L
80 %
884 t/y
707 t/y
706 t/y
706 t/y
0.12 t/h
755 t/y
679 t/y
90 %
3.08 t/y
666 t/y
0.1 t FM/h
98 % DM
26976 t/y
3364 t/y
13 %
785 t/y
2509 t/y
3.6 t FM/h
35511 t/y
10000 t/y
28.16 %
1000 t/y
2825.7 t/y
8992 t/y
FIGURE 8.5 Flowsheet of a green biorenery: Base-case mass ows and
concentrations (DM = Dry Matter; FM = Feed Matter).
despite variations in several factors that affect the optimal solution
for silage fractionation and biogas plants within the value chain,
including prices of key products such as electricity and press cake.
Further details on the method and the case study are provided in
(Halasz, Povoden, and Narodoslawsky, 2005).
8.3.4 Azeotropic Distillation Systems
Azeotropic distillation is common in chemical and allied industries.
Many of the existing distillation processes were designed and
developed through extensive trial-and-error efforts. The thermo-
dynamic pinches or boundaries (e.g., azeotropes), distillation
boundaries, and boundaries of liquidliquid equilibrium envelopes
are of critical importance for azeotropic distillation. Moreover, the
compositions of the feed and product streams must be specified in
order to define the synthesis problem for an azeotropic distillation

174
system. Such information can be represented by a residue curve map
(RCM). The RCM of an ethanol-water-toluene system is shown in
Figure 8.7. The points E, W, and T represent the pure components
ethanol (product), water (by-product), and the entrainer, respectively,
while points F and H denote the feed and the ternary azeotrope,
respectively. The whole RCM is partitioned into materials
corresponding to these points; then the lines L1, . . . , L13 demarcate
the areas A1, . . . , A6.
A set of operating units for this process can be represented in a
P-graph; see Figure 8.8. The maximal structure and each solution
structure can be generated by algorithms MSG and SSG, respectively.
The Mathematical Programming model of a process network includes
constraints on operating units (i.e., mathematical models of those
units) as well as constraints on materials (e.g., mass balance
constraints). Mathematical models of mixers, separators, and decanters
are linear, including their mass balances, because they are based on
component flow rates. Thus, the Mathematical Programming model
of process networks involving mixers, separators, and decanters
gives rise to an LPR problem. Each solution structure satisfying
Operating unit Acronym Operating unit Acronym
Mobile press MP Central converter, juice CCJ
Central press CP Local converter, rest of
fibers
LCRF
Local fibers
production
LF Central converter, rest
of fibers
CCRF
Central fibers
production
CF Central converter, rest
of juice
CCRJ
Green biorefinery GBR Local transport, silage LTrS
Local biogas LBG Central transport,
silage
CTrS
Central biogas CBG Local transport, cake LTrC
Local converter,
silage
LCS Central transport, cake CTrC
Central converter,
silage
CCS Local transport, juice LTrJ
Local converter, cake LCC Central transport, juice CTrJ
Central converter,
cake
CCC Central transport, rest
of fibers
CTrRF
Local converter, juice LCJ
TABLE 8.2 List of Process Steps Incorporated into the Synthesis of the Base
Case
175
S
MP
J
CTrC
LTrC LTrJ
CL
JL
SL
LCS LCJ LCC LCRF
GODML
LBG
E
1
RFC
CCRF
CCJ CCS
CF CTrRF
F
1
F
2
LTrS CTrJ
RFL
LF
C
CTrS
SC
CP
JC
GBR
RJC
CCRJ
AA LA
CC
CCC
GODMC
CBG
E
2
FIGURE 8.6 Maximal and optimal structure for base-case synthesis.
A=Area
E
L1 L11
L10
F
W
L7 L4
L3
L2
H
L12
L13
L5
L9
L8
L6
A2
A1
A6
A5
A4
A3
T
L=Line
FIGURE 8.7 Residue
curve map (RCM) of
the ethanol-water-
toluene system.

176
combinatorial constraints has been generated by algorithm SSG and
evaluated by linear programming (Feng et al., 2003).
8.4 Optimal Synthesis of Energy Systems
8.4.1 Simple Heat Integration
A methodology for combining PNS and HENs for integrated
synthesis has been presented by Nagy et al. (2001). It employs the
hP-graph, a special graph that incorporates both operating units and
heat exchangers. Figure 8.9 shows an example flowsheet and its
hP-graph representation.
Mixer
Mixer
Separator
Separator
W
L
12
L
6
L
13
L
1
L
11
E
Decantor
L
7
F
FIGURE 8.8 P-graph
representing the
structure of an
azeotropic
distillation system.
177
In a hP-graph, the node for a heater is indicated by a bar with a
solid lower half and that for a cooler by a bar with a solid upper half.
If the content of an operating unit is heated or cooled by latent heat,
then its mode is extended to the left by an appropriate heat
exchanger. For example, the flowsheet in Figure 8.9 shows that
operating unit 3 is heated with hot latent heat. Suppose that part of a
material stream fed to an operating unit requires temperature
modulation but that the remaining part, which feeds another
operating unit, does not. In this case, the former is diverted through
a heat exchanger and the latter is directed to another operating unit
(as with the two streams of M
6
in the figure).
The ABB algorithm determines whether any of the operating
units should be included in the optimal structure. Applications of
the PNS algorithms extended to the synthesis of combined process
and HENs amply demonstrate the efficacy of the P-graph
framework.
8.4.2 Optimal Retrofit Design
A novel holistic method based on the P-graph approach has been
proposed by Halasz, Povoden, and Narodoslawsky (2002) and Liu
et al. (2006) for process retrofitting. Unlike conventional approaches,
the proposed methodology resynthesizes the entire process by
considering the enhanced performance of the operating units. As
such, this approach can account for all possible outcomes, including
the networks inevitable restructuring. The method employs a
P-graph implementation originally devised for synthesizing
grassroots processes. With the combinatorial feasibility of most
operating units largely predetermined, the approach detects any
M
10
M
11
M
8
M
4
M
7
M
9
M
6
M
3
M
5
M
2
M
1
M
5
M
9
M
10
M
11
M
8
M
7
M
4
M
1
M
2
M
3
(3)
M
3
(1)
M
3
(4)
M
6
(4)
M
6
(1) M
6
(6)
363
1
343
333
Heating:
3
353
363
4
328
6
5
2
3
1 2
4 5
7
6
7
Cooling:
FIGURE 8.9 Flowsheet (left) and hP-graph (right) representations of a heat-
exchanging system.

178
necessary retrofit changes in the network structure. For example, the
retrofit of a conventional downstream process for the biochemical
production of butanol is accomplished by incorporating newly
identified adsorbing units, whose characteristics are summarized in
Table 8.3. Note that each of the processing units 24 and 25 are
represented by two operating units in the P-graphthat is, 241,
242 and 251, 252, respectively.
The P-graph of the problems maximal structure is presented in
Figure 8.10. It includes a gas stripper, an extractor, 27 simple
distillation columns, two azeotropic distillation units, a centrifuge,
and four adsorption columns.
The objective function is to minimize the operating cost (in terms
of its present values) for all operating units in the process flowsheet.
The cost for the three operating units is estimated heuristically. The
optimal flowsheet is illustrated in Figure 8.11.
This approach to retrofitting accounts for the fact that any change
implemented in downstream processing systemsespecially at an
upper segmentwill tend to propagate throughout the system as a
function of each systems unique sequence of structural features. The
approach is also applicable to many other chemical processes that
share the same structural features. With this methodology, a set of
optimal and near-optimal retrofit flowsheets can be generated and
ranked in terms of their costs. One (or more) of the options in this set
may be seen as infeasible or unsustainable when the retrofitted
system is further assessed by taking into account additional criteria
and constraints, including stability and controllability as well as
environmental, societal, and regulatory constraints.
TABLE 8.3 Characteristics, Including Costs of Operating Units, Identified by the
P-graph Method (after Liu et al., 2006)
Operating units and subunits Cost [10
3
$]
Annual cost
[10
3
$/y]
No. of
units
No. of
sub-
units
Equipment
desig-
nation
Type Capital Annualized
capital
Operating Total
23 C1 Centrifuge 9,240 3,080 1,168 4,248
24 241 B1 Adsorption
column
25,107 8,369 871 9,248
column
column
3,806 1,269 132 1,401
column
179
8.5 Optimal Scheduling for Increased Throughput,
Profit, and Security
8.5.1 Maximizing Throughput and Revenue
Majozi and Friedler (2006) developed an effective search algorithm
for determining the globally optimal throughput, revenue, or profit
over a predefined time horizon in multipurpose batch plants on the
basis of the S-graph framework. To demonstrate its performance, a
S00
E1
C1
S11
S16
S1
S51 S52
S53
S15 S17
S31
S32 S33
S34
S35
S36
S37
S38 S39 S40
D22 D26
D28 D29
S43
S44
S45
S46
S48 S49
S07 S06 S13
A1 A2 D3
S02
S09
S19
S20
S43
D20
S08
D5
D6 D8 D10 D12 D16 D18
D7 D9 D11
D15
D17 D13 D14
D19
D21
D25 D27
D2 D1
S01
S54
S03
S05
G1
B4 B3 B2 B1
FIGURE 8.10 P-graph representation of the maximal structure for producing
butanol, ethanol, and acetone with the inclusion of adsorption.
S00
A 11
E 3
W 35
B 26
A 7
[A 7]
[E 2]
[B 26]
E 2
W 26
S01
S05
G1
S54
B4
D21 D22
S08
S09
S20
S39
S40
S19
S05
S08
S39
S19 S20
S40
S09
S54
S00
3(G1)
25-1(B3) 25-2(B4)
20-1(D21)
20-2(D22)
S01
B3
A 11
E 4
W 1773
B 27
E 1
W 1738
B 1
A 4
E 1
W 35
Acetone: A kg/h
kg/h
kg/h
kg/h
B
E
W
Butanol:
Ethanol:
Water:
Legend:
FIGURE 8.11 Optimal owsheet for the example considering adsorption.

180
case study from a real-life multipurpose batch facility is presented
next.
Example 8.3: Optimal Scheduling
The case study is taken from a multinational pharmaceuticals facility that
produces lotions, shampoos, conditioners, and various creams. The problem
features nonintermediate storage policy (NIS), and the processes involve
mixing and packaging. Mixing occurs in four mixing vessels (V1, V2, V3, and
V4), and packaging occurs in three packing lines (P1, P2, and P3). Because the
stirrers in mixing vessels are of different designs, mixing times vary according
to the vessel used. Table 8.4 shows the duration of mixing for each product
in each vessel, which have a capacity of about 3 t each. The table also lists
the economic contribution made to the company revenue or profit by selling
a unit of each product; shampoos have the highest economic contribution.
The packing duration for each product is 12 h, regardless of which packing
line is employed. The objective in this case study is to maximize the overall
economic result for a 24-h period. The S-graph for the recipe for the products
manufactured in this facility is given in Figure 8.12, where the sets of candidate
equipment units for performing tasks 1, . . . , 15 are defined by sets U1 = {V1, V2,
V4}, U2 = {P1, P2, P3}, U3 = {V1, V2, V3}, U4 = {V3}, U5 = {V2, V3}, and U6 = {V1,
V2, V4}.
The global optimal solution corresponds to two batches of Cream 2 and
one batch of Shampoo, which yields revenue of 9.5 cost units. The schedule
corresponding to the global optimum is shown in Figure 8.13.
Two advantages that this approach has over its Mathematical Programming
counterparts are: (1) it guarantees global optimality and (2) no manipulation
of the time horizon is requiredin particular, it is unnecessary to presuppose
time points that will discretize the time horizon into equal (or unequal) time
intervals. For this reason, the technique qualifies as a true continuous-time
methodology.
8.5.2 Heat-Integrated Production Schedules
Many algorithmic and heuristic methods have been developed for
solving Heat Integration problems in continuous processes: Pinch
Technology (Linnhoff et al., 1982), superstructure-based mixed
Product Economic
contribution [cost
unit/batch]
Production time in mixing vessel [h]
V1 V2 V3 V4
Cream 1 2 10 5 N/A 5
Cream 2 3 12 10 7 N/A
Conditioner 1 N/A N/A 12 N/A
Shampoo 3.5 N/A 8 13 N/A
Lotion 1.5 10 6 N/A 9
TABLE 8.4 Scheduling Data for the Case Study of Example 8.3
181
integer programming (Douglas, 1988; Biegler, Grossman, and
Westerberg, 1997), and integration with PNS (Nagy et al., 2001). In
contrast, scheduling and Heat Integration of batch processes are
both complex optimization problems and quite different in nature.
The problems of scheduling and Heat Integration could be solved
sequentially (in either order). Yet because the solution of one problem
will affect the other, the result of this simplistic, sequential approach
is usually poor. A better solution may result from an integrated
consideration of scheduling and Heat Integration. Since there were
not too many methods for solving this integrated problem, the
effective design and operation of integrated batch systems required
development of a new method (Adonyi et al., 2003). The goal was to
operate simultaneously those tasks that involve potential heat
1
U1
5
7
1
8
6
1
11 Cream 1
Cream 2
Conditioner
Shampoo
Lotion
12
13
14
15
1
1
1
1
2
U2
3
U3
4
U2
5
U4
6
U2
7
U5
8
U2
9
U6
10
U2
FIGURE 8.12
S-graph
representing the
recipe for the case
study of
Example 8.3.
V1
Task 3 (Batch 2)
7 8 12
Time [h]
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t

U
n
i
t
s
19
Task 7 (Batch 1)
Task 3 (Batch 1)
Task 4 (Batch 1)
Task 4 (Batch 2)
Task 8 (Batch 1)
V2
V3
V4
P1
P2
P3
FIGURE 8.13 Globally optimal schedule for the case study of Example 8.3.

182
exchange without compromising the quality of the scheduling
solution.
Example 8.4: Heat-Integrated Production Schedules
The recipes of products A, B, and C are shown in Table 8.5, and the corresponding
S-graph of the recipe is given in Figure 8.14. The parameters of the heat streams
are listed in Table 8.6. The available hot and cold utilities are 200C and 10C.
The heat transfer coefficient between a hot and a cold stream is 1500 W/m
2
C,
and the area of a heat exchanger unit is 3 m
2
.
Product A Product B Product C
Task Eq. Time [h] Eq. Time [h] Eq. Time [h]
1 E1
E2
5
5
E1
E2
5
5
E1
E2
6
6
2 E3
E4
4
4
E5
E6
4
4
E5
E6
3
3
3 E5
E6
4
4
E7
E8
4
4
E7
E8
4
4
4 E1
E2
5
5

TABLE 8.5 Recipes for the Products in Example 8.4
1
U1
5 4 4
A
A
A
A
5
B
B
B
C
C
5
5
4 4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3 4
4 3
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
4
U4
7
U7
10
U10
13
U13
17
U17
21
U21
25
U25
28
U28
29
U29
26
U26
22
U22
18
U18
14
U14
11
U11
8
U8
5
U5
2
U2
3
U3
6
U6
9
U9
12
U12
15
U15
19
U19
23
U23
27
U27
24
U24
20
U20
16
U16
31
32
33
34
38
39
37
U2
36
U2
35
U2
30
U30
FIGURE 8.14 S-graph of the recipe for the products in Example 8.4.
183
If the heating and cooling duties are satisfied by utilities, then the minimal
makespan is 33.1 h with 3100 MJ utility. Extending the upper bound for the
makespan to 36 h reduces the required utility to 1100 MJ. Figure 8.15 displays
the Gantt chart of the optimal solution.
8.6 Minimizing Emissions and Effluents
The task of designing a complete energy system involves significant
combinatorial complexity. For this, integer programming procedures
are not efficient. The P-graph framework and its associated algorithms
are capable of efficiently handling exactly the type of complexity that
is inherent to network optimization, and they appear to be some of
the best tools for solving this task. The P-graph approach can readily
evaluate technologies in their early stages of development, such as
fuel-cell combined cycles (FCCCs) based on molten carbonate and
solid oxide fuel cells (Varbanov and Friedler, 2008).
Name Type Initial temp.
[C]
Final temp.
[C]
Heat
[MJ]
Product/
Task
c
1
Cold 40 120 400 A/2
h
1
Hot 140 50 200 B/3
c
2
Cold 80 130 100 B/4
h
2
Hot 150 40 300 C/2
TABLE 8.6 Parameter Values for the Heating and Cooling Requirements in
Example 8.4
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5
E6
E7
E8
10
1 4 13 21 10
7 16 24
20
17 28 25
2 5
3 14 6
22 18 29 26
27 30 15 23
19
12
9
11
8
20
Time [h]
Product A Product B Product C
30 36
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t

U
n
i
t
s
FIGURE 8.15 Gantt chart of the optimal solution for Example 8.4.

184
Example 8.5: FCCC Systems for Reducing Carbon Footprint
This example presents a procedure for evaluating energy conversion systems
involving FCCC subsystems that use biomass and/or fossil fuels; see Figure 8.16.
The procedure provides a tool for evaluating trends in CO
2
emission levels
and the economics of such systems. The significant combinatorial complexity
involved is efficiently handled by P-graph algorithms. Promising system
components are evaluated by a methodology for synthesizing cost-optimal
FCCC configurations that account for the carbon footprint of the various
technology and fuel options using the P-graph framework.
The efficiency of an FCCC system varies with the fuel-cell (FC) operating
temperature, the type of bottoming cycle, and the degree of cycle integration
(see Varbanov et al., 2007). High-temperature fuel cells can be combined with
gas turbines, steam turbines, or both; however, combining all three yields only
marginal improvements. The main reason is that energy in the FC exhaust can
only be shared by the bottoming cycles, and typically this potential for energy
generation is most fully utilized by a steam or gas turbine alone. Hence the
involvement of more than one bottoming cycle cannot substantially increase
overall efficiency, although it can present capital cost trade-offs. Figure 8.17
shows an FCCC system represented by a conventional block-style diagram and
a P-graph fragment.
The synthesis of a processing network, such as the energy conversion system
considered here, requires that the designer choose the best solution from a
Biomass
Processing:
Gasification or
Digestion
Fossil fuels
Biofuel
Energy Conversion:
FCCCs
Boilers
Power
Heat
...
FIGURE 8.16 FCCC system boundary and processing steps.
F
F
FCCC
FCCC
P-graph
Q
Block-style flowsheet
Legend
F: Fuel; FCCC: Fuel Cell Combined Cycle unit; Q: Heat; W: Power
W Q W
CO
2
CO
2
FIGURE 8.17 Flowsheet and P-graph representations of an FCCC system.
185
number of options. This optimization task may have several different objectives.
The most obvious are maximizing the system profit (minimizing its cost) and
minimizing the amount of CO
2
emissions. Although it is mathematically
possible to define a multiobjective criterion to be optimized, using profitability
alone seems most coherent with the logic of a market economy because profit
drives the behavior of companies. Therefore, in this discussion the system profit
is used as the objective (to be maximized); CO
2
emissions are then used as an
additional criterion during the analysis stage.
The materials and streams for the system considered in this example are
listed in Table 8.7. The waste products are assigned negative prices, denoting
that they generate costs for the system rather than revenue. Other performance
Stream Type P-graph
classification
Description Price
BM Biomass Raw material Agricultural residues Varies
BG Clean biofuel Intermediate Biogas suitable for
utilization as a fuel
BR Waste /
By-product
Product / Output Biomass residues
(solid remainder from
the biomass after
gasification)
10 /t
CO
2
Waste,
greenhouse gas
Product / Output CO
2
emissions Varies
FRT Useful
by-product
Product / Output Fertilizer obtained as
a by-product from the
anaerobic digester
50 /t
NG Fossil fuel Raw material Natural gas 36.8 /
MWh
PR Waste /
By-product
Product / Output Particulates left from
cleaning the synthesis
gas
10 /t
Q40 Steam Intermediate
Steam at P = 40 bar(a)
Q5 Steam Product / Output

Steam at P = 5
bar(a) to satisfy user
demands
30 /
MWh
RSG Intermediate
fuel
Intermediate Raw synthesis gas
SG Clean biofuel Intermediate Clean synthesis gas
suitable for use as a
fuel
W Power product Product / Output Electrical power to

satisfy user demands
100 /
MWh
TABLE 8.7 Materials and Streams for Example 8.5

186
and economic data specifications, which provide the basis for appropriate
economic evaluation of the designs, are given in Varbanov and Friedler (2008).
The P-graph tools can be used to generate different solutions based on the
objectives of interest (operating cost, CO
2
emissions) and market conditions.
The results show that systems of this type that employ renewable fuels are
economically viable for a wide range of economic conditions; this finding is due
mainly to the high energy efficiency of the FC-based systems. Figure 8.18 shows
the P-graph for the base case in which operating cost is minimized.
8.7 Availability and Reliability
The significance of waste management systems has increased in
recent years because of the growing problems of waste management
chains affecting not only the environment, but also the daily lives of
millions of people. Several promising approaches have appeared,
including the RAMS (reliability, availability, maintenance, and
safety) software for modeling waste management systems. This
approach was analyzed and evaluated thoroughly by Sikos and
Kleme (2009a, 2009b, 2010).
In todays technological world, most waste management plants
depend on the continuous operation of a wide array of complex
machinery and equipment to sustain development, safety, human
health, and economic welfare. Plant operators expect a wide variety
BM
55.2 MW
15.1 MW
2.2 MW
10.0 MW W
16.9 MW
FCCC_36
(MCFC+ST)
32.0
MW
BGD
CO
2 BG
4.2 t/h
1.4 t/h
0.17 t/h
FRT
BLR_BG
12.8 MW
Q40
15.0 MW
LD_40_5
15.0 MW Q5
FIGURE 8.18 P-graph solution for the energy system of Example 8.5.
187
of appliances to function without unexpected problems or major
breakdowns. If these equipment units fail, the consequences can be
catastrophic: contamination, smog, acid rain, injury, loss of life,
production cutbacks, amassed garbage heaps, energy losses, and so
on. Catastrophic failures would also entail substantial added costs.
For these reasons, solid waste management is a matter of serious
concern, which in some cases (waste collection in Naples, Italy) has
even led to a change in government. The models that have been
developed to manage waste-producing processes are of two types:
optimization models deal with specific aspects of waste-related
problems; in contrast, integrated waste management models focus on
sustainability. The latter type can be subdivided into three main
subcategories: models based on costbenefit analysis, models based
on life-cycle inventory, and multicriteria models (Morrissey and
Browne, 2004).
However, there is an element of uncertainty or risk associated
with most environmental decisions. Multicriteria techniques can
be extended to consider reliability issues along the entire waste
management chain and need not be limited to comparing the environ-
mental impacts of different waste treatment methods. As the
complexity of unit arrangements increases, risk assessment becomes
more complicated. Risk is a measure of the plants ability to carry
out its specific operating mission reliably. The expected return on
related investments is a function of the plant equipments capacity,
which is defined in terms of reliability, availability, durability, and
performance.
Reliability engineering in waste management addresses all
aspects of the waste life cycle, from its collection and treatment
processes and through the energy generation lifetime, including
maintenance support and availability. The concepts of reliability,
maintainability, and availability can be quantified with the aid of
reliability engineering principles and life data analysis (Kececioglu,
2002). A significant fraction of any systems operating cost is due to
unplanned system stoppages for unscheduled repair of components
or the entire system. One method of mitigating the cost (and impact)
of such failures is to improve the systems reliability and availability.
Of course, improvements in reliability that are made by the supplier
early in the equipments life cycle may well result in additional
development cost being passed on to the customer in the form of
higher equipment acquisition cost. However, this cost increase can be
more than offset by the operational cost reduction associated with
improved reliability and increased uptime, which also improve
productivity. Note that, in the context of waste management,
reliability, availability, and maintenance have specialized meanings.
Reliability is the probability that a system will perform satisfactorily
for at least a given period of time t when used under stated conditions
(Kuo and Zuo, 2003).

188
Availability is the probability of the successful operation of a
system in a determined period of time. It can be calculated as the
ratio between an equipments lifetime and total time between failures
(de Castro and Cavalca, 2006):

Lifetime Lifetime MTBF
Total time Lifetime Repair time MTBF MTTR
A

(8.1)
where MTBF is the Mean Time Between Failure (the inverse of the
failure rate) and MTTR is the Mean Time To Repair (the inverse of the
repair rate).
In addition, there are three frequently used terms defined
by Ireson, Coombs, and Moss (1996) and elsewhere: inherent,
achieved, and operational availability. The expression for inherent
availability is

MTBF
MTBF MTTR
i
A
(8.2)
for achieved availability,

MTBM
MTBM MAMT
a
A
(8.3)
and for operational availability,

MTBM
MTBM MDT
o
A
(8.4)
Further specifications also existfor example, those given by
Hosford (1960):
Pointwise availability is the probability that a system will be
able to operate within tolerances at a given instant of time.
Interval availability is the expected fraction of a given interval
of time that a system will be able to operate within
tolerances.
A special type of interval availability, called limiting interval
availability, was defined by Barlow and Proschan (1996); it is
the expected fraction of time in the long run that a system
operates satisfactorily.
There are even more specific definitions. For example, the availability
of a redundant system represented by a series of parallel systems is
formulated by de Castro and Cavalca (2006) as

1
[1 (1 ) ]
n
y
i
s i
i
A A
(8.5)
189
where A
i
is the availability of the components of subsystem i and y
i
is
the number of redundant components in subsystem i. Comparing
downtimes is another, intuitive way to express availability.
Maintenance covers those activities undertaken after a system is
in the field in order to keep it operational or restore it to operational
condition after a failure has occurred (Ireson, Coombs, and Moss,
1996). There are several classifications of maintenance, the most
important of which are listed as follows:
Breakdown maintenance: An item of the system would be
repaired each time it breaks down (Mechefske and Wang,
2003).
Condition-based maintenance (CBM): The critical components
are monitored for deterioration, and maintenance is carried
out just before the failure occurs (Mechefske and Wang,
2003).
Preventive (scheduled) maintenance: The plant is stopped at
intervals, often annually, and is partly stripped and inspected
for faults (Mechefske and Wang, 2003).
Reliability-centered maintenance (RCM): A procedure to identify
preventive maintenance requirements of complex systems
(Cheng et al., 2008).
Maintainability is the measure of an items ability to be retained in
(or restored to) a specified condition when maintenance is performed
by personnel having specified skill levels, using prescribed
procedures and resources, at each prescribed level of maintenance
and repair (Ireson, Coombs, and Moss, 1996). De Castro and Cavalca
(2006) defined it as the ability to renew a system or component in a
determined period of time, enabling it to continue performing its
designed functions.
For further information on reliability, availability, and mainten-
ance of waste management systems, see Sikos and Kleme (2010a).
Another difficulty with large systems is that troubleshooting
usually requires several problems to be solved, often simultaneously.
Data collection is also difficult because of the variety of input data;
the characteristics (e.g., type) of waste; production that changes
seasonally, weekly, and also randomly or unpredictably (due, e.g., to
weather changes, price changes that lead to different consumption
priorities, unpredictable natural disasters such as volcanic eruptions);
and changes related to a special venue, where a gathering or migration
of a mass of people can cause substantial changes as at a football
match or rock concert. The associated danger and hazards mean that
waste materials have to be appropriately cared for. A wide variety of
possible failure causes have to be identified. There are many other
issues to consider, too. Waste management systems are quite complex,

190
containing both serial and parallel subsystems. They include several
equipment units, each with its own degree of availability and
reliability. Scheduled outages need to be differentiated from the
downtimes caused by unexpected faults. Maintenance actions
including scheduled outagesshould be updated as needed to cope
with changes that occur within the system. The recommendations of
reliability engineers inform the designers task of effectively modeling
and optimizing all the specified objectives.
Many things need to be improved in waste management. These
include policy focus and popular opinion, which should both pay
more attention to the importance of this process and its effects.
Landfill space is decreasing while solid waste is increasing, so public
and private landfills compete for municipal clients to ensure the
capital required to extend landfill life while coping with new permits.
The situation varies in different countries and geographic regions, so
investigation is needed to devise appropriate solutions for specific
scenarios.
8.6 Summary
This chapter presented several examples of combined PI and
optimization. The main focus was on exploiting the advantages of
graph-theoretic (P-graph and/or S-graph) frameworks. These
methods are well tested and have demonstrated their efficiency
across many applications.
CHAPTER 9
Software Tools
9.1 Overview of Available Tools
Process Integration, modeling, and optimization problems in
chemical engineering are complex in terms of scale and relationships.
Solving these problems requires the application of information
technology and computer software, which provide fast and as much
as possible accurate solutions via a user-friendly interface. Software
tools have been widely used for process simulation, integration, and
optimization, and this has helped process industry companies
achieve their operational goals. There is a large number of efficient
tools available, each with its particular advantages. The aim of this
chapter is to describe these tools based on comprehensive experience
with them and their application to Process Integration, modeling,
and optimization.
The online encyclopedia Wikipedia (2009) presents a comprehensive
list of available software tools for the simulation of material and energy
balances of chemical processing plants. Examples include: (1) ASCEND;
(2) Aspen HYSYS by Aspen Technology; (3) ASSETT and D-SPICE
by Kongsberg Process Simulation; (4) CHEMCAD; (5) COCO simulator;
(6) Design II by Winsim; (7) EcosimPro; (8) Environment for Modeling,
Simulation and Optimization (EMSO); (9) Dymola; (10) GIBBSim;
(11) gPROMS by PSE Ltd; (12) OLGA by SPT Group (Scandpower);
(13) Omega by Yokogawa; (14) OpenModelica; (15) Petro-SIM; (16) ProMax;
(17) SimSci-Esscor DYNSIM & PRO/II by Invensys; (18) SysCAD;
(19) UniSim Design & Shadow Plant by Honeywell; and (20) VMGSim.
However, this selection cannot be fully comprehensive and is limited
just to process simulation software. It should cover a wider field and be
studied in more detail, which is the target of this chapter.
9.2 Graph-Based Process Optimization Tools
9.2.1 Process Network Synthesis Solutions
Process network synthesis (PNS) Solutions is a software package
designed to solve problems in PNS. Process synthesis involves
191

192
C h a p t e r N i n e
finding the optimal structure of a process system, and this includes
determining optimal types, configurations, and capacities of the
units that perform various operations within the system. The details
of the process graph (P-graph) approach were presented in Chapters 7
and 8. Process network synthesis is sometimes called flowsheeting
or flowsheet optimization because it involves the creation of a
flowsheet for the industrial process under consideration.
In order to solve a PNS problem, the designer must examine all
feasible structures and select the best among them. The structures
optimality can be assessed in terms of cost, profit, efficiency, and so
on. When designing an optimal process network, both structural
information (which processing units are connected, and how) and
sizing information (how much is produced from a given material)
are needed.
The questions addressed by PNS Solutions are as follows:
(1) How are the building blocks of a process network best represented?
(2) What are the possible solution structures of the problem? (3) What
is the maximal structure (which includes all solution structures)?
(4) What is the optimal structure?
The maximal structure comprises all the combinatorially feasible
structures capable of yielding the specified products from the
specified raw materials. Certainly, the optimal network or structure
is among these feasible structures. The maximal structure generation
(MSG) algorithm produces a P-graph (see Figure 9.1) in which each
FIGURE 9.1 Starting state of the MSG algorithm (PNS Solutions).
S o f t w a r e T o o l s
193
material and operating unit appears exactly once. In the composition
phase, the nodes are linked stepwise, layer by layer, starting from the
shallowest end (i.e., the final-product end) of the remaining input
structure. The algorithm proceeds by assessing whether any of the
linked nodes violates any of the axioms described in Chapter 7.
The structure generation is performed transparently, and the
maximum structure that results is the input for the Solution Structures
Generation (SSG) algorithm. If a material has to be produced, then
the SSG algorithm generates all possible ways for its production. For
example, if M1 can be produced by O2 or by O3 then the possibilities
include production by O2 alone or by O3 alone or by using both.
Once an operating unit is included, its input materials must be
produced as well, and so forth. Materials are selected in a specific
order. The parentchild relation between steps ensures that the
materials are selected by the process according to this order.
The SSG algorithm yields all the combinatorially feasible solution
structures of a given problem. Unfortunately, the number of feasible
structures at this stage is often too large to be enumerated explicitly.
Therefore, the Accelerated Branch-and-Bound (ABB) algorithm is
used to determine the optimal structure without generating all the
possible solutions. Input to this algorithm includes not only the
structural relationships between materials and operating units but
also such additional information as the costs of each raw material,
the fixed and proportional costs of operating units, and the constraints
(if any) on the quantity of materials and the capacity of operating
units.
9.2.2 S-Graph Studio
S-Graph Studio is a software package that enables the user to design
batch processes and to optimize them via various optimization
methods (S-Graph, 2009). The program also allows scheduling
problems to be defined using graphical tools. It has a modular
architecture, so different solvers can be used with the program.
S-Graph Studio uses the industrys standard file format: BatchML (as
defined by the ISA-88 standard of the World Batch Forum), which is
used to exchange information between industry sites and plants as
well as for other purposes. The Excel file format can also be used for
both input and output. The software includes a solver that utilizes
the S-graph methodology developed at the University of Pannonia
(S-Graph, 2009).
One of the main goals of batch process optimization is to
minimize makespanthat is, finding the shortest time in which a
process can be completed using available resources. S-Graph Studio
can be used to define batch processes in terms of the tasks to be
performed, the available equipment units, and task completion times
(as a function of the equipment units used). This information is
necessary and sufficient for minimizing the makespan of a process.

194
The results are presented graphically (by Gantt chart or by schedule
graph) but can be exported to various formats for further use. Issues
addressed by S-Graph Studio include how to represent a scheduling
problem and how to generate the optimal schedule structure in the
cases of unlimited and no intermediate storage. The schedule
associated with the selected solution is displayed as a Gantt chart
(Figure 9.2) or a schedule graph, both of which clearly show the unit
task assignments and their associated timing.
FIGURE 9.2 The Gantt chart and schedule graph of a solution (S-Graph Studio).
195
9.3 Heat Integration Tools
9.3.1 SPRINT
SPRINT is the software package used to design energy systems for
individual processes on a site (SPRINT, 2009). This software tool
provides energy targets and optimizes the choice of utilities for an
individual process. It also performs Heat Exchanger Network (HEN)
design automatically for the utilities that are selected. Both new
design and retrofit can be carried out automatically, though the
designer maintains control over network complexity. For example,
several retrofit modifications can be generated automatically and
then presented to the designer one at a time, so that the number of
modifications is minimized, and the final decision on each
modification is left to the designer. SPRINT can also be used for
HEN operational optimization tasks. The SPRINT and the STAR
programs (see Section 9.3.3) are linked by common data structures,
which facilitate their interaction (e.g., the same files can be used, and
no manual data transfer is required between the programs).
SPRINT is used in both academic and industrial settings for the
following applications: (1) optimizing the choice and load of utilities
for individual processes; (2) automatic design of new HENs;
(3) automatic retrofit design of HENs while using a minimum number
of modifications; (4) automatic design for multiple utilities (new
design and retrofit); (5) interactive network design; (6) simulation of
networks via simple models; (7) targeting minimum energy
consumption; (8) network optimization; and (9) assessing network
operability. User interaction with the network structure is through
the graphical editor shown in Figure 9.3.
9.3.2 HEAT-int
HEAT-int (2009) is a product of Process Integration Ltd. This program
is used to improve the energy performance of individual processes
on a site. It is the next-generation development of SPRINT software
(by a related team of developers) to a commercial standard, and it
offers more user-friendly interface features. The areas in which
HEAT-int is applied are similar to those listed previously for
SPRINT.
9.3.3 STAR
STAR is a software package for the design of site utility and
cogeneration systems (STAR, 2009); see Figure 9.4 for an example
user interface. This program analyzes all the interactions between
site processes and the steam system, steam turbines, gas turbines
(with auxiliary firing options), the boiler house, local fired heaters,
and cooling systems. The analysis is used to reduce energy cost and

196
FIGURE 9.3 SPRINT software interface (SPRINT, 2009).
FIGURE 9.4 STARs graphical user interface (STAR, 2009).
197
to plan infrastructure investment when operational changes are
anticipated, changes that may include the replacement of energy
equipment. STAR can also be used to investigate flue gas emissions,
which should often be reduced to meet tighter environmental
regulations. The STAR package incorporates several tools, as
described next.
Utility system optimization: A given utility system configuration
incorporates important degrees of freedom for optimization.
Multiple boilers with different efficiencies and different fuels in
addition to multiple back-pressure steam turbines, condensing
turbines, gas turbine heat recovery steam generators, and letdown
valves provide optional heat flow paths that can all be exploited for
significant cost reduction. STAR has a utility system optimization
facility that allows existing utility systems to be optimized. It can
also be used to plan infrastructure de-bottlenecking and investment
strategies.
Top-level analysis: When studying an existing site, it is important
to understand how its infrastructure influences the degrees of
freedom to make changes as well as the economic consequences of
those changes. These considerations are addressed by STARs top-
level analysis, whose results ensure that the designer does not waste
time and costs pursuing changes that are not viable (structurally or
economically) in the overall site context.
Process energy targets: Even though the primary function of STAR
is the analysis of utility systems, it includes tools for setting energy
targets and selecting utilities for individual processes. Using these
tools allows the picture of the Total Site to be built up from the
individual processes within STAR.
Total Sites: STAR can produce profiles that represent the heating
and cooling requirements of the Total Site. This allows targets to be
set for fuel consumption in the boilers, cogeneration potential, and
energy costs. The Site Profiles can be based either on the full heat
recovery data or, more simply, on data for the utility exchangers
only.
Boiler systems and steam turbine systems: Using STAR allows the
designer to establish optimal targets for the amount of steam
generated by boilers and gas turbines (with auxiliary firing options).
A gas turbine model enables the study of different gas turbine
arrangements. Steam turbines are a part of most utility systems,
serving to generate power or as allocated drivers for process
machines. STAR software incorporates the design of steam turbine
networks and the analysis of their operability.
Emissions: By relating process energy requirements to the supply
of utilities, it is possible to target the amount of fuel required for the
utility system. Such targets can be combined with information on the

198
fuel and type of combustion device to generate targets for emissions
of CO
2
, SO
x
, NO
x
, and particulates. It is then possible to explore the
various options for reducing these emissions.
9.3.4 SITE-int
Like HEAT-int (see Section 9.3.2), SITE-int (2009) is a product of
Process Integration Ltd. SITE-int is a state-of-the-art software package
for the design, optimization, and integration of site utility systems in
process industries. Its main features include methods to: (1) model
and optimize site utility systems; (2) minimize operating costs for
existing systems without modification; (3) target cogeneration
potential; (4) optimize site steam pressures and loads; (5) minimize
site energy costs through system modifications; (6) determine the
true benefit from saving energy in the individual processes; (7) reduce
greenhouse gas emissions from the site; and (8) create partial-load
models of utility system components from plant operating data using
regression functions and data reconciliation functions.
9.3.5 WORK
WORK is the software package used for the design of low-temperature
(subambient) processes (WORK, 2009). Low-temperature processes
require heat rejection to refrigeration systems. As a result, the
operating costs for such processes are usually dominated by the cost
of power to run the refrigeration system. Complex refrigeration
systemsincluding cascade and mixed refrigerant systemscan be
analyzed using WORK. For mixed refrigerants, WORK can be used
to optimize refrigerant composition. The software enables the user
to: (1) understand complex refrigeration systems; (2) target minimum
shaft work for low-temperature cooling duties; (3) optimize the
number and temperatures of refrigeration levels; (4) target minimum
shaft work for cascade refrigeration systems; (5) target minimum
shaft work for mixed refrigerant systems; and (6) determine the
optimum composition for mixed refrigeration systems. Three of
these features are discussed in more detail next.
Targeting low-temperature systems: WORK can target minimum
shaft work for simple and complex refrigeration cycles. Targets are
based on rigorous thermodynamic calculations that are highly
accurate even when compared with the results of rigorous simulation.
When multiple refrigeration levels are used, trade-offs arise between
temperature levels and shaft loads. Adjustments to each temperature
level affects not only its own shaftwork requirement but also that of
the other levels. Therefore, all levels of refrigeration must be
optimized simultaneously. This task is facilitated by WORKs
extremely accurate shaftwork predictions.
Simulating refrigeration systems: WORK enables the simulation of
simple and complex refrigeration systems (see Figure 9.5), which may
involve multiple heat levels and multiple compressors. The refrigerant
199
heat loads and temperature levels can be optimized relative to the
background process in order to minimize overall shaftwork.
Optimizing mixed-refrigerant systems: WORK can optimize the
composition of mixed refrigerants to minimize shaftwork
requirements. This goal is achieved by matching the composition of
the mixed refrigerant to the cooling profile (see Figure 9.5). The
software outputs a visual representation of the shaftwork losses in
refrigeration cycles, including both mechanical and thermal losses.
9.3.6 HEXTRAN
HEXTRAN is a steady-state simulator that provides a view of heat
transfer systems (IPS, 2009a). It is used to design new systems,
monitor current systems, optimize existing operations, and solve (or
prevent) heat transfer problems. The program simulates integrated
processes and allows engineers to monitor the performance of
individual exchangers or an entire heat transfer network. It also
offers superior postprocessing displays, plotting Grand Composite
Curves as well as the results from network targeting and zone
analysis. HEXTRAN provides new efficiencies in all types of design
and operational analysis work, such as individual exchanger and
network designs, Pinch Analysis, exchanger zone analysis, split
flows, area payout, and optimal cleaning cycles.
HEXTRAN analyzes factors that can make the difference between
profits and losses. These factors include: (1) improved process heat
transfer, product yield, and quality; (2) increased energy efficiency
and significantly reduced operating costs; (3) increased plant flexibility
and throughput; (4) optimized cleaning schedule for exchangers;
(5) optimal antifouling selection and usage; and (6) improved process
designs and revamps. The HEXTRAN simulator for process heat
transfer offers features that facilitate straightforward evaluations of
complex design, operational, and retrofit situations; in particular, it:
(1) enables the design of both simple and complex heat transfer
systems that result in cost-effective, flexible processes; (2) allows the
FIGURE 9.5 Refrigeration composition options and ideal composition proles
(WORK user interface).

200
designer to retrofit existing equipment and revamp HENs to yield
optimum performance; and (3) identifies cleaning incentives and
predicts future performance.
9.3.7 SuperTarget
SuperTarget is mainly used to improve Heat Integration in new
design and retrofit projects by reducing operating costs and optimally
targeting capital investment (Linnhoff March, 2009). SuperTarget is
also a tool for day-to-day application by novice or occasional users,
and it makes Pinch Analysis a routine part of process design. The
software features an intuitive user interface that makes the technology
accessible to users at all levels of expertise, and advanced tools are
available for expert applications. Many of the most time-consuming
tasks traditionally associated with Pinch Analysis have been partially
or fully automated.
SuperTarget takes data directly from most popular process
simulation programs through interfaces to Aspen Plus, HYSYS, and
PRO/II. Its automatic data extraction system converts raw process
data into Pinch data, although the user has the option of overriding
the extraction defaults. SuperTarget consists of three program
modules: (1) Process is the core program, which is used to optimize
energy use within a single process unit; (2) Column performs a
thermal analysis of the heat distribution in distillation columns; and
(3) Site is used to establish heat and power targets across a Total Site.
9.3.8 Spreadsheet-Based Tools
Pinch Analysis provides a comprehensive and systematic approach to
maximizing the plant energy efficiency and minimizing the use of
utilities. The Pinch technique is amenable to use with commercial
spreadsheets, which display a grid of rows and columns made up of
multiple cells, each containing alphanumeric text or numeric values.
Kemp (2007) developed an Excel spreadsheet for Pinch Analysis that
incorporates targeting calculations and plots (see Figure 9.6). The main
components of this spreadsheet are: (1) input of stream data; (2) calcu-
lation of Composite Curves (CCs), the problem table, energy targets, and
the Pinch temperature; (3) plots of CCs and the GCC; (4) plots of the
stream population over the temperature range of the problem and the
basic grid diagram; and (5) tables and graphs of the variation in energy
and Pinch temperature over a range of T
min
values.
Neither area targeting nor cost targeting is included in the
spreadsheet because doing so would add considerable complexity.
Suitable data on heat exchanger coefficients is often lacking and most
plots of cost against T
min
could look fairly flat, which is not always
the case when the appropriate cost scale is set. However, topology
can still be identified from the graphs of utility use and Pinch
temperature against T
min
(Kemp, 2007).
201
9.4 Mass Integration Software: WATER
WATER is a software package for the design of water systems in
process industries (WATER, 2009). Water is used for a wide variety
of operations for mass transfer, washing operations, steam systems,
cooling systems, and so forth. WATER targets and designs for
minimum water consumption by identifying opportunities for
water regeneration, reuse, and recycling. The cost of effluent
treatment systems is minimized through design methods that lead
to distributed systems. Networks involving water use and effluent
treatment are designed automatically, with the designer in full
control of network complexity. This software tool is capable of
handling multiple contaminants. The six principal issues addressed
by WATER are described next.
Water minimization: WATER minimizes freshwater use by
identifying reuse opportunities. The program works using data on
the water quality constraints of each operation of the process. In
addition to constraints for multiple contaminants, constraints on
maximum and minimum flow rate and on water losses and gains
can be specified, as well as forbidden matches.
Multiple sources of freshwater: It is often the case that there are a
number of different sources of freshwater available, each featuring
different qualities and different costs. WATER is able to optimize the
use of multiple sources of freshwater.
FIGURE 9.6 Spreadsheet user interface for Pinch Analysis (Kemp Pinch
Spreadsheet, 2006).

202
Automatic design of water reuse networks: All constraints relating to
maximum and minimum flow rates, forbidden matches, and water
losses or gains in individual operations can be accounted for. The
designer also has control over network complexity.
Regeneration of water: Once water reuse has been maximized,
further reduction in water consumption can only result from
regenerating wastewater. WATER enables a network designer to
examine and compare the effects of regeneration reuse and
regeneration recycling.
Automatic design of water reuse and effluent treatment networks:
WATER can automatically generate not only water reuse networks
but also effluent treatment networks at a minimum cost. The design
engineer maintains control over network complexity and over the
relevant constraints (e.g., forbidden matches, flow-rate ranges, water
losses and gains during treatment operations).
Pipe work and sewer costs in network design: In addition to the capital
cost associated with regeneration and treatment processes, WATER
also incorporates the cost of connecting the operations that involve
running new pipes and sewers. These factors are included with the
freshwater cost and other capital cost when assessing trade-offs
between cost and overall performance. It is important to consider
pipe work and sewer cost because they have a profound effect on
network structure and complexity.
9.5 Flowsheeting Simulation Packages
9.5.1 ASPEN
Aspen Technology, Inc., provides integrated software applications
for a variety of industriesoil and gas, petroleum, chemicals, and
pharmaceuticalsthat manufacture products using chemical
processes. Aspen ONE (AspenTech, 2009d) is an application suite
that enables process manufacturers to implement best practices for
optimizing their engineering, manufacturing, and supply chain
operations. This software package addresses inefficiencies
throughout the plant, resulting in significant cost savings. Aspen
Plus (Aspen-Tech, 2009c) is a core element of the Aspen ONE process
engineering suite. It is a process modeling tool used in conceptual
design, optimization, and performance monitoring for the chemical,
polymer, specialty chemical, metals and minerals, and coal power
industries. Aspen Plus includes a large database of pure component
and phase equilibrium data for conventional chemicals, electrolytes,
solids, and polymers. This information is updated regularly using
data from the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Aspen Plus is well integrated with Aspens software for cost analysis
(AspenTech, 2009a) and heat exchanger design (AspenTech, 2009b).
These software applications enable rigorous sizing and rating of
203
key equipment, such as heat exchangers and distillation columns,
within the simulation environment.
9.5.2 HYSYS and UniSim Design
The HYSYS software was initially created by Hyprotech for
simulating both steady-state and dynamic processes. It includes tools
that can be applied to: (1) estimating physical properties, including
liquidvapor phase equilibrium; (2) establishing heat and mass
balances; (3) designing and optimizing oil and gas processes; and
(4) evaluating and selecting process equipment. HYSYS technology
was acquired and modified by Aspen (see Section 9.5.1) and later by
Honeywell, where it is known as UniSim Design (Honeywell, 2010).
Aspen HYSYS and UniSim Design are similar in terms of application
and the working interface. Both include: (1) a library of physical
properties of many chemical substances; (2) a set of subroutines for
estimating the behavior of several types of plant equipment (heat
exchangers, reactors, etc.); and (3) a graphical user interface for
inputting case specifications and displaying results.
Once the designer describes the process in terms of equipment
units interconnected by process streams, the program solves all the
equations for mass, energy, and equilibrium while taking into
consideration the units specified design parameters. The program
is built upon proven technologies that for two decades have supplied
process simulation tools to the oil and gas industry. Another
advantage of Aspen HYSYS and UniSim Design is their interactive
and flexible process modeling, which allows engineers to design,
monitor, and troubleshoot as well as to make operational
improvements and perform asset management. Employing these
features leads to decision making that enhances the productivity,
reliability, and profitability of a processing plants life cycle
(Ebenezer, 2005). The HYSYS fluid package module requires
information on the characteristics of unit components and the
physical properties of relevant streams. Also, accurate simulation of
processes requires that appropriate thermodynamic models be
selected as a framework for the simulation. Note that a process that
is otherwise fully optimized in terms of equipment selection,
configuration, and operation is of no use whatsoever if the process
simulation was based on an incomplete or inaccurate fluid package
or on an inappropriate thermodynamic model.
HYSYS requires minimal input data from the user; the most
important input parameters are the streams temperature, pressure,
and flow rate (Ebenezer, 2005). The software includes an assortment
of utilities that can be attached to process stream and unit operations.
These tools interact with the process to provide valuable additional
information. For example, the flowsheet used within the HYSYS
simulation environment can be manipulated by the designer to
estimate desired output.

204
9.5.3 gPROMS
An advanced modeling environment for process industries is offered
by gPROMS (PSE, 2009), which provides advanced custom modeling
capabilities within a flowsheeting environment combined with an
object-oriented modeling language. The process modeling, process
simulation, and optimization capabilities of gPROMS are used to
generate accurate process behavior predictions and information for
decision support in product and process innovation, design, and
operation. Because gPROMS is a flowsheeting environment, the user
can optimize complex units within the context of an entire process.
The software employs synchronized graphical and text views, which
makes it easy to develop, maintain, and assure the quality of the
models, and archive them. It is capable of assessing all phases of the
process life cycle, from laboratory experimentation to process design
and detailed engineering to online operations.
For modeling problems and deriving solutions, the environment
provided by gPROMS ModelBuilder is employed. ModelBuilder is a
flexible environment in which engineering experts can perform custom
modeling, process engineers can generate graphical flowsheets, and
process operators can run execution-only routines. Figure 9.7 shows
an example user interface. In summary, gPROMS is an equation-
oriented modeling system used for building, validating, and executing
first-principles models within a flowsheeting framework.
FIGURE 9.7 Flowsheeting environment (ModelBuilder) with dual graphical and
text views (PSE, 2009).
205
9.5.4 CHEMCAD
The CHEMCAD software tool for simulating chemical processes
includes libraries of chemical components, thermodynamic methods,
and unit operations (Chemstations, 2009). Its purpose is to facilitate
the simulation of steady-state continuous chemical processes from
laboratory-scale experiments to full-scale operations; see Figure 9.8
for the user interface. This software package has recently been
upgraded to allow for the dynamic analysis of flowsheets. It offers
operability assessment, proportional integral derivative (PID) loop
tuning, and operator training as well as online process control and
soft-sensor functionality. Models for nonstandard unit operations
can simulate the behavior of a process under varying feed rates,
product rates, temperatures, pressures, and compositions.
The program contains the 1500-component Design Institute for
Physical Property (DIPPR) database as well as a separate, user-
defined database. Components are selected by ID number, formula,
synonym, or class. The program also includes routines for predicting
the properties of components not included in the database. Crude oil
feeds may be characterized by American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) or true boiling point (TBP) curves and then
represented in the simulation by a series of pseudocomponents (cuts)
with different boiling points.
The flowsheet representing the plant layout is input graphically,
and data describing each feed stream and unit operation is entered
via pull-down menu options. Automatic error checking is used to
preclude overspecification or missing data entries. The interactive
interface also permits individual unit operations to be run separately
FIGURE 9.8 CHEMCAD software interface.

206
from the complete flowsheet for the purpose of quick what if
analyses (Chempute Software, 2001).
Results output by the program include a full heat and material
balance; thermodynamic and physical properties of all streams;
component flow rates; stream temperatures, pressures, and vapor
fractions; and process equipment parameters. The user may view the
results graphically or obtain a printout of either summary or detailed
results. CHEMCAD includes additional modules; some of them are
(1) CHEMCAD-THERM for the design and rating of shell-and-tube
heat exchangers (including air coolers), (2) CHEMCAD-BATCH for
simulation of batch distillation processes, and (3) CHEMCAD-REACS
for the dynamic simulation of stirred tank reactors. The software
package also includes a subroutine, called CONVERT, which
translates the process flow diagram generated by the program into a
series of drawing exchange format (DXF) files for incorporation into
AutoCAD software routines.
9.5.5 PRO/II
The PRO/II computer simulation system is used by process engineers
in the chemical, petroleum, natural gas, solids processing, and
polymer industries (IPS, 2009b). It includes a large chemical component
library and multiple thermodynamic property prediction methods as
well as advanced and flexible techniques for evaluating unit
operations. The software tool can perform mass and energy balance
calculations for modeling steady-state processes. Expert systems,
extensive input processing, and error checking are included to help
inexperienced users. Typically, PRO/II simulation is applied to the
following tasks: (1) process design; (2) evaluating alternative plant
configurations; (3) modernizing and revamping existing plants;
(4) assessing, documenting, and complying with environmental
regulations; (5) troubleshooting and de-bottlenecking plant processes;
and (6) monitoring and improving plant yields and profitability.
9.6 General-Purpose Optimization Packages
9.6.1 GAMS
The General Algebraic Modeling System (GAMS, 2009) is a high-level
modeling system for Mathematical Programming and optimization.
GAMS is designed for modeling linear, nonlinear, and mixed integer
optimization problems. The system is well suited to complex, large-
scale modeling applications, and it allows the user to build and
archive large models that can later be adapted to new situations. A
particular advantage of GAMS is its ability to handle large, complex,
and/or unique designs that may require many revisions before an
accurate model is established.
207
The system models problems in a natural and highly compact
way. The package includes an integrated development environment
and a group of integrated solvers. GAMS was the first algebraic
modeling language, and it is formally similar to several common
programming languages. Models are described in algebraic
statements that are easy for humans and machines to read. The
system is capable of handling models of many different types, so
switching between model types can be done with a minimum of
effort. For instance, the same data, variables, and equations can be
reused for a linear and a nonlinear model by simply converting a
small number of parameters to variables. GAMS also includes a
variety of solvers for different classes of models.
9.6.2 MIPSYN
The MIPSYN (short for Mixed Integer Process SYNthesizer) is a
user-friendly computer package for the integrated synthesis of new
plants and for the innovative reconstruction of existing plants at
different levels of complexity. The tasks to which it can be applied
range from simple nonlinear programming (NLP) solutions for
plant optimization problems to the mixed integer nonlinear
programming (MINLP) optimization of heat-integrated, flexible
plants. MIPSYN is the successor to the PROSYN synthesizer
(Kravanja and Grossmann, 1990; Kravanja and Grossmann, 1994).
As such, it is based on the most advanced modeling and optimization
techniques: those rooted in disjunctive MINLP. The MIPSYN
software can simultaneously address both discrete optimization
(e.g., selection of process units, their operating status, their
connectivity, and ranges of operation) and continuous optimization
(of temperatures, flows, pressures, etc.). The package integrates the
following methods and related components: (1) GAMS with a variety
of different NLP and MILP solvers; (2) different versions of the outer
approximation (OA) algorithmincluding the modified OA/ER
algorithm (ER denotes equality relaxation) and a new logic-
based OA/ER algorithmwhich are supervised by MIPSYN
command files; (3) a simple simulator that serves as an initializer to
provide NLP subproblems with feasible (or nearly feasible) starting
points; (4) a library of models pertaining to process units,
interconnected nodes, and the simultaneous integration of heat and
mass; (5) a database of the physical properties of the most common
chemical components; and (6) a hybrid modeling environment, with
a link to external FORTRAN routines, for solving the implicit part of
synthesis models.
Execution of the NLP and MILP steps in OA algorithms is
performed through the use of GAMS saving and restart capabilities,
which enable the user to execute MIPSYN in automated or interactive
modes of operation. The synthesizer features many important

208
capabilities: initialization of NLP subproblems; calling different NLP
and MILP solvers in a sequence with different option files (text files
containing specifications of solver options to be applied); the efficient
modeling of different formulations and strategies (e.g., multilevel
MINLP); the capacity to solve feasibility problems whose objective
functions are augmented by penalties; multiobjective optimization;
integer-infeasible path optimization; multiperiod optimization; and
flexible synthesis for cases where the true parameters are uncertain.
Some of these applications were described in Kravanja (2009).
MIPSYN can be comprehended and used at different levels of
problem abstraction because it includes: (1) an MINLP solver for
problems of a general nature; (2) a process synthesizer for generating
process flowsheets; and (3) a synthesizer shell for accommodating
applications from different engineering domains.
A number of case studies have been performed using MIPSYN.
In these studies, the synthesis was applied to all basic process
systems and subsystems. Examples include: (1) heat-integrated
reactor networks in overall process schemes; (2) heat-integrated and
flexible separator networks; (3) Heat Exchanger Networks, including
retrofits and networks that use more than one exchanger type;
(4) mass exchanger networks; (5) heat-integrated overall process
schemes based on a sustainable, multiobjective approach; and
(6) flexible and heat-integrated flowsheets, together with their
HENs, for cases involving as many as 30 uncertain parameters.
Note that the MIPSYN synthesizer shell also enables applications
in the area of mechanics (Kravanja, Kravanja, and Bedenik, 1998a;
Kravanja, Kravanja, and Bedenik, 1998b; Kravanja, ilih, and
Kravanja, 2005). These mechanical applications range from simple
NLP optimizations to complex, multilevel MINLP syntheses of
structures in which topology, material use, and dimensions are
optimized simultaneously.
9.6.3 LINDO
LINDO is a tool for solving linear, integer, and quadratic program-
ming problems (Lindo Systems, 2009). It provides an interactive
modeling environment that facilitates the simulation and solution of
optimization problems. LINDO has the speed and capacity to solve
large-scale linear and integer models. The dynamic link library
(DLL) version of LINDO allows users to seamlessly integrate the
LINDO solver into Microsoft Windows applications that are written
in Visual Basic, C/C++, or any language that supports DLL calls.
Workstation users can exploit the linkable object libraries to hook
the solver engine to applications written in FORTRAN or C. The
latest LINDO version (ODC, 2009) offers a number of enhancements,
including: (1) significantly expanded nonlinear capabilities; (2) global
optimization tools; (3) improved performance on linear and integer
209
problems; and (4) enhanced interfaces to other systems, such as
MATLAB and Java.
LINDO API was the first full-featured solver with a callable
library to offer general nonlinear and integer nonlinear capabilities.
This feature allows developers to incorporate a single, general-
purpose solver into their custom applications. The softwares linear
and integer capabilities provide the user with a comprehensive set
of routines for formulating, solving, and modifying nonlinear
models (although a separate, nonlinear license must be purchased to
access these nonlinear capabilities). The global solver combines
techniques for range bounding (e.g., interval analysis, convex
analysis) and range reduction (e.g., linear programming, constraint
propagation) within a branch-and-bound framework to find proven
global solutions to nonconvex nonlinear programs or mixed-integer
nonlinear programs.
9.6.4 Frontline Systems
Solvers (optimizers) are software tools that help users find the best
way to allocate scarce resources. Frontline Systems (Solver.com,
2009) offers products that cover several problem types and that
allow model definition via an Excel spreadsheet or via a program
written in any of several common programming languages and
environments (e.g., Visual Basic, C/C++/C#, VB.NET, Java, MATLAB).
Models designed using these solver products include decision
variables for quantities of resources as well as calculated results
(constraints) that are subject to limits (e.g., budget, capacity, and/or
time constraints).
9.6.5 ILOG ODM
The ILOG system is geared toward optimizing decisions and thereby
finding the best solutions to complex planning and scheduling
problems. It provides an application environment that supports the
flexible exploration of all the trade-offs and sensitivities. Thus, the
ILOG optimization decision manager (ODM) makes optimization
easier (ILOG, 2006); see Figure 9.9. A unique aspect of ODM-based
applications is that they provide all the features that business people
need to take full advantage of optimization technology. Applications
built using ILOG ODM allow users to create, visualize, and compare
planning or scheduling scenarios, to adjust any of the models inputs
or goals, and to comprehend the relevant binding constraints, trade-
offs, sensitivities, and business options.
With ODM-based applications, overconstrained problems are
automatically relaxed during runtime by ILOG CPLEX, which is
programmed to relax the least important (and fewest possible)
constraints. This ensures that a solution will always be found, and
solutions are presented along with clear information about any

210
relaxed preferences or constraints. The optimized solutionwhich
includes a recommended plan or schedule and the attendant
metricscan easily be further explored, allowing users to
understand the optimization models dynamics and perhaps
identify better solution scenarios.
9.7 Mathematical Modeling Suites
9.7.1 MATLAB
MATLAB (short for matrix laboratory) is an interpreted language
for numerical computation (MathWorks, 2009). It allows performing
numerical calculations and then visualizing the results without
the need for complicated and time-consuming programming.
MATLAB allows users to solve problems accurately, to produce
graphics easily, and to generate code efficiently. It also enables
matrix manipulation, the plotting of functions and data,
implementation of algorithms, creation of user interfaces, and
interfacing with programs written in other languages. For technical
problem solving, MATLAB has many advantages over conventional
computer languages, as described next (see also Chapman, 2009).
Ease of use: Programs can be easily written and modified under
the built-in integrated development environment, and they can be
debugged using the MATLAB debugger.
FIGURE 9.9 User interface for an ILOG ODM-based application (ILOG, 2006).
211
Platform independence: MATLAB is supported on many different
computer platforms, which provides a large measure of platform
independence. The language is supported on Windows, Linux,
several versions of UNIX, and the Macintosh. This means that
programs written in MATLAB can migrate to different platforms.
Predefined functions: MATLAB comes complete with an extensive
library of well-tested, predefined functions that generate solutions
to many basic technical tasks. The arithmetic mean, standard
deviation, median, and hundreds of other mathematical functions
are built in to the MATLAB language, which makes the users job
much easier.
Device-independent plotting: Unlike most other computer languages,
MATLAB has many commands for imaging and integral plotting.
The images and plots can be displayed on any graphical output device
supported by the computer that is hosting MATLAB.
Graphical user interface: MATLAB includes tools with which a
programmer can interactively construct a graphical user interface for
any program. Given this capability, programmers can design
sophisticated data-analysis programs that can be operated by
relatively inexperienced users.
The built-in functions of MATLAB allow users to perform basic
minimization and maximization routines. However, compiling and
executing a proper optimization program may require the use of
add-on packages. One popular add-on is TOMLAB (TOMLAB, 2010),
a powerful optimization platform and modeling language for
solving applied optimization problems in MATLAB. The TOMLAB
environment includes a wide range of features, tools, and services
for optimization analyses.
9.7.2 Alternatives to MATLAB
There are two free alternatives to MATLAB software: SCILAB
(Scilab, 2009) and OCTAVE (Octave, 2009). Both provide number-
crunching power similar to MATLABs but at an advantageous
cost/performance ratio (since they are free). In essence, SCILAB and
OCTAVE are interpreted, matrix-based programming languages.
They have strong similarities to MATLAB: (1) the use of matrices as
a fundamental data type; (2) built-in support for complex numbers;
(3) powerful built-in math functions and extensive function libraries;
and (4) extensibility in the form of user-defined functions and macro
languages.
9.8 Other Tools
9.8.1 Modelica
Modelica is an object-oriented, declarative, multidomain language
for the component-oriented modeling of complex systemsthat is,

212
systems containing mechanical, electrical, electronic, hydraulic,
thermal, control, power, and/or process-oriented subcomponents
(Modelica, 2009a; Modelica, 2009b). The free Modelica language is
developed by the nonprofit Modelica Association. In this language,
models are described by classes, which may contain differential,
algebraic, and discrete equations alongside properties and algorithms.
The language can be used for hardware in the loop simulations
and for embedded control systems (Modelica, 2009a). Modelica
supports high-level modeling by composing complex models from
detailed, component models. Models of standard components are
typically available in model libraries. A model can be defined by
using a graphical model editor offered by the various language
implementations (Modelica, 2010) to draw a composition diagram:
positioning icons that represent the model components, drawing
connections between the components; and providing parameter
values in dialogue boxes (Modelica, 2009b). Constructs for including
graphical annotations in Modelica render the icons and composition
diagrams portable between different platforms. Typical composition
diagrams from various domains are shown in Figure 9.10.
In addition to the basic language elements mentioned previously,
Modelica also supports arrays (via a MATLAB-like syntax). Array
elements may consist of basic data types (e.g., real, integer, boolean,
string) or, more generally, of component models. This flexibility
allows for convenient descriptions of complex models containing
repetitive elements.
9.8.2 Emerging Trends
Lead times for the development of new energy technologiesfrom
initial idea to commercial applicationcan run into years. Reducing
I
n
e
r
t
i
a
l
y
x
r1={0,1,0} r4={0,1,0}
r6={0,1,0}
load
r
2
=
{
1
,
0
,
0
}
r
3
=
{
1
,
0
,
0
}
r
5
=
{
1
,
0
,
0
}
b1={0,0,0}
b2={0,0.5,0}
b3={0,0,0}
b4={0,0.73,0}
b5={0,0,0}
b0
control
motor gear
1
C
load
p3 p2 p1
R
p
2
Rp1
Rel
Line1
Line2
VolP
emf
T1
q
G2
3rd
Order
R
a
T
2
T
4
P
4
L
a
3D mechanics
control systems
power trains
electrical systems
C=C
L
=
L
k=k
R=200
R
=
2
5
0
R
=
5
0
J=1
power systems
t
i
m
e
>
5
t
i
m
e
>
3
hydraulics
state machines
FIGURE 9.10 Composition diagrams produced using Modelica (2009b).
213
this lead time is a primary objective of the European Commissions
Directorate-General for Transport and Energy (DGTREN), which has
funded two related projects, EMINENT (Early Market Introduction
of New Energy Technologies) and EMINENT2 (Kleme et al., 2005b).
The principal features of these projects are a software tool and an
integrated database of new technologies and sectoral energy supplies
and demands. The software tool is for analyzing the potential
impact of new and underdeveloped energy technologies emerging in
different sectors from different countries. This tool has also been
used in case studies that illustrate the new technologies.
The aim of the EMINENT software is to assess the market
potential of early-stage technologies (ESTs) in various energy supply
chains by evaluating their performance in terms of: (1) CO
2
emissions,
(2) costs of energy supply, (3) use of primary fossil energy, and
(4) effects on different subsectors of society. Technology developers
and financial supporters are frequently not aware of all the potential
applications or the relative market attractiveness of such technology
across different countries and sectors of society. Thus, the EMINENT
project provides insight into the market potential that can accelerate
the development of technologies; this benefits research and development
efforts by targeting them more effectively.
The EMINENT tool that evaluates ESTs makes use of two databases:
(1) national energy infrastructures, which contain information on the
number of consumers per sector, type of demand, typical quality of
the energy required, and consumption and installed capacity per end
user and (2) other ESTs and technologies that are already commercial
including key information on new energy technologies currently
under development and proven energy technologies now available
and in use. The availability, price, and geographical conditions of
primary energy resources differ significantly worldwide, so the impact
of ESTs can be evaluated only within the context of a particular
(national) energy supply system (Kleme et al., 2007b). The EMINENT
package consists of an integrated resource manager, a demand
manager, and an EST manager as well as databases on resources and
demand. The methodology, as shown in Figure 9.11, can be briefly
summarized as follows:
Resource manager selects, enters, and modifies data on country
resources (electrical, fuel-based, geothermal, hydro, ocean tidal,
wave, and wind energy).
Demand manager describes energy demands per subsector in a
given country; it selects data for the technology assessment, enters
new data, and modifes old data.
Technology manager stores key data on existing technologies and
ESTs.
User input: (1) The sectoral energy demands whose potential supply
by EST is being evaluated; (2) any other peripheral technologies

214
needed to establish full energy supply chains; and (3) resources
the EST would require to satisfy the full energy supply chain.
Output: (1) aggregate numbers; (2) application potential of ESTs per
(sub)sector; (3) annual cost of energy delivery per consumer and
per (sub)sector; and (4) annual CO
2
emissions.
Performance indicators: (1) effciency of energy supply chain;
(2) usage of primary fossil energy; (3) CO
2
emissions per MWh;
and (4) costs of delivered energy [/MWh].
Most of the ESTs analyzed were not yet able to achieve the cost
levels of existing technologies. Some of the ESTsfor instance,
molten carbonate fuel cells (MCFCs)could become competitive
with relatively small efforts aimed at cost reduction. Various
promising future trends located with the help of EMINENT have
been supported by policy makers. Some near-term prospects are:
(1) diverse energy systems that encompass supplies, management,
and control of demand; (2) market-based grids with large power
stations, including wind farms of different types; (3) local distributed
generation, including biomass, waste, and wind; (4) micro generation,
FIGURE 9.11 Methodology employed in EMINENT toolbox (after Kleme et al.,
2007b).
Hydro
Solar Coal
Gas/Oil
Wind
Biomass
Hydrogen
Ground
Heat
Apply EMINENT tool to assess the
new technology potential
Energy supply system
Biomass/waste
Coal
Oil
Natural gas
Hydro
Wind
Solar energy
Geothermal
Intermediate products
Pre-
treat-
ment-
sys-
tems
Transpor-
tation and
storage
Conver-
sion
processes
EST
to be
evaluated
Distribu-
tion and
storage
Electricity
Heat
Transportation
fuel
215
including Combined Heat and Power (CHP), fuel cells, and
photovoltaic technology; new homes built with nearly zero carbon
emissions; (6) natural gas; (7) coal-fired generation combined with
carbon capture and storage; and (8) mixed fuels (e.g., coal mixed
with biomass, natural gas mixed with hydrogen). Longer-term
prospects include nuclear power stations, fuel cells, hydrogen
obtained from nonelectricity sources (e.g., biomass, low-carbon
biofuels), and nuclear fusion.
9.8.3 Balancing and Flowsheeting Simulation for
Energy-Saving Analysis
Tools for balancing, reconciliation, and flowsheeting simulation are
frequently used for energy-saving analysis and have become an
essential item in the process engineers toolbox. These tools help
designers develop complete mass and energy models based on actual
measurements and/or design values and mathematical models. As a
result, these simulation tools play an important role in the technical
and economic decision making related to the planning and design
stages of processes under development and to the operation of
existing equipment. Several computer-based systems have been
developed over the years in order to assist process engineers with
energy and mass balance calculations. However, ongoing development
costs have resulted in a limited number remaining on the market,
and these have been secured only by a substantial volume of sales.
An early overview of the field was presented by Kleme (1977).
The technology used for balancing and for data validation and
reconciliation consists of a set of procedures incorporated into a
software tool. Process data reconciliation has become the main
method for monitoring and optimizing industrial processes as well as
for performing component diagnosis, condition-based maintenance,
and online calibration of instrumentation. According to Heyen and
Kalitventzeff (2007), reconciliation has three main goals: (1) detect
and correct deviations and errors of measurement data so that all
balance constraints are satisfied; (2) exploit the structure of and
knowledge about the process system by using measured data to
estimate unmeasured data whenever possible, in particular as
regards key performance indicators (KPIs); and (3) determine the
postprocessing accuracy of measured and unmeasured data,
including KPIs.
A comprehensive system called DEBILwhich included
balancing, flowsheeting simulation, and optimizationwas created
several decades ago (see Kleme, Lucha, and Vaek, 1979) and has
since been further developed by Belsim into the balancing and
reconciliation tool VALI (VALI III User Guide, 2003). This tool has been
applied to various energy-efficiency tasks, as reported with respect
to nuclear power plants (Langenstein, Jansky, and Laipple, 2004) and
regenerative heat exchangers (Minet et al., 2001).

216
9.8.4 Integrating Renewable Energy into
Other Energy Systems
There are many different computer tools now available that can be
used to analyze the integration of renewable energy. Connolly and
colleagues (2010) have reviewed these tools in considerable detail.
Their study analyzed 37 computer tools designed for this purpose, as
summarized (in alphabetical order) in Table 9.1.
Tool (availability) Applications Reference
AEOLIUS (commercial) Power plant dispatch
simulation tool
Universitt Karlsruhe
(2009)
BALMOREL (free
download)
Open-source electricity
and district heating tool
Balmorel (2009)
BCHP Screening Tool
(free download)
Assesses CHP in buildings Oak Ridge National
Laboratory (2009a)
COMPOSE (free
download)
Single-project techno-
economic assessments
Aalborg University
(2009a)
E
4
cast (commercial) Tool for energy projection,
production, and trade
ABARE (2009)
EMCAS (commercial) Creates techno-economic
models of the electricity
sector
Argonne National
Laboratory (2009a)
EMINENT (registration
required)
Early-stage technologies
assessment
EMINENT2 (2009)
EMPS (commercial) Electricity systems with
thermal/hydro generators
SINTEF (2009b)
EnergyPLAN (free
download)
User-friendly analysis of
national energy systems
Aalborg University
(2009b)
energyPRO
(commercial)
Single-project techno-
economic assessments
EMD International A/S
(2009)
ENPEP-BALANCE (free
download)
Market-based energy-
system tool
Argonne National
Laboratory (2009b)
GTMax (commercial) Simulates electricity
generation and flows
Argonne National
Laboratory (2009c)
H
2
RES (internal use
only)
Energy-balancing models
for island energy systems
Instituto Superior
Tcnico (2009)
HOMER (free
download)
Techno-economic
optimization for stand-
alone systems
HOMER (2009)
TABLE 9.1 Software Tools for Analyzing the Integration of Renewable Energy into
Other Energy Systems (after Connolly et al., 2010)
217
HYDROGEMS (free for
TRNSYS users)
Renewable and H
2
stand-
alone systems
Institute for Energy
Technology (2009)
IKARUS (earlier
versions are free)
Bottom-up cost
optimization tool for
national systems
Forschungszentrum
Jlich Institute for
Energy Research (2009)
INFORSE (free to
nongovernmental
organizations)
Energy-balancing models
for national energy
systems
INFORSE-Europe (2009)
Invert (free download) Simulates promotion
schemes for renewable
energy
Vienna University of
Technology (2009)
LEAP (free for
developing countries
and for students)
User-friendly analysis for
Stockholm Environment
Institute (2009)
MARKAL/TIMES
(commercial)
Energyeconomic tools for
International Energy
Agency (2009)
MESAP PlaNet
(commercial)
Linear network models of
Schlenzig (2009)
MESSAGE (free except
for the simulators)
Medium- and long-term
assessment of national or
global energy systems
International Institute
for Applied Systems
Analysis (2009)
MiniCAM (free
download)
Simulates long-term,
large-scale global changes
MiniCAM (2009)
NEMS (free except for
the simulators)
Simulates the U.S. energy
market
Energy Information
Administration (2009)
ORCED (free
download)
Simulates regional
electricity dispatch
Oak Ridge National
Laboratory (2009b)
PERSEUS (sold to large
European utilities)
Family of energy and
material flow tools
Universitt Karlsruhe
(2009)
PRIMES (projects are
undertaken for a fee)
Market equilibrium tool
for energy supply and
demand
National Technical
University of Athens
(2009)
ProdRisk (commercial) Optimizes operation of
hydro power
SINTEF (2009a)
RAMSES (projects are
Simulates the electricity
and district heating sector
Danish Energy Agency
(2009)
RETScreen (free
download)
Renewable analysis for
electricity and/or heat in
systems of any size
National Resources
Canada (2009)
Other Energy Systems (Continued)

218
SimREN (projects are
Bottom-up supply and
demand for national
energy systems
Institute for Sustainable
Solutions and
Innovations (2009)
SIVAEL (free download) Electricity and district
heating sector tool
Energinet.dk (2009)
STREAM (free
download)
Overview of national
energy systems to create
scenarios
Ea Energy Analyses
(2009)
TRNSYS16
(commercial)
Modular structured
models for community
energy systems
TRNSYS (2009)
UniSyD3.0 (contact
jleaver@unitec.ac.nz)
National energy systems
scenario tool
Unitec New Zealand
(2009)
WASP (free to IAEA
member states)
Identifies the least-cost
expansion of power plants
IAEA (2009)
WILMAR Planning Tool
(commercial)
Increasing the use of
wind in national energy
systems
Ris National
Laboratory (2009)
Other Energy Systems (Continued)
CHAPTER 10
Examples and
Case Studies
T
his chapter provides a selection of problems that have been
collected by the authors over twenty years of teaching and
consulting. The problems include step-by-step solutions,
which provide guidance for mastering the methodology. Space
limitations make it impossible to cover all aspects or to provide fully
comprehensive solutions, for which an entire book would be required.
The representative problems selected for presentation here are
divided into five groups: Heat Pinch Technology, Total Sites,
integrated placement of processing units, utility placement, and
Water Pinch Technology.
10.1 Heat Pinch Technology
The first group of problems involves heat Process Integration, known
also as Heat (and, in Australia and South Africa, as Thermal) Pinch
Technology.
10.1.1 Heat Pinch Technology: First Problem
Problem 1: Task Assignment
A chemical process is served by a Heat Exchanger Network (HEN),
as displayed in Figure 10.1. The figure shows the supply and the
target temperatures at the start and end of each stream. For this
problem, the minimum allowed temperature difference T
min
= 10C.
The following tasks should be performed:
(a) Completion of the network description. (1) Convert the network
representation to a grid diagram. (2) Calculate the missing
temperatures and heat loads for the recovery heat exchangers,
heaters, and coolers.
(b) Identification of the Network Pinch. (1) Find and write down a
path that connects a heater and a cooler through a recovery
heat exchanger. Derive expressions for the heat loads and
219

220
C h a p t e r T e n
temperatures that will vary with shifting amounts of heat
X [kW] through the path in order to increase the heat
recovery. (2) Shift the maximum amount of load through the
path while accounting for the minimum allowed temperature
difference. Write down the maximum shifted load, the
pinching exchanger, and the stream temperatures for the
exchanger. Using the Pinch method yields the Maximum
Energy Recovery (MER) targets listed in Table 10.1 and the
Grand Composite Curve (GCC) shown in Figure 10.2.
(c) Identification of the scope for improvement. (1) Calculate the
scope for improvement in heat recovery in terms of the
networks total heating requirement. (2) Find the heat
exchangers, implementing cross-Pinch heat transfer, and
write them down.
Problem 1: Solutions
Answer to (a)(1) and (a)(2). The HEN is represented as a grid diagram in
Figure 10.3, which also shows the missing HEN parameters (i.e., temperatures
and loads).
Answer to (b)(1). A path between a cold and a hot utility is called a utility path.
Heat duty can be shifted along a utility path, which provides a degree of freedom
in the HEN retrofit. Figure 10.4 shows a utility path connecting a heater and a
H1
H
H
C
C
C
C1
100
140C
40C
100
160
50
190
160C
60C
45C
100C
220C
220C
160C
337C
CP [kW/C]
CP [kW/C]
190C
35C 80C 60C 140C
164C 125C 170C 300C
70 175 60 200
C2 C3 C4 C5
H2
H3
H4
FIGURE 10.1 Existing Heat Exchanger Network (Problem 1).
E x a m p l e s a n d C a s e S t u d i e s
221
Interval T
*
[C] Enthalpy [MW]
1 332 17,780
2 305 20,480
3 215 2,480
4 175 2,880
5 169 2,580
6 155 900
7 145 0 (Pinch)
8 130 1,650
9 105 25
10 85 725
11 65 4,925
12 55 7,625
13 40 10,925
14 35 11,425
TABLE 10.1 Calculated MER Heat Cascade
for Problem 1
0
0.0 5.0 10.0
H [MW]
T
min
=10C
T
*

[
C
]

15.0 20.0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
FIGURE 10.2 Grand Composite Curve for Problem 1.

222
C h a p t e r T e n
C1
40.0
160.0
60.0 88.0
45.0 118.55
100.0
190.0 99.7 337.0
100
CP [kW/C]
160
50
190
100
70
175
60
200
220.0
220.0
160.0
247.0
300.0
164.0
125.0
170.0
300.0
188.0
35.0
80.0
60.0
140.0
C3
C6
E7
E5
E4
E2 E1 H1
H2
H3
H4
H8
H9
9600 kW 22400 kW
9030 kW
14700 kW 5300 kW
6600 kW
7875 kW
5970 kW
C10
C2
C3
C4
C5
FIGURE 10.3 Calculated grid diagram for Problem 1.
40.0
160.0
60.0
88.0
118.55
45.0
Load-shift path
C3
C6
E7
E5
E4
E2
H1
H2
H3
H4
E1
C1
C10
C2
C3
C4
C5
1400 kW
T
H12
Q
C3
Q
E1
Q
H8
T
C2,in
=35.0
T
C11
T
H11
T
C2,out
=164.0
13984 kW
100.0
80.0
60.0
140.0
125.0
300.0
160.0
220.0
220.0
337.0
170.0
300.0
188.0
7875 kW
6600 kW
9030 kW
9600 kW
22400 kW
H9
H8
100
160
50
190
100
70
60
200
175
CP [kW/C]
FIGURE 10.4 The load-shift path identied for Problem 1.
223
cooler through a heat recovery exchanger. The temperatures, which will vary
with the amount of heat shifted, are also indicated in the figure.
The expressions for the variation in the affected heat loads and temperatures
in response to a shifted load of X kW are displayed in Eqs. (10.1)(10.8) (notation
as in Figure 10.4):
Cooler C3 load: (10.1)
Temperature of stream C1: (10.2)
Heater H8 load: (10.3)
Exchanger E1 heat load: (10.4)
Temperature 1 of stream H1: (10.5)
Output temperature of C2: (10.6)
Input temperature of C2: (10.7)
Temperature 1 of stream H1: 99.7 /100 X (10.8)
Answer to (b)(2). The temperature differences should be checked at the affected
heat exchangers, which are E1 and E2. As can be seen, the heat capacity flow
rate (CP) values for both streams in E1 are equal to 100 kW/C. Exchanger E2s
hot stream has a higher CP value than that for the cold stream, so the smaller
temperature difference will be at its hot end. This allows one to calculate the
maximum amount of the load X to shift by solving a few inequalities. For
process exchanger E2, the temperature difference should not be less than
T
min
, and this determines the value of the maximum heat load that can be
shifted:
T
H11
T
C2,out
T
min
(10.9)
190 X/100 164 10 (10.10)
X 2600 kW (10.11)
For this value of load shift, the exchanger E2 will be pinched at its hot end as
follows: T
H11
= 174.0C and T
C2,out
= 164.0C. The temperatures at the cold end
will be T
H12
= 83.7C and T
C2, in
= 35.0C.
Answer to (c)(1). Total heating requirement for the existing network:
Q
H
= Q
H8
+ Q
H9
= 27,700 kW. Total cooling requirement for the network:
Q
C
= Q
C3
+ Q
C6
+ Q
C10
= 21,345 kW. There is no inappropriate use of utilities.
Compared with the targets, both total utility heating and total utility cooling
are higher by 9920 kW, which is due to cross-Pinch heat transfer.
Answer to (c)(2). The Process Pinch is at 150C for hot streams and at 140C for
cold streams. Comparing the network temperatures with the Pinch location
yields a list of exchangers that violate the Pinch; see Table 10.2.
= -
C3
5970 Q X
C11
247 /100 = + T X
H8
5300 = - Q X
= -
H11
190 /100 T X
=
C2,out
164 T
=
C2,in
35 T
= +
E1
14700 E X

224
C h a p t e r T e n
10.1.2 Heat Pinch Technology: Second Problem
The stream data for a process are as listed in Table 10.3. The hot utility
is steam at 200C, the cold utility is water at 38C, and T
min
= 24C.
(a) Plot the Composite Curves (CCs) for this process.
(b) Determine Q
H,min
, Q
C,min
, and the Pinch temperatures.
(c) Assuming that the cost of cooling water and steam is 18.13
and 37.78 $ kW
1
y
1
, plot the minimum annual cost for the
utilities as a function of T
min
in the range 5154C (in 1
increments).
(d) Design a network that features a minimum number of units
and maximum energy recovery for T
min
= 24C.
Answer to (a). The Composite Curves for the process stream data are shown in
Figure 10.5.
Answer to (b). The position of the CCs in Figure 10.5 indicates that, for
T
min
= 24C, this is a threshold problem at the cold end: Q
H,min
= 0 kW. On the
cold end there is excess of hot streams, which means that some cold utility is
required: Q
C,min
= 482 kW.
TABLE 10.2 Exchangers That Violate the Pinch (Problem 1)
Exchanger Hot side violation Cold side violation
E1 No Yes
E2 Yes Yes
E4 No No
E5 Yes Yes
E7 Yes No
Stream T
in
[C] T
out
[C] CP [kW/C]
1 Cold 38 205 11
2 Cold 66 182 13
3 Cold 93 205 13
4 Hot 249 121 17
5 Hot 305 66 13
TABLE 10.3 Process Stream Data for Problem 2
225
Answer to (c). The utility cost plot, which is given in Figure 10.6, is based on the
data in Table 10.4.
Answer to (d). A network that features the minimum number of units and
maximum energy recovery is shown in Figure 10.7.
T [C]
200
100
0
0 2000 4000 H [kW]
T
min
= 24C
No
heating utility
482 kW
FIGURE 10.5 Composite
Curves for Problem 2.
51 52 53 54
8000
9000
10000
11000
12000
Utility
Cost [$/y]
T
min
[C]
FIGURE 10.6 Minimum allowed temperature difference T
min
versus annual
utility cost.
TABLE 10.4 Utility Requirements and Cost for Various T
min
Values
T
min
[C]
51 52 53 54
Q
H
[kW] 0 0 27 57
Cost of heating [$/y] 0 0 1,020 2,153
Q
C
[kW] 482 482 509 539
Cost of cooling [$/y] 8,739 8,739 9,228 9,772
Total utility cost [$/y] 8,739 8,739 10,248 11,926

226
C h a p t e r T e n
10.2 Total Sites
10.2.1 Total Sites: First Problem
Suppose a Total Site incorporates two processes, A and B. The stream
data for process A (assuming T
A,min
= 10C) are given in Table 10.5,
and the GCC for this process is shown in Figure 10.8. The stream
data for process B (assuming T
B,min
= 10C) are shown in Table 10.6.
E4
121C 163.4C 249C
CP [kW/C]
305C 103.1C 66C
66C 182C 121.43C
93C
38C 205C
CP=3.9 kW/C
CP=9.1 kW/C
205C
E4
E1 4 17
13
11
13
13
5
E1
1456 kW
788 kW
1837 kW
720 kW
E2
E2
E3 C
482 kW
1
2
3
E3
One possible design
E4
E4
121C 249C
CP [kW/C]
305C 103.1C 193C
144.3C
66C
66C 182C
93C
38C 205C
CP=5.22 kW/C
CP=11.78 kW/C
205C
E1
E1
4
17
13
11
13
13
5
E1
1456 kW
1508 kW
668.16 kW
1169 kW
E2
E3
E3
C
482 kW
1
2
3
E2
A second possible design
(a)
(b)
FIGURE 10.7 Optimal Heat Exchanger Network.
227
High-pressure (HP) steam from a boiler is available at 240C
saturation temperature, and cooling water is available at 2030C.
It is necessary to analyze these two processes (and hence the
Total Site) as follows:
(a) Find the Pinch temperatures and minimum utility demands
for processes A and B.
(b) Construct the GCC for process B.
Stream name Supply temp. [C] Target temp. [C] H [kW]
A1 50 140 450
A2 100 30 420
A3 100 140 80
TABLE 10.5 Data for Process A (Problem 3)
0
20
50
100
150
100 200
H [kW]
T
*

[
C
]
T
min
= 10C
Sink A1
Source A2
Source A1
(0;95)
(59;105)
(40;55)
(220;25)
(330;145)
Sink A2
300
FIGURE 10.8 Grand Composite Curve for process A (Problem 3).
Stream name Supply temp. [C] Target temp. [C] CP [kW/C]
B1 190 120 6
B2 100 240 4
B3 80 60 2
TABLE 10.6 Data for Process B (Problem 3)

228
C h a p t e r T e n
(c) Construct the Total Site Profiles (TSPs).
(d) Assuming that the site manager is willing to accept just one
more steam main in addition to the HP, identify this steam
level on the Site Profiles. What saturation temperature will
yield the most energy savings?
(e) Determine the load target for this steam level.
Answer to (a). For process A, T
min
= 10C, the minimum hot utility is 330 kW,
and the minimum cold utility is 220 kW (see Table 10.7).
For process B, T
min
= 10
o
C, the minimum hot utility is 240 kW, and the minimum
cold utility is 140 kW (see Table 10.8).
Answer to (b). Given the data in Table 10.8, the GCC for process B is drawn as
shown in Figure 10.9.
Answer to (c). Using the GCC plots from Figures 10.8 and 10.9, the heat source
and heat sink segments have been extracted. These segments are listed in
Tables 10.9 and 10.10 for process A and process B, respectively.
The data reported in Tables 10.9 and 10.10 have been combined into
composite heat source and sink profiles. Figures 10.10 and 10.11 illustrate the
composition procedure, which is analogous to the one for constructing the
process CCs. Figure 10.12 shows the resulting TSPs.
Interval Temperature [C] Enthalpy [kW]
1 145 330
2 105 50
3 95 0 (Pinch)
4 55 40
5 25 220
TABLE 10.7 Problem Table for Process A (Problem 3(a))
Interval Temperature [C] Enthalpy [kW]
1 245 240
2 185 0 (Pinch)
3 115 140
4 105 100
5 75 100
6 55 140
TABLE 10.8 Problem Table for Process B (Problem 3(a))
229
Answers to (d) and( e). By analyzing the TSPs (Figure 10.12), one can see that
there is an opportunity to match heat source and heat sink requirements
in the steam temperature interval between 100C and 180C. The proposed
steam saturation temperature is in the interval from 117.1C to 130C. Within
this interval, the maximum heat recovery through the steam system (equal to
100 kW) is achieved. This results from matching the values for steam generation
and steam use (here both are equal to 100 kW).
0
40
100
200
50 150 100
H [kW]
T
*

[
C
]

T
min
=10C
Sink B1
Source B2
Source B1
(0;185)
(100;135)
(100;105)
(100;75)
(140;55)
(140;115)
(240;245)
250 200
FIGURE 10.9 Grand Composite Curve for Process B (Problem 3(b)).
TABLE 10.9 Heat Source and Sink Segments from the GCC for Process A
[Problem 3(c)]
Segment T
*
start
[C] T
*
end
[C] H [kW] T
**
start
[C] T
**
end
[C]
Sink A1 105 145 280 110 150
Sink A2 95 105 50 100 110
Source A1 95 55 40 90 50
Source A2 55 25 180 50 20
Segment T
*
start
[C] T
*
end
[C] H [kW] T
**
start
[C] T
**
end
[C]
Sink B1 185 245 240 190 250
Source B1 185 135 100 180 130
Source B2 75 55 40 70 50
TABLE 10.10 Heat Source and Sink Segments from the GCC for Process B
[Problem 3(c)]

230
C h a p t e r T e n
TB [C]
Sink A1 Sink A2 Sink B1
250
190
150
110
100
[kW]
[kW/C] CP
280
7
240
4
50
5
H
CP = 4
CP = 0
CP = 7
CP = 5
H = 240
H = 0
H = 280
H = 50
FIGURE 10.11
Combined Site
heat sinks for
Problem 3(c).
400 200 0 200 400 600
50
150
250
Temperature
Temperature interval with
100 kW heat recovery via
the steam system
T
= 130C
T
= 117.1C
H [kW]
FIGURE 10.12 Total Site Proles for Problem 3(c).
180
Source
A1
40 180 100 40
1 6 2 2
Source
A2
Source
B1
Source
B2
TB [C]
H [kW]
CP = 2
CP = 0
CP = 1
CP = 3
CP = 6
H = 100
H = 0
H = 20
H = 60
H = 180
CP [kW/C]
130
90
70
50
20
FIGURE 10.10 Combined Site heat sources for Problem 3(c).
231
10.2.2 Total Sites: Second Problem
Two processes (A and B) are operating on a site. The stream parameters
for process A and process B are given in Tables 10.11 and 10.12,
respectively. Medium-pressure (MP) steam from a boiler is available
at 220C saturation temperature, and T
min
= 10C for both processes.
The cooling water supply temperature is 18C and the return
temperature is at most 35C.
(a) Use the Problem Table Algorithm (PTA) to identify the
minimum heating/cooling duty for each process, and plot
the GCCs.
(b) Create the TSPs including the GCC pockets.
(c) Select the saturation temperature for a second (low-pressure)
steam level, and construct the Total Site composites, so as to
maximize heat recovery via the steam system.
Answer to (a). Pinch Analysis has been applied to the two processes just
described, and the targets thus identified are given in Table 10.13.
The GCCs for process A and process B are shown in Figures 10.13 and 10.14,
respectively.
Stream T
supply
[C] T
target
[C] CP [MW/C] H [MW]
A1 143 160 0.15 2.55
A2 75 116.01 0.15 6.16
A3 124 90 0.412 14.0
A4 90 84 0.35 2.1
A5 84 37.5 0.101 4.7
TABLE 10.11 Stream Data for Process A (Problem 4)
Stream T
supply
[C] T
target
B1 158.3 159.9 1.33 2.08
B2 70 158.3 0.05 4.42
B3 10 70 0.03 1.8
B4 180 135.6 0.075 3.33
B5 135.6 105 0.105 3.21
TABLE 10.12 Stream Data for Process B (Problem 4)

232
C h a p t e r T e n
Q
H,min
[MW] Q
H,min
[MW] Pinch (hot/cold) [C]
Process A 2.852 14.955 124 / 114
Process B 1.800 0 None (threshold problem)
TABLE 10.13 Heat Recovery Targets for Problem 4(a)
T

[C]
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 H [MW]
(0; 119.0)
(0.3; 121.0)
(0.3; 148.0)
(2.9; 165.0)
(8.9; 85.0)
(10.3; 79.0)
(9.9; 80.0)
(15.0; 32.5)
FIGURE 10.13 GCC for process A [Problem 4(a)].
0
(0; 15.0)
(1.8; 75.0)
(1.8; 175.0)
(3.1; 100.0)
(2.6; 164.9)
(1.4; 130.6)
(0.5; 163.3)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
T* [C]
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 H [MW]
FIGURE 10.14 GCC for process B [Problem 4(a)].
Answer to (b). The TSPs for the combination of the two processes are plotted in
Figure 10.15. The apparent temperature overlap of the profiles indicates a good
opportunity for heat recovery.
Answer to (c). The heat recovery on the site can only take place via the steam
system. Any steam raised from process cooling has to be utilized to the greatest
233
extent possible in order to maximize the recovery. Usage may exceed generation;
in this case, the difference would be made up by MP steam. The profiles in
Figure 10.15 were used to balance steam generation and use by the processes
by varying the LP level saturation temperature. This has been achieved for LP
generation and use steam loads of 6.9 MW at 109C saturation temperature,
which corresponds to 1.39 bar(a) steam pressure. The Total Site composites are
shown in Figure 10.16
50
100
200
T** [C]
H [MW]
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20
FIGURE 10.15 Total Site Proles for Problem 4(b).
50
100
200
T** [C]
6.9 MW
H [MW]
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20
FIGURE 10.16 Total Site composites for Problem 4(c).

234
C h a p t e r T e n
10.3 Integrated Placement of Processing
Units and Data Extraction
The process flow sheet for a base-case design is shown in Figure 10.17
with some additional data. The CCs and GCC of the process (with
appropriate data) for T
min
= 20C are shown in Figures 10.18 and
10.19, respectively.
1300
1928
RB
CB 200C
RA
980
1050
1000
900
purge
505
H
R1
T=180C
H
HM
180C
180C
220C
220C
180C
70C 150C
270C 270C
200C
FR m=0.4
m=1.4
m=1.3
120C
CA
Column A
Column B
130C
50C
50C
70C
H
H
H
H
Q
C Heat exchanged
with cold utility
Heat exchanged
with hot utility
Heat exchanged [kW]
m=[kg/s]
C
B
A
C
C P1
P2
F2
F1
m=1
m=0.8
m=0.5
FIGURE 10.17 Process owsheet for the base-case design (Problem 5).
0
50
150
250
T [C]
2000
1958.6
2642.6
10316.6
Pinch
T
h
= 240 C
T
c
= 220 C
0 4000 6000 8000 10000 H [kW]
T
min
= 20 C
100
200
FIGURE 10.18 Composite Curves for the process in Problem 5.
235
(a) Extract the appropriate stream data for performing a Pinch
Analysis. Tabulate the extracted data where appropriate. If a
stream involves phase changes (several segments), then give
the relevant details (e.g., stream F1 has three segments:
liquid phase, vaporization, and vapor phase).
(b) In the base-case design, what is the hot and cold utility
consumption and how much is the process heat recovery?
Compare the utility usage in the base case with the targets
shown on the CCs. Why are they different?
(c) Explain how the heat recovery system can be improved over
the base case without modifying any conditions (e.g., reactor
pressure, column pressure) of the main process.
(d) Refer to the GCC in Figure 10.19.
(1) If a heat pump is proposed, what operating temperature
levels will best fit the heating and cooling needs of the
process?
(2) What qualitative suggestions can be made concerning
alternatives for utility saving and appropriate utility
placement?
(e) If process modifications are allowed, comment on whether
they could help to improve the process Heat Integration.
Your answer should address the reactors, the distillation
columns, feed vaporization, and soft data.
For this problem, the following assumptions are made. Utilities
generated can be sold, and the unit cost of high-temperature utilities
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Q (kW)
50
100
150
200
250
T (C)
FIGURE 10.19 GCC for the process in Problem 5.

236
C h a p t e r T e n
is greater than that for low-temperature utilities. The temperature of
flue gas for direct heating ranges from 800C to 160C. Steam usage
and generation are isothermal utilities (up to four levels between
100C and 340C). A heat pump or heat engine can be introduced.
Additional data for the problem:
Condensers and reboilers of distillation columns A and B
involve only phase changes.
In the condenser of distillation column B, total condensation
is assumed (i.e., the outlet is in the liquid phase only).
An endothermic reaction takes place in reactor R1. A heating
medium (HM) is necessary to keep the isothermal condition
in R1.
Some properties of the streams are as follows:
F1: Boiling point = 120C, H
vap
= 990 kJ/kg,
C
p,vap
= 4.5 kJ/kgC
F2: Boiling point = 125C, H
vap
= 1250 kJ/kg,
C
p,vap
= 7.5 kJ/kg
C,
C
p,liq
= 15 kJ/kg
C
FR: C
p,vap
= 5.0 kJ/kg
C
HM: C
p,liq
= 25 kJ/kg
C
P1: Boiling point = 270C, H
vap
= 1556 kJ/kg
P2: Boiling point = 200C
Answer to (a). Stream data needed to perform a Pinch Analysis is reported in
Table 10.14.
Answer to (b). For the base case, Q
H
= 4828 kW, Q
C
= 3366.4 kW, and process heat
recovery = 3530 kW. The targets are Q
H
= 2642.6 kW and Q
C
= 1958.6 kW, and
process heat recovery = 5715.8 kW. The base-case design requires much more
utility consumption. This is because some heat is transferred across the Pinch
and also because there is some unnecessary utility use. For example, some
amount of heat is needed in the column B reboiler for heating up P1, and this
amount must be taken out again when P1 needs cooling.
Answer to (c).
The cold streams below the Pinch are F1, F2, and FR. These streams can
be heated up by P1 (parts below the Pinch), P2, and by the condensers of
columns A and B. In the base case, stream P1 is used to supply heat to
stream F2, resulting in heat transfer across the Pinch. Instead, to heat up
stream F2 at its higher temperature range, heat exchange with stream P2
can be employed; for the lower-temperature part of F2, the heat from the
condenser of column A can be recovered.
Above the Pinch, P1 can be used to heat up parts of the column A
reboiler or of the heating media of reactor R1.
237
Answer to (d)(1). Using the GCC in Figure 10.19, from the viewpoint of a heat
pump, two good candidates for its integration are as follows:
Across the Process Pinch. Heat rejection from the heat pump to the
process T* = 230C (real temperature T = 240C) and heat absorption
from the process at T* = 190C (T = 180C), would result in temperature
lift T
lift
= 60C. The main challenge is that the heat available for
absorption by the heat pump is relatively smaller than what can be
delivered by the heat pump above the Process Pinch.
Across a potential Utility Pinch. Heat rejection level T* = 130C and
absorbtion heat level T* = 110C. The corresponding real heat pump
temperatures are: heat rejection level T = 140C and heat absorption
level, T = 100C. This results in temperature lift T
lift
= 40C. At this
level, a large amount of heat is available to be absorbed from the process
and an even larger amount can be rejected to the process.
Answer to (d)(2).
From the GCC, the heat pump integration can be placed at the levels of
140C and 100C with only a small amount of shaft work required. This
could save a large part of the cold utility required.
Above the Pinch, a large and quite flat pocket is present in the CCC,
providing an opportunity to generate steam at the maximum level
of 180C.
Above the Pinch, steam is preferred over flue gas for a hot utility because
the process stream temperatures are not too high.
Stream Type T
s
[C] T
t
[C] m
[kg/s]
C
p

[kJ/kgC]
H
vap

[kJ/kg]
CP
[kW/C]
H
[kW]
F1-liq
F1-evap
F1-vap
Cold
old
old
50
120
120
120
120
180
1
1
1
11
4.5
990
11
4.5
770
990
270
F2-liq
F2-evap
F2-vap
Cold
Cold
Cold
50
125
125
125
125
180
0.8
0.8
0.8
15
7.5
1250
12
6
900
1000
330
HM Cold 220 250 1.4 25 35 1050
CA Hot 120 120 900
RA Cold 220 220 1000
FR Cold 120 180 0.4 5 2 120
CB Hot 200 200 980
RB Cold 270 270 1928
P1-cond
P1-liq
P2
Hot
Hot
Hot
270
270
200
270
70
70
0.5
0.5
0.8
37.17
12.5
1556
18.58
10
778
3716
1300
TABLE 10.14 Stream Data for Pinch Analysis [Problem 5(a)].

238
C h a p t e r T e n
A heat engine could also be a candidate for the pocket in the
GCC below the Pinch. However, since T is smallabout 80C, or
[(190 + 10) (130 10)]only a small amount of work may be produced.
Answer to (e).
Reactors. The reaction is endothermic and, to save utility, its heating
medium heat demand should be placed below the Pinch. It is now placed
above the Pinch. If the pressure and temperature of reactor R1 are
reduced, then an alternative heating media with lower temperature levels
could be used. As a result of decreased R1 pressure, the boiling points of
feeds F1 and F2 would also decrease. This would result in different
targets. For instance the GCC could be shifted more to the left and the
Pinch point could be changed, resulting in more process heat recovery.
Distillation columns. The reboilers of columns A and B currently
evaporate the entire flow from the column bases. The appropriate
arrangement would be to move the reboilers to evaporate only the
branches of these flows that are intended for the columns.
Feed vaporization. In the base case, the vaporization of F1 and F2 are both
placed below the Pinch. However, as mentioned, the current vaporization
of F2 results in cross-Pinch heat transfer. Also, the vaporization of F1
employs utility heating below the Pinch, which should be eliminated
and substituted for process-to-process heat recovery.
Soft data. The P1 and P2 target temperatures are soft data that can be
changed. The temperatures could be increased to reduce cold utility
required, but this would not change the CC much.
10.4 Utility Placement
10.4.1 Utility Placement: First Problem
A set of data for a part of a crude distillation process has been
extracted, and the stream data are shown in Table 10.15. For this
problem, the minimum temperature difference is T
min
= 10C. The
available utilities are presented in Table 10.16.
A targeting procedure was performed for the initial data
summarized in Tables 10.15 and 10.16. Figure 10.20, which exhibits
two Pinch points, shows the balanced CCs for the problem.
(a) Complete the missing entries in Table 10.15.
(b) Identify the Pinches and explain their significance.
(c) Draw the design grid for the problem, including the hot utilities.
Position the streams relative to the location of the Pinches.
(d) Design the MER HEN below the Process Pinch.
(e) Design the MER HEN above the Process Pinch.
(f) Design the MER HEN above the Utility Pinch.
239
Stream Name T
s
[C] T
t
[C] H [kW] CP
[kW/C]
1 OH_Naphta_1 100 41 27.5113
2 OH_Naphta_2 132 60 23.1850
3 OH_HKD 224 65 11.2400
4 LCT 268 30 363.12 1.5257
5 Residue 283 45 336.25 1.4128
6 Crude 30 146 2031.50 17.5132
7 Denaphta_1 117 204 977.88
8 Denaphta_2 176 305 1641.45 12.7244
TABLE 10.15 Process Streams for Problem 6
Stream T
s
[C] T
t
[C] Cost
[/kWy]
HP steam 320.1 320.0 100
MP steam 260.1 260 60
Cooling water 20.0 40.0 8
TABLE 10.16 Available Utilities for Problem 6
300
200
100
0
41.0C
30.0C
2000 4000 6000 8000
H [kW]
Cooling water = 2657 kW
20.0C
60.0C
4
5
.
0
C
100.0C
132.0C
122.0C
40.0C
146.0C
176.0C
204.0C
224.0C
260.0C
260.1C
320.0C
320.1C
305.0C
250.1C
MP steam = 874.4 kW
HP steam = 654.2 kW
T
*

[
C
]
FIGURE 10.20 Balanced Composite Curves and heat recovery targets for
Problem 6.

240
C h a p t e r T e n
Answer to (a). Table 10.17 shows the missing parameters of process streams
described in Table 10.15.
Answer to (b). There are two Pinches: the Process Pinch (located at 132C/122C)
and the Utility Pinch (located at 260.1C/250.1C; see Figure 10.21. The Utility
Pinch is caused by the placement of the MP steam. More significant is the
Process Pinch, which divides the design area into two different parts: a net
heat sink above the Pinch temperatures and a net heat source below the Pinch
temperatures.
The Utility Pinch further subdivides the area above the Process Pinch. In
the interval between the Process Pinch and the Utility Pinch, the only utility
allowed is the MP steam. Above the Utility Pinch, the only utility available
remains the HP steam.
Answer to (c). See Figure 10.22.
TABLE 10.17 Process Streams for Problem 6(a) with Missing Data Filled In
No Name T
s
[C] T
t
[C] H [kW] CP [kW/C]
1 OH_Naphta_1 100 41 1623.17 27.5113
2 OH_Naphta_2 132 60 1669.32 23.1850
3 OH_HKD 224 65 1787.16 11.2400
4 LCT 268 30 363.12 1.5257
5 Residue 283 45 336.25 1.4128
6 Crude 30 146 2031.50 17.5132
7 Denaphta_1 117 204 977.88 11.2400
8 Denaphta_2 176 305 1641.45 12.7244
300
200
100
0
41.0C
30.0C
2000 4000 6000 8000
H [kW]
Cooling water = 2657 kW
20.0C
60.0C
4
5
.
0
C
100.0C
132.0C
122.0C
Process Pinch
146.0C
176.0C
204.0C
224.0C
260.0C
260.1C
320.0C
320.1C
305.0C
250.1C
Utility Pinch
MP steam = 874.4 kW
HP steam = 654.2 kW
T

[
C
]
FIGURE 10.21 Pinch identication for Problem 6(b), T
min
= 10C.
241
Answer to (d). See Figure 10.23.
T
min
= 10C; All temperatures are in [C], H are in [kW], CP are in [kW/C]
H = 942.878
H = 921.68
H = 420.316
H = 180.979
H = 195.442
H = 1034.08
H = 654.163
H = 12.053
H = 32.353
H = 698.589
H = 874.373
H = 2656.687
H = 56.2
H = 1611.214
H = 122.913
H = 165.621
H = 753.08
H = 1669.32
H = 1623.167
6
7
9
CP = 11.24
CP = 17.51
CP = 132.83
20.0
122.0
40.0
117.0
CP = 23.18
CP = 11.24
CP = 11.24
CP = 8743.73
CP = 6541.63
CP = 1.53
CP = 1.41
CP = 12.72
CP = 1.63
CP = 1.41
CP = 17.51
CP = 11.24
CP = 12.72
CP = 1.63
CP = 1.41
CP = 27.51
60.0
41.0
65.0
30.0
45.0
30.0
100.0
1
2
8
204.0
146.0
3
224.0
260.0
132.0
260.1
260.1
11
320.0 320.1
10
132.0
268.0
283.0
4
5
250.1
305.0
HP_steam
MP_steam
OH_Nafta_1
OH_Nafta_2
OH_HKD
LCT
Residue
Crude
Denafta_1
Denafta_2
Cooling water
FIGURE 10.22 Preliminary grid diagram for Problem 6(c).
41.0
1623.17 kW
C1
60.0
696.88 kW
155.62 kW
122.91 kW
56.2 kW
1611.21 kW
57.71 kW
C3
C5
C6
C7
C7 C1 C6 C5 C3
62.51
127.3
2
4
65.0
30.0
30.0
20.0
45.0
6
9
122.0
7 4
117.0
122.0
122.0
132.0
132.0
132.0
132.0
132.0
100.0
2
1
2
3
4
5
FIGURE 10.23 HEN design below the Process Pinch [Problem 6(d)].

242
C h a p t e r T e n
Answer to (e). See Figure 10.24.
Answer to (f). See Figure 10.25.
132.0
CP = 11.24
CP = 1.53
CP = 1.41
CP = 8.755
CP = 17.51
CP = 11.24
CP = 12.72
6
7
260.0 260.1
260.1
214.0
224.0
8 9
10
10
13
11
11
12 13
11 MP steam
4
5
3
144.32
122.0
180.98 kW
921.68 kW
8
8
142.67
176.0
185.32
250.1
204.0
143.49 146.04
195.44 kW
112.4 kW 830.48 kW
43.90 kW
9 12
All temperatures are in [C], H is in [kW], CP is in [kW/C]
FIGURE 10.24 HEN design above the Process Pinch [Problem 6(e)].
260.1
320.0
CP = 6541.86
CP = 1.53
CP = 1.41
CP = 3.36
CP = 3.36 CP = 6.72
12.05 kW
15
14
15
16
8
250.1
14
32.35 kW 654.16 kW
255.19
251.99
253.59
305.0
283.0
268.0
320.1
5
4
16 10
FIGURE 10.25 HEN design above the Utility Pinch [Problem 6(f)].
243
10.4.2 Utility Placement: Second Problem
A process involves the set of process streams described in Table 10.18.
The utilities available to satisfy its heating and cooling requirements
are given in Table 10.19.
For the HEN to be designed, assume T
min
= 30C.
(a) Identify the minimum heating duty, the minimum cooling
duty, and the Process Pinch location.
(b) Plot the GCC.
(c) Perform an appropriate placement of the utilities against the
GCC so as to achieve minimum total cost of the utilities.
(1) Draft the placement on the GCC.
(2) Calculate the total duty for each of the utilities.
(3) Calculate the total utility cost for the problem.
(d) Consider the following ways to reduce the utility costs
further, and comment on their suitability for application to
Stream T
s
[C] T
t
H1 175 75 3.5
H2 100 40 2.4
H3 180 130 1.5
H4 195.1 195 100
C1 50 150 2.0
C2 140 140.1 150
C3 80 140 1.5
C4 20 80 3.0
TABLE 10.18 Process Streams Data for Problem 7
Name T
s
[C] T
t
[C] Cost [$/MWy]
HP steam 300.1 300 65000
MP steam 200.1 200 50000
Cooling water 15.0 20.0 7000
Chilled water 5.0 10.0 30000
TABLE 10.19 Utilities Available for Problem 7

244
C h a p t e r T e n
this current problem. Wherever appropriate, suggest how
an option can be exploited.
(1) Flue gas heating
(2) Heat pumping
(3) Introduction of a new steam level
Answer to (a). The heat recovery targets and the Pinch location can be obtained
with the help of the PTA. The heat cascade intervals and the corresponding
stream population are shown in Table 10.20, and the computed problem table
is given in Table 10.21.
Temperature boundary Interval number Stream population
180.1
1 H4
180.0
2
165.0
3 H3, C1
160.0
3 H1, H3, C1
155.1
4 H1, H3, C1, C2
155.0
5 H1, H3, C1, C3
115
6 H1, C1, C3
95.0
7 H1, C1, C4
85.0
8 H1, H2, C1, C4
65.0
9 H1, H2, C4
60.0
10 H2, C4
35.0
11 H2
25.0
TABLE 10.20 Heat Cascade Intervals and Stream Population for Problem 7(a)
245
Alternatively, the heat recovery targets can be obtained by plotting the CCs,
as shown in Figure 10.26.
Answer to (b). See Figure 10.27.
Answer to (c)(1) and (c)(2). See Figure 10.28.
Answer to (c)(3).
Total utility cost = 37.5 [MW MP steam] 50,000 [$/MWy]
+ 62.5 [MW cooling water] 7,000 [$/MWy]
+ 24 [MW chilled water] 30,000 [$/MWy]
= 3,032,500 [$/y]
Interval number Temperature
[C]
Enthalpy
[MW]
1 180.1 37.5
2 180 137.5
3 165 137.5
4 160 135.0
5 155.1 149.7
6 (Pinch) 155 0.0
7 115 60.0
8 95 60.0
9 85 45.0
10 65 63.0
11 60 77.5
12 35 62.5
13 25 86.5
TABLE 10.21 Problem Table for Problem 7(a)
T [C]
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 200 400 600 800 H [MW]
Q
Cmin
=86.5 MW
Q
H,min
= 37.5 MW
Pinch: 170C (hot)
140C (cold)
FIGURE 10.26
Composite Curves for
Problem 7(a),
T
min
= 30C.

246
C h a p t e r T e n
Answer to (d)(1). The flue gas heating option will probably be more expensive
than heating with steam. The temperature levels in the problem do not suggest
exploitation of furnace heat.
Answer to (d)(2). The appropriate placement of a heat pump is across the Process
Pinch, so the pump will transfer heat from below to above the Pinch. In this
problem it is technically impractical to install a heat pump with water or steam
as a working fluid, since this would require operation at a slight vacuum (the
Pinch is at 170C/140C). The relatively small duties that could be achieved
with this technique indicate that investment in a heat pump here is likely to be
economically unattractive.
Answer to (d)(3). Introducing a new steam level at a steam temperature of 165C
is a good option that can be exploited by passing the steam (taken at 200C)
through a steam turbine. This has the potential of generating additional power
on the site. The steam would be returned to the process at the level of 165C
(the process heating requirement is at 150C, which makes this arrangement
feasible). If the site could use additional power, then this option may reduce the
overall utility cost by providing on-site power generation.
T [C]
150
100
50
0
0 50 100 H [MW]
Q
Cmin
=86.5 MW
Q
H,min
= 37.5 MW
FIGURE 10.27
Grand Composite
Curve for
Problem 7(b),
T
min
= 30C.
T [C]
150
100
50
0
0 50 100 H [MW]
MP steam 37.5 MW
Cooling Water
62.5 MW
Chilled Water 24 MW
FIGURE 10.28
Appropriate
placement of
utilities for
Problem 7(c).
247
10.5 Water Pinch Technology
10.5.1 Water Pinch Technology: First Problem
A certain process contains several water-processing operations, as
shown in Table 10.22.
(a) Create the limiting CCs by plotting the contaminant concen-
tration, C, against contaminant load, m [kg/h], [ppm].
(b) Calculate the minimum water flow rate for maximum reuse.
Answer to (a). The individual limiting water profiles are graphed in Figure 10.29.
Figure 10.30 shows the result when these water profiles are combined.
Operation Contaminant flow
rate [kg/h]
C
in
[ppm] C
out
[ppm] Limiting flow
rate [t/h]
1 2 0 100 20
2 5 50 100 100
3 30 50 800 40
4 4 400 800 10
TABLE 10.22 Data for Water-Processing Operation of Problem 8
800
400
100
50
0 2 7 37 41 40
m [kg/h]
C

[
p
p
m
]
1
2
3
4
FIGURE 10.29 Limiting water proles for Problem 8(a).

248
C h a p t e r T e n
Answer to (b). The minimum wastewater is targeted as follows:
6
3
Mass pickup at pinch
Minimum flow rate
Pinch concentration
9 [kg/h] kg 9 10
100 [ppm] 100 h
9 10 t
90 [t/h]
100 h
=
(
= =
(

(
= =
(

See Figure 10.31.
FIGURE 10.30 Combined limiting water proles for Problem 8(a).
0
1 9 21 41
m [kg/h]
Pinch
C

[
p
p
m
]
Minimize
flowrate
W
a
t
e
r

S
u
p
p
l
y

L
i
n
e
(
M
i
n
i
m
u
m

f
l
o
w
r
a
t
e

9
0

t
/
h
)
100
400
800
FIGURE 10.31 Minimum wastewater targeting for Problem 8(b).
249
10.5.2 Water Pinch Technology: Second Problem
Using the stream data from Problem 8, suggest a design of a network
for maximum reuse of water. The limiting CC is shown in
Figure 10.32.
Problem 9: Solution
Cut off the pockets of the limiting CC. The minimum water requirement for
each pocket can then be defined for each region (Figure 10.33). This enables one
to propose the design strategy shown in Figure 10.34.
Following the design strategy, set up a design grid as shown in Figure 10.35.
Connect streams to water mains and merge operations that cross boundaries;
see Figure 10.36.
Remove intermediate water mains where this is appropriate (Figure 10.37).
Then connect operations directly, as shown in Figure 10.38. Finally, Figure 10.39
illustrates (in conventional flowsheet form) one of the possible resulting designs
of the water system.
0
1 9 21 41
m [kg/h]
C

[
p
p
m
]
100
400
800
FIGURE 10.32 Limiting Composite Curve for Problem 9.

250
C h a p t e r T e n
50
90 t/h
45.7 t/h
m [kg/h]
C

[
p
p
m
]
100
400
800
FIGURE 10.33 Water Pinch diagram used to target the minimum water ow
rate in Problem 9.
50
90 t/h
90 t/h
45.7 t/h 100 ppm
45.7 t/h
800 ppm
44.3 t/h100 ppm
m [kg/h]
C

[
p
p
m
]
100
400
800
FIGURE 10.34 Design strategy for Problem 9.
251
Flowrate
required for the
interval
Limiting
Flowrates
Wastewater
(90-90)
0 t/h
10 t/h
40 t/h
100 t/h
20 t/h
90 t/h
F.W.
45.7 t/h
100 ppm
0 t/h
800 ppm
2
3 3
4
50 ppm
50 ppm
(90-45.7)
44.3 t/h
100 ppm
(45.7-0)
45.7 t/h
800 ppm
Water mains
400 ppm
1
FIGURE 10.35 Design grid for the water system in Problem 9.
10 t/h
20 t/h
40 t/h
40 t/h
5.7 t/h
100 t/h
20 t/h
20 t/h
90 t/h
F.W.
0 t/h 44.3 t/h 45.7 t/h
45.7 t/h
100 ppm
0 t/h
800 ppm
2
3
4
20 t/h
50 t/h
1
FIGURE 10.36 Streams are connected with the water mains (Problem 9).

252
C h a p t e r T e n
10 t/h
20 t/h
40 t/h
5.7 t/h
100 t/h
20 t/h
50 t/h
20 t/h
20 t/h
90 t/h
F.W.
0 t/h
44.3 t/h
45.7 t/h
2
3
4
1
FIGURE 10.38 Connecting operations directly (Problem 9).
5.7 t/h
20 t/h
20 t/h
50 t/h
40 t/h
F.W.
90 t/h
Wastewater
90 t/h
44.3 t/h
Operation 1
Operation 2
Operation 3
Operation 4
FIGURE 10.39 Flowsheet representation of a water system design (Problem 9).
FIGURE 10.37 Removing intermediate water mains and then connecting
sources and sinks (Problem 9).
10 t/h
20 t/h
40 t/h
50 t/h
40 t/h
5.7 t/h
100 t/h
20 t/h
20 t/h
20 t/h
90 t/h
F.W.
0 t/h 44.3 t/h 45.7 t/h
45.7 t/h
100 ppm
0 t/h
800 ppm
2
3
4
1
CHAPTER 11
Industrial Applications
and Case Studies
T
his chapter provides an overview of selected implementations
of the Process Integration methodology for various industrial
case studies. The presentation is somewhat condensed because
of space limitations; more information is available in the works
cited.
11.1 Energy Recovery from an FCC Unit
In this case study, the Heat Exchanger Network (HEN) of a Fluid
Catalytic Cracking (FCC) unit process consisted of a main column
and a gas concentration section (Al Riyami, Kleme, and Perry, 2001).
The stream data was made up of 23 hot streams and 11 cold streams.
The associated cost and economic data required for the analysis were
specified by the refinery owners. Incremental area efficiency was
used for the targeting stage of the retrofit design. This was carried
out using the Network Pinch method (Asante, 1996; Asante and Zhu,
1997), which consists of a diagnosis stage and an optimization stage.
In the diagnosis stage, a few promising retrofit steps were generated
using the UMIST (now the University of Manchester) software
package SPRINT (2009). This software was also used to optimize the
initial design by trading off capital cost against energy savings. The
design options were then compared and evaluated, followed by
the final retrofit design proposed for final inspection.
The existing T
min
of the process was identified as 24C, and the
hot utility consumption of the process was 46.055 MW; the area
efficiency of the existing design was 0.805. The potential for energy
saving was then derived from the resultant Composite Curves, which
are shown in Figure 11.1. As seen in the figure, the Composite Curves
are relatively wide apart except in the area around the Pinch.
The capital cost was estimated under the assumption that the
retrofit distribution of area would be the same as that for the
existing network. The resulting optimum minimum temperature
approach was found to be about 11.5C for incremental and about
253

254
C h a p t e r E l e v e n
17.5C for constant . The area efficiency of the existing network
was found to be 0.804. This value indicated that the existing design
was using the area reasonably efficiently. Even so, there was still room
for improvement. Since the constant- targeting produced a
conservative estimate, an incremental value of 1.0 was used to set
the retrofit target, which yielded potential for energy savings of
about 12.117 MW. Analysis of the existing design revealed that there
were four process-to-process heat exchangers that transferred heat
across the Process Pinch (from above to below the Pinch). It was
also found that some heaters supplied utility heat to process streams
below the Pinch and that some coolers removed heat from process
streams above the Pinch. These energy violations of the established
Pinch rules generated the scope of the projects possible energy
savings.
The retrofit design using the Network Pinch method allowed a
limit to be set on the structures energy recovery. The next stage
consisted of testing a set of modifications that would result in higher
levels of energy recovery in the process. The increase in energy
recovery would come at the expense of increased heat exchange area.
Therefore, any benefit in energy cost reduction had to be weighed
against the additional capital cost associated with increasing that
area. A number of promising design solutions were generated, which
were then optimized for minimum total cost. The four designs
identified each involved a payback period of less than two years, yet
increases in energy prices rendered the actual payback period closer
to one year. The final design chosen for the retrofit situation was the
one with the shortest payback period and the least additional area
required; it is shown in Figure 11.2.
In this design option, four new heat exchangers were added and
one existing exchanger (number 1 in Figure 11.2) was removed, since
its duty approached zero. In reality the exchanger equipment item
Enthalpy [MW]
T
min
= 11.50C
400
300
200
100
0
1 2
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

[
C
]
FIGURE 11.1 Composite Curves of FCC process with optimum T
min
(after
Al Riyami, Kleme, and Perry, 2001).
I n d u s t r i a l A p p l i c a t i o n s a n d C a s e S t u d i e s
255
need not be removed. Instead, it could be used in place of one of the
additional exchangers called for by the new design by repiping either
the hot or cold stream (so in this case, exchanger number 1 becomes
exchanger 42 in Figure 11.2), thus further reducing the additional area
224
150.8
207.8 210.5
62.87
74.3 96.3
123
109
83.3
74 54.9
760.5 kW
481 kW
1247 kW
1235 kW
294.25 kW
12459 kW
3324 kW
1902 kW
2704 kW
244.5 kW
73.9 kW
53267 kW
359.6 kW
563 kW
653.3 kW
14125 kW
195.83 kW
856.4 kW
32.3 kW
7336 kW
206 kW
3802 kW 2381 kW1803 kW
10198.9 kW
1413.6 kW
872.25 kW
1151.8 kW
5669.4 kW
1051.9 kW
213.7 kW 4258.8 kW
41479.7 kW
3697.5 kW
4282.8 kW
22841 kW
8787 kW
2402.6 kW
13291 kW
763.9 kW
200 kW
1815.6 kW
62.05
60
238
52
38
38
38
38
38
38
46
46
38
38
48.92
38
38
38
38
38
88.2
110 134.8
38
38
184.5
95
50
55
192.6
195
385
171.7
102
60
67.24
53
46.44
46
53
193
46
96.41
51.5
52.5
63.11
68.11
97.17
104
158
224
238
293
293
366
366
102
54.3
49.68
124
101.7
193
119.3
78.56
118.4
101.78
118
48.23
51.16
95.40
100
58.32
60
60
C1
C 3
43
40
11
40
44
41
12
8
10
11
9 7
H
H
H
H
6
43
42
2 3
5
4
9
42
44
10 7
6
5
4
12
41
H1
H2
H3
H4
H5
H6
H7
H8
H9
H10
H11
H12
H13
H14
H15
H16
H17
H18
H19
H20
H21
H22
H23
8
2
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
50
108
40
FIGURE 11.2 Grid diagram of the chosen retrot option (after Al Riyami,
Kleme, and Perry, 2001). Exchanger number 1 from the original network is
removed and now used repiped as new added area (exchanger number 42);
exchanger number 10 is only repiped.

256
required. All the modifications carried out in the diagnosis stage had
the effect of moving heat from below to above the Network Pinch. The
final retrofit design produced energy savings of 8.955 MW, about
74 percent of the potential of the design. The annual utility cost savings
amounted to $2,388,600, a 27 percent decrease in the utility bill. Since
the modified HEN required an investment of $3,758,420, the payback
period was less than 19 months.
The study demonstrated that a combination of targeting and
Pinch Technology (process Pinch and Network Pinch) can yield
substantial improvements in an existing HEN and thereby reduce the
total network cost. The employed method can recognize bottlenecks
in an existing system, and then generate a series of potential
improvements by searching for modifications capable of shifting heat
from below to above the Network Pinch. It was found that targeting
for maximum energy savings at each potential modification usually
produces a good trade-off between area and energy cost.
11.2 De-bottlenecking a Heat-Integrated Crude-Oil
Distillation System
A crude-oil preheating system retrofit problem was studied by
Seikova, Varbanov, and Ivanova (1999). The objective of the study was
to develop a topology modification proposal for the refinery owners
that would feature better energy efficiency than the existing network
under a flexibility requirementnamely, that the distillation plant
be able to work with several alternative feedstocks. The preheating
system of the distillation plant was analyzed, and several topology
modifications were evaluated.
The retrofit aspect of Heat Integration was first considered
systematically by Tjoe and Linnhoff (1986), who proposed a framework
for retrofit assessment and targeting. Later, Asante and Zhu (1997)
developed the Network Pinch methodology. This hybrid approach,
which combines heuristics and Mathematical Programming (MPR),
was implemented through an iterative procedure whose two main
stages are to identify the heat transfer bottleneck of the given HEN
and then to implement modifications for overcoming it.
Another important Process Integration issue involves accounting
for different plant operating conditions stemming from the market
availability of various feedstocks. The case study reported in Saboo,
Morari, and Woodcock (1985) was based on the HEN retrofit
methodologies just described and combined the energy recovery
improvement with handling of the flexibility requirements that are
common to real-life processing plants.
The crude-oil distillation unit (Figure 11.3) consists of a main
distillation column (with 6 m
3
/h capacity) for fractionating crude oil
into four products: light distillate, heavy gasoline, diesel fuel, and
atmospheric residue. The preheating HEN recovers heat from the
257
pump-around and from some of the products before the furnace. To
bring the final crude oil temperature to the columns required target,
the remaining heat duty is provided by the combustion of
noncondensed light gases and of additional natural gas.
The process features the following characteristics: (1) temperature-
dependent heat capacities; (2) continuous partial phase change of the
crude oil; (3) temperature variations, which are small owing to
specifications of the distillation process; and (4) large variations of
the hot stream flow rates due to changing stockfeed composition.
The three utility sources available for HEN operation are light
gases (as a furnace fuel for higher temperature levels), steam at 1 atm
(1.01325 bar), and cooling water at 1835C. The data used to estimate
the utility cost are $68.74/kWy for furnace heating, $103.10/kWy for
steam, and $30.00/kWy for cooling water. The following area cost
law was used:
Capital cost [$ = 25,000 + 680 Area
0.81
[m
2
] (11.1)
The plant processes a range of alternative feedstocks. Three
crude-oil types were selected to represent this range. Feed 1 is a light
crude oil; it contains a significant amount of the lightest fractions,
which require a large amount of cooling in the condensers. However,
the relatively small amount of the heavy fraction means that less
reboiler heating is required. Feed 2 is medium crude oil and feed 3 is
heavy crude oil. These two feedstocks are characterized by a relatively
greater amount of the heavy fractions (diesel and atmospheric
residue), which means that more heat is available for recovery in the
higher temperature range. It was assumed that, over a years worth of
operation, the plant uses equal amounts of the three feedstocks. Each
alternative feedstock is associated with a unique operating point.
Crude Oil
Gases
Water
Lower pumparound
Heavy Distillate
Atmospheric residue
Light Distillate
Steam
Steam
Steam
Diesel Oil
FIGURE 11.3 Flowsheet of the crude-oil distillation unit.

258
At all three operating points, the crude oil is preheated within a
large temperature intervalfrom 20C to 310C. The preheating
process consists of three phases. In the first phase, the crude oil is
heated from the starting temperature to its bubble point. The next
phase involves continuous partial evaporation in heat exchangers.
The third and hottest phase is heating to the specified column entry
temperature of 310C (this heating is performed in the furnace). The
upper pump-around features a large enthalpy change split between
condensation and subcooling segments. None of the other process
streams has phase transitions.
The existing HEN for the preheating train is shown in Figure 11.4.
In order to initialize the retrofit procedure, a Pinch Analysis of the
stream data for T
min
= 10C was carried out. The results of this
analysis are given in Table 11.1.
For the first two feeds, the Pinch is located at the temperature
boundary of the crude oil bubble point. For feed 3, the Pinch is
located at a temperature that is close to the beginning of the phase
change. Note that each operating point offers a different potential
for heat recovery.
After looking at the existing network and thermodynamic
targets, one can suggest several retrofit modifications. First, the hot
utility usage below the Pinch leads to extremely poor heat recovery
as well as to substantially increased utility cooling and thus to using
considerable amounts (3038 m
3
/h) of cooling water. Taking a look
at the coolers in the temperature interval of heater H1 (Figure 11.4),
one can see that the sum of the cooler loads at the outlets of streams
H3, H4, and H5 offers enough heat supply to satisfy the heating
demand in the interval from 20C to 60C. This analysis implies that
steam heating can be eliminated through repiping of the coolers as
recovery matches. It can also be seen that the availability of heat
recovery varies in response to the different temperature levels
characteristic of each type of crude-oil feed. This effect is most
significant for the atmospheric residue stream H5, whose heat
capacity flow rate varies from 0.98 to 1.47 kW/C. To handle this
variation in heat availability temperatures, a cascade of recovery
Pinch
location
[C]
Minimum
hot utility
[kW]
Minimum
cold utility
[kW]
Maximum
heat recovery
[kW]
Feed 1 110120 556.25 560.26 610.64
Feed 2 110120 481.31 428.24 664.33
Feed 3 86.1996.19 507.34 395.66 696.45
TABLE 11.1 Pinch Analysis Results for Operating Points of the Three
Preheating Phases
259
CP [kW/C]
CP
H12
= 17.68
CP
H11
= 17.68
CP
H12
= 2.086
CP
C11
= 2.87
CP
C12
= 4.25
CP
C13
= 4.49
CP
H11
= 9.286
CP
C11
= 2.92
CP
C13
= 4.23
CP
C12
= 5.40
CP
H11
H1
CP
C11
CP
C1
CP
H12
CP
C1
0.38
C2
C3
C4
C5
C1
C1
C1
C1
C6
H1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
H1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
H1
28
60.0
40.0
40.0
100.0
20.0 60.0 65.3 119.8
94.2
H2
H3
H4
H5
H1
H2
H3
H4
H5
111.3
186.0
197.0
296.3
130.3 158.7 310.0
140.3
70.0
75.3
129.8
65.5
1.66
0.84
0.98
101.9 kW
11.3 kW
25.4 kW
75.8 kW
39.7 kW
28.0 54.7
70.0
74.2
122.1
137.3
48.5
70.0
73.2
109.4
127.6
55.7 kW
40.0
8.6 kW
436.7 kW
469.9 kW
60.0
17.70 kW
40.0
21.4 kW
100.0
20.0 60.0
60.0
64.2 112.1 127.3 180.5
63.2 99.4 117.6 172.2
101.7
111.6
186.3
196.7
294.6
H1
H2
H3
H4
H5
96.2
111.2
186.0
197.1
294.8
310.0
310.0
54.8 kW
28.0
46.6 kW
40.0
8.0 kW
60.0
15.1 kW
40.0
61.2 kW
100.0
20.0
38.7 kW
114.8 kW 11.9 kW 140.4 kW 64.7 kW 231.1 kW 582.8 kW
101.7 kW
507.5 kW
11.9 kW 183.6 kW 56.7 kW 153.5 kW 677.3 kW
1
1
C1
1
1
2
3
3 4
4
2 H2
2
3
3 4
4
2 H2
C1
1
1
2
3
3 4
4
2 H2
(a) Initial HEN Feed 1
(b) Initial HEN Feed 2
137.0 kW 10.9 kW 129.2 kW 77.7 kW 235.1 kW 614.1 kW
(c) Initial HEN Feed 3
0.28
1.25
0.87
1.47
CP
H12
= 2.27
CP
C11
= 3.43
CP
C12
= 4.25
CP
C13
= 4.46
CP
H11
= 9.85
0.27
1.15
0.88
1.41
1 2 3
FIGURE 11.4 Initial HEN for the crude-oil preheating process.
matches is needed. This requirement suggests the repiping of coolers
mentioned previously, which would form three loops for internal
heat transfer.
Another important observation concerns the amount of recovery
from streams H2 to H5. Streams H3 and H4 feature close supply
temperatures. For all three operating points, and especially for that
of feed 1, H3 has substantially greater heat capacity flow rate than

260
H4, which results in a relatively slower decrease in its temperature.
This fact and the heat exchanger cascade already planned suggest
another topology modification: resequence matches 2 and 3 on
stream C1. Such resequencing would yield a larger driving force in
both matches, although some load would then be shifted to the lower
temperature segment of stream C1.
The network was modified according to the strategy and changes
suggested by the analysis. The result is shown in Figure 11.5. Cooler
C3, on the hot stream with the lowest target temperature, is left at its
old location. This, together with the introduced three loops, will
account for variations in composition of the feedstock. When there is
a larger total heat supply from streams H2 to H5, any heat surplus is
removed from the system through cooler C3.
Comparing the initial and new topologies reveals that a
significant improvement in energy efficiency has been achieved.
The heat recovery fraction is increased from 67.03 to 91.22 percent
for feed 1, from 73.37 to 89.77 percent for feed 2, and from 74.12 to
77.86 percent for feed 3. Although the relative increase for feed 3 is
lower, its net increase in heat recovery is the same as that of
feed 2.
Based on the simulations for the initial and modified networks,
the heat transfer area for each match is determined as recorded in
Table 11.2 (where H1 is 4 6.26 m
2
). The area requirement of the
recovery matches EC4 (new), 3, EC5, and EC6 increase after the
topology change. Note that only the increase of EC4 is significant,
which is due to the heat load shifted from match 2. Another effect
of the modification is that the four eliminated steam heating
Match
Feed 1 Feed 2 Feed 3
Initial Retrofit Initial Retrofit Initial Retrofit
C1 67.69 67.69 61.62 61.62 75.56 75.56
C2 43.42 43.42 30.51 30.51 31.30 31.30
1 10.83 4.74 8.12 3.44 7.39 4.80
C3 3.45 2.00 2.62 1.61 2.42 0.00
2 98.04 38.43 69.49 27.21 57.75 31.57
C4EC4
4.95 59.41 3.49 39.97 3.02 12.99
3 10.67 11.83 11.85 12.30 12.97 15.64
C5EC5
7.99 11.43 2.37 11.17 7.47 5.64
4 14.58 14.44 24.98 23.84 24.20 24.42
C6EC6
1.81 9.68 2.54 12.01 1.89 2.48
H1 21.33 20.98 25.04
TABLE 11.2 Changes in Heat Transfer Area Due to Retrot, in [m
2
]
261
H1 C2
C3
C1
C1
C1
C1
28.0
20.0
27.7
49.4
130.2
94.2
111.3
111.7
111.6
186.3
196.7
294.6
96.2
111.2
186.0
197.1
294.8
186.0
296.3
197.0
115.3
147.3
89.4
105.3
120.0
137.0 165.0
310.0
1
1
65.5
60.0
40.0
52.1
40.0
100.0
C1
28.0
20.0
25.8 49.1
81.6
107.0
124.0
138.0 187.0
149.8
54.7
48.5
134.5
117.0
60.0
40.0
40.0
100.0
C1
28.0
20.0
25.5
31.9
45.2 54.5
89.4 112.7 169.1
60.0
40.0
39.8
99.4
65.1
122.7
40.0
100.0
H2
H2
H3
H4
H5
H1
310.0
H2
H3
H4
H5
H1
310.0
H2
H3
H4
H5
4.54 kW
C2
C3
C2
C3
3.79 kW
101.85 kW
55.7 kW
55.70 kW
0 kW
436.7 kW
53.2
507.47 kW
22.3 kW 63.5 kW 116.6 kW 46.6 kW 68.9 kW 92.5 kW 146.6 kW 609.9 kW
EC5
EC5
EC5
EC5
EC4
EC4
EC4
EC4
EC6
EC6
EC6
EC6
3
2
2
4
4
H2
2
2
4
4
3
3
3
(a) Modified HEN Feed 1
(b) Modified HEN Feed 2
(c) Modified HEN Feed 3
1
1
EC5
EC5
EC4
EC4 EC6
EC6
H2
2
2 4
4
3
3
1
1
436.72 kW
FIGURE 11.5 Modied HEN for the crude-oil preheating process.
exchangers can be used to satisfy the increased area needs for
matches 3, EC5, and EC6. Thus the investment, which is estimated
to be $42,330, is only for the additional area of EC4. Overall, the
modified heat recovery system yields a significant reduction in
energy cost. The total sum of savings after the retrofit is estimated

262
to be $17,519 per year, which results in a reasonable payback period
of about 2.4 years (or less if energy prices increase).
This case study of a combined problem in heat recovery and
process flexibility within a distillation units preheating system
combined advanced Pinch-based retrofit methodologies with
additional heuristic rules. The result was that the flexibility goals
were better met by the introduction of loops in the network topology.
In short, the new and modified paths enabled a significant improvement
in heat recovery. Another benefit was that the more expensive steam
heating was partially replaced by slightly increased furnace duty in
the case of higher heat demand. This interesting trade-off between
two hot utilities yields an economic benefit owing to the lower cost
of furnace fuel.
11.3 Minimizing Water and Wastewater in
a Citrus Juice Plant
This case study describes a water and wastewater minimization
project designed for a citrus plant located in Argentina (Thevendiraraj
et al., 2003); the study proceeded by applying the Water Pinch
technology (Wang and Smith, 1994). Citrus juiceprocessing plants
consume large quantities of freshwater. The principal objective of
this study was to reduce both the freshwater consumed and the
wastewater produced by the plant. The citrus processing plant housed
the following processes: selection and cleaning, juice extraction, juice
treatment, emulsion treatment, and peel treatment.
Water minimization was achieved by maximizing water reuse
and identifying regeneration opportunities. Water-using operations
were represented by the maximum inlet and outlet contaminant
concentrations, which are functions of equipment corrosion,
fouling limitations, minimum mass transfer driving forces, and
limiting water flow rate through an operation. Targets determined
the minimum freshwater requirement using the Limiting
Composite Curve for the water design network. The graphical
Pinch methods that are based on single contaminants can be
extended to cover multiple contaminants. When dealing with a
number of operations, multiple contaminants, and multiple water
sources, the problem becomes more complex and so algorithms
using the basic Pinch principles have been developed for solving
by MPR-based methods (see Smith, 2005).
The study began with data extraction: each stream had to be
characterized by its contaminant concentration, inlet and outlet
concentration levels, and limiting flow rate through each operation.
The data were provided in a schematic flow diagram of the citrus
plant that incorporated a simplified water distribution network and
the mass balance of the plants water streams. Eleven freshwater-
using operations were identified. Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
263
was chosen as a component to proxy for all contaminants for two
reasons: first, COD measures the most significant contaminant
load in the majority of water streams; and second, COD exhibits
significantly high values.
The overall mass balance is closed by using the assumption
that evaporation losses from the steam system amount to 1 t/h
(otherwise, there is an inconsistency of 1 t/h of water that must
be accounted for). The extracted data on contaminant concentrations
and water flow rate made it possible to establish the amount of
water gained or lost by each operation in the process. The total
mass load picked up by the freshwater through each operation was
then calculated. The eleven water-using operationstogether with
the water flow rates entering and leaving each operationcan be
represented in the form of a simplified water network, as shown in
Figure 11.6.
The freshwater COD concentration level for the plant is 30 ppm.
There was an existing water reuse between processes currently in
the plant, and these reuse streams were left unchanged. The
simplified water network presented in Figure 11.6 shows the
freshwater-using operations with existing water reuse streams built
in to each identified operation. The current total freshwater consumed
and wastewater generated by this citrus plant were, respectively,
240.3 and 246.1 t/h.
The existing water network provided a base starting point for the
Water Pinch Analysis. The freshwater target was evaluated by using
the Composite Curves. The maximum concentration levels were
based on the constraints and limitations dictated by process
conditions and requirements. This data were represented in the
WATER software tool (2005) with identified constraints. The process
restrictions on water type permissible for each operation indicated
that operations 2, 4, 5, and 10 can use only freshwater as input. Hence,
the minimum freshwater required by plant operations was
164.4 t/h.
Operation 1 is a batch process for which the analysis assumed
freshwater must always be available. This increases the plants total
minimum freshwater requirement [t/h] to 164.9 = 164.4 + 0.5 for
operation 1. The current total freshwater feed to the plant is 240.3 t/h.
These figures can be used to calculate the maximum theoretical
freshwater reduction (MTFWR) that is achievable:

240.3 164.9
MTFWR 100 31.4 percent
240.3

(11.2)
The Water Pinch Analysis was then carried out for the existing
water network with maximum concentration levels. The overall
freshwater target was calculated using the maximum reuse analysis.
Figure 11.7 shows the modified water network represented as a
conventional diagram, and the Limiting Composite Curve is plotted

264
in Figure 11.8. The freshwater target was compared with the current
freshwater consumption in order to assess the plants overall potential
for minimizing water and wastewater. The redesigned network
yielded a freshwater demand of 169.3 t/h and a wastewater flow rate
of 175.1 t/h. Although this amounts to a substantial reduction in both
water and wastewater, the design includes reuse of certain streams
that will require treatment. As already described, the analysis was
based on COD as the pseudocontaminant in reuse streams. However,
these streams may well contain other contaminants (e.g., solid waste,
0.5 t/h
7.265 t/h
6.265 t/h
1 t/h
1.000 t/h
28.093 t/h
118.093 t/h
0.5 t/h
0 t/h
26.15 t/h
137.558 t/h
Overflow as WW 47.558 t/h
3.385 t/h
1.62 t/h
240.318 t/h
246.054 t/h
Loss to Process
Loss to Process
Loss to Process
Loss to Process
Fresh Water to
Plant
Waste Water
from plant
Packing (1)
Loss to
Environment
Blowdown+
Condensate
Lossess Neglected
26.15 t/h
Treatment Plant
(Potable) (2)
Boiler
Selection / Cleaning (3)
Gain from Process
Gain from Process
APV Condenser &
Green Tank (4)
Screen 2&3 &
Vincent Press
90.0 t/h
4.8 t/h
1.5 t/h
7.322 t/h
10.95 t/h
8.64 t/h
15.84 t/h
3.6 t/h
7.2 t/h
0.476 t/h
240.318 t/h
246.054 t/h
5.736 t/h
37.391 t/h
31.655 t/h
5.736 t/h
4.076 t/h
39.6 t/h
28.65 t/h
8.822 t/h
1.62 t/h
4.8 t/h
3.385 t/h
Vacuum Pump (5)
Screen Taca-Taca (6)
Finisher (7)
Condensate from
distiller stream
Condensate from
juice vapour
Gain from Process
Distiller (8)
Distiller Condenser &
Washing Spiral 1 (10)
Screen 1 (9)
Centrifugal (11)
Total Raw Water
Total Waste Water
Difference
Total Gain from Process
Total Losses to Process
Difference
Error % 0.00
FIGURE 11.6 Existing water network (simplied).
265
0.5 t/h
Operation 1
Operation 2 Operation 3
Operation 6
Operation 11
Operation 9
Operation 7
Operation 4
Operation 4a
Operation 5
Operation 2a/8
Operation 10
Loss to Process, 6.265 t/h
Loss to Process, 4.8 t/h
6.265 t/h
4.8 t/h
47.56 t/h
90.00 t/h
3.39 t/h
1.00 t/h
15.84 t/h
3.39 t/h
8.82 t/h
7.20 t/h
0.79 t/h
3.53 t/h
31.83 t/h 39.60 t/h
4.38 t/h
113.72 t/h
2.45 t/h
0.5 t/h
8.96 t/h
2.45 t/h
0.79 t/h
4.01 t/h
28.60 t/h
Recycle, 23.7 t/h
Recycle, 0.83 t/h
Gain from Process,
0.48 t/h
Gain from Process,
28.09 t/h
Net gain from Process,
28.09 t/h
Loss to Process,
10.95 t/h
Wastewater
175.05 t/h
Freshwater
169.3 t/h
Loss to Process
8.64 t/h
FIGURE 11.7 Water Network after Pinch Analysis as a conventional diagram.
small amounts of chemicals) that require further treatment prior to
being used for other processes. Hence additional design options
must be developed for dealing with specific process requirements,
operating conditions, and suitability standards for water reuse.
The necessary design refinements may be achieved by introducing
further constraints to potential reuse streams and by utilizing the
maximum water reuse analysis to obtain optimal designs that use
even less freshwater while meeting all process operating conditions
and restrictions. The regeneration reuse analysis can also be used to
explore additional design options incorporating the reuse of
regenerated water in some operations. Such analysis is based on
installation of a treatment unit to regenerate wastewater (by gravity
settling, filtration, membranes, activated carbon, biological agents,
etc.). This modification would further reduce plant levels of
freshwater and wastewater, and it was also evaluated with the
WATER software.

266
Four different design options were generated that considered
both the maximum reuse analysis and regeneration reuse analysis
(Figure 11.9). Design options A and B were based on the maximum
reuse analysis, and both achieve a freshwater consumption of 188 t/h;
this is a reduction of about 22 percent from the actual freshwater
consumption of 240 t/h. Because of process limitations and
restrictions, there was no further scope for water reuse. Yet results
from the diagnostic stage indicated that a 31 percent reduction in
freshwater and wastewater was possible. This additional extent is
achievable by regenerating wastewater and then reusing it in other
operations. Design options C and D are based on the regeneration
reuse analysis; both result in total freshwater consumption of 169
t/h, which amounts to a 30 percent reductionthat is, nearly all of
the theoretical maximum predicted by Eq. (11.2), the expression for
MTFWR.
The reduction in freshwater use was achieved by rerouting water
streams, a modification that requires new pipes. Design option A
requires five new pipes; this is fewer than options B or D, which
require seven pipes, and option C, which requires nine new pipes.
New piping will affect investment cost. The five new pipes identified
for design option A are also required in the other options for the
same function and at similar flow rates. Therefore, this option
requires the least investment and option C the most. Furthermore,
design options C and D each require additional investment cost for a
Analysis=Single Component Reference Contm No. 1 [COD]
Limiting Composite Curves
Mass [t/h]
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

[
p
p
b
]
Limiting CC Water Supply Line
FIGURE 11.8 Limiting Composite Curve generated by WATER software.
267
regeneration unit that is not part of options A and B. These results
are summarized in Figure 11.9.
Design options A and D are the most attractive ones in terms of
maximizing both reuse and regeneration reuse. Option A results in a
smaller reduction in freshwater use but at a lower investment cost
than option D, which results in a larger reduction in freshwater use
but at a much higher investment cost. Wastewater reductions are
proportional to freshwater reductions, with corresponding reductions
in wastewater treatment costs for each of the options. The cost
analysis carried out for design option A indicates attractive financial
returns for this low-investment option, whose payback period is only
0.14 years. The outlet water quality of operation 3 required further
analysis, so a complete cost evaluation of design option D was not
possible. Fully evaluating this option would require additional
detailed studies to identify the regeneration process type required
and its associated costs.
The heat energy of the reuse water streams proposed in the
design options was reviewed to ensure that stream temperatures at
the inlet of operations remained unchanged. Citrus plant managers
reported that nearly all of the process operations occur at ambient
temperatures; the only exception was operation 8, which produces
wastewater at 90C. (This particular waste stream is highly
contaminated, which imposes some limitations.) All the water reuse
streams proposed by the four design options are at appropriate
temperatures, so they should not have a thermal effect on operations.
The overall hot and cold utility requirements of the plant would not
be affected by the changes proposed in the design options.
With its existing water network, the plant consumes 240.3 t/h of
freshwater and generates 246.1 t/h of wastewater. The proposed
design options offer a 30 percent and a 22 percent reduction in
freshwater consumption and wastewater generation. For a practical
project, the number of modifications is limited. The maximum water
Design Options
FRESHWATER SAVINGS
Theoretical Freshwater Reduction Limit, 31%
Number of
New Pipes
Required
% Feed Water
Reduction
30
25
20
A
10
5
5
22 22
30 30
7
9
7
B C D
FIGURE 11.9 Summary of four design options.

268
reuse design requires a minimum of five new pipes, and the
regeneration reuse design requires seven new pipes. The reuse
analysis predicted a short payback period, but the regeneration
analysis was not definitive for the reasons described previously. In
sum, a Water Pinch Analysis for this citrus plant demonstrated that
the consumption of freshwater could be reduced by as much as 30
percent with low investment and few changes to the existing
plant.
11.4 Efficient Energy Use in Other Food and
Drink Industries
Many studies have employed Pinch Technology (and its associated
Heat Integration Analysis) in the food-processing industry. This
industry has a far different thermodynamic profile than that of the
refining and petrochemical industries. The food-processing industry
is characterized by process streams of relatively low temperature
(normally 120140C), a small number of hot streams, low boiling-
point evaporation of food solutions, considerable deposition of scale
in evaporators and heat recovery systems, and seasonal operation.
However, a number of studies have also found that the application
of Pinch Technology and Heat Integration is hampered by particular
aspects of the food-processing systems. These aspects include direct
steam heating, difficulties in cleaning heat exchanger surfaces, and
high utility temperatures. Despite these drawbacks, the benefits that
can be obtained by applying the Pinch Technology (e.g., optimized
heat recovery systems and reduced energy consumption) far outweigh
the difficulties of performing the studies. There are also other
advantages that can be realized by technological improvements:
reduced deposition of scale due to reduced utility temperatures, self-
regulation of heat processes, and reduced emissions.
A case study of the production of refined sunflower oil (Kleme,
Kimenov, and Nenov, 1998) exemplifies the benefits of process
analysis based on Pinch Technology and Heat Integration. The
process studied operated with a minimal temperature difference of
65C at the Process Pinch. The external heating required by the
system was provided by two types of hot utilitiesDowtherm steam
and water steam; the required external cooling was provided by two
cold utilitiescooling water and chilled water. The analysis proposed
that heat recovery be increased and that the minimum temperature
difference be reduced to 814C. The increase in heat recovery
(provided by a reduction in the minimum driving force for the
process) entailed an increase in the heat transfer area, but this was
more than offset by reductions in the hot and cold utility requirements.
A further benefit of the analysis was a reduction in the number of
utilities needed: eliminating water steam and cooling water
considerably simplified the overall design.
269
A case study of a whisky distillery by Smith and Linnhoff (1988;
see also Caddet, 1994) provides another example of how Pinch
Technology and Heat Integration can reduce energy use and increase
energy efficiency. In this case it was found that steam was being used
below the Process Pinch, resulting in an overall increase in utility
usage. The steam was related to use of a heat pump, so the steam
used below the Process Pinch was eliminated by reducing the size of
that heat pump. Although the steam now had to be used for process
heating above the Process Pinch, the overall energy costs were
reduced owing to the reduction in compressor duty.
Another study involving a whisky distillery was made by Kemp
(2007). The hot utility requirement for the process examined was
8 MW, and the Process Pinch was at 95C. The main hot utility
requirements were steam for the distillation system and hot air for
the drying system. Kemp showed that the form of the Grand
Composite Curve and the temperature of the Pinch could be
exploited for heat pumping, and he also suggested that the process
would benefit from the introduction of a Combined Heat and Power
(CHP) scheme for improved Process Integration and energy
efficiency. The sites power demand was 12 MW, so there were two
possibilities for providing both the power and the heat demands
from the same utility system. First, a gas turbine that produced
12 MW of power would also supply about 30 MW of high-grade heat
from the exhaust. The second option involved the use of back-
pressure steam turbines, but these would produce nearly 100 MW,
much more than what was required. Another advantage of a gas
turbine was that its exhaust could be used for drying purposes.
Figure 11.10 shows the final configuration of the utility system
matched to the GCC. Most of the necessary heat was provided by the
gas turbine exhaust and the existing thermo compressors. The
existing package boilers were used to provide steam for the thermo
compressors. The efficiency of this part of the system was increased
by using waste heat from below the Pinch to preheat the boiler feed
water. Waste heat boilers driven by the exhaust from the gas turbine
provided additional steam.
Many processes in the food and drink industry make use of
chilling and refrigeration systems. Pinch Technology and Heat
Integration have also been used to increase the efficiency of these
systems. For example, Fritzson and Berntsson (2006) studied a
Swedish slaughtering and meat-processing plant. Their analysis of
the plants subambient temperature section employed the method
proposed by Linnhoff and Dhole (1992) for low-temperature process
changes that involve shaftwork targeting. Figure 11.11 shows the
plants Exergy Grand Composite Curve (EGCC). There is a large gap
between the EGCC and the utility curve, which indicates low
efficiency in the use of available shaftwork. Improvements in this
area could result in a 15 percent reduction in energy demand.

270
0
0
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
c
[1]
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
EGCC
Utility curve
3500 4000 Q [kW]
FIGURE 11.11 Exergy Grand Composite Curve for meat-processing plant (after
Fritzson and Berntsson, 2006).
0
500
400
300
S
h
i
f
t
e
d

t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

[
C
]
200
Site steam
G
a
s
t
u
r
b
i
n
e
e
x
h
a
u
s
t
G
a
s

t
u
r
b
i
n
e

e
x
h
a
u
s
t
Driver steam
Waste
heat
boiler
Heat
pump
Cooling
water
Boiler Feed Water heating
10 10 20 30 40 50 60
Net heat flow [MW]
FIGURE 11.10 Final conguration of proposed utility system matched to the
process GCC (after Kemp, 2007).
Fritzson and Berntsson (2006) started the energy reduction
process by adjusting the loads on the subambient utilities, first
maximizing the load on the highest-temperature (10C) subambient
utility. After this, the load on each lower-temperature utility was
271
maximized. The reduction process began at the highest level (the
highest temperature), since this utility requirement can be satisfied
at a lower cost than refrigeration at lower temperatures. The modified
system was then modeled and simulated in HYSYS, which showed a
5 percent reduction in the shaftwork required.
However, these results still made for a relatively poor fit between
the EGCC and the utility curve. To reduce the gap further, it was
suggested that the level of the highest-temperature refrigeration
utility be increased from 10C to 3C and then the loads be
readjusted as before; the result is shown in Figure 11.12. This modified
configuration yielded a 10 percent reduction in the shaftwork
requirement. Other temperature changes were suggested to reduce
further the shaftwork requirements, but these changes were found to
be less cost-effective.
11.5 Synthesis of Industrial Utility Systems
Varbanov and colleagues (2005) demonstrated the synthesis of a
utility system (CHP network) of an industrial Total Site by applying
a combination of targeting and Mathematical Programming
techniques. Figure 11.13 shows the heating and cooling demands of
the chemical site studied. There are two operating scenariosfor
winter and summer, with different prices for power and fuel. The
basic data for the problem are listed in Tables 11.3 and 11.4.
Generic estimates of the corresponding coefficients were specified
for the boiler performance (field-erected boilers are slightly more
efficient than packaged units), and the capital cost estimates were
obtained online (Boiler Cost 2003). These estimates are a function of
boiler capacity and steam pressure. The performance and cost of gas
0
0
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
c
[1]
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
EGCC
Utility curve
3500 4000 Q [kW]
FIGURE 11.12 Area between the EGCC and the utility curve is further
decreased by changing the temperature of the rst refrigeration level from
10C to 3C (after Fritzson and Berntsson, 2006).

272
40 20 0 20
130.51
130.51
130.51
130.51
209.15
209.15
209.15
198.89 198.89
270.68
270.68
HP level candidates HP level candidates
LP level candidates LP level candidates
T [C]
300
200
100
T [C]
300
200
100
H [MW]
Winter Summer
40 60 80 40 60 20 0 20
H [MW]
40 60 80
FIGURE 11.13 Total Site Proles and candidate steam pressure levels for three
steam mains of an industrial chemical site (the Heat Source Prole for summer
provides more heat than that for winter).
Winter Summer
Fraction of year 0.55 0.45
Price of cooling water [$/t] 0.0185 0.0212
Site power demand [MW] 25 31
Maximum export allowed [MW] 10 10
Price of power (import and export) [$/MWh] 20 30
TABLE 11.3 Operating Scenarios for the Total Site
Working hours per year 8600
Interest rate [%] 8
Life of plant [y] 10
Capital installation factor 4.8
T
CW
[C] 10
T
BFW
[C] 120
P
VHP
[bar(a)] 90
T
VHP,SH
[C] 200
T
VP
[C] 50
Natural gas price [$/MWh] 9.369
Distillate oil price [$/MWh] 10.734
Fuel gas price [$/MWh] 4.984
Fuel oil price [$/MWh] 6.226
TABLE 11.4 Conguration Data for the Total
Site
273
turbines (ranging from 11.7 to 85.4 MW) were estimated using data
from Gas Turbine World (2001).
The preliminary Total Site targets estimated minimum utility
demand of about 80 t/h for the winter scenario, leading to the choice
of a field-erected boiler for stand-alone steam generation. A gas
turbine with a Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) is also selected.
For this case, three steam mains (headers) were considered: one for
very-high-pressure (VHP) steam generated by the boiler and by the
HRSG, and two more intermediate steam mains. The VHP header
properties were specified by the problem definition and are given in
Table 11.4. Hence, locations for the two other headers still have to be
determined. Figure 11.13 illustrates the partitioning of the candidate
steam levels, whose ranges are highlighted. For the upper steam
main, this graph was used to identify three candidate levels with
respective saturation temperatures of 270.68C, 209.15C, and
198.89C; the only candidate for the lower steam main there has a
saturation temperature of 130.51C. The problem superstructure is
illustrated in Figure 11.14.
Optimizing and reducing the superstructure yields the flowsheet
shown in Figure 11.15. It features two fired steam boilers and one
steam turbine sized to the steam flow for the winter period. This
flowsheet features relatively low on-site power generation and a
significant amount of power import. The main reasons behind this
approach are that power is cheap and capital is expensive; these
factors preclude a better utilization of the steam systems potential
cogeneration. This design also involves a significant amount of CO
2

emissions.
12.000
MW
7.700
MW
13.383
MW
1.300
MW
15.500
MW
18.136
MW
8.210
MW
10.632
MW
To cooling water
Make-up water
Condensate return
To the stream generators
2.877
MW
16.885
MW
hdr
02
: tb
01

hdr
02
: st
01
hdr
01
: st
01
hdr
01
: st
02
tb
01
tb
02
Canditate
pressure levels
tb
03
hdr
01
hdr
02
: st
02
CT: st
01
CT: st
02
DA
COND: 0.1235 bara
VHP: 90 bara, 503.35 C
3.550
MW
Winter
b
02
b
01
HRSG HRSG
gt
01
gt
01
Gas turbines
Summer
Winter Summer
Process heating
demands
Process cooling
demands
9.038
MW
5.956
MW
1.635
MW
50.591
MW
43.777
MW
14.660
MW
10.632
MW
1.501
MW
3.175
MW
FIGURE 11.14 Superstructure of the industrial utility system.

274
Next, potential design measures for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions were evaluated. The sensitivity analysis addressed four
cases, as summarized in Table 11.5. Case 1 is the base case and thus
represents the conditions discussed so far. The other cases gradually
increase the price of power and fuel as well as the penalties on
emissions. The optimal utility system flowsheet for case 3 is shown
in Figure 11.16. Case 4 also replaces fuel oil with a biofuel, which is
assumed to have zero CO
2
emissions.
Analysis of these emission reduction options leads to the
following conclusions: (1) Increasing the system efficiency is the
cheapest option for CO
2
abatement, but it has a relatively limited
scope. (2) The next economic option for this particular problem is to
close the carbon cycle by using biofuels; in general, however, CO
2

capture and sequestration could also be considered.
12.000 MW
7.700 MW 13.383 MW
1.300 MW
33.139 t/h 52.304 t/h
5.625 t/h 6.289 t/h
18.907 t/h
84.620 t/h 77.960 t/h
23.116 t/h
Winter: 114.025 t/h
Summer: 101.182 t/h
Winter: 16.645 t/h
Summer: 0.558 t/h
Winter: 15.717 t/h
Summer: 0.001 t/h
Winter: 136.671 t/h
Summer: 116.369 t/h
Winter: 18.769 t/h
Summer: 12.493 t/h
Winter: 154.502 t/h
Summer: 128.237 t/h
Winter: 22.646 t/h
Summer: 15.187 t/h
Power import [MW]: 21.1 (Winter); 30.0 (Summer)
Total annualized cost: 13.124 10
6
$/y
Winter: 4.767 MW
Capacity: 51.334 t/h
Uses fuel gas Uses fuel gas
Winter: 51.334 t/h
Summer: 45.049 t/h
Winter: 52.409 t/h
Summer: 26.213 t/h
Winter: 41.990 t/h
Summer: 0 t/h
Summer: 1.941 MW
17.597 t/h
13.210 t/h
25.240 t/h 29.533 t/h
15.500 MW 18.136 MW
8.210 MW 10.632 MW
To cooling water
Make-up
water
Condensate return
from processes
To the stream
generators
2.877 MW
16.885 MW
hdr
01
: st
01
DA
COND: 0.1235 bara
VHP: 90 bara, 503.35 C
P=15.19 bara
T
SAT
=130.51 C (tb
01
); P=2.74 bara
T
SAT
=198.89 C;
3.550 MW
Winter
b
02
b
01
POWER
(tb
03)
Summer
Winter Summer
9.038 MW 5.956 MW
1.635 MW
50.591 MW 43.777 MW
14.660 MW 10.632 MW
1.501 MW
3.175 MW
FIGURE 11.15 Optimal utility system for Case 1 (base case).
Case Price of
CO
2
[$/t]
Price of
SO
x
[$/t]
Price of
NO
x
[$/t]
Power price
[$/MWh]
1 0 0 0 20.00 30.00
2 0 0 0 30.00 45.00
3 40 500 1000 40.00 60.00
4 40 500 1000 40.00 60.00
TABLE 11.5 Sensitivity Analysis for Reducing Emissions: Basic
Parameters
275
11.6 Heat and Power Integration in Buildings and
Building Complexes
Herrera, Islas, and Arriola (2003) studied a hospital complex that
included an institute, a general hospital, a regional laundry center, a
sports center, and some other public buildings. The use of diesel fuel
represented 75 percent of its total energy consumption and 68 percent
of its total energy cost, which was $396,131 in 1999.
In the hospital complex, the heat demand is met by producing
steam in boilers fueled by high-price diesel fuel. There is no heat
recovery between the existing heat sources and heat sinks. The hot
streams were identified as the soiled soapy water from the laundry
and the flow of condensed steam not recovered in the condensation
network. The stream data are presented in Table 11.6.
For this hospital complex, the amount of external heating required
(i.e., the hot utility target) is 388.64 kW, which can be seen on the hot
and cold Composite Curves in Figure 11.17. This plot was employed
to determine what temperature levels of the utilities would satisfy
this requirement. The heating utility target of 388.64 kW translates
to an annual energy requirement of 12.26 TJ/y.
The amount of heating provided is actually 625.28 kW, which
represents the heat services that are currently transferred to the
complex. This figure represents a potential for energy savings of
38 percent, which is equivalent to an annual reduction in diesel fuel
of 246,000 liters (worth about $100,000). To reduce heating energy
demands to the targeted value, the Heat Integration Analysis
To cooling water
8.210 MW 10.632 MW
15.500 MW 18.136 MW
gt
01
hdr
01
: st
01
hdr
02
: st
01
T
SAT
= 198.89C;
T
SAT
= 130.51C;
b
02
Winter Summer Winter Summer
12.000 MW 16.885 MW
7.700 MW
1.300 MW 2.877 MW
13.383 MW
33.139 t/h
25.240 t/h
52.304 t/h
29.533 t/h
To the stream
generators
Winter:
Summer:
22.758 t/h
15.119 t/h
Winter:
Summer:
4.904 t/h
0.555 t/h
Winter:
Summer:
19.869 t/h
12.491 t/h
Winter:
Summer:
18.016 t/h
0.164 t/h
Winter:
Summer:
114.832 t/h
101.157 t/h
Winter:
Summer:
137.590 t/h
116.343 t/h
Winter:
Summer:
156.466 t/h
128.209 t/h
Winter:
Summer:
95.230 t/h
45.022 t/h
DA
Make-up
water Power export [MW]: 10.0 (Winter); 4.4 (Summer)
Total annualized cost: 23.060 10
6
$/y
Condensate return
from processes
Power
Power
Capacity: 33.917 MW
Winter: 30.085 MW
Summer: 33.916 MW
Winter: 0.000 t/h
Summer: 0.000 t/h
Winter: 52.017 t/h
Summer: 26.023 t/h
Winter: 13.997 t/h
Summer: 0.000 t/h
Winter: 7.722 MW
Summer: 1.942 MW
Power
Winter: 0.733 MW
Summer: 0.000 MW
HRSG
VHP: 90 bara, 503.35C
6.289 t/h 5.625 t/h
18.907 t/h 13.210 t/h
84.271 t/h 77.935 t/h
24.272 t/h 17.597 t/h
3.550 MW 3.175 MW
9.038 MW 5.956 MW
1.635 MW 1.501 MW
50.591 MW 43.777 MW
14.660 MW 10.632 MW
P=2.74 bara
P=15.19 bara
(tb
01
)
(tb
03
)
COND: 0.1235 bara
FIGURE 11.16 Optimal utility system for Case 3.

276
TABLE 11.6 Process Stream Data of Hospital Complex (Herrera, Islas, and
Arriola, 2003)
Stream Name T supply
[C]
T target
[C]
DH
[kW]
CP
[kW/C]
1 Hot Soapy water 85 40 23.70 0.53
2 Hot Condensed
steam
80 40 96.32 2.41
3 Cold Laundry
sanitary water
25 55 17.60 0.59
4 Cold Laundry 55 85 77.27 2.58
5 Cold Boiler feed
water
30 60 7.13 0.24
6 Cold Sanitary water 25 60 77.12 2.20
7 Cold Sterilization 30 121 12.50 0.14
8 Cold Swimming pool
water
25 28 151.67 50.56
9 Cold Cooking 30 100 59.63 0.85
10 Cold Heating 18 25 100.82 14.40
11 Cold Bedpan
washers
21 121 4.94 0.05
0 240 160 80 320 400 480
H [MW]
T [C]
120
Cold CC
Hot CC
100
80
60
40
PINCH
20
FIGURE 11.17 Process Composite Curves for hospital complex (T
min
= 20C).
indicates that four extra heat exchangers should be added to the
network. Two are needed in the laundry to cover part of the heat
demand, a third is needed in the machinery rooms that help to heat
boiler feed water, and a fourth is needed in the condensation tank
area that heats the sanitary water. The analysis could be refined
277
further by considering several other issues, such as fouling, pressure
drop, and variation in the heat demand.
11.7 Optimal Design of a Supply Chain
In the global market, optimal management control of a company is
necessary for survival. Such control involves a series of effective
strategic decisions that are concerned with various aspects of the
supply chainfor example, decisions regarding the products
themselves as well as the location of production facilities and
distribution centers. When the subject is the development or
operation of highly complex business processes (e.g., supply
chains, value chains), computer-aided decisions are preferred.
A conventional approach for systematically evaluating decision
alternatives is Mathematical Programming, although a daily
management problem is usually not resolved via MPR methods.
Even when the MPR can be constructed for the problem, it is still
difficult to verify whether the mathematical formulation of relevant
decision alternatives is sufficiently accurate and complete to
identify the optimal solution. When the mathematical model is not
generated systematically, the models chances of embodying the
optimal solution are very low.
This case study involves determining the optimal design of a
supply chain. Here, the purpose of the supply chain is to meet a given
volume demand for commodity C at location L1. Three options are
considered: produce commodity C at location L1; produce commodity
C at location L2 and then transport it to location L1; or some combination
of these. Production requires the availability of part A and part B at
the same location. Part A is available at location L3 and, to a limited
extent, at location L4; it can be transported to location L1 or to
location L2. Part B is available at location L2 and can be transported to
location L1. The list of potential activities is given in Table 11.7.
ID Activity Location Precondition Effect
P
L1
Production L1 A and B at L1 C at L1
P
L2
Production L2 A and B at L2 C at L2
T
AL3L1
Transportation From L3 to L1 A at L3 A at L1
T
AL3L2
T
AL4L1
T
AL4L2
T
BL2L1
Transportation From L2 to L1 B at L2 B at L1
T
CL2L1
Transportation From L2 to L1 C at L2 C at L1
TABLE 11.7 Potential Activities in the Supply Chain Case Study

278
Given the list of potential activities defined by their preconditions
(activating entities) and effects (resulting entities), the Maximal
Structure Generation (MSG) algorithm then produces the maximal
structure (Friedler et al., 1993). Next, when applied to the maximal
structure so derived, the Solution Structures Generation (SSG)
algorithm (Friedler et al., 1995) enumerates 15 combinatorially
feasible business process structures for the problem.
To determine the optimal business practice, the following
quantitative information is provided in addition to the case studys
15 structural alternatives. The required volume of the demand is
20,000 pieces annually. Producing one piece of commodity C requires
the availability of one piece of part A and one of part B. At most 5000
pieces of part A are available at location L4 for 230 each. An
unlimited number of part A can be purchased at location L3 for 250
each, and an unlimited number of part B can be purchased at
location L2 for 310 each.
The cost of an activity depends on its volume. To estimate the
increase in the cost of an activity as a function of its volume, costs
are given for handling 1000 and 2000 pieces per year. If a linear cost
function with a fixed charge is adopted to estimate the cost of the
activities with different volumes, then this function is determined
by the fixed charge and the proportionality constant. Table 11.8
summarizes the cost of processing 1000 versus 2000 pieces per
annum as well as the parameters of the fixed-charge linear cost
function for each activity.
The optimal business process, as determined by the Accelerated
Branch-and-Bound (ABB) algorithm (Friedler et al., 1996), corresponds
to the activities given in Table 11.9 whose annual cost totals
Activity
ID
Cost of processing Cost function parameters
1000 pcs/y
[/y]
2000 pcs/y
[/y]
Fixed charge
[/y]
Proportionality
constant
[/pcs/y]
P
L1
8,000 10,000 6,000 2
P
L2
9,000 10,000 8,000 1
T
AL3L1
4,000 8,000 0 4
T
AL3L2
10,000 20,000 0 10
T
AL4L1
12,000 24,000 0 12
T
AL4L2
2,000 4,000 0 2
T
BL2L1
10,000 20,000 0 10
T
CL2L1
14,000 28,000 0 14
TABLE 11.8 Cost of Activities in the Supply Chain Case Study
279
11,439,000. The second-best business process has a total annual cost
of 11,466,000, and the third-best business process has a total annual
cost of 11,568,000.
11.8 Scheduling a Large-Scale Paint Production System
Paint production usually consists of three major operations: grinding
and dispersion, mixing and coloring, and discharging and packaging.
Paints and coatings are typically produced in batches. They are made
in stationary and portable equipment units such as high-speed
dispersion mixers, rotary batch mixers, blenders, sand mills, and
tanks. The raw materials are solvents, resins, pigments, and additives
that include inorganic and organic chemicals. Paint manufacturing
does not usually involve chemical reactions between the raw
materials, so the finished product consists of a mixture of the different
raw materials. Several dozens of products are produced at the
manufacturing site, so the corresponding scheduling problem is
bound to be highly complex.
The S-graph framework of batch scheduling (see Chapter 7) has
been extended to solve complex paint production problems (Adonyi
et al., 2008). Changeover time is defined for any equipment unit that
requires cleaning. Traditionally, minimizing makespan (total time to
completion) is the criterion used when assigning equipment units to
tasks and scheduling the tasks. Such schedules maximize the
production systems efficiency, but they may lead to unnecessarily
high levels of waste generation. Thus, determining which task
schedule minimizes cleaning cost will require that the problems
objective function be modified. Now, rather than minimizing
makespan as in the original problem, the reformulation seeks to
Activity ID Optimal 2
nd
best 3
rd
best
Volume [pcs/y]
P
L1
15,000 20,000
P
L2
5,000 20,000
T
AL3L1
15,000 15,000
T
AL3L2
15,000
T
AL4L1
5,000
T
AL4L2
5,000 5,000
T
BL2L1
15,000 20,000
T
CL2L1
5,000 20,000
Total cost [/y] 11,439,000 11,466,000 11,568,000
TABLE 11.9 Activities in the Optimal, Second-Best, and Third-Best Business
Processes

280
minimize the cleaning cost. This change in criterion has only a minor
effect on the solution procedure, so an effective solver for the original
problem is also useful for the reformulated problem.
Twenty-three equipment units, E1 through E23, are available to
generate six products, A through F. The changeover time is 70 minutes
for equipment units E6, E7, E8, and E9 but 100 minutes for equipment
units E1 through E5 and E10 through E20. All other changeover times
are presumed to be zero. The number of batches to be produced is
given in Table 11.10.
Cleaning the equipment units is a costly operation that involves
many pollutants. The minimal makespan schedule contains 11
cleaning operations, which are denoted by the dotted changeover
arcs on its S-graph; see Figure 11.18.
The cleaning cost of the solution with minimal makespan is
$14,000. In contrast, the solution based on minimizing the cost
involves four (rather than 11) cleaning operations and only $3,500 in
cleaning cost; its makespan is 6,910 minutes. If the cleaning cost is
limited to reach $5,500, then the corresponding makespan is reduced
to 6,700 minutes.
Product A B C D E F
Number of batches 3 5 1 3 9 3
TABLE 11.10 Number of Batches Produced of Each Product
E1 E6 E11 E22 E4 E6
E6
E6
E6
E6
E6
E6
E6
E6
E7
E7
E7
E10
E12
E10
E12
E10
E12
E10
E12
E16
E19
E20
E15
E21
E21
E21
E21
E21
E21
E21
E21
E21
E23
E23
E23
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
E4
E4
E4
E4
E4
E4
E4
E4
E5
E5
E5
97
70
70
100
100
A E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
F
F
F
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
C
D
D
D
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
100
100
105
106
107
108
E22
E22
E22
E22
E22
E22
E22
E22
E22
E22
E23
E11
E11
E15
E19
E11
E13
E15
E16
E18
E14
E20
E6
E6
E7
E7
E7
E7
E7
E7
E7
E7
E8
60
0
0
60
0
60
0
60
0
60
60
60
60
60
60
90
90
90
90
90
0
0
0
60 60
50
90
90
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
310
240
240
240
240
0
0
240
0
240
0
240
0
240
240
240
240
120
70
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
310
310
120 120 720
720
720
720
720
720
720
720
720
720
720
720
120
120
300
300
300
300
300
300
120
120
540
540
40
40
0
40
0
40
0
40
0
40
0
40
0
0
0
40
0
40
40
40
40
540
540
540
540
540
540
540
540
540
720
70
120
120
120
120
120
120
100
100
70
E1
E1
E1
E1
E1
E1
E1
E2
E3
E3
E3
FIGURE 11.18 Schedule graph of the solution that minimizes makespan (after
Adonyi et al., 2008).
CHAPTER 12
Typical Pitfalls and
How to Avoid Them
P
rocess Integration (PI) has proven to be a powerful optimization
tool for designing processes that are energy-efficient,
environmentally friendly, and sustainable. The methodology
provides clear insight into the design process, but this direct
simplicity is sometimes misunderstood by potential users. Once
proper data are made available, the procedure generates an excellent
lead for the design process. But just as with all optimization tools,
potential pitfalls when using PI include improper formulation of the
problem and incorrect data extraction.
Even when the most efficient and well-developed methodology
is used to solve an optimization problem with high precision, the
results may be suspicious unless we have been solving the right
problem. In other words, has the problem been formulated in a way
that closely reflects the real process under consideration and
(especially) has the correct data been extracted? Negative answers to
these questions explain such published statements as: Pinch
technology [or process integration] did not work for this problem.
When these problems are revisited it usually becomes obvious that
the PI methodology is not at fault; rather, an inexperienced or
overconfident user is typically the cause.
Therefore, this chapter is devoted to various mistakes that a
designer might unwittingly make. The most basic issue concerns
how one starts a PI-based project and how it is run. Kemp (2007)
summarized the key steps listed below, which have been further
developed based on the authors experience. These steps are
specifically related to Heat Integration; however, they apply with
only small adjustments to mass, water, and other integration as
well.
1. Become familiar with the analyzed process. The most efficient
way is to closely liaise with the process designer and/or plant
manager, especially if the plant is already operating.
281

282
C h a p t e r T w e l v e
2. Develop a mass and heat balance. This should be based on
the designed process flowsheet data and calculations and/
or on measurements taken from the operating plant (if the
study is for a retrofit).
3. Select the streams. This is a critical step and, as will be shown
in this chapter, not as straightforward as it may seem.
4. Remove all the existing units related to the PI analysis. For
Heat Integration, remove all heat-transferring units, for
mass water integration remove all water interconnections
(the pipes). This step is also criticalwithout it, the
optimized design would not differ from the initial design.
Section 4.2.4 provides an example illustrating this activity.
5. Extract the stream data for the PI analysis. Different data are
relevant for each PI analysis type. For HI heat loads and
temperatures are extracted.
6. Make a qualified initial guess for the T
min
value; this value
can be adjusted later at various stages of the design
optimization.
7. Perform the Pinch analysis: obtain the Pinch temperatures
and the utility targets.
8. Design the initial (heat exchanger) network using the
criterion of maximizing energy recovery.
9. Check for a cross-Pinch transfer and for inappropriate
placement of utilities.
10. Check for proper placement of reactors, separation columns,
heat engines, and heat pumps.
11. Investigate the potential for further modifying the process
in order to minimize energy consumption and reduce
capital costs. Investigate the potential benefits of applying
the plus-minus principle (see Chapter 4) and the KHSH and
KCSC principles (see Figure 4.44).
12. Investigate the potential for integration with other processes
that is, Total Site Analysis.
13. Consider the implications of pressure drop (trade-offs between
heat savings and extra energy for pumping) and the physical
layout (capital cost of heat exchangers and/or piping).
14. Make the preselection of heat exchange equipment and
perform the preliminary costing. Provision should be made
for variations in the future price of energy.
15. Make the first optimization run of the predesign plant or
site, and make adjustments to T
min
.
T y p i c a l P i t f a l l s a n d H o w t o A v o i d T h e m
283
16. Based on the optimization, extract adjusted data and return
to step 7. Perform an additional loop (or loops) while
screening and scoping for potential simplifications.
17. Consider real plant constraints; these include safety,
technology limitations, controllability, operability, flexibility,
availability, and maintainability.
18. Pay attention to start-up and shutdown of the process; some
early designs for highly integrated plants had problems in
this area.
19. Run a second optimization for the final tuning accounting
for the information added during steps 16 to 18. If necessary,
return to any appropriate previous step for adjustment.
20. The design is now ready for detailing. However, optimization
is a never-ending procedure, and designs may need to be
modified in response to changes in operating conditions
(e.g., plant capacity) or the economic environment (e.g., tax
policy; prices for energy, materials, and production).
12.1 Data Extraction
As emphasized previously, data extraction is a crucial step. Bodo
Linnhoff presented one of his last plenary lectures (Linnhoff and
Akinradewo, 1998) on the automated interface between simulation
and integration. This has been a substantial step toward data
extraction for PI software tools. The plenary has been fairly
comprehensive and suggested the way forward for this important
task. The problem received increased interest following this lecture,
and several software packages now offer support for solving it.
Nonetheless, more work in this area is needed to satisfy the
requirements of routine industrial applications.
In their SuperTarget and Pinch Express software packages,
Linnhoff March (1998) included procedures for automatic extraction
of data for Heat Integration. Even so, thermal data, which involve the
stream heating and cooling information and utilities information,
are the most critical data required for Pinch Analysis. There are
several possibilities for extracting the thermal data from a given heat
and material balance. This must be done carefully, as poor data
extraction can easily lead to missed opportunities for improved
process design. In extreme cases, poor data extraction can falsely
present the existing process flow-sheet as optimal in terms of energy
efficiency. If the data extraction accepts all the features of the existing
flow-sheet then there will be no scope for improvement. If it does not
accept any features of the existing flow-sheet then Pinch Analysis

284
may over-estimate the potential benefits. Appropriate data extraction
accepts only the critical sections of the plant which cannot be
changed. Data extraction skill develops with increased experience in
the application of Pinch Technology (Linnhoff March, 1998).
Since the release of these packages, the methodology has
developed further and more attempts have been made to extract
data automatically. However, experience and following the proper
rules remain valuable assets. Basic questions to ask include the
following:
1. When is a stream a stream?
2. How precise must the data be at each step?
3. How can considerable changes in specific heat capacities be
handled?
4. What rules and guidelines must be followed to extract data
properly?
5. How can the heat loads, heat capacities, and temperatures of
an extracted stream be calculated?
6. How soft are the data in a plant or process flowsheet?
7. How can capital costs and operating costs be estimated?
12.1.1 When Is a Stream a Stream?
To those unfamiliar with PI, identifying a stream seems fairly
straightforward. In fact, many considerations are involved, and
accounting for them properly is key to setting up the problem. First,
we need not consider any stream that neither gains nor provides heat;
no data needs to be extracted from a stream with identical supply
and target temperatures and enthalpies. (Of course, in the absence of
perfect insulation, every stream loses or gains some heat; in many
cases, however, these small amounts of losses and gains can be
neglected.) If we do not extract data from such streams, the problem
is considerably simplified.
There are also streams that, for one reason or another, should not
be included in the PI problemfor example, streams that are remote
and streams that should not be altered for safety, product purity, and
operational reasons and for other (mostly practical) considerations.
Finally, Heat Integration deals with heat flows, which can be carried
not only by a pipe line but also by radiation or conduction.
Consider the example depicted in Figure 12.1. This example was
introduced, along with some data extraction rules, by Linnhoff and
colleagues (1982) and was later modified for use in many follow-up
books (e.g., Smith, 1995; Smith, 2005; Kemp, 2007) and in many courses
based on UMIST (later the University of Manchester) teaching
materials. The figure shows part of a flowsheet in which the feed
stream is heated to 45C by recuperated heat in a heat exchanger and
then enters a processing unit. After leaving this unit, the stream is
285
heated further by two heat exchangers and then enters a reactor. The
reactor requires the feed stream to be at 165C. The question is: How
many streams should be extracted?
1. Three streams: 1045C, 4580C, and 80165C
2. Two streams: 1045C and 45165C
3. One stream: 10165C
Choosing option 1 yields a design exactly like the original one;
there will again be three heat exchangers with the same heat transfer
duties as before. This case accounts for claims of no process
improvement by some PI critics. Option 2 presents more degrees of
freedom: the first heat exchanger would be the same, but the other
could be modified. Extracting two streams would be appropriate for
cases when the processing unit requires a feed temperature of close
to 80C.
Option 3 provides the most degrees of freedom and scope for
improvement, but with this design the processing unit feed could be
at any temperature between the 10C supply and the reactor target of
165C. If the processing unit is, say, a filter (as assumed by Smith,
2005), then there would probably be some restriction on the filter
supply temperature to ensure proper operation of the filter. If the
processing unit is storage (as assumed by Linnhoff et al., 1982), then
the supply temperature might be restricted to a different range
(depending, e.g., on whether liquid or gas is stored). This simple
example demonstrates that choosing the right stream from which to
extract data cannot be a fully automatic process. Making this choice
requires assessments related to specific processing units and
performance requirements for the plant.
12.1.2 How Precise Must the Data Be at Each Step?
There are frequently questions about required data precision, and a
common excuse for not applying PI analysis is that the data on a
plant is not sufficiently precise. However, the process of applying PI
150
160
120
140
45 45
40
140
10
190
Reactor
80
H
3
H
2
H
1
Unit
Feed
FIGURE 12.1 Partial owsheet for example process.

286
is itself based on (initially) rough assumptions, which are revised
during the course of several design loops. At the beginning there are
no specifications for the heat-transferring units, and neither are the
feed temperatures (and several other important factors) fully fixed.
At this stage, then, extremely precise data is not needed. It is important
to recognize that PI and the initial optimization are more about
screening and scoping than about detailed design. In seeking
potential energy savings, it is the general direction in which
optimization should proceed that is the initial concern. If the result
of this first step is that a 15 percent savings in energy is possible, then
this figure is sufficient to confirm the design approach and it doesnt
much matter if the precise figure is actually 13 or 17 percent.
It is in the regions close to the Pinch that the data should be as
precise as possible (Linnhoff et al., 1982). Also, it is best to remain
inside the Composite Curves in the plot of temperature versus
enthalpy. At the start of data extraction, we might have only a vague
idea of where (and at what temperature) the Process Pinch will occur;
also, the Composite Curves are based solely on data extraction.
Therefore, data extraction must necessarily start from rough
assessments and then be corrected step by step.
12.1.3 How Can Considerable Changes in Specific Heat
Capacities Be Handled?
Further analysis of the flowsheet in Figure 12.1 reveals that phase
changes are very likely to occur when the temperature increases
from 10C to 165C. In general, C
p
varies with temperature, but latent
heat is also a determining factor. Clearly, using a constant value for
C
p
would not be sufficiently realistic.
A segmentation technique has been developed to deal with this
problem. This technique is used, for example, in the software tools
SPRINT (2009) and STAR (2009). The software tools treat the segments
as individual streams that are combined to form input and output
streams. Data extraction is affected by how many segments are used
and their boundary temperatures (see Figure 12.2). Increasing the
number of segments naturally increases the complexity, so this
T
? ?
1
T
2
H H
? ?
T T
3 4
H H
FIGURE 12.2 How should we linearize?
287
number should be minimized for industrial problems involving
many streams.
12.1.4 What Rules and Guidelines Must Be
Followed to Extract Data Properly?
As mentioned in Section 12.1.1, data extraction rules were first
introduced by Linnhoff et al. (1982) and frequently used with some
modifications thereafter (Smith, 1995; CPI, 2004 and 2005; Smith,
2005; Kemp, 2007). Most of this work is related to Heat Integration,
but the principles apply as well to mass (water) integration. These
rules are reviewed briefly in this section.
When two or more streams of different temperatures are mixed,
this nonisothermal mixing constitutes a heat exchange with
degradation of the higher temperature. In some cases, such mixing
can also cause cross-Pinch transfer problemsas in Figure 12.3(a),
160
110
110
40
40
75
75
70
35
35
70
160
160
110
40 75 70
35
35
35 70
160
(a)
(b)
FIGURE 12.3 Nonisothermal
stream mixing extracted as
(a) three streams and (b) two
streams.

288
where three streams are extracted. The correct data extraction for this
case involves two streams, as shown in Figure 12.3(b).
General guidelines for data extraction may be summarized as
follows:
1. Heat losses. In most cases, heat losses can be neglected. However,
they should not be neglected when streams (mass and heat
flow in pipes) are long or subject to varied temperatures. In
such cases, the solution is to introduce hypothetical coolers (or
heaters) that represent the heat loss.
2. Extracting utilities. The utilities should never be extracted from
the existing plant or flowsheet, for then the solution would
likely arrive at the same utility values and perhaps neglect
some options that would be more efficient. This rule of thumb
applies especially to cases where utilities can be generated
on-site and thereby (at least partially) replace costly existing
utilities. In this connection it should be remembered that
steam is not always a utilitysometimes it is also a process
stream (e.g., stripping steam in separation columns). Process
streams should remain in place and not be removed.
3. Generating utilities. The Heat Integration analysis may indicate
some valuable options for using otherwise wasted heat or
cold to generate utilities. The Grand Composite Curves can
be used to locate such options. However, when extracting
data it must be recognized that steam requires the boiler
feedwater (BFW) to be heated, water to be evaporated, and
the steam to be superheated; see Figure 12.4. Many mistakes
have been caused by designers who simply matched the
Specified Steam
Conditions
BFW Conditions
T
H
FIGURE 12.4 Extraction of a cold stream including segments for BFW
preheating, evaporation, and superheating.
289
steam generation line without making provisions for
preheating and superheating.
4. Extracting at the effective temperature. In some cases a stream
cannot be extracted directly because it has to still be used by
a related process. For example, a hot stream should be
extracted at temperatures at which the heat becomes
available. An example is given in Smith (2005, p. 433) for a
reactor using a quench liquid.
5. Forced and prohibited matches. In almost any process there exist
matches that are necessary for technological reasonsthe
forced matchesas well as those, such as hot and cold stream
matches in a heat exchanger, that should be prohibited (e.g., to
prevent contamination of one of the streams). In manual design
these constraints have to be observed by the designer, but
software tools usually offer this option. If not then the
constraints can be secured by an appropriate penalty or bonus
(as applies) in the objective function used for the optimization.
6. Keeping streams separate only when necessary. If streams can be
merged then it may be possible to eliminate some heat-
exchanging units. For example, streams that leave the plant
to be treated as wastewater often have some heat content that
can be utilized.
12.1.5 How Can the Heat Loads, Heat Capacities, and
Temperatures of an Extracted Stream
Be Calculated?
Once a stream has been extracted, the next problem is calculating the
heat-related data. There are standard engineering procedures
available for the running plants as the measurements with the
following data reconciliation (Kleme, Lucha, and Vaek, 1979;
Minet et al., 2001; VALI III User Guide, 2003). The other option is to
develop a flowsheeting simulation model (Kleme, 1977). An
overview of flowsheeting and balancing simulators was given in
Chapter 9. If a plant is being designed, some data could be also
extracted from the process flow diagram (PFD). But all those options
consume time and resources, so in the early design stages (when the
process structure is still under development and likely to be changed
as a result of PI analysis), it is reasonable and easier to use a simplified
approach based on the extracted data. Such an approach is
demonstrated in Figure 12.5 for a part of the flowsheet from
Figure 12.1. The CPs of the stream segments are assumed constant
and calculated from the temperatures and the duties given in the
flowsheet. Experience has indicated that the resulting rough
preliminary data are sufficient and can later be made more precise
by one or more of the procedures listed previously.

290
12.1.6 How Soft Are the Data in a Plant or
Process Flowsheet?
Distinguishing soft data from hard data is one of the most important
aspects of data extraction. Inexperienced persons are usually trying
to stick the temperatures shown in the PFD, extract those temperatures,
and then perform the PI analysis. However, this approach usually
ends up overlooking many opportunities. A better approach is to
question every temperature, discuss each one with the process
engineer (or plant designer or plant manager), and thereby establish
which temperatures are critical (the hard data) while the rest (the
soft data) can be in some way compromised. In practice, most data
are at least a little soft, and designers can use this fact to their
advantage. Typically, streams that are leaving the plant (see
Figure 12.6) are characterized by soft data and thus are suitable for
optimization via the plus-minus principle (Figure 12.7). Data softness
is closely related to changing conditions and to a designs flexibility,
operability, and resilience.
12.1.7 How Can Capital Costs and Operating
Costs Be Estimated?
The need to find cost data arises when the appropriate T
min
(which
should be close to the optimum) is being selected. The optimum T
min
depends strongly on economic parameters, and its value is important
for both grassroots design and retrofit. Estimating capital costs is
usually a time-consuming procedure. However, it is possible to use
150
160
160
80
45
10
190
140 140
120
80 45 45 10
40
Unit
Feed
H
3
H
1
H
2
H
2
H
1
H
3
T
H
Reactor
FIGURE 12.5 Obtaining rough data from owsheet heat loads and
temperatures.
291
approximate methods (Taal et al., 2003) at the initial design stage,
when little is known about the types of heat transfer units to be used,
the ultimate design, the materials required, or the temperature,
pressure, and composition of streams. The estimates so derived will
usually suffice until the final detailed design cost date, at which time
information is obtained from selected manufacturers. Note, however,
that equipment cost may vary regionally and may also be related to
market conditions (e.g., a large customer can secure discounts, and
prices fall during a recession).
It is much more difficult to establish operating cost, which is
affected by labor, taxation, and so forth but is mainly a function of
energy cost. Here the most obvious problemand greatest potential
pitfallis using the current price of energy. (It is possible to find
110 110 70 20
Storage
70
Storage
20
Cooler Cooler
FIGURE 12.6 Soft data for streams leaving a plant.
T
T
T
T
Decrease ()
Hot Stream
Decrease ()
Cold Stream
Increase (+)
Cold Stream
Increase (+)
Hot Stream
Reduced Cold
Utility Target
Reduced Cold
Utility Target
Reduced Hot
Utility Target
Reduced Hot
Utility Target
H
H H
H
FIGURE 12.7 The plus-minus principle can be used to optimize application
targets by using properly extracted soft data.

292
many publications and projects where this rule was not followed.) It
is better to use the anticipated average energy price for the life span
of the plant or, in the case of a retrofit, for the payback period. The
problem then becomes one of estimating this future energy price for
periods that may be as long as five or ten years. It has been shown
(see, e.g., Kleme and Bulatov, 2001; Donnelly, Kleme, and Perry,
2005) that even the forecasts of highly qualified experts are frequently
inaccurate. One of the obvious potential approaches is to use the
scenarios and target the most flexible design that would provide a
balanced optimum for various situations.
12.2 Integration of Renewables: Fluctuating
Demand and Supply
The integration of renewable energy sources was discussed in
Chapter 6. Renewable resources are usually available on a smaller
scale and are often distributed over a certain region. Their availability
(with the exception of biomass) varies significantly with time and
location. This variability is due to changing weather and geographic
conditions. The energy demands (heating, cooling, and power) of
sites also vary significantly with time of the day and period of the
year. These variations in the supply and demand of renewables can
be predicted in part, and some of the variation is fairly regularfor
instance, day versus night in predominantly cloudless areas for solar
energy. The availability of wind-generated energy can be less
predictable. One approach to dealing with these problems is the
advanced PI technique that employs time as an additional problem
dimension. A basic methodology along these lines (involving Time
Slices and Time Average Composite Curves) was developed for the
Heat Integration of batch processes (Kleme et al., 1994; Kemp and
Deakin, 1998). This methodology was recently revisited by Foo,
Chew, and Lee (2008).
This methodology has also been extended to the Heat Integration
of renewables. Important steps in this direction were reported by
Perry, Kleme, and Bulatov (2008) and Varbanov and Kleme (2010).
Dealing with variation and fluctuation brought another complexity
into data extraction. Data should be collected for all time slices that
increase the complexity. Especially, for each case, it is necessary to
choose the time horizon for the analysis and number of time slices.
This is a fast-developing field, so it is advisable to monitor recently
published research papers and conference presentations.
12.3 Steady-State and Dynamic Performance
It has been assumed that all analyzed and optimized processes
operate in a steady state. Many industrial processes do operate in this
293
fashion, and a common control task is to maintain such processes in a
steady state. However, there are also many situations in which the
working regime must be changed. This occurs not only at start-up
and shutdown but also in response to changes in operating conditions
(e.g., outside temperatures) and production conditions (e.g., capacity,
volume). Problems involving such variation are generally addressed
in one of two ways: (1) accommodating various scenarios via a design
objective of minimizing sensitivity to the possible changes or
(2) designing to optimize the total systems overall dynamic
performance. The second option is much more complicated and
requires more time and resources; hence it is used only when
substantial deviations from steady-state operations are anticipated.
12.4 Interpreting Results
After data extraction, the most important aspect of PI analysis and
optimization is the correct interpretation of results. These results are
typically presented in the form of a printout generated by some
software tool; in most cases, the software output is in the form of
a grid diagram (e.g., STAR, 2009) or PFD supported by printout
tablesas with ASPEN (AspenTech, 2009a, 2009b, 2009c) and
gPROMS (PSE, 2009). In order to minimize typos and misinterpretation,
many software tools feature an interface that facilitates the transfer
of data files. This technology is now fairly well developed.
The most challenging aspect of data interpretation is assessing
the results in terms of possible further development or correction of
the important process features. The interpretation will depend on the
extent to which the factors mentioned previously (i.e., data uncertainty,
data softness, flexibility, operability, controllability, safety, availability,
and maintenance) have already been incorporated into the data
extraction. If the data extraction did not reflect these considerations,
then they must be addressed during the data interpretation. At this
stage, the close collaboration of a team that includes the main involved
professionals is highly recommended.
Designers are strongly advised not to stick with just one solution
but rather to explore different potential scenarios associated with
various operating conditions and then test their designs sensitivity
to the possible variations. For screening and scoping it is helpful to
use all types of Composite Curves as well as information (if provided
by software) on which streams are contributing to specific parts of
the curves.
12.5 Making It Happen
Even when a sustainable and near-optimum design is developed,
it must still be put into practice. This involves selling the

294
proposalswhich are often unconventionalto plant management,
investors, and contractors. This was a big problem when PI was just
beginning, and great strides in this area were made by UMIST, Bodo
Linnhoff, and his company Linnhoff March in the 1980s and 1990s.
PI has since proven itself and gained in popularity, so decision
makers have become more receptive.
Much of the situations improvement is due to multinational
companies that have incorporated PI into their design and operational
practice. Because the methodology has become widespread, it is not
possible to list all of these companies. However, among the pioneers
were members of the UMIST and, after the merger, the University of
Manchester Process Integration Research Consortium: Air Products,
Aspen, BASF, Bayer, BOC, BP, Canmet, Degussa, EDF, Engineers
India, Exxon Mobil, Hydro, IFP, JGC, KBC, Mitsubishi Chemical
Corporation, MOL, MW Kellogg, Petrobras, Petroleum Research
Centre, Petrom, Petronas, Saudi Aramco, Shell, Sinopec, Technip,
Total, UOP, and Vito. These firms were joined in the consortium by
several universities, including University POLITEHNICA Bucharest
and Petronas Technological University.
There have also been strong supporters of PI in the United
States, both at universities and in the industry; some of them are
listed in Chapter 13. A major goal remains a close collaboration and
smooth joint effort among PI specialists and the designers,
managers, and owners (or contractors) of processing plants. A
projects best chance of success is when all these stakeholders share
the goal of developing an optimized and sustainable process.
CHAPTER 13
Information Sources
and Further Reading
T
here are various sources of information on optimization and
integration in the process industry. The aim of this chapter is
to summarize many of these sources, although their number is
growing rapidly. No such list could be fully comprehensive, but
every attempt has been made to include the most important sources
of information.
The chapter is divided into five sections as follows: (1) general
sources of information, (2) Heat Integration, (3) Mass Integration,
(4) combined analysis, and (5) optimization for sustainable industry.
Within each section, listings are further divided into four groups:
conferences, journals, service providers, and projects. A listing is
repeated when the information is relevant to more than one category;
this makes searching more efficient for users.
13.1 General Sources of Information
13.1.1 Conferences
Conferences that address Process Integration (PI) approaches to
minimizing the use of energy, water, and other resources can be
sorted into three groups. The first group consists of conferences that
are directly related to energy and resource minimization.
Process Integration, Modelling and Optimisation for Energy
Saving and Pollution Reduction (PRES), organized annually
since 1998, <www.conferencepres.com>
European Symposium on Computer Aided Process
Engineering (ESCAPE), organized annually since 1992,
<www.cape-wp.eu>
295

296
C h a p t e r T h i r t e e n
AIChE International Congress on Sustainability Science and
Engineering (ICOSSE), organized since 2009, <www.aiche.
org/IFS/Conferences/index.aspx>
Dubrovnik Conference on Sustainable Development of
Energy, Water and Environment Systems (SDEWES),
organized biannually since 2002, <www.sdewes.fsb.hr>
Italian Conference on Chemical and Process Engineering
(ICheaP), organized biannually since 1993, <www.aidic.it/
italiano/pubblicazioni/confse.htm>
Europe Energy Efficiency Conference, <www.esv.or.at/esv/
index.php?id=1484&L=1>
The second group includes large conferences organized
throughout the world and for which PI topics are part of their
scientific programs.
AIChE annual and spring meetings, specialty conferences,
and cosponsored conferences, <www.aiche.org/Conferences>
European Congress of Chemical Engineering (ECCE),
organized biennially
Chemical Engineering, Chemical Equipment Design and
Automation (CHISA), organized biennially since 1962 (odd
years), <www.chisa.cz>
World Congress of Chemical Engineering,<www.wcce8.org/
index.html> (the 9th World Congress of Chemical
Engineering, incorporating the 14th APCChE Congress, will
be held in 2013)
World Bioenergy, <www.elmia.se/worldbioenergy/>
World Sustainable Energy Days, <www.wsed.at>
World Renewable Energy Congress: Innovation in Europe,
<www.wrenuk.co.uk>
The third group of conferences includes those dealing with
specific issues (food processing, pulp and paper, etc.) and at which
energy and resource efficiency are addressed as special cases.
Total Food, organized biennially, <www.ifr.ac.uk/totalfood
2009>
TAPPI EPE (Engineering, Pulping and Environmental)
Conference, organized annually, <www.tappiepe.org>
CLIMA Congress, official congress of the Federation of
European Heating and Air-Conditioning Societies (REHVA),
<www.clima2010.org>
I n f o r m a t i o n S o u r c e s a n d F u r t h e r R e a d i n g
297
13.1.2 Journals
There are many journals that cover topics related to energy, water,
and resource minimization from the Process Integration standpoint;
just a few of them are listed (alphabetically) here.
Chemical Engineering Transactions, <www.aidic.it/cet>
Journal of Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, <www.
springer.com/environment/sustainable+development/journal/
10098>
Journal of Cleaner Production, <www.elsevier.com/wps/find/
journaldescription.cws_home/30440/description#description>
Resources, Conservation & Recycling, <www.elsevier.com/
wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/503358/description
#description>
13.1.3 Service Providers
The following alphabetical list includes service providers as well as
professional bodies and networks.
ADAS, Inside and Solutions, Woodthorne, Wergs Rd.,
Wolverhampton, WV6 8TQ, UK, <www.adas.co.uk/contact/
index.html>
Artie McFerrin Department of Chemical Engineering, Texas
A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA, <www.che.
tamu.edu>, contact person: Mahmoud M. El-Halwagi
AspenTech, Aspen Technology, Inc., 200 Wheeler Rd.,
Burlington, MA 01803, USA, <www.aspentech.com>
Dansk Energi Analyse A/S, <www.dea.dk>
Department of Chemical Engineering, Auburn University,
212 Ross Hall, Auburn University, AL 36849-5127, USA, <eng.
auburn.edu/programs/chen/about/index.html>
BIS, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, UK,
<www.bis.gov.uk>
Centre for Advanced Process Decision-Making, Carnegie
Mellon University, Department of Chemical Engineering,
5000 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA, <capd.cheme.
cmu.edu>
Center for Engineering and Sustainable Development
Research, De La Salle University, Manila, 2401 Taft Avenue,
1004 Manila, Philippines, <www.dlsu.edu.ph/research/
centers/cesdr/strg.asp>, contact person: Raymond Tan
Centre for Process Integration, School of Chemical
Engineering and Analytical Science, The University of

298
Manchester (formerly UMIST), Manchester, M13 9PL, UK,
<www.ceas.manchester.ac.uk/research/researchcentres/
centreforprocessintegration>, contact person: Robin Smith
Centre for Process Integration and Intensification (CPI
2
),
European Community Project Marie Curie Chair (EXC)
MEXC-CT-2003-042618 INEMAGLOW, Research Institute of
Chemical and Process Engineering, Faculty of Information
Technology, University of Pannonia, Egyetem u.10, Veszprem,
H-8200, Hungary, <inemaglow.dcs.uni-pannon.hu>, contact
person: Ji Kleme
Centre for Process Systems Engineering, Imperial College
London, C507 Roderic Hill Bldg., South Kensington Campus,
London, UK, <www3.imperial.ac.uk/centreforprocess
systemsengineering>, contact person: Efstratios Pistikopoulos
Centre for Technology Transfer in the Process Industries,
University POLITEHNICA Bucharest, 1 Polizu St., Bldg. A,
RO-011061, Bucharest, Romania, <www.chim.upb.ro/CTTPI>,
contact person: Valentin Pleu
Charles Parsons Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick,
Ireland, <www2.ul.ie/web/WWW/Faculties/Science_%26_
Engineering/Research/Research_Institutes/CPI>, contact
person: Toshko Zhelev
Chiyoda Corporation, Energy Frontier Business Development
Office, 2-12-1 Tsurumichuo, Tsurumi-ku, Yokohama 230-8601,
Japan, <www.chiyoda-corp.com/en>, contact person: Kazuo
Matsuda
COWI A/S, Parallelvej 2, DK-2800, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark,
tel. +45 45 97 22 11, <www.cowi.com/>, cowi@cowi.dk
DEFRA, Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs, UK, <www.defra.gov.uk>
Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering,
University of Nottingham Malaysia, Broga Rd., 43500
Semenyih, Selangor, Malaysia, <www.nottingham.edu.
my/Faculties/Engineering/Research/ENV>, contact person:
Dominic Foo
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Maribor,
Smetanova ulica 17, Maribor, Slovenia, <atom.uni-mb.si>,
contact person Zdravko Kravanja
Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Ave., Room 66350,
Cambridge, MA 02139, <web.mit.edu/cheme/index.html>
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Pretoria,
Lynwood Rd., Pretoria 0002, South Africa, <web.up.ac.za/
299
default.asp?ipkCategoryID=2063&language=0>, contact person:
Thoko Majozi
Department of Computer Science and Systems Technology,
Faculty of Information Technology, University of Pannonia,
Egyetem u.10, Veszprem, H-8200, Hungary, <www.dcs.vein.
hu>, contact person: Ferenc Friedler
Department of Energy and Climate Change, UK, <www.
decc.gov.uk>
Department of Energy and Environment, Chalmers University
of Technology, SE-412 96, Gteborg, Sweden, <www.chalmers.
se/ee/EN>, contact person: Thore Berntsson
Energy Information Administration, USA, <www.eia.doe.
gov>
Energy Research Group, School of Science & Engineering,
University of Waikato, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand, <sci.
waikato.ac.nz/atee>, contact person: Martin Atkins
Energy Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, 400076, India, <www.
me.iitb.ac.in>, contact person: Santanu Bandyopadhyay
European Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control
Bureau, producing best available techniques (BAT) reference
documents (aka BREFs), <www.eippcb.jrc.es/pages/
FActivities.htm>
EVECO Brno, Bezinova 42, 616 00 Brno, Czech Republic,
<www.evecobrno.cz/index.php/english>, contact person:
Jaroslav Oral
Fraunhofer Institute for Environmental, Safety and Energy
Technology (UMSICHT), Osterfelder Str., D-46047,
Oberhausen, Germany, <www.umsicht.fraunhofer.de>
Global Footprint Network (Advancing the Science of
Sustainability), 312 Clay St., Suite 300, Oakland, CA 94607-
3510, USA, <www.footprintnetwork.org>, contact person:
Susan Burns
Institute for Scientific Research, University of Guanajuato,
Lascurain de Retana No 5, 36000, Guanajuato, Gto., Mxico,
<www.siia.ugto.mx/cosupera/siac.asp?ID_Des_p=1>, contact
person: Martin Picon-Nuez
Institute of Process and Environmental Engineering, Faculty
of Mechanical Engineering, Brno University of Technology
(UPEI VUT), Brno, Technick 2896/2, 616 69, Brno, Czech
Republic, <www.fme.vutbr.cz/index.html?lang=1>, contact
person: Petr Stehlk

300
International Energy Agency, 9 rue de la Fdration, 75739
Paris Cedex 15, France, <www.iea.org>, contact persons:
Nobuo Tanaka (Executive Director); Richard H. Jones (Deputy
Executive Director)
KBC Energy Services (formerly Linnhoff March), Targeting
House, Gadbrook Park, Northwich, Cheshire CW9 7UZ, UK,
<www.kbcenergyservices.com>
Laboratory for Industrial Energy Systems, Ecole Polytechnique
Federale de Lausanne, Bat. ME A2, Station 9, CH-1015
Lausanne, Switzerland, <leniwww.epfl.ch>, contact person:
Francois Marechal
Lehrstuhl fr Technische Chemie A, Technische Universitt
Dortmund, Fakultt Bio- und Chemieingenieurwesen,
Geschossbau 1, Emil-Figgestr. 66, 44227, Dortmund, Germany,
<www.chemietechnik.uni-dortmund.de/tca/>
Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Universitt Paderborn,
Warburger Str. 100, D-33098, Paderborn, Germany, <www.
uni-paderborn.de>
Process Integration Ltd, One Central Park, Northampton
Road, Manchester, M40 5WW, UK, <www.proint.org>, contact
person: Robin Smith
Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA), <www.
sepa.org.uk>
AO Sodrugestvo-T, NTU KhPI, Frunze Str., 21, 61002,
Kharkov, Ukraine, <www.sodr-t.kharkiv.com>
Thermal Energy, Department of Energy and Process
Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and
Technology, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway, <www.ntnu.no>,
contact person: Truls Gundersen
UK Energy Research Centre, 58 Princes Gate, Exhibition Rd.,
London SW7 2PG, UK, <www.ukerc.ac.uk>
University College London Energy Institute, Central House,
14 Upper Woburn Place, London, WC1H 0HY, UK, <www.
ucl.ac.uk/energy>
U.S. Department of Energy, USA, <www.energy.gov>
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk
Management Research Lab/USEPA, 26 W. M.L. King Dr.,
Cincinnati, OH 45268, USA, <www.ep,a.gov>, contact person:
Subhas K. Sikdar
Warsaw University of Technology, Pock Campus, Warsaw,
Poland, <www.pw.plock.pl>, contact person: Krzysztof
Urbaniec
301
13.1.4 Projects
There have been hundreds of projects related to these general
concerns. Several typical projects that are publicly available are listed
in subsequent sections dealing with specific applications (13.2.4,
13.3.4, 13.4.4, 13.5.4).
13.2 Heat Integration
13.2.1 Conferences
Dubrovnik Conference on Sustainable Development of
Energy, Water and Environment Systems (SDEWES),
organized biennially since 2002, <www.sdewes.fsb.hr>
13.2.2 Journals
Applied Thermal Engineering, <www.elsevier.com/wps/find/
Energy, <www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.
cws_home/483/description#description>
Heat Transfer Engineering, <www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/
01457632.asp>
Renewable Energy, <www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journal
description.cws_home/969/description#description>
American Process Inc., 817 West Peachtree St., Suite M105,
Atlanta, GA 30308, USA [also offices in Athens (Greece), and
Cluj-Napoca (Romania)], <www.americanprocess.com>,
contact person: Theodora Retsina
Centre for Process Integration, School of Chemical
Engineering and Analytical Science, The University of
Manchester (formerly UMIST), Manchester, Oxford Rd., M13
9PL, UK, <www.ceas.manchester.ac.uk/research/research

302
centres/centreforprocessintegration/>, contact person: Robin
Smith
2
),
Research Institute of Chemical and Process Engineering,
Egyetem u.10, Veszprem, H-8200, Hungary, <inemaglow.
dcs.uni-pannon.hu>, contact person: Ji Kleme
Chemical Process Engineering Research Institute (CPERI),
Center for Research and Technology-Hellas (CERTH), PO
Box 361,Thermi Thessaloniki, Greece, <www.cperi.certh.gr/
en/cperi.htm>
Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering,
Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Sltofts Plads, Bldg.
229, DK-2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark, <www.kt.dtu.dk/
English/Forskning.aspx>
Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, Rzeszow
University of Technology, al. Powstacw Warszawy 6,
35959 Rzeszw, Poland, <portal.prz.edu.pl/en/>, contact
person: Jacek Jeowski
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Monash,
PO Box 36, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia, <www.eng.
monash.edu.au/chemical>
Department of Energy and Environment, Chalmers
University of Technology, SE-412 96, Gteborg, Sweden,
<www.chalmers.se/ee/EN>, contact person: Thore Berntsson
Energy Research Group, School of Science & Engineering,
University of Waikato, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand, <sci.
waikato.ac.nz/atee>, contact person: Martin Atkins
Energy Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, 400076, India, <www.
me.iitb.ac.in>, contact person: Santanu Bandyopadhyay
EVECO Brno, Bezinova 42, 616 00 Brno, Czech Republic,
<www.evecobrno.cz/index.php/english>, contact person:
Jaroslav Oral
Faculty of Technology, Lappeenranta University of
Technology, P.O.Box 20, FIN-53851 Lappeenranta, Finland,
<www.lut.fi>
Institute of Process and Environmental Engineering, Faculty
of Mechanical Engineering, Brno University of Technology
303
(UPEI VUT), Brno, Technick 2896/2, 616 69, Brno, Czech
Republic, Contact person: Petr Stehlk, <www.fme.vutbr.cz/
index.html?lang=1>, contact person: Petr Stehlk
Laboratory for Analysis and Synthesis of Chemical Systems,
Institut de Chimie-Btiment B6, Sart Tilman, 4000 Lige,
Belgium, <www.lassc.ulg.ac.be>
Lausanne, Switzerland, <leniwww.epfl.ch>, contact person:
Francois Marechal
Process Design Center (PDC), B.V. Catharinastraat 21f,
NL-4811 XD Breda, The Netherlands, <www.keuken.
com/1.0-general.htm>
person: Robin Smith
AO Sodrugestvo-T, NTU KhPI, Frunze Str., 21, 61002,
Kharkov, Ukraine, <www.sodr-t.kharkiv.com>
Thermal Energy, Department of Energy and Process
Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and
Technology, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway, <www.ntnu.no>,
contact person: Truls Gundersen
Management Research Lab/USEPA, 26 W. M.L. King Dr.,
Cincinnati, OH 45268, USA, <www.epa.gov>, contact person:
Subhas K. Sikdar
VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, PO Box 1000, FI-
02044 VTT, Finland, <www.vtt.fi>
Warsaw University of Technology, Pock Campus, Warsaw,
Poland, <www.pw.plock.pl>, contact person: Krzysztof
Urbaniec
13.2.4 Projects
TOTAL SITE, European Community Non-Nuclear Energy
Programme Research & Technology Development Project
JOULE II PL920520, Targeting and Planning for Reduction
of Fuel, Power and CO2 on Total Sites
EMINENT 2, Early Market Introduction of New Energy
Technologies in Liaison with Science and Industry, <www.
eminentproject.com>

304
EUBIONET 3, Solutions for Biomass Fuel Market Barriers
and Raw Material Availability, <www.eubionet.net>
PEPNET, Network for the Promotion of RTD Results in the
Field of Eco-building Technologies, Small Polygeneration
and Renewable Heating and Cooling Technologies for
Buildings, <www.proecopolynet.net>
European Community Project JOULE II PL930287,
Methodology for Optimisation of Operation Site-Scale
Energy Used in Production Plants
European Community Project JOULE II PL 930485, Process
Integration with Combined Heat and Power
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ernest Orlando
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Energy Efficiency
Improvement and Cost Saving Opportunities for Petroleum
Refineries, An ENERGY STAR

Guide for Energy and Plant
Managers (by E. Worell & C. Galitsky), LBNL-56183
U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Ultra-Low-Emission, Integrated Process
Heater System, <www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/combustion/
pdfs/processheatersystem.pdf>, accessed 22 December 2009;
Bob Gremmer, High-Efficiency Technology Manager, 1000
Independent Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, USA
Development of an Advanced Combined Heat and Power
(CHP) System Utilizing Off-Gas from Coke Calcination,
Utilization of Process Off-Gas as a Fuel for Improved Energy
Efficiency, <www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/distributed
energy/pdfs/coke_calcination.pdf>, accessed 22 December
2009; project partners: Yaroslav Chudnovsky, Gas Technology
Institute (GTI), Des Plaines, IL; Mark Zak, Superior Graphite
Co. (SGC), Chicago, IL
13.3 Mass Integration
13.3.1 Conference
Loss Prevention and Safety Promotion in the Process Industries,
organized triennially, <conf.ti.kviv.be/Lossprevention2010>
13.3.2 Journals
springer.com/environment/sustainable+development/
journal/10098>
305
Journal of Cleaner Production, <www.elsevier.com/wps/find/
Resources, Conservation & Recycling, <www.elsevier.com/wps/
find/journaldescription.cws_home/503358/description
#description>
Transactions of the IChemE, UK
American Process Inc., 817 West Peachtree St., Suite M105,
Atlanta, GA 30308, USA, [also offices in Athens (Greece) and
Cluj-Napoca (Romania)], <www.americanprocess.com>,
contact person: Theodora Retsina
Centre for Process Integration, School of Chemical Engineering
and Analytical Science, The University of Manchester
(formerly UMIST), Manchester, Oxford Rd., M13 9PL, UK,
centreforprocessintegration/>, contact person: Robin Smith
2
),
MEXC-CT-2003042618 INEMAGLOW, Research Institute of
Technology, University of Pannonia, Egyetem u.10, Veszprem,
Person: Ji Kleme
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Monash,
PO Box 36, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia, <www.eng.
monash.edu.au/chemical>
person: Robin Smith
School of Chemical and Environmental Engineering,

306
Semenyih, Selangor, Malaysia, <www.nottingham.edu.my/
Faculties/Engineering/Chemical/Pages/default.aspx>,
contact person: Dominic Foo
VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, PO Box 1000, FI-
02044 VTT, Finland, <www.vtt.fi>
Water Footprint Network, University of Twente, UNESCO-
IHE, RIVM, <www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/Contact>,
contact person: A.Y. Hoekstra
13.3.4 Projects
Assessing Collaborative and Integrated Water Management
in the Maitland River Watershed, University of Guelph,
Ontario, Canada, <sustsci.aaas.org/content.html?listed=
1&contentid=2061>
European Community Programme JOULE III PL950749,
Water Pinch: Simultaneous Energy and Water Use
Minimisation
AWARNET (Agro-food Wastes Minimisation and Reduction
Network), project involving various aspects of waste
minimization and energy, EC GROWTH, GRD1-CT2000-28033
(de las Fuentes, Sanders, and Kleme, 2002), <www.cordis.lu/
data/PROJ_FP5/ACTIONeqDndSESSIONeq112242005919nd
DOCeq154ndTBLeqEN_PROJ.htm>, accessed 10 December
2005
EU INCO Project ERB IC18-CT98-0271, Intelligent
Management System for Water and Energy Minimisation in
Latin American Food Industries WATERMAN
Waste Minimisation for the Process Industry: New
Researchers Fund, University of Nottingham Malaysia,
May 2006April 2009
13.4 Combined Analysis
13.4.1 Conferences
307
13.4.2 Journals
Applied Thermal Engineering, <www.elsevier.com/wps/find/
Chemical Engineering and Processing, <www.elsevier.com/
wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/504081/description#
description>
Chemical Engineering Science, <www.elsevier.com/wps/
find/journaldescription.cws_home/215/description#description>
Chemical Engineering Transactions, <www.aidic.it/cet/>
Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, <www.elsevier.com/
wps/find/bookdescription.cws_home/BS_CCE/description
#description>
Ecological Modelling, <www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journal
Energy, <www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.
cws_home/483/description#description>
springer.com/environment/sustainable+development/journal/
10098>
Journal of Cleaner Production, <www.elsevier.com/wps/
find/journaldescription.cws_home/30440/description#
description>
Renewable Energy, <www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journal
Resources, Conservation & Recycling, <www.elsevier.com/
#description>
Waste Management, <www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journal
Centre for Process Integration, School of Chemical Engineering
and Analytical Science, The University of Manchester
(formerly UMIST), Manchester, Oxford Rd., M13 9PL, UK,
centreforprocessintegration/>, contact person: Robin Smith
2
),

308
MEXC-CT-2003-042618 INEMAGLOW, Research Institute of
Technology, University of Pannonia, Egyetem u.10, Veszprm,
Person: Ji Kleme
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of
Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA, <www.ecs.umass.edu/
~chemeng>
Hebling Technik, Hohlstr. 614, CH-8048 Zurich, Switzerland,
<www.helbling.ch/htk>
Process Integration Ltd, One Central Park, Northampton Road,
Manchester, M40 5WW, UK, <www.proint.org>, contact
person: Robin Smith
School of Chemical and Environmental Engineering,
Semenyih, Selangor, Malaysia, <www.nottingham.edu.my/
Faculties/Engineering/Chemical/Pages/default.aspx>,
contact person: Dominic Foo
13.4.4 Projects
AVICENNE, Integrated Concept for the Fermentation of
Sewage Sludge and Organic Waste as a Source of Renewable
Energy and for Use of the Fermented Products as a Hygienic
Fertiliser and Soil Improver, AVI*94005, Universitt Stuttgart,
Germany, 1997
ANDI-POWER-CIFRU, An Anaerobic Digestion Power Plant
for Citrus Fruit Residues, FP5 EESD NNE5/364/
2000, Envisec S.A., Greece, 2004, <www.cordis.lu/data/
PROJ_EESD/ACTIONeqDndSESSIONeq7826200595nd
DOCeq1ndTBLeqEN_PROJ.htm>, accessed 14 March 2006
Biogas by Bioaugment, Optimized Biogas Production and
Resource Recovery through Bio-Augmentation in a Joint
Plant Treating Poultry and Pig Waste, NNE5/46/1999, Centro
para a Conservaao de Energia, Praceta 1, 2720-537 Amadora,
Portugal, <www.cordis.lu/data/PROJ_EESD/ACTIONeq
DndSESSIONeq7826200595ndDOCeq4ndTBLeqEN_PROJ.
htm>, accessed 14 March 2006
DEP-PROJECT, Power Plant Based on Fluidized Bed Fired
with Poultry Litter, FP5 NNE5/75/1999, 2003, Energy
Systems BV, De Vest 51, Postbus 218, 5555 XP Valkenswaard,
309
Netherlands, <www.cordis.lu/data/PROJ_EESD/ACTIONeq
DndSESSIONeq7826200595ndDOCeq13ndTBLeqEN_PROJ.
htm>, accessed 14 March 2006
Development of a CHP Process Using Grease and Oil Waste
from Plants and Animals, FP5 EESD ENK5 CT-2000-35008,
Sud recuperation Sarl, France, 2001, <www.cordis.lu/data/
PROJ_EESD/ACTIONeqDndSESSIONeq26119200595
ndDOCeq216ndTBLeqEN_PROJ.htm>, accessed 14 March
2006
Development of Property Integration Techniques for Waste
Minimisation, Ministry of Science, Technology and
Innovation, Malaysia University of Nottingham Malaysia,
September 2007August 2009
INEMAGLOW European Community Project MARIE CURIE
CHAIR (EXC) MEXC-CT-2003-042618 Integrated Waste to
Energy Management to Prevent Global Warming, <inemaglow.
dcs.vein.hu>
Project SUCLEAN, Research on Minimization of Energy
and Water Use in Sugar Production by Cooling Crystallization
of Concentrated Raw Juice, IC15960734, <cordis.europa.eu.
int/inco/fp4/projects/ACTIONeqDndSESSIONeq6118200595
ndDOCeq42ndTBLeqEN_PROJ.htm>, accessed 10 December
2005
WREED, Development of an Energy Efficient to Reduce the
Cost of Drying Food and Feed Waste, FP5 EESD ENK6-
CT2001-30002, Ceramic Drying Systems Ltd, UK, 2004, <cordis.
europa.eu/search/index.cfm?fuseaction=acro.document&
AC_LANG=EN&AC_RCN=5264809&pid=0&q=147D222710D
BDE0DC2BE8C48AD190162&type=sim>, accessed 3 May 2010
Western Renewable Energy Zones, a joint initiative of the
Western Governors Association and U.S. Department of Energy,
<www.westgov.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=ar
ticle&id=219&Itemid=81>, accessed 29 December 2009
Flexible Distributed Energy and Water from Waste for the
Food and Beverage Industry, General Electric, <www1.eere.
energy.gov/industry/distributedenergy/pdfs/water_to_
waste.pdf>, accessed 29 December 2009
13.5 Optimization for Sustainable Industry
13.5.1 Conferences
AIChE meetings, organized twice annually in the United
States, <www.aiche.org>

310
European Symposium on Computer Aided Process
Engineering (ESCAPE), organized annually since 1992, <www.
cape-wp.eu>
AIChE International Congress on Sustainability Science and
Engineering (ICOSSE), organized since 2009, <aiche.confex.
com/aiche/>
13.5.2 Journals
AIChE Journal, <www.aiche.org/Publications/AIChEJournal/
index.aspx>
Chemical Engineering and Processing, <www.elsevier.com/
#description>
Chemical Engineering Science, <www.elsevier.com/wps/find/
journaldescription.cws_home/215/description>
Chemical Engineering Transactions, <www.aidic.it/cet>
Computers & Chemical Engineering, <www.elsevier.com/wps/
find/journaldescription.cws_home/349/description>
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, <pubs.acs.org/
journal/iecred>
Journal of the Chinese Institute of Chemical Engineers, <www.
elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/712103/
description>
Journal of Universal Computer Science, <www.jucs.org>
Advanced Process Combinatorics, Inc., Purdue Technology
Center, 3000 Kent Ave., West Lafayette, IN 47906, USA,
<www.combination.com>
Centre for Process Systems Engineering, Imperial College
London, C507 Roderic Hill Bldg., South Kensington Campus,
London, UK, <www3.imperial.ac.uk/centreforprocesssy
stemsengineering>, contact person: Efstratios Pistikopoulos
Computer-Aided Systems Laboratory, Department of
Chemical Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton,
NJ 08544 USA, <titan.princeton.edu/>, Contact person
Christodoulos A. Floudas
Department of Computer Science and Systems Technology,
311
Egyetem u.10, Veszprm, H-8200, Hungary, <www.dcs.vein.
hu>, contact person: Ferenc Friedler
Honeywell, 300-250 York St., London, Ontario, N6A 6K2
Canada, <www.honeywell.com>
Lausanne, Switzerland, <leniwww.epfl.ch/>, contact person:
Francois Marechal
Process Integration Ltd, One Central Park, Northampton Road,
Manchester, M40 5WW, UK, <www.proint.org>, contact person:
Robin Smith
School of Chemical Engineering, Purdue University, Forney
Hall of Chemical Engineering, 480 Stadium Mall Dr., West
Lafayette, IN 47907, <engineering.purdue.edu/ChE/index.
html>
Management Research Lab/USEPA,26 W. M.L. King Dr.,
Cincinnati, OH 45268, USA, <www.epa.gov>, contact person:
Heriberto Cabezas
13.5.4 Projects
ZEROWIN, Towards Zero Waste in Industrial Networks,
Austrian Society for Systems Engineering and Automation,
Gurkgasse 43/2, A-1140 Vienna, Austria, <www.zerowin.eu>
EMINENT 2, Early Market Introduction of New Energy
Technologies in Liaison with Science and Industry, <www.
eminentproject.com>
PRISM, Knowledge-Based Processing Systems, FP6 MC
Human Resources Project (Prof. E. Pistikopoulos, coordinator),
Imperial College of Science Technology and Medicine,
London, UK, <www.cpi.umist.ac.uk/prism/>
CHAPTER 14
Conclusions and
Further Information
T
he two options when writing this book were either to make it
fully comprehensive or to present selected material while
directing the reader to sources of further information. The
first option would have resulted in a book of more than a thousand
pages, so it was decided to keep the book compact and thus accessible
to a wider audience. This chapter supplies additional references to
provide guidelines for more detailed and comprehensive studies.
14.1 Further Reading
Chapter 13 gives an overview of places to find more information. Of
course, the most recent information is found in archive research
papers and proceedings from related conferences. However, the
number of research papers has been increasing, and many of them
are dedicated to rather specialized matters. For this reason, it is often
useful for a potential user of the methodology to have some material
for further reading: guidebooks, handbooks, and teaching texts. The
reader should bear in mind that even the most excellent books are
only as current as their date of publication. No book can cover
methodology developed subsequent to its printing.
14.1.1 Books and Key Articles
Process Integration
The most well-known and perhaps most referenced book on Process
Integration (PI) is A User Guide on Process Integration for the Efficient
Use of Energy (Linnhoff et al., 1982). This red book, authored by a
team led by Bodo Linnhoff, was updated for an extended second
edition in 1994. Although it was published a long time ago, it remains
an excellent vehicle for teaching and learning about Heat Integration
and several other PI applications, providing the reader with a
smooth and understandable learning path.
313

314
C h a p t e r F o u r t e e n
Valuable references for engineers (as well as for teachers and
students) are the books authored by Robin Smith, Linnhoffs
successor to head of the Department of Process Integration at UMIST
andafter the university merged to become the University of
Manchesterdirector of the Centre for Process Integration. Smith
published two books: the first in 1995 and a new version in 2005 that
included more recent developments. Ian Kemp undertook the task
of developing the second (1994) edition of Linnhoffs red book, and
in 2007 he published an updated and extended version. Some of
UMIST legacy course materials (CPI, 2004 and 2005) were used in
that book (Kemp, 2007), which also includes spreadsheet software
available as a web annex. A handy guidebook entitled A Process
Integration Primer was developed by Gundersen (2000) with support
from the International Energy Agency.
Shenoy (1995) described the application of Heat Integration
methodology to Heat Exchanger Network synthesis. Furman and
Sahinidis (2002) presented a comprehensive review of 461 published
works (through the year 2000) on heat exchanger synthesis, although
this article is rife with misspelled non-English names (e.g., Kleme
was rendered as Klemebvs). More recently, Sieniutycz and Jeowski
(2009) authored a book dedicated to PI and energy optimization
methods.
In addition, a number of books (and chapters of books) have
resulted from the collaboration between Centre for Process
Integration at the University of Manchester and a Centre for Process
Integration and Intensification (CPI
2
), recently created at the
University of Pannonia. Key staff members of CPI
2
gained much of
their experience at UMIST, and the two centers have been close
collaborators. Chapters have been published in handbooks related
to energy and to the management of water and waste in food
processing, and the material provided includes advanced
methodology in addition to a number of case studies. This material
can be found in Kleme and Perry (2007a, 2007b) and in Kleme,
Smith, and Kim (2008). The water footprints connection to water
integration was examined in a chapter from Kleme, Varbanov, and
Lam (2009), and combining PI with state-of-the-art methods for the
recovery of organic materials from process water in the food industry
was discussed by Napper, Kim, and Bulatov (2009) in their chapter
of that same handbook. Carbon footprint and its relation to energy
efficiency are analyzed in a chapter of Kleme, Bulatov, and Perry
(2008).
Substantial developments in the field of mass integration have
been reported by Mahmud El-Halwagi and colleagues; in particular,
the synthesis of mass exchange networks (MENs) was reviewed by
El-Halwagi (1997, 1999), El-Halwagi and Spriggs (1998), and Spriggs
and El-Halwagi (2000). This information is also available in the book
C o n c l u s i o n s a n d F u r t h e r I n f o r m a t i o n
315
form (El-Halwagi, 2006). A fast-developing group at the Malaysian
campus of the University of Nottingham has compiled a new book
edited by Dominic Foo and his colleagues (Foo, El-Halwagi, and Tan,
2010). An overview of capital cost targeting for MEN synthesis was
provided by Fraser and Hallale (2000a, 2000b), and the application of
Mathematical Programming to MEN synthesis was reviewed by
Galan and Grossmann (1999) and Grossmann, Caballero, and
Yeomans (1999).
Optimization and Optimal Design of Industrial Processes
Several books covering these topics were published in the late 1980s
and the 1990s. Although much time has passed since then, the basics
of optimization are still valid. Texts that are worth mentioning
include Conceptual Design of Chemical Processes (Douglas, 1988),
Nonlinear and Mixed-Integer Optimization: Fundamentals and Applications
(Floudas, 1995), and Systematic Methods of Chemical Process Design
(Biegler, Grossman, and Westerberg, 1997). The book by Bumble
(1999) also provides useful information.
A series of books have been published on process system
engineering, including titles by Seferlis and Georgiadis (2004),
Papageorgiou and Geogiadis (2007a, 2007b), Pistikopoulos, Georgiadis,
and Dua (2007a, 2007b), and Georgiadis, Kikkinides, and Pistikopoulos
(2008). Along with extensive information on process costing, the well-
known Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers (Peters,
Timmerhaus, and West, 2003) contains a wealth of knowledge on
optimization methodologies, including P-graph basics.
14.1.2 Lecture Notes and Online Teaching Resources
Teaching materials and training courses covering the various
aspects of PI have been developed for many years at UMIST and
The University of Manchester. These materials are based on more
than 25 years research and are continuously updated by the Process
Integration Research Consortium. The material has been used as a
basis for a number of books in the field; for example, some of it was
referenced in CPI (2004 and 2005). It also has been supported by
such PI software as SPRINT (2009), STAR (2009), WATER (2009), and
WORK (2009). The training courses were closely developed with
Linnhoff March (1998) to produce Introduction to Pinch Technology,
which later developed independently. Another well-known source
of teaching materials is A Process Integration Primer (Gundersen,
2000), which provides a comprehensive overview of the period up
to year 2000. Teaching materials are also included in Energy and
Process Integration (Georgiadis and Pistikopoulos, 2006).
Many other teaching resources have either been developed
in-house or been tailor-made for specific fields such as the pulp and
paper industry, oil refining industry, and the sugar industry.

316
14.2 Development Trends
At the 2009 PRES conference, development trends in PI, optimization,
and Mathematical Programming as tools for sustainability in
process industries were reviewed by Friedler (2009, 2010). Some of
these trends are discussed in this section.
14.2.1 Top-Level Analysis
A typical industrial site comprises different process production units
linked to a common utility system. The centralized utility system
meets the demands for heat and power, creating indirect links
between the processes. Considerable amounts of steam can often be
saved by optimizing and retrofitting site processes and their heat
exchanger networks (Dhole and Linnhoff, 1993a; Asante and Zhu,
1997). Although such projects might have the potential to save steam
at different pressure levels, they may not always save costs or even
fuel. Moreover, steam at a given level of pressure can have different
prices depending on how much is saved, despite the common practice
of attributing a single value to steam at a given level. This issue was
first addressed systematically by Makwana and colleagues
(Makwana, 1998; Makwana, Smith, and Zhu, 1998), who provided an
approach to screening energy projects without the need to collect
data from every site process. Instead, their methodology of top-level
analysis required the collection and analysis only of basic data
relating to the central utility system. This approach was based on
comparing current and optional heat flow paths through the utility
system. The procedure provided a good conceptual view of the
problem, but the required number of manual steps and calculations
was not amenable to automation and too complex for application to
real sites. However, an important concept derived from this initial
version of top-level analysis is that, given marginal steam prices, a
small part of the total site can be analyzed to rank the most promising
directions for steam-saving projects. Those marginal steam prices
are key because they can be computed in a different waynamely,
by utility system optimization. This approach led to the development
by Varbanov et al. (2004) of a stepwise optimization procedure that
can be used to determine the true marginal price of steam at different
pressure levels as well as the constraints on steam savings imposed
by the utility system. This approach builds on the optimization
framework for industrial utility systems presented by Varbanov,
Doyle, and Smith (2004), and it enables the analysis of complex utility
systems using automated tools for utility system optimization.
14.2.2 Maintenance Scheduling, Maintainability,
and Reliability
A chief concern of companies and operators is that industrial plants
should operate safely and reliably, with minimal costs for maintenance.
317
Increasing the efficiency of process systems via PI increases the
importance of this issue because PI also increases the interdependence
of the various process modules and subsystems. Cheung and Hui
(2004) proposed a scheme for Total Site maintenance scheduling for
better energy utilization. To minimize the impacts on production
and utility systems during routine maintenance, the scheduling
must be done carefully and with consideration of sitewide utilities
and material balances. The reliability analysis targets maintenance
requirements, cost, availability, and maintainability. The method-
ology described by Yin et al. (2009) considers flexible process design
simultaneously with reliability and risk factors, and the best
solutions are obtained by optimizing the PI. Sikos and Kleme
(2010a, 2010b) applied a combination of HEN optimization and
reliability software packages to develop a methodology with several
advantages over the commonly used approach.
14.2.3 Hybrid Energy Conversion Systems
Energy conversion systems for heat and power generation
traditionally involve only gas and steam turbines. However, the
interest of research and industrial engineers has recently been
attracted by a broader range of technologies: the hybrid energy
conversion systems involving fuel cells (FCs). Especially interesting
are high-temperature fuel cells (HTFCs), which feature electrical
efficiency of 4060 percent (Yamamoto, 2000) compared with
3035 percent for most gas turbines (Gas Turbine World, 2001). There
has been an extensive research aimed at improving the efficiency of
FC systems. Karvountzi, Price, and Duby (2004) compared the
integration of molten carbonate fuel cells (MCFCs) and solid oxide
fuel cells (SOFCs) into hybrid systems. Kurz (2005) focused on the
choice of appropriate gas turbines for the given FCs, and Massardo
and Bosio (2002) studied the MCFC combinations with gas and
steam turbines. One promising option is to integrate the FCs with
bottoming cycles for dedicated power generation or Combined
Heat and Power applications. Varbanov et al. (2006) and Varbanov
and Kleme (2008) studied the benefits of integrating HTFC systems
with steam cycles for purposes of industrial cogeneration. The
results indicate that HTFCs have great potential in terms of economic
viability and a low carbon footprint.
14.2.4 Integration of Renewables and Waste
Most energy systems of industrial, residential, service and business,
agriculture, and production sites continue to use fossil fuels as their
primary energy source. Sites are usually equipped with steam and/
or gas turbines and with steam boilers and water heaters (running on
electricity or gas) as energy conversion units. The challenge of
increasing the share of renewables in the primary energy mix could
be met by integrating solar, wind, biomass, and some types of waste

318
with the fossil fuels. Renewable resources typically feature
availability distributed over certain areas, varying significantly with
time and location.
Another source of variability is the energy demands (for heating,
cooling, and power) of residential and business consumers, which
vary significantly with the time of day and period of the year. (The
notable exception is large-scale industries that operate continuous
processes; in this case, variations are less pronounced and can often
be either neglected or conveniently modeled using multiperiod
optimization.) Furthermore, the variations in consumer energy
demand are not synchronous but instead are displaced in time. For
instance, commercial and office buildings tend to have higher energy
demands during normal business hours, whereas residential
demands tend to increase after business hours.
These factors all make optimizing the design of energy conversion
systems using renewable resources more complex than when using
fossil fuels only. However, combining the supply and demand
streams of individual users may allow such systems to serve
industrial plants as well as residential customers and the service
sector (hotel complexes, hospitals). The design task is to account for
both the demand- and supply-side variability. One approach to
solving the task is to employ advanced PI methodology with time as
another problem dimension. A basic methodology along these lines
has already been developed for Heat Integration of batch processes
(Kemp and Deakin, 1989; Kleme et al., 1994) and was recently
revisited by Foo, Chew, and Lee (2008). A further important step in
the direction of extending this methodology to Heat Integration of
renewables was taken by Perry, Kleme, and Bulatov (2008), who
considered the integration of local energy sectors into extended total
sites involving residential and commercial processes and buildings
in addition to industrial ones. This work was further developed by
Varbanov and Kleme (2010) to account for the integration of
inherently variable renewables.
Converting waste via thermal processing is an intriguing option
because it simultaneously reduces the demand for fossil fuels and
landfilling. Bbar et al. (2001, 2002) demonstrated a method for
efficiently utilizing the heat value of incineration products that
would partially compensate for the cost of thermal waste treatment.
The challenge of utilizing waste as an energy source is not variability,
as it is with renewables, since waste is relatively plentiful and
generated at significant rates. Rather, the main problems associated
with extracting energy from waste are technological. Municipal and
other solid wastes are typically incinerated (Bbar et al., 2001; Bbar
et al., 2002; Stehlik, 2009), a process that involves three principal
issues.
First, the incineration must ensure efficient combustion and
minimal emissions of pollutants; this is often achieved by co-firing
319
the waste with other fuels (Werther, 2007). Second, it is important to
prevent the release of toxic pollutants with the flue gasfor example,
the emission of dioxins from incinerated solid wastes. These
emissions can be minimized by proper waste separation and
moisture reduction prior to the incineration (Werther, 2007). Third,
the moisture content poses other challenges besides the formation of
dioxins. The higher the moisture content, the larger fraction of
energy is wasted on evaporating it; thus, increased moisture reduces
the specific energy gain from incineration. This means that, for
purposes of energy generation, waste with especially high water
content is more beneficially treated via other processes. Examples
include the anaerobic digestion of wet organic waste from food
industry and agriculture (Zhang et al., 2007; Macias-Corral et al.,
2008) and the supercritical gasification of black liquor from pulp-
and-paper plants (Pettersson and Harvey, 2009; Sricharoenchaikul,
2009).
14.2.5 Better Utilization of Low-Grade Heat
Desai and Bandyopadhyay (2010) proposed a scheme incorporating
organic Rankine cycles (ORCs) in the efficient utilization of low-
grade waste heat for power generation. They provided a graphically
assisted procedure for integrating an industrial process with an ORC,
thereby reducing the process cooling demand and the need to import
external power.
14.2.6 Energy Planning That Accounts for Carbon Footprint
The international community has become increasingly concerned
with climate change. Most attention has been focused on the carbon
footprint (CFP), which quantifies the impact of greenhouse gas
emissions. In parallel with this development, the issue of energy
independence has been given more attention in a number of countries
that import fossil fuelsespecially the United States, European
countries (except Norway), and, to a lesser extent, Australia and
Japan.
An interesting paper by Foo, Tan, and Ng (2008) addresses
Carbon and Footprint-Constrained Energy Planning Using Cascade
Analysis Technique. The authors presented algebraic targeting
techniques for energy-sector planning under constraints on CO
2

emissions and land availability. This contribution extends the classic
Pinch Analysis of Linnhoff and Hindmarsh (1983) to identify the
minimum amount of low- or zero-carbon energy sources needed to
meet regional or national energy demands while observing limits on
CO
2
emissions.
The concept of Regional Energy Clustering presented by Lam,
Varbanov, and Kleme (2010) involves the synthesis of regional energy
targeting and supply chains. The methodology seeks to account for

320
the complete spectrum of renewable energy sources and energy
carriersand to evaluate the appropriate combinations of waste-to-
energy and fossil fuelsin order to deliver more complete and
practical procedures.
14.3 Conclusions
In recent years there has been much interest in the development of
renewable, non-carbon-based energy sources to combat the threat of
increased CO
2
emissions and related climatic change. Increases in
the price of oil and gas have further boosted interest in such
alternative energy sources. These concerns have resulted in increased
efficiency of energy and water use in the industrial sector, although
the major industrys use of renewable energy sources has been only
sporadic. In contrast, domestic energy supply has moved more
positively toward the integration of renewable energy sources,
including wind turbines, solar heating, and heat pumps. Yet efforts
to design a sustainable combined energy system that includes both
industrial and residential buildings have been limited and ad hoc,
since there are no systematic design techniques available for
producing a symbiotic system on this scale.
Increasing the efficiency of energy-using processes is the most
effective current method for reducing costs and emissions that affect
the stability of the worlds climate, and contributing to sustainable
growth. Increasing energy efficiency is the cleanest short-term
method to produce green energythat is, energy that produces the
least amount of emissions. The situation is similar with respect to
minimizing the consumption of water and the generation of
wastewater. Unfortunately, these relatively mundane approaches are
often overlooked by those who are seduced by exciting new
technologiessuch as renewable energy sourcesthat have
generated more publicity. Nonetheless, the primary sustainability
issue remains the efficient use of resources: raw materials, energy,
and water.
Two metrics have recently been developed to assess the impact
of energy-efficient methods and energy-reduction proposals. The
carbon footprint (CFP) takes account of all carbon emissions over the
entire life cycle of a process or product, and the water footprint (WFP)
indicates how much water is used during the life cycle of a product
or service.
Bibliography
Aalborg University, 2009a. EnergyInteractive.NET. <energyinteractive.net>
(accessed 11 June 2009).
Aalborg University, 2009b. EnergyPLAN: Advanced Energy System Analysis
Computer Model. <energy.plan.aau.dk> (accessed 10 January 2009).
Aaltola, J., 2002. Simultaneous synthesis of flexible heat exchanger network.
Applied Thermal Engineering, 22, 907918.
ABARE, 2009. ABARE Models. <www.abare.gov.au/publications_html/models/
models/models.html> (accessed 22 April 2009).
Acevedo, J., Pistikopoulos, E. N., 1997. A multiparametric programming approach
for linear process engineering problems under uncertainty. Industrial &
Engineering Chemistry Research, 36, 717728.
Adonyi, R., Biros, G., Holczinger, T., Friedler, F., 2008. Effective scheduling of
a large-scale paint production system. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(2),
225232.
Adonyi, R., Romero, J., Puigjaner, L., Friedler, F., 2003. Incorporating heat integration
in batch process scheduling. Applied Thermal Engineering, 23, 17431762.
AEA Technology, 2000. Study on Energy Management and Optimisation in
Industry, 2000 (prepared by AEA Technology plc at the request of the
Environment Directorate-General of the European Commission). <www.
ec.europa.eu/environment/ippc/pdf/energy.pdf> (accessed 23 August 2007).
Ahmad, M. I., Chen, L., Jobson, M., Zhang, N., 2008. Synthesis and optimisation of
heat exchanger networks for multi-period operation by simulated annealing.
11th Conference on Process Integration, Modelling and Optimisation for Energy
Saving and Pollution ReductionPRES2008/CHISA2008, Summaries 4. Prague:
Czech Society of Chemical Engineering lecture J8.2, Proceedings, pp.1200
Ahmad, S., Linnhoff, B., Smith, R., 1989. Supertargeting: Different process
structures for different economics. Journal of Energy Resources Technology,
111(3), 131136.
Ahmad, S., Linnhoff, B., Smith, R., 1990. Cost optimum heat exchanger networks:
2. Targets and design for detailed capital cost models. Computers & Chemical
Engineering, 14(7), 751767.
Ahmad, S., Smith, R., 1989. Targets and design for minimum number of shells
in heat exchanger networks. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 67(5),
481494.
Albrecht, J., 2007. The future role of photovoltaics, a learning curve versus
portfolio perspective. Energy Policy, 35(4), 22962304.
Almat, M., Espua, A., Puigjaner, L., 1999. Optimisation of water use in batch
process industries. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 23, 14271437.
Al-Riyami, B. A., Kleme, J., Perry, S., 2001. Heat integration retrofit analysis of a
heat exchanger network of a fluid catalytic cracking plant. Applied Thermal
Engineering, 21, 14491487.
321

322
B i b l i o g r a p h y
Alva-Argez, A., Kokossis, A. C., Smith, R., 1998. Wastewater minimisation of
industrial systems using an integrated approach. Computers & Chemical
Alves, J., 1999. Analysis and design of refinery hydrogen distribution systems.
PhD thesis, UMIST, Manchester, U.K.
Alves, J. J., Towler, G. P., 2002. Analysis of refinery hydrogen distribution systems.
Industry and Engineering Chemistry Research, 41, 57595769.
Arellano-Garcia, H., Martini, W., Wendt, M., Li, P., Wozny, G., 2003. Chance
constrained batch distillation process optimization under uncertainty.
Foundations of Computer Aided Process OperationsFOCAPO (Coral Springs,
FL, 1215 January).
Arellano-Garcia, H., Wozny, G., 2009. Chance constrained optimization of process
systems under uncertainty: I. Strict monotonicity. Computers & Chemical
Argonne National Laboratory, 2009a. Electricity Market Complex Adaptive
System (EMCAS). <www.dis.anl.gov/projects/emcas.html> (accessed 23
April 2009).
Argonne National Laboratory, 2009b. Energy and Power Evaluation Program
(ENPEP-BALANCE). <www.dis.anl.gov/projects/Enpepwin.html> (accessed
23 April 2009).
Argonne National Laboratory, 2009c. Generation and Transmission Maximization
(GTMax) Model. <www.dis.anl.gov/projects/Gtmax.html> (accessed 23 April
2009).
Asante, N. D. K., 1996. Automated and interactive retrofit design of practical heat
exchanger networks. PhD thesis, UMIST, Manchester, U.K.
Asante, N. D. K., Zhu, X. X., 1997. An automated and interactive approach for
heat exchanger network retrofit. Chemical Engineering Research and Design,
75(part A), 349360.
Aspelund, A., Berstad, D. A., Gundersen, T., 2007. An extended pinch analysis and
design procedure utilizing pressure based exergy for subambient cooling.
Aspelund, A., Gundersen, T., 2007. A new process synthesis methodology utilizing
pressure exergy in subambient processes. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering,
24, 11331138.
AspenTech, 2009a. Aspen Economic Evaluation. <www.aspentech.com/products/
aspen-economic-eval.cfm> (accessed 26 October 2009).
AspenTech, 2009b. Aspen Exchanger Design & Rating (EDR). <www.aspentech.
com/products/spen-edr.cfm> (accessed 26 October 2009).
AspenTech, 2009c. Aspen Plus. <www.aspentech.com/core/aspen-plus.cfm>
(accessed 26 October 2009).
AspenTech, 2009d. What Is Aspen ONE. <www.aspentech.com/v7/whatis.cfm>
Avriel, M., Wilde, D. J., 1966. Optimality proof for the symmetric Fibonacci search
technique. Fibonacci Quarterly, 4, 265269.
Bagajewicz, M., 2000. A review of recent design procedures for water networks
in refineries and process plants. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 24,
20932113.
Bagajewicz, M., Savelski, M., 2001. On the use of linear models for the design
of water utilization systems in process plants with a single contaminant.
Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 79(5), 600610.
Balmorel [Danish Energy Research Program], 2009. <www.balmorel.com/>
(accessed 30 December 2009).
Bandyopadhyay, S., Ghanekar, M. D., Pillai, H. K., 2006. Process water management.
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 45, 52875297.
Banerjee, I., Ierapetritou, M. G., 2003. Parametric process synthesis for general
non-linear models. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 27, 14991512.
Barlow, R. E, Proschan, F., 1996. Mathematical theory of reliability. Society
for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, New York, USA, ISBN-13:
978-0898713695.
323
BAT-CENTRE, 2009. Vitos Centre for Best Available Techniques. <www.emis.vito.
be/vito%E2%80%99s-centre-best-available-techniques-bat-centre> (accessed
30 April 2010).
Bbar, L., ank, J., Kermes, V., Stehlk, P., Oral, J., 2001. Low NO
x
burnersRecent
development, equipment, experience, modelling. International Conference on
Incineration and Thermal Treatment Technologies (Philadelphia, 1418 May).
College Park: University of Maryland Press.
Bbar, L., Martink, P., Hjek, J., Stehlk, P., Hajn, Z., Oral, J., 2002. Waste to energy
in the field of thermal processing of waste. Applied Thermal Engineering, 22,
897906.
Bertok, B., Friedler, F., Feng, G., Fan, L. T., 2001. Systematic generation of the optimal
and alternative flowsheets for azeotropic distillation systems. Computer Aided
Chemical Engineering, 9, S351S356.
Biegler, L. T., Grossmann, I. E., Westerberg, A. W., 1997. Systematic methods of
chemical process design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bjrk, K., M., Westerlund, T., 2002. Global optimization of heat exchanger network
synthesis problems with and without the isothermal mixing assumption.
Computers & Chemical Engineering, 26(11), 15811593.
Blomquist, P. A., Brown N. J., 2004. A review of the pre-assessment and assessment
techniques used in waste minimisation audits. Water SA, 30(2), 131141.
Bochenek, R., Jezowski, J., Jezowska, A., 1998. Retrofitting flexible heat exchanger
networksOptimization vs. sensitivity tables method. CHISA '98/ 1st
Conference PRES '98 (Prague), lecture F1. Prague: Czech Society of Chemical
Engineering.
Boiler Cost (MATCHES), 2003. <www.matche.com/EquipCost/Boiler.htm>
(accessed 15 September 2009).
BREF, 2006. Reference Document on Best Available Techniques in Food, Drink and
Milk Industries (Seville, Spain). <ftp.jrc.es/pub/eippcb/doc/fdm_bref_0806.
pdf> (accessed 26 December 2009).
Brooke, A., Kendrick, D., Meeraus, A. A., 1992. GAMSA users guide, release 2.25.
San Francisco: Scientific Press.
Brown, M., Ulgiati, S., 2004. Energy quality, emergy, and transformity: H.T. Odums
contributions to quantifying and understanding systems. Ecological Modelling,
178(12), 201213.
Bumble, S., 1999. Computer generated physical properties. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
CADDET [Center for the Analysis and Dissemination of Demonstrated Energy
Technologies], 1994. Integrated Heat Recovery in a Malt Whisky Distillery.
Project no. UK-94-509.
CAPE, 2009. Working Party of Computer Aided Process Engineering, European
Federation of Chemical Engineering. <www.cape-wp.eu> (accessed 10
January 2009).
Carbon Trust, 2009. <www.carbontrust.com> (accessed 26 December 2009).
Casani, S., Rouhany, M., Knchel, S., 2005. A discussion paper on challenges and
limitations to water reuse and hygiene in the food industry. Water Research,
39(6), 11341146.
Castell, C. M. L., Lakshmanan, R., Skilling, J. M., Baares-Alcntara, R., 1998.
Optimisation of process plant layout using genetic algorithms. Computers &
Chemical Engineering, 22(Suppl.), S993S996.
Castro, P., Barbosa-Pvoa, A. P. F. D., Matos, H., 2001. An improved RTN continuous-
time formulation for the short-term scheduling of multipurpose batch plants.
Cerd, J., Galli, M. R., 1990. Synthesis of flexible heat exchanger networksII.
Nonconvex networks with large temperature variations. Computers & Chemical
Cerd, J., Galli, M. R., 1991. Synthesis of flexible heat exchanger networksIII.
Temperature and flowrate variations. Computers & Chemical Engineering,
15(1), 724.
Cerd, J., Galli, M. R., Camussi, N., Isla, M. A., 1990. Synthesis of flexible heat
exchanger networksI. Convex networks. Computers & Chemical Engineering,
14(2), 197211.

324
Cerd, J., Henning, G. P., Grossmann, I. E., 1997. A mixed-integer linear
programming model for short-term scheduling of single-stage multiproduct
batch plants with parallel lines. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research,
36, 16951707.
Chapman, S. J., 2009. Essentials of MATLAB programming, 2nd ed. Stamford, CT:
Cengage.
Chempute Software, 2001. CHEMCAD: Process Flowsheet Simulation. <www.
chempute.com/chemcad.htm> (accessed 26 October 2009).
Chemstations, 2009. CHEMCAD. <www.chemstations.com> (accessed 26 October
2009).
Chen, C. L., Chang, C. Y., Lee, J. Y., 2008. Continuous-time formulation for the
synthesis of water-using networks in batch plants. Industrial & Engineering
Chemistry Research, 47(20), 78187832.
Chen, C. L., Lee, J. Y., Tan, J. W., Ciou, Y. J., 2009. Synthesis of water-using network
with central reusable storage in batch processes. Computers & Chemical
Cheng, Z., Jia, X., Gao, P., Wu, S., Wang , J., 2008. A framework for intelligent
reliability centered maintenance analysis. Reliability Engineering and System
Safety, 93, 784792.
Cheung, K.-Y., Hui, C.-W., 2004. Total-site scheduling for better energy utilization.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 12, 171184.
Chopra, S., Meindl, P., 2009. Supply chain management: Strategy, planning and ope ation.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Ciric, A. R., Floudas, C. A., 1989. A retrofit approach for heat exchanger networks.
Ciric, A. R., Floudas C. A., 1990. A comprehensive optimisation model of the HEN
retrofit problem. Heat Recovery Systems and CHP, 10(4), 407422.
Colberg, R. D., Morari, M., 1990. Area and capital cost targets for heat exchanger
network synthesis with constrained matches and unequal heat transfer
coefficients. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 14(1), 122.
Connolly, D., Lund, H., Mathiesen, B. V., Leahy, M., 2010. A review of computer
tools for analysing the integration of renewable energy into various energy
systems. Applied Energy, 87(4), 10591082.
CPI [Centre for Process Integration], 2004 and 2005. Heat integration and energy
systems (MSc course, School of Engineering and Analytical Science, UMIST
and The University of Manchester). Manchester, U.K.
Cunha, M. C., Ribeiro, L., 2004. Tabu search algorithms for water network
optimization. European Journal of Operational Research, 157(3), 746758.
Daichendt, M. M., Grossmann, I. E., 1997. Integration of hierarchical decomposition
and mathematical programming for the synthesis of process flowsheets.
Danish Energy Agency, 2009. Ramses. <www.ens.dk/da-DK/Info/TalOgKort/
Fremskrivninger/modeller/ramses/Sider/Forside.aspx> (accessed 1 July 2009).
Dantzig, G. B., 1951. Maximization of a linear function of variables subject to
linear inequalities. In T. C. Koopmans (Ed.), Activity analysis of production and
allocation, pp. 339347. New York: Wiley.
Dantzig G. B., 1968. Linear programming and extensions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Dantzig, G., Orchard-Hays, W., 1953. Notes on linear programming, V: Alternative
algorithm for the revised simplex method using product form of the
inverse. Rand Research Memorandum RM-1268, RAND Corporation, Santa
Monica, CA.
Dantzig, G. B., Orden, A., Wolfe, P., 1954. The generalized simplex method for
minimizing a linear form under linear inequality restraints. Rand Research
Memorandum RM-1264, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.
De Benedetto, L., Kleme, J., 2009. The environmental performance strategy map:
An integrated LCA approach to support the strategic decision making process.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(10), 900906.
325
de Castro, H. F., Cavalca, K. L., 2006. Maintenance resources optimization
applied to a manufacturing system. Reliability Engineering and System Safety,
91, 413420.
de las Fuentes, L., Sanders, B., Kleme, J., 2002. Awarenet: Agro-food wastes
minimisation and reduction. PRES / CHISA 2002 Conference on Process
Integration, Modelling, and Optimisation for Energy Saving and Pollution Reduction
(Prague), lecture H4.4 [13282002]. Czech Society of Chemical Engineering.
Del Nogal, F., Kim, J.- K., Perry, S., Smith, R., 2008. Synthesis of cryogenic energy
systems. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, 25, 6772.
Desai, N. B., Bandyopadhyay, S., 2010. Process integration of organic Rankine cycle.
Energy, 34(10), 16741686.
Dhole, V. R., Linnhoff, B., 1993a. Distillation column targets. Computers & Chemical
Engineering, 17(56), 549560.
Dhole, V. R., Linnhoff, B., 1993b. Total site targets for fuel, co-generation, emissions
and cooling. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 17(Suppl.), 101109.
Dhole, V. R., Ramchandi, N., Tainsh, R. A., Wasilewski, M., 1996. Make your process
water pay for itself. Chemical Engineering, 103(1), 100103.
Donnelly, N., Kleme, J., Perry, S., 2005. Impact of economic criteria and cost
uncertainty on HEN network design and retrofit. In J. Kleme (Ed.), Proceedings
of PRES '05, pp. 127132. Milano, Italy: AIDIC.
Douglas, A. P., Hoadley, A. P. A., 2006. A process integration approach to the design
of the two- and three-column methanol distillation schemes. Applied Thermal
Douglas, J. M., 1988. Conceptual design of chemical processes. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Doyle, S. J., Smith. R., 1997. Targeting water reuse with multiple contaminants.
Trans. IChemE, 75(part B), 181189.
DTI, 2006. UK Energy in BriefJuly 2006. <www.dti.gov.uk/energy/statistics/
publications/in-brief/page17222.html> (accessed 15 March 2007).
Dua, V., Bozinis, N. A., Pistikopoulos, E. N., 2002. A multiparametric programming
approach for mixed-integer quadratic engineering problems. Computers &
Chemical Engineering, 26(45), 715733.
Dupont, D., Renzetti, S., 1998. Water use in the Canadian food processing industry.
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 46(1), 8392.
Duran, M. A., Grossmann, I. E., 1986. An outer-approximation algorithm for a
class of mixed-integer nonlinear programs. Mathematical Programming, 36(1),
307339.
DWSIM, 2010. About DWSIM. <dwsim.inforside.com.br> (accessed 18 January
2010).
Ea Energy Analyses, 2010. The STREAM Modelling Tool. <www.streammodel.
org> (accessed 5 May 2010).
Ebenezer, S. A., 2005. Removal of Carbon Dioxide from Natural Gas for LNG
Production (semester project work report, December 2005, Norwegian
University of Science and Technology, Norway). <www.ipt.ntnu.no/~jsg/
studenter/prosjekt/Salako2005.pdf> (accessed 29 December 2009).
Edgar, T. F., Himmelblau, D. M., 1988. Optimization of chemical processes. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
EEBPp, 2002. Benchmarking tool for industrial buildingsHeating and internal lighting.
London: U.K. Energy Efficiency Best Practice Programme.
EEO [Energy Efficiency Office], 1993. Opportunities for compact heat exchangers. Best
Practice Programme R&D Profile 36, London.
Ehrgott, M., 2005. Multicriteria optimization, 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer.
El-Halwagi, M. M., 1997. Pollution prevention through process integration: Systematic
design tools. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
El-Halwagi, M. M., 1999. Pollution prevention through mass integration: Systematic
design tools. In Proceedings of International Conference on Process Integration,
vol. 1, pp. 95112. Copenhagen: PI99.
El-Halwagi, M. M., 2006. Process integration. Amsterdam: Academic Press.

326
El-Halwagi, M. M., Gabriel, F., Harell, D., 2003 Rigorous graphical targeting for
resource conservation via material recycle/reuse networks. Industrial &
El-Halwagi, M. M., Glasgow, I. M., Eden, M. R., Qin, X., 2004. Property integration:
Componentless design techniques and visualization tools. AIChE Journal,
50(8), 18541869.
El-Halwagi, M., Manousiouthakis, V., 1989. Synthesis of mass exchange networks.
AIChE Journal, 35(8), 12331244.
El-Halwagi, M. M., Spriggs, H. D., 1998. Solve design puzzles with mass integration.
Chemical Engineering Progress, 94, 2544.
EMD International A/S, 2009. <www.emd.dk/> (accessed 23 April 2009).
EMINENT2, 2009. Welcome to EMINENT. <www.eminentproject.com> (accessed
23 April 2009).
Energinet.dk, 2009. SIVAEL. <www.energinet.dk/en/menu/Planning/
Analysis+models/Sivael/SIVAEL.htm> (accessed 27 April 2009).
Energy Information Administration, 2009. The National Energy Modeling System:
An Overview; 2003. <www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/overview/index.html>
(accessed 26 April 2009).
ENVIROWISE, 2009. <envirowise.gov.uk> (accessed on 4 November 2009).
EUROPA, 2009. EUROPAGateway to the European Union. <europa.eu> (accessed
4 November 2009).
European Commission, 2009. Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996
(concerning integrated pollution prevention and control). Official Journal L
257, 10 October 1996, pp. 00260040.
European Commission, DG Environment. 2000. Water Framework Directive
(2000/60/EC). <ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-framework/index_
en.html> (accessed 10 December 2009).
Eurostat, 2007. Eurostat Press Office. <ec.europa.eu/eurostat> (accessed 15 March
2007).
Faber, R., Jockenhvel, T., Tsatsaronis, G., 2005. Dynamic optimization with
simulated annealing. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 29(2), 273290.
Fahnich, A., Mavrov, V., Chmiel, H., 1998. Membrane processes for water reuse in
the food industry. Desalination, 119(13), 213216.
Fan, L. T., Zhang, T., Liu, J., Seib, P. A., Friedler, F., Bertok, B., 2008. Price-targeting
through repeated flowsheet re-synthesis in developing novel processing
equipment: Pervaporation. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 47,
15561561.
Feng, G., Fan, L. T., 1996. On stream splitting in separation system sequencing.
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 35(6), 19511958.
Ferrer Nadal, S., Holczinger, T., Mndez, C. A., Friedler, F., Puigjaner, L., 2006.
Rigorous scheduling resolution of complex multipurpose batch plants:
S-graph vs. MILP. 16th European Symposium on Computer Aided Process
EngineeringESCAPE 16 (Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany, 913 July).
Fiaschi, D., Carta, R., 2007. CO
2
abatement by co-firing of natural gas and biomass-
derived gas in a gas turbine. Energy, 32(4), 549567.
Fieg, G., Xing, L., Jeowski, J., 2009. A monogenetic algorithm for optimal design
of large-scale heat exchanger networks. Chemical Engineering and Processing,
48(1112), 15061516.
Floudas, C. A., 1995. Nonlinear and mixed-integer optimization: Fundamentals and
applications. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
Floudas, C. A., Lin, X., 2004. Continuous-time versus discrete-time approaches for
scheduling of chemical processes: A review. Computers & Chemical Engineering,
28(11), 21092129.
Floudas, C. A., Grossmann, I. E., 1987a. Automatic synthesis of multiperiod heat
exchanger network configurations. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 11(2),
123143.
Floudas, C. A., Grossmann, I. E., 1987b. Synthesis of flexible heat exchanger
networks with uncertain flowrates and temperatures. Computers & Chemical
327
Foo, D. C. Y., Chew, Y. H., Lee, C. T., 2008. Minimum units targeting and network
evolution for batch heat exchanger network. Applied Thermal Engineering,
28(16), 20892099.
Foo, D. C. Y., El-Halwagi, M. M., Tan, R. R. (Eds.), 2010. Recent advances in sustainable
process design and optimisation. Singapore: World Scientific.
Foo, D., Kazantzi, V., El-Halwagi, M., Mananc, Z. A., 2006. Surplus diagram and
cascade analysis technique for targeting property-based material reuse
network. Chemical Engineering Science, 61, 26262642.
Foo, D. C. Y, Manan, Z. A., Tan, Y. L., 2005. Synthesis of maximum water recovery
network for batch process systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(15), 1381
1394.
Foo, D. C. Y., Tan, R. R., 2007. Targeting for minimum low and zero-carbon energy
resources in carbon-constrained energy sector planning using cascade
analysis. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 12, 139144.
Foo, D., Tan, R., Ng, D. K. S., 2008. Carbon and footprint-constrained energy
planning using cascade analysis technique. Energy, 33(10), 14801488.
Forschungszentrum Jlich Institute for Energy Research, 2009. Systems
Analysis and Technology Evaluation. <www.fz-juelich.de/ief/ief-ste/index.
php?index=3> (accessed 15 June 2009).
Fraser, D. M., Hallale, N., 2000a. Capital and total cost targets for mass exchange
networks: Part 1. Simple capital cost models. Computers & Chemical Engineering,
23(1112), 16611679.
Fraser, D. M., Hallale, N., 2000b. Capital and total cost targets for mass exchange
networks: Part 2. Detailed capital cost models. Computers & Chemical
Engineering, 23(1112), 16811699.
Frausto-Hernndez, S., Rico-Ramrez, V., Jimnez-Gutirrez, A., Hernndez-
Castro, S., 2003. MINLP synthesis of heat exchanger networks considering
pressure drop effects. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 27(89), 11431152.
Friedler, F., 2009. Process integration, modelling and optimisation for energy
saving and pollution reduction. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 18, 126.
Friedler, F., 2010. Process integration, modelling and optimisation for energy
saving and pollution reduction. Applied Thermal Engineering, doi:10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2010.04.030.
Friedler, F., Fan, L. T., 2009. Mathematical modeling in process design and operation:
Structural assessment. Seventh International Conference on the Foundations
of Computer-Aided Process Design: Design for Energy and the Environment
FOCAPD 2009 (Breckenridge, CO, 712 June).
Friedler, F., Fan, L. T., Imreh, B., 1998. Process network synthesis: Problem
definition. Networks, 28, 119124.
Friedler, F., Tarjan, K., Huang, Y. W., Fan L. T., 1992a. Combinatorial algorithms for
process synthesis. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 16, S313S320.
Friedler, F., Tarjan, K., Huang Y. W., Fan, L. T., 1992b. Graph-theoretic approach
to process synthesis: Axioms and theorems. Chemical Engineering Science, 47,
19731988.
Friedler, F., Tarjan, K., Huang, Y. W., Fan, L. T., 1993. Graph-theoretic approach to
process synthesis: Polynomial algorithm for maximal structure generation.
Friedler, F., Varga, J. B., Fan, L. T., 1995. Decision-mapping: A tool for consistent
and complete decisions in process synthesis. Chemical Engineering Science,
50(11), 17551768.
Friedler, F., Varga, J. B., Fehr, E., Fan, L. T., 1996. Combinatorially accelerated
branch-and-bound method for solving the MIP model of process network
synthesis. In C. A. Floudas and P. M. Pardalos (Eds.), State of the art in global
optimization, pp. 609626. Boston: Kluwers.
Fritzson, A., Berntsson, T., 2006. Efficient energy use in a slaughter and meat
processing plantOpportunities for process integration. Journal of Food
Furman, K. C., Sahinidis, N. V., 2002. A critical review and annotated bibliography
for heat exchanger network synthesis in the 20th century. Industrial &

328
Galan, B., Grossmann, I. E., 1999. Optimization strategies for the design and
synthesis of distributed wastewater treatment networks. Computers & Chemical
Engineering, 23, S161S164.
GAMS, 2009. GAMS Home Page. < www.gams.com> (accessed 26 October 2009).
Gas Turbine World, 2001. Handbook 20002001, vol. 21. Southport, CT: Pequot.
Georgiadis, M. C., Kikkinides, E. S., Pistikopoulos, E. N., 2008. Process systems
engineering, vol. V: Energy systems engineering. New York: Wiley.
Georgiadis, M. C., Pistikopoulos, E. N., 2006. Energy and process integration.
Redding, CT: Begell House.
Giammatei, J. A. G., 1994. Simultaneous optimization of a chemical process, its
heat exchanger network, and the utility system using a process simulator.
PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. <dspace.mit.edu/
handle/1721.1/11709> (accessed 28 December 2009).
Gouws, J. F., Majozi, T., 2008a.A mathematical technique for the design of near-
zero-effluent batch processes. Water SA, 34, 291295.
Gouws, J. F., Majozi, T., 2008b. Impact of multiple storage in wastewater
minimization for multicontaminant batch plants: Toward zero effluent.
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 47(2), 369379.
Grossmann, I. E., 1985. Mixed-integer programming approach for the synthesis
of integrated process flowsheets. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 9(5),
463482.
Grossmann, I. E., 1990. MINLP optimization strategies and algorithms for process
synthesis. FOCAPD, CACHE, pp. 105132. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Grossmann, I. E., Caballero, J. A., Yeomans, H., 1999. Mathematical programming
approaches for the synthesis of chemical process systems. Korean Journal of
Chemical Engineering, 16, 407426.
Guinand, E. A., 2001. Optimization and network sensitivity analysis for process
retrofitting. PhD thesis, Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
Gunaratnam, M., Alva-Argez, A., Kokossis A., Kim, J., Smith, R., 2005. Automated
design of total water systems. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research,
44(3), 588599.
Gundersen, T., 2000. A process integration primerImplementing agreement on process
integration. Trondheim, Norway: International Energy Agency, SINTEF Energy
Research.
H
2
RES, 2009. Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture,
University of Zagreb. <www.powerlab.fsb.hr/h2RES/> (accessed 23 April
2009).
Halasz, L., Nagy, A. B., Ivicz, T., Friedler, F., Fan, L. T., 2002. Optimal retrofit design
and operation of the steam-supply system of a chemical complex. Applied
Thermal Engineering, 22, 939947.
Halasz, L., Povoden, G., Narodoslawsky, M., 2005. Sustainable processes synthesis
for renewable resources. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 44, 293307.
Hall, S. G., Ahmad, S., Smith, R., 1990. Capital cost targets for heat exchanger
networks comprising mixed materials of construction, pressure ratings and
exchanger types. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 14(3), 319335.
Hallale, N., 2002. A new graphical targeting method for water minimization.
Advances in Environmental Research, 6(3), 377390.
Hallale, N., Fraser, D. M., 1998. Capital cost targets for mass exchange networks,
a special case: Water minimization. Chemical Engineering Science, 53(2),
293313.
Hallale, N., Liu, F., 2001. Refinery hydrogen management for clean fuels production.
Advances in Environmental Research, 6(1), 8198.
Hangos, K. M., Cameron, I. T., 2001. Process modelling and model analysis. In
Process systems engineering, vol. 4. New York: Academic Press.
Hassan, M., Kleme, J., Pleu, V., 1999. Process integration analysis and retrofit
suggestions for a FCC plant. Integrirovannye Tehnologii i Energosberegenie
(Integrated Technologies and Energy Saving), 2, 1030 (in Russian).
HEAT-int, 2009. PIL Web Pages. <www.proint.org/Heat.html> (accessed 14
January 2010).
329
Heckl, I., Friedler, F., Fan, L. T., 2009a. Reduced super-structure for a separation
network comprising separators effected by different methods of separation.
Heckl, I., Friedler, F., Fan, L. T., 2009b. Solution of separation network synthesis
problems by the P-graph methodology. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering,
26, S641S646.
Heckl, I., Kovcs, Z., Friedler, F., Fan, L. T., Liu, J., 2007. Algorithmic synthesis of
an optimal separation network comprising separators of different classes.
Chemical Engineering and Processing, 46, 656665.
Hegyhti, M., Adonyi, R., Holczinger, T., Friedler, F., 2006. Demonstration program
for S-graph based batch-process scheduling. CHISA 2006 (2731 August).
Prague: Czech Society of Chemical Engineering.
Hegyhti, M., Majozi, T., Holczinger, T., Friedler, F., 2009. Practical infeasibility
of cross-transfer in batch plants with complex recipes: S-graph vs. MILP
methods. Chemical Engineering Science, 64(3), 605610.
Hernndez, S., Jimnez, A., 1999. Design of energy-efficient Petlyuk systems.
Herrera, A., Islas, J., Arriola, A., 2003. Pinch technology application in a hospital.
Heyen, G., Kalitventzeff, B., 2007. Process monitoring and data reconciliation.
In L. Puigjaner and G. Heyen (Eds.), Computer Aided Process and Product
Engineering, vol. 2, pp. 517540. New York: Wiley.
Himmelblau, D. M., 1988. Applied nonlinear programming. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Hoekstra, A. Y., 2008. The value of water. Research Report Series, 28, UNESCO-IHE,
Delft, The Netherlands.
Hoekstra, A. Y., Chapagain, A. K., 2007. Water footprints of nations. Water Resources
Management, 21(1), 3548.
Hohmann, E. C., 1971. Optimum networks for heat exchange. PhD thesis,
University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Holczinger, T., Biros, G., Friedler, F., Sarkozi, N., 2004. Acceleration tools for
batch process scheduling. CHISA 2004 (Prague, 2226 August), Czech Society
of Chemical Engineering.
Holczinger, T., Majozi, T., Hegyhati, M., Friedler, F., 2007. An automated algorithm
for throughput maximization under fixed time horizon in multipurpose
batch plants: S-graph approach. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, 24,
649654.
Holczinger, T., Romero, J., Puigjaner, L., Friedler, F., 2002. Scheduling of
multipurpose batch processes with multiple batches of the products. Hungarian
Journal of Industrial Chemistry, 30, 305312.
HOMER, 2009. HOMER Energy LLC. <www.homerenergy.com/> (accessed 2
September 2009).
Honeywell, 2010. UniSim Design. <hpsweb.honeywell.com/Cultures/en-US/
Products/ControlApplications/simulation/UniSimDesign/default.htm>
(accessed 18 January 2010).
Hosford, J. E., 1960. Measures of dependability. Operations Research, 8(1), 5364.
Houdkov, L., Bor, J., Ucekaj, V., Elser, T., Stehlk, P., 2008. Thermal processing
of sewage sludgeII. Applied Thermal Engineering, 28(16), 20832088.
Huang, C.-H., Chang, C.-T., Ling, H.-C., Chang, C.-C., 1999. A mathematical
programming model for water usage and treatment network design. Industrial
& Engineering Chemistry Research, 38(7), 26662679.
Hul, S., Tan, R. R., Auresenia, J., Fuchino, T., Foo, D. C. Y., 2007. Water network
synthesis using mutation-enhanced particle swarm optimization. Process
Safety and Environmental Protection, 85(6), 507514.
HYSYS, 2010. Aspen HYSYS. <www.aspentech.com/hysys> (accessed 18 January
2010).
IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency], 2009. Planning and Economic Studies
Section (PESS). <www.iaea.org/OurWork/ST/NE/Pess/PESSenergymodels.
shtml> (accessed 13 June 2009).

330
IEA [International Energy Agency], 2009. Energy Technology Systems Analysis
Programme. <www.etsap.org/> (accessed 25 April 2009).
Ierapetritou, M. G., Floudas, C. A., 1998a. Effective continuous-time formulation
for short-term scheduling. Part 1. Multipurpose batch processes. Industrial &
Ierapetritou, M. G., Floudas, C. A., 1998b. Effective continuous-time formulation
for short-term scheduling. Part 2. Continuous and semi-continuous processes.
ILOG, 2006. ILOG Optimisation Decision Manager. <www.ilog.com/download/
docs/DS-ODM.pdf> (accessed 26 October 2009).
ILOG, 2009. ILOG Parallel CPLEX. <www.ilog.com/products/cplex/product/
parallel.cfm> (accessed 26 October 2009).
INFORSE-Europe, 2009. Vision 2050: Visions for a Renewable Energy World.
<www.inforse.org/europe/Vision2050.htm> (accessed 25 April 2009).
Institute for Energy Technology, 2009. HYDROGEMS. <www.hydrogems.no/>
Institute for Sustainable Solutions and Innovations, 2009. Energy Rich Japan.
<www.energyrichjapan.info> (accessed 4 July 2009).
Instituto Superior Tcnico, 2010. H2RES (Instituto Superior Tcnico & University
of Zagreb). <www.powerlab.fsb.hr/h2RES/> (accessed 5 May 2010).
International Energy Agency, 2010. Energy Technology Systems Analysis
Programme. <www.etsap.org/> (accessed 5 May 2010).
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, 2009. Energy Modeling
Framework: Model for Energy Supply Strategy Alternatives and Their General
Environmental Impact (MESSAGE). <www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/ENE/model/
message.html> (accessed 26 April 2009).
IPS [Invensys Process Systems], 2009a. HEXTRANHeat Transfer. <ips.invensys.
com/en/products/processdesign/pages/heattransfer-p007.aspx> (accessed
26 October 2009).
IPS [Invensys Process Systems], 2009b. PRO/II. <ips.invensys.com/en/products/
processdesign/Pages/Pro-II-P004.aspx> (accessed 26 October 2009).
Ireson W. G., Coombs, C. F., Moss, R. Y., 1996. Handbook of reliability engineering and
management. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Jansen, P., Koppejan, J., Hetland, J., Kleme, J., Phuengphaeng, T., Pipio, A., Perry,
S., 2004. EMINENT accelerates market introduction of promising early stage
technologies for transport and energy. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 5,
187192.
Jegede, F. O., Polley, G. T., 1992. Capital cost targets for networks with non-uniform
heat exchanger specifications. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 16(5), 477
495.
Jeowski, J., 1990. Linear programming based method of heat exchanger network
synthesis. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Process Design, 10, 305312.
Jeowski, J., Shethna, H. K., Castillo, F. J.L., 2003. Area target for heat exchanger
network using linear programming. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry
Research, 42(8), 17231730.
Joint Global Change Research Institute [JGCRI]. 2009. Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory and University of Maryland. <www.globalchange.umd.edu/>
Karuppiah, R., Grossmann, I. E., 2006. Global optimization for the synthesis
of integrated water systems in chemical processes. Computers & Chemical
Karvountzi, G. C., Price, C. M., Duby, P. F., 2004. Comparison of molten carbonate
and solid oxide fuel cells for integration in a hybrid system for cogeneration or
tri-generation. ASME, Advanced Energy Systems Division AES, 44, 139150.
Kazantzi, V., El-Halwagi, M. M., 2005. Targeting material reuse via property
integration. Chemical Engineering Progress, 101(8), 2837.
Kececioglu, D. B., 2002. Reliability engineering handbook, vol 1. Lancaster, PA:
DESTech.
Kemp Pinch Spreadsheet, 2006. NOV06 Final. <books.elsevier.com/companions/
0750682604> (accessed 13 December 2009).
331
Kemp, I. C., 2007. Pinch analysis and process integration. A user guide on process
integration for efficient use of energy. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Kemp, I. C., Deakin, A. W., 1989. The cascade analysis for energy and process
integration of batch processes. Part 1: Calculation of energy targets. Chemical
Engineering Research and Design, 67, 495509.
Khachiyan, L. G., 1979. A polynomial algorithm in linear programming. Doklady
Akademii Nauk SSSR, 244, 10931096 (in Russian).
Kiefer, J., 1953. Sequential minimax search for a maximum. Proceedings of the
American Mathematical Society, 4, 502506.
Kiepuszewski, B., ter Hofstede, A. H. M., van der Aalst, W. M. P., 2003. Fundamentals
of control flow in workflows. Acta Infromatica, 39(3), 143209.
Kim, S. B., Lee, H. K., Lee, I. B., Lee, E. S., Lee, B., 2000. Scheduling of non-sequential
multipurpose batch processes under finite intermediate storage policy. Computers
& Chemical Engineering, 24, 16031610.
Kim, J.-K., Smith, R., 2004. Automated design of discontinuous water systems.
Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 82(3), 238248.
Kim, J., Smith, R., 2005. Pinch design and analysis. In Encyclopedia of Chemical
Processing, pp. 21652180. New York: Marcel Dekker.
King, C. J., 1980. Separation processes. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C. D., Jr., Vecchi, M. P., 1983. Optimization by simulated
annealing. Science, 220(4598), 671680.
Kleme, J., 1977. Chemical process simulation programsPresent state and
future development of flowsheeting. Collection of Czechoslovak Chemical
Communications, 42(2), 426445.
Kleme J., 1986. Synthesis of process flowsheets a comprehensive review. 35th
National Congress CHISA (Karlovy Vary, Czech Republic), lecture A3.05 (in
Czech).
Kleme, J., Bulatov, I., 2001. Integration of technical information with economic
and business data in process industries applications. PRES '01 Conference on
Process Integration, Modelling, and Optimisation for Energy Saving and Pollution
Reduction (Florence, Italy, 2023 May).
Kleme, J., Bulatov, I., Cockeril, T., 2007. Techno-economic modelling and cost
functions of CO
2
capture processes. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 31(56),
445455.
Kleme, J., Bulatov, I., Hetland, J., Jansen, P., Koppejan, J., 2005a. Contribution to
market introduction of promising early stage hydrogen technologiesAn
application of EMINENT software tool. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 8,
251256.
Kleme, J., Bulatov, I., Jansen, P., Koppejan, J., 2005b, Novel energy saving
technologies assessment by EMINENT evaluation tool. Chemical Engineering
Transactions, 8, 163168.
Kleme, J., Bulatov, I., Koppejan, J., 2009. Novel energy saving technologies
evaluation tool. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 33(3), 751758.
Kleme, J., Bulatov, I., Perry, S., 2008. Energy efficiency and carbon footprint
reduction. In E. Pistikopoulos, M. Georgiadis, and E. S. Kikkinides (Eds.),
Process systems engineering, vol. 5, pp. 203254. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley.
Kleme, J., Cockerill, T., Bulatov, I., Shackley, S., Gough, C., 2006. Engineering
feasibility of carbon dioxide capture and storage. In C. Gough and S. Shackley
(Eds.), Carbon capture and its storage: An integrated assessment, pp. 4382.
Aldershot, U.K.: Ashgate.
Kleme, J., Dhole, V. R., Raissi, K., Perry, S. J., Puigjaner, L., 1997. Targeting and
design methodology for reduction of fuel, power and CO
2
on total sites.
Kleme, J., Friedler, F., 2005. Recent novel developments in heat integrationTotal
site, trigeneration, utility systems and cost-effective decarbonisation. Case
studies waste thermal processing, pulp and paper and fuel cells. Applied
Thermal Engineering, 25(7), 953960.
Kleme, J., Kimenov, G., Nenov, N., 1998. Application of pinch-technology in food
industry. 1st Conference on Process Integration, Modelling and Optimisation for

332
Energy Saving and Pollution ReductionPRES '98 (Prague, August), lecture
F6.6.
Kleme, J., Klemsa, J., Lucha, J., Dohnal, M., Vaek, V., 1975. Local and global
extremum finding strategy in optimization of chemical processes. In
Computers in the Design and Erection of Chemical Plants, vol. 2, pp. 627638.
Karlovy Vary, Czech Republic: Czechoslovak Chemical Society, Working
Group on Computers.
Kleme, J., Linnhoff, B., Kotjabasakis, E., Zhelev, T. K., Gremouti, I., Kaliventzeff,
B., Heyen, G., Marchal, F., Lebon, M., Puigjaner, L., Espua, A., Graells, M.,
Santos, G., Prokopakis, G. J., Ashton, G. J., Murphy, N., de Paor, A. M.,
Kemp, I.C., 1994. Design and operation of energy efficient batch processes. Brussels:
Commission of the European Communities.
Kleme, J., Lucha, J., Vaek, V., 1979. Resent extension and development of design
integrated system DIS. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 3(4), 357361.
Kleme, J., Nenov, N., Kimenov, G., Mintchev, M., 1999. Heat integration in food
industry. Integrirovannye Tehnologii i Energosberegenie (Integrated Technologies
and Energy Saving), 4, 926 (in Russian).
Kleme, J., Perry, S., 2007a. Process optimisation to minimise energy use in food
processing. In K. Waldron (Ed.), Handbook of waste management and co-product
recovery in food processing, vol. 1, pp. 5989. Cambridge, U.K.: Woodhead.
Kleme, J., Perry, S., 2007b. Process optimisation to minimise water use and
wastage. In K. Waldron (Ed.), Waste management and co-product recovery in food
processing, vol. 1, pp. 90118. Cambridge, U.K.: Woodhead
Kleme, J., Phuengphaeng, T., Bulatov, I., Jansen, P., Koppejan, J., 2005c. Novel
energy saving technologies evaluation tool. In Proceedings of Heat Transfer
in Components and Systems for Sustainable Energy TechnologiesHeat SET
2005 (Grenoble, France, April), pp. 663668. Grenoble: Groupement pour la
Recherche sur les Echangeurs ThermiquesGRETh.
Kleme, J., Ptnk, R., 1985. Computer-aided synthesis of heat exchange network.
Journal of Heat Recovery Systems, 5(5), 425435.
Kleme, J., Smith, R., Kim, J.-K. (Eds.), 2008. Handbook of water and energy management
in food processing. Cambridge, U.K.: Woodhead.
Kleme, J.,Varbanov, P., 2008. Total sites for combined utilisation of renewables
and fossil fuels via improved energy conversion technologies. In Proceedings
of CHISA 2008, K4.2, pp. 12421243. Prague: Czech Society of Chemical
Engineering.
Kleme, J., Varbanov, P., Lam, H. L., 2009. Water footprint, water recycling and food
industry supply chain. In K. Waldron (Ed.), Waste management and co-product
recovery in food processing, vol. 2, pp. 134168. Cambridge, U.K.: Woodhead.
Kleme, J., Vaek, V., 1973. Methods for optimising complex chemical processes. In
Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium on the Use of Computers in Chemical Engineering
(st nad Labem, Czech Republic), pp. 84102. Prague: Czechoslovak Chemical
Society, Working Group on Computers.
Kleme, J., Zhang, N., Bulatov, I., Jansen, P., Koppejan, J., 2005d. Novel energy
saving technologies assessment by EMINENT evaluation tool. Chemical
Engineering Transactions, 7, 163167.
Kok, A. G., Graves, S. C., 2003. Supply chain management: Design cooperation and
operation (Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science, vol.
11). New York: Elsevier.
Kondili, E., Pantelides, C. C., Sargent, R. W. H., 1993. A general algorithm for
short-term scheduling of batch operations. I. MILP formulation. Computers &
Koschuh, W., Povoden, G., Hong, T.-V., Kromus, S., Kulbe, H. D., Novalin, S.,
2004. Production of leaf protein concentrate from ryegrass (Loliumperenne
multiflorum) and alfalfa (Medicago sativa subsp. sativa). Comparison
between heat coagulation/centrifugation and ultrafiltration. Desalination,
163, 253259.
Kotjabasakis, E., Linnhoff, B., 1986. Sensitivity tables for the design of flexible
processes (1)How much contingency in heat exchanger networks is cost-
effective? Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 64(3), 197211.
333
Kovacs, Z., Ercsey, Z., Friedler, F., Fan, L. T., 2000. Separation-network synthesis:
Global optimum through rigorous super-structure. Computers & Chemical
Kovacs, Z., Friedler, F., Fan, L. T., 1993. Recycling in a separation process structure.
AIChE Journal, 39, 10871089.
Kravanja, S., Kravanja, Z., Bedenik, B. S., 1998a. The MINLP optimization approach
to structural synthesis. Part I: A general view on simultaneous topology
and parameter optimization. International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Kravanja, S., Kravanja, Z., Bedenik, B. S., 1998b. The MINLP optimization approach
to structural synthesis. Part II: Simultaneous topology, parameter and standard
dimension optimization by the use of the linked two-phase MINLP strategy.
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 43, 293328.
Kravanja, S., ilih, S., Kravanja, Z., 2005. The multilevel MINLP optimization
approach to structural synthesis: the simultaneous topology, material,
standard and rounded dimension optimization. Advances in Engineering
Software, 36(9), 568583.
Kravanja, Z., 2009. The development of an advanced systems synthesis
environment: Integration of MI(NL)P methods and tools for sustainable
applications. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, 26, 2535.
Kravanja, Z., Grossmann, I. E., 1990. PROSYNAn MINLP process synthesizer.
Kravanja, Z., Grossmann, I. E., 1994. New developments and capabilities in
PROSYNAn automated topology and parameter process synthesizer.
Kromus, S. G., 2002. Biorefinery AustriaDevelopment of an integrated system for
the use of grassland biomass. PhD thesis, Technical University Graz, Austria
(in German).
Kuhn, H. W., Tucker, A. W., 1951. Nonlinear programming. In J. Neyman (Ed.),
Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and
Probability, pp. 481493. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kuo, W. J., Smith, R., 1997. Effluent treatment system design. Chemical Engineering
Science, 52(23), 42734290.
Kuo, W., Zuo, M. J., 2003. Optimal reliability modellingPrinciples and applications.
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Kurz, R., 2005. Parameter optimization on combined gas turbinefuel cell power
plants. ASME Journal of Fuel Cell Science and Technology, 2, 268273.
Lam, H. L., Varbanov. P., Kleme, J., 2009. Optimisation of regional energy supply
chains utilising renewables: P-graph approach. Computer Aided Chemical
Lam, H. L., Varbanov, P., Kleme, J., 2010. Minimising carbon footprint of regional
biomass supply chains. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54(5), 303309.
Land, A. H., Doig, A. G., 1960. An automatic method of solving discrete
programming problems. Econometrica, 28(3), 497520.
Langenstein, M., Jansky, J., Laipple, B., 2004. Finding megawatts in nuclear power
plants with process ata reconciliation. In Proceedings of the 12th International
Conference on Nuclear EngineeringICONE12 (Arlington, VA). <www.btbjansky.
com/pdf/Q_70_ICONE-final-paper.pdf> (accessed 3 October 2007).
Laue, H. J., 2006. Heat pumps. In C. Clauser, T. Strobl, and F. Zunic (Eds.), Renewable
energy, vol. 3C. Berlin: Springer.
Leewongtanawit, B., 2005. Heat-integrated water system design. PhD thesis,
UMIST, Manchester, U.K.
Leewongtanawit, B., Kim, J., 2008. Synthesis and optimisation of heat-integrated
multiple-contaminant water systems. Chemical Engineering and Processing,
47(4), 670694.
Leewongtanawit, B., Kim, J., 2009. Improving energy recovery for water
minimisation. Energy, 34(7), 880893.
Li, B. H., Chang, C. T., 2006. A mathematical programming model for discontinuous
water-reuse system design. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 45(14),
50275036.

334
LINDO System, 2009. LINDO System Website. <www.lindo.com> (accessed 26
October 2009).
Linnhoff, B., Ahmad, S., 1990. Cost optimum heat exchanger networks1. Minimum
energy and capital using simple models for capital cost. Computers & Chemical
Linnhoff, B., Akinradewo, C. G., 1998. Automated interface between dimulation
and integration, CHISA 1998 / 1st Conference PRES 1998, Plenary lecture A3.0
[818] Prague: Czech Society of Chemical Engineering.
Linnhoff, B., Dhole, V. R., 1992. Shaftwork targets for low temperature process
design. Chemical Engineering Science, 47(8), 20812091.
Linnhoff, B., Dhole, V. R., 1993. Targeting for CO
2
emissions for total sites. Chemical
Engineering and Technology, 16(4), 252259.
Linnhoff, B., Flower, J. R., 1978. Synthesis of heat exchanger networks: I. Systematic
generation of energy optimal networks. AIChE Journal, 24(4), 633642.
Linnhoff, B., Hindmarsh, E., 1983. The pinch design method for heat exchanger
networks. Chemical Engineering Science, 38(5), 745763.
Linnhoff, B., Mason, D. R., Wardle, I., 1979. Understanding Heat Exchanger
Networks. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 3(14), 295302.
Linnhoff, B., Townsend, D. W., Boland, D., Hewitt, G. F., Thomas, B. E. A., Guy, A.
R., Marsland, R. H., 1982. A user guide on process integration for the efficient use
of energy. Rugby, U.K.: IChemE [revised edition published in 1994].
Linnhoff, B., Vredeveld, D. R., 1984. Pinch technology has come of age. Chemical
Engineering Progress, 80(7), 3340.
Linnhoff March, 1998. Introduction to Pinch Technology. <www.linnhoffmarch.
com/pdfs/PinchIntro.pdf> (aaccessed 27 October 2009).
Linnhoff March, 2009. Introduction to Pinch Technology. <www.kbcat.com/Products-
and-Services/Software/Energy-Optimisation-Software-/SuperTarget/>
Liu, F., Zhang, N., 2004. Strategy of purifier selection and integration in hydrogen
networks. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 82(A10), 13151330.
Liu, J., Fan, L. T., Seib, P., Friedler, F., Bertok, B., 2004. Downstream process
synthesis for biochemical production of butanol, ethanol, and acetone from
grains: Generation of optimal and near-optimal flowsheets with conventional
operating units. Biotechnology Progress, 20, 15181527.
Liu, J., Fan, L. T., Seib, P. A., Friedler, F., Bertok, B., 2006. Holistic approach to process
retrofitting: Application to downstream process for biochemical production of
organics. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 45, 42004207.
Liu, Y., Yuan, X., Luo, Y., 2007. Synthesis of water utilization system using
concentration interval analysis method, II. Discontinuous process. Chinese
Journal of Chemical Engineering, 15(3), 369375.
Luenberger D. G., Ye, Y., 2008. Linear and nonlinear programming, 3rd ed. New York:
Springer.
Macias-Corral, M., Samani, Z., Hanson, A., Smith, G., Funk, P., Yu, H., Longworth, J.,
2008. Anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste and agricultural waste
and the effect of co-digestion with dairy cow manure. Bioresource Technology,
99(17), 82888293.
Majozi, T., 2005. An effective technique for wastewater minimisation in batch
processes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13, 13741380.
Majozi, T., Brouckaert, C. J., Buckley, C. A., 2006. A graphical technique for waste-
water minimisation in batch processes. Journal of Environmental Management,
78, 317329.
Majozi, T., Friedler, F. 2006. Maximization of throughput in a multipurpose batch
plant under fixed time horizon: S-graph approach. Industrial & Engineering
Chemistry Research, 45, 67136720.
Majozi, T., Zhu, X. X., 2001. A novel continuous time MILP formulation for
multipurpose batch plants. 1. Short-term scheduling. Industrial & Engineering
Makwana, Y., 1998. Energy retrofit and debottlenecking of total sites. PhD thesis,
335
Makwana, Y., Smith, R., Zhu, X. X., 1998. A novel approach for retrofit and
operations management of existing total sites. Computers & Chemical
Engineering, 22(Suppl.), S793S796.
Manan, Z. A., Foo, C. Y., Tan, Y. L., 2004. Targeting the minimum water flow
rate using water cascade analysis technique. AIChE Journal, 50(12), 3169
3183.
Manan, Z. A., Tea, S. Y., Alwi, S. R. W., 2009. A new technique for simultaneous
water and energy minimisation in process plant. Chemical Engineering
Research and Design, 87(11), 15091519.
Mandil, C., 2005. Saving electricity in a hurry. Paris: IEA Publications. <www.iea.
org/textbase/nppdf/free/2005/savingElec.pdf> (accessed 5 August2009).
Manolas, D. A., Frangopoulos, C. A., Gialamas, T. P., Tsahalis, D. T., 1997. Operation
optimization of an industrial cogeneration system by a genetic algorithm.
Energy Conversion and Management, 38(1517), 16251636.
Maros, I., 2003a. A piecewise linear dual phase-1 algorithm for the simplex method.
Computational Optimization and Applications, 26(1), 6381.
Maros, I., 2003b. Computational techniques of the simplex method. Boston: Kluwer.
Masruroh, N. A., Li, B., Kleme, J., 2006. Life cycle analysis of a solar thermal system
with thermochemical storage process. Renewable Energy, 31(4), 537548.
Massardo, A. L., Bosio, B., 2002. Assessment of olten carbonate fuel cell models and
integration with gas and steam cycles. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines
and Power, 124, 103109.
Masso, A. H., Rudd, D. F., 1969. The synthesis of system designs II. Heuristic
structuring. AIChE Journal, 15(1), 1017.
MathWorks, 2009. Getting Started with Matlab. <www.mathworks.com/access/
helpdesk/help/techdoc/matlab_product_page.html> (accessed 26 October
2009).
Mavromatis, S. P., Kokossis, A. C., 1998. Conceptual optimisation of utility networks
for operational variationsII. Network development and optimization.
Chemical Engineering Science, 53(8), 16091630.
McKay, B., Willis, M., Barton, G., 1997. Steady-state modelling of chemical process
systems using genetic programming. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 21(9),
981996.
Mechefske, C. K., Wang, Z., 2003. Using fuzzy linguistics to select optimum
maintenance and condition monitoring strategies. Mechanical Systems and
Signal Processing, 17(2), 305316.
Mehrotra, S., 1992. On the implementation of a primal-dual interior point method.
SIAM Journal on Optimization, 2(4), 575601.
Meixell, M. J., Gargeya, V. B., 2005. Global supply chain design: A literature review
and critique. Transportation Research Part E, 41, 531550.
Mndez C. A, Cerd, J., 2003. An MILP continuous-time framework for short-
term scheduling of multipurpose batch process under different operation
strategies. Optimization and Engineering, 4, 722.
Minet, F., Heyen, G., Kalitventzeff, B., Di Puma, J., Malmendier, M., 2001. Dynamic
data reconciliation of regenerative heat exchangers coupled to a blast furnace.
Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, 9, 10531058.
MiniCAM, 2009. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. <www.pnl.gov/gtsp/
research/minicam.stm> (accessed 26 April 2009).
Modelica, 2009a. Modelica and Modelica Association. <www.modelica.org>
Modelica, 2009b. ModelicaLanguage, Libraries, Tools, Workshop and EU-Project
RealSim. <www.modelica.org/documents/ModelicaOverview14.pdf>
Modelica, 2010. Modelica Tools. <www.modelica.org/tools> (accessed 26 April
2010).
Monod, J., 1949. The growth of bacterial cultures. Annual Review of Microbiology,
3, 371394.
Montgomery, D. C., 2005. Design and analysis of experiments, 6th ed. New York:
Wiley.

336
Morrissey, A. J., Browne, J., 2004. Waste management models and their application
to sustainable waste management. Waste Management, 24, 297308.
MW Kellogg, 1998. Kellogg divided wall column (promotional brochure). Henley,
U.K.
Nagy, A. B., Adonyi, R., Halasz, L., Friedler, F., Fan, L. T., 2001. Integrated synthesis
of process and heat exchanger networks: Algorithmic approach. Applied
Thermal Engineering, 21(1314), 14071427.
Napper, D., Kim, J.-K., Bulatov, I., 2009. Hygienic and sustainable use and reuse
of water and energy in food factories. In K. Waldron (Ed.), Waste management
and co-product recovery in food processing, vol. 2, pp. 169195. Cambridge, U.K.:
Woodhead.
National Resources Canada, 2009. RETScreen International. <www.retscreen.net>
National Technical University of Athens, 2009. EnergyEconomicsEnvironment
Modelling Laboratory Research and Policy Analysis. <www.e3mlab.ntua.
gr/> (accessed 26 April 2009).
Nemhauser, G. L., Wolsey, L. A., 1999. Integer and combinatorial optimization.
New York: Wiley.
Ng, D. K. S., Foo, D. C. Y., Rabie, A., El-Halwagi, M. M., 2008. Simultaneous
synthesis of property-based water reuse/recycle and interception networks
for batch processes. AIChE Journal, 54(10), 26242632.
Nie, X. R., Zhu, X. X., 1999. Heat exchanger network retrofit considering pressure
drop and heat-transfer enhancement. AIChE Journal, 45(6), 12391254.
Nishida, N., Liu, Y. A., Lapidus, L., 1977. Studies in chemical process design and
synthesis: III. A Simple and practical approach to the optimal synthesis of heat
exchanger networks. AIChE Journal, 23(1), 7793.
NRCan, 2007. Natural Resources Canada Success Stories. <cetc-varennes.nrcan.
gc.ca/en/indus/agroa_fd/ip_pi/ap_pa.html> (accessed 1 October 2007).
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2009a. Oak Ridge Competitive Electricity Dispatch
(ORCED) Model. <www.ornl.gov/sci/ees/pes/capabilities_ORCED.html>
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2009b. Whole-Building and Community Integration
Program. <www.coolingheatingpower.org/about/bchp-screening-tool.php>
Octave, 2009. Octave Website. <www.gnu.org/software/octave> (accessed 26
October 2009).
ODC, 2009. LINDO API. <www.odcindia.com/products/optimizationtool/
lindoapi.php> (accessed 26 October 2009).
Odum, H. T., 1996. Environmental accounting: Emergy and environmental decision
making. New York: Wiley.
OpenModelica, 2010. The OpenModelica Project. <www.ida.liu.se/~pelab/
modelica/OpenModelica.html> (accessed 18 January 2010).
Panjeshahi, M. H., Tahouni, N., 2008. Pressure drop optimisation in debottlenecking
of heat exchanger networks. Energy, 33(6), 942951.
Pantelides, C. C., 1993. Unified frameworks for optimal process planning and
scheduling. In D. W. T. Rip-pin, J. C. Hale, and J. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of
the Second International Conference on Foundations of Computer-Aided Process
Operations, pp. 253274. Crested Butte, CO: Computer Aids for Chemical
EngineeringCACHE.
Papageorgiou, L. G., Georgiadis, M. C., 2008a. Process systems engineering, vol. III:
Supply chain optimization, part 1. New York: Wiley.
Papageorgiou, L. G., Georgiadis, M. C., 2008b. Processs systems engineering, vol. IV:
Supply chain optimization, part 2. New York: Wiley.
Papalexandri, K. P., Pistikopoulos, E. N., 1996. Generalized modular representation
framework for process synthesis. AIChE Journal, 42(4), 10101032.
Papoulias, S. A., Grossmann, I. E. 1983. A structural optimization approach in
process synthesis. Part I: Utility systems. Computers & Chemical Engineering,
7, 695706.
Pekny, J., Reklaitis, G., 1998. Towards the convergence of theory and practice:
A technology guide for scheduling/planning methodology. In J. F. Pekny
337
and G. E. Blau (Eds.), Foundations of computer-aided process operations (AIChE
Symposium Series, no. 320), pp. 91111. New York: AIChE.
Perry, S., Bulatov, I., Kleme, J., 2007. The potential of the EMINENT tool in the
screening and evaluation of emerging technologies for CO
2
reduction related
to buildings. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 12, 709714.
Perry, S., Kleme, J., Bulatov, I., 2008. Integrating waste and renewable energy
to reduce the carbon footprint of locally integrated energy sectors. Energy,
33(10), 14891497.
Peters, M. S., Timmerhaus, K. D., West, R. E., 2003. Plant design and economics for
chemical engineers. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pettersson, K., Harvey, S., 2010. CO
2
emission balances for different black liquor
gasification biorefinery concepts for production of electricity or second-
generation liquid biofuels. Energy, 35(2), 11011106.
Pinto, J. M., Grossmann, I. E., 1994. Optimal cyclic scheduling of multistage
continuous multiproduct plants. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 18(9),
797816.
Pinto, J. M., Grossmann, I. E., 1995. A continuous time mixed integer linear
programming model for short-term scheduling of multistage batch plants.
Pistikopoulos, E. N., Georgiadis, M. C., Dua, V., 2007a. Process systems engineering,
vol. I: Multi-parametric programming: Theory, algorithms and applications. New
York: Wiley.
Pistikopoulos E. N., Georgiadis M. C., Dua ,V., 2007b. Process systems engineering,
vol. II: Multi-parametric model-based control: Theory and applications. New York:
Wiley.
Pleu, V., Kleme, J., Georgescu, M., 1998. Applications of process integration in
Romanian oil refining and petrochemical industry. CHISA '98 / 1st Conference
PRES '98, lecture F6.7. Prague: Czech Society of Chemical Engineering.
PNS Editor, 2010. <www.p-graph.com> (accessed 18 January 2010).
Polley, G., Panjeh Shahi, M. H., Jegede, F. O., 1990. Pressure drop considerations
in the retrofit of heat exchanger networks. Chemical Engineering Research and
Design, 68(3), 211220.
Polley, G., Reyes Athie, C. M., Gough, M., 1992. Use of heat transfer enhancement
in process integration. Heat Recovery Systems and CHP, 12(3), 191202.
Ponton, J. W., Kleme, J., 1993. Alternatives to neural networks for inferential
measurement. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 17(10), 9911000.
POST [U.K. Parliamentary Office for Science and Technology], 2006. Carbon
Footprint of Electricity Generation, no. 268. <www.parliament.uk/documents/
upload/postpn268.pdf> (accessed 29 December 2009).
Povoden, G., 2002. Analysis of protein loss in grass juice. MSc dissertation,
University of Technology, Graz, Austria (in German).
Prakash, R., Shenoy, U. V., 2005. Targeting and design of water networks for fixed
flowrate and fixed contaminant load operations. Chemical Engineering Science,
60(1), 255268.
Prakotpol, D., Srinophakun, T., 2004. GAPinch: Genetic algorithm toolbox for
water pinch technology. Chemical Engineering and Processing, 43(2), 203217.
Prkopa, A., 1995. Stochastic programming. Dordrecht: Springer.
PRES, 2009. Conference on Process Integration, Modelling and Optimisation
for Energy Saving and Pollution Reduction. <www.conferencepres.com>
(accessed 1 November 2009).
PSE, 2009. gPROMS. <www.psenterprise.com/gproms> (accessed 26 October
2009).
Raissi, K., 1994. Total site integration. PhD thesis, UMIST, Manchester, U.K.
Rakovi, P., 2002. Industrial energy system optimization based on heat exchanger
network synthesis. Working paper, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Nis, Serbia and Montenegro.
Rakovi, P., 2006. Process integration approach for energy saving and pollution
prevention in industrial plants. French-Serbian European Summer University:
Renewable Energy Sources and Environment-Multidisciplinary Aspect (Vrnjaka
Banja, Serbia, 1724 October).

338
Rakovi, P., 2010. Water pinch technology for designing wastewater reduction
and water conservation systems. Working paper, Faculty of Mechanical
Engineering, University of Nis, Serbia and Montenegro. <water-environment.
vin.bg.ac.rs/presentations/banja/Raskovic/Raskovic%20paper%20VB%20
2007> (accessed 3 January 2010).
Ravagnani, M. A. S. S., Silva, A. P., Arroyo, P. A., Constantino A. A., 2005. Heat
exchanger network synthesis and optimisation using genetic algorithm.
Applied Thermal Engineering, 25(7), 10031017.
Ris National Laboratory, 2009. WILMAR: Wind Power Integrated in Liberalised
Electricity Markets. <www.wilmar.risoe.dk> (accessed 27 April 2009).
Romero, J., Puigjaner, L., Holczinger, T., Friedler, F., 2004. Scheduling intermediate
storage multipurpose natch plants using the S-graph. AIChE Journal, 50(2),
403417.
Ryu, J., Pistikopoulos, E. N., 2005. Design and operation of an enterprise-wide
process network using operation policies. 1. Design. Industrial & Engineering
Chemistry Research, 44, 21742182.
Saboo, A. K., Morari, M., Woodcock, D. C., 1985. Design of resilient processing
plants, VIII. A resilience index for heat exchanger networks. Chemical
Engineering Science, 40(8), 15531565.
Sahdev, M., 2010. Chemical Engineering, Pinch technology: Basics for Beginners.
<www.cheresources.com/pinchtech.pdf> (accessed 2 January 2010).
Sanmart, E., Friedler, F., Puigjaner, L., 1998. Combinatorial technique for short
term scheduling of multipurpose batch plants based on schedule-graph
representation. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 22(Suppl.), S847S850.
Sanmart, E., Holczinger, T., Puigjaner, L., Friedler, F., 2002. Combinatorial
framework for effective scheduling of multipurpose batch plants. AIChE
Journal, 48(11), 25572570.
Santos, L. C., Zemp, R. J., 2000. Energy and capital targets for constrained
heat exchanger networks. Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 17(47),
659670.
Sargent, R. W. H., 1979. Flowsheeting. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 3(14),
1720.
Sargent, R. W. H., 1983. Computers in chemical engineeringChallenges and
constraints. AIChE Symposium Series, 79(235), 5764.
Savulescu, L., 1999. Simultaneous energy and water minimisation. PhD thesis,
Savulescu, L., Kim, J., 2008. Novel methods for combined energy and water
minimisation in the food industry. In J. Kleme, R. Smith, and J.-K. Kim (Eds.),
Handbook of water and energy management in food processing. Cambridge, U.K.:
Woodhead.
Savulescu, L., Kim, J., Smith, R., 2005a. Studies on simultaneous energy and water
minimisationPart I: Systems with no water re-use. Chemical Engineering
Science, 60(12), 32793290.
Savulescu, L., Kim, J., Smith, R., 2005b. Studies on simultaneous energy and water
minimisationPart II: Systems with maximum re-use of water. Chemical
Engineering Science, 60(12), 32913308.
Saw, S. Y., Lee, L., Lim, M. H., Foo, D. C. Y., Chew, I. M. L., Onyedim, V. F.O., Tan, R. R.,
Kleme, J., 2009. A new graphical targeting procedure for water minimisation.
3rd International Conference on Chemical and Bioprocess EngineeringICCBPE
2009 (Sabah, Malaysia).
Schilling, G., Pantelides, C. C., 1996. A simple continuous-time process scheduling
formulation and a novel solution algorithm. Computers & Chemical Engineering,
20(Suppl.), S1221S1226.
Schlenzig, C., 2009. Seven2one Modelling: Building Integrated Energy Concepts
with Mesap/PlaNet (in German). <www.seven2one.de/de/technologie/
mesap.html> (accessed 30 December 2009).
Scilab, 2009. Scilab Website. <www.scilab.org> (accessed 26 October 2009).
Seferlis, P., Georgiadis, M. C., 2004. The integration of process design cnd control.
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
339
Segurado, R., Pereira, S., Pipio, A., Alves, L., 2009. Comparison between EMINENT
and other energy technology assessment tools. Journal of Cleaner Production,
17(10), 907910.
Seidler, I., Badach, A., Molisz, W., 1980. Methods of solving of optimization problems.
Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Naukowo Techniczne.
Seikova, I., Varbanov, P., Ivanova, E., 1999. Debottlenecking of a heat-integrated
crude oil distillation system. In F. Friedler and J. Kleme (Eds.), Proceedings of
PRES '99, pp. 583588. Budapest: Hungarian Chemical Society.
SEMPRA ENERGY, 2009. Energy Saving Tips. <www.sdge.com/business/esc/
promo_tipsresources.shtml> (accessed 5 August 2009).
Serna-Gonzlez, M., Jimnez-Gutirrez, A., Ponce-Ortega, J.M., 2007. Targets for
heat exchanger network synthesis with different heat transfer coefficients
and non-uniform exchanger specifications. Chemical Engineering Research and
Design, 85(10), 14471457.
S-Graph, 2009. S-Graph for Scheduling. <www.s-graph.com> (accessed 20
December 2009).
Shah, N., Pantelides, C. C., Sargent, R. W. H., 1993. A general algorithm for short-
term scheduling of batch operations. Part II. Computational issues. Computers
& Chemical Engineering, 17(2), 229244.
Shah, R. K., Sekuli, D. P., 2003. Fundamentals of heat exchanger design. New York:
Wiley.
Shang, Z., 2000. Analysis and optimisation of total site utility systems. PhD thesis,
Sharma, R., Jindal, A., Mandawala, D., Jana, S. K., 1999. Design/retrofit targets of
pump-around refluxes for better energy integration of a crude distillation
column. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 38(6), 24112417.
Shelley, M. D., El-Halwagi, M. M., 2000. Componentless design of recovery and
allocation systems: A functionality-based clustering approach. Computers &
Chemical Engineering, 24, 20812091.
Shenoy, U., 1995. Heat exchanger network synthesis: Process optimization by energy and
resource analysis. Houston, TX: Gulf Professional.
Shilling, R. L., Bell, K. J., Berhhagen, P. M., Flynn, T. M., Goldschmidt, V. M., Hrnjak,
P. S., Standiford, F. C., Timmerhaus, K. D., 2008. Heat-transfer equipment. In
D. W. Green and R. H. Perry (Eds.), Perrys chemical engineers handbook, 8th ed,
chap. 11. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Shoaib, A. M., Said, M. A., Moustafa, E. A., Foo, D. C.Y., El-Halwagi, M. M., 2008.
A hierarchical approach for the synthesis of batch water network. Computers
& Chemical Engineering, 32(3), 530539.
Shopova, E. G., Vaklieva-Bancheva, N. G., 2006. BASICA genetic algorithm
for engineering problems solution. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 30(8),
12931309.
Sieniutycz, S., Jeowski, J., 2009. Energy optimization in process systems. Amsterdam:
Elsevier.
Sikos, L., Kleme, J., 2009. RAMS contribution to efficient waste minimisation and
management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(10) 932939.
Sikos, L., Kleme, J., 2010a. Evaluation and assessment of reliability and availability
software for securing an uninterrupted energy supply. Clean Technologies and
Environmental Policy, 12(2), 137146.
Sikos, L., Kleme, J., 2010b. Reliability, availability and maintenance optimisation
of heat exchanger networks. Applied Thermal Engineering, 30, 6369.
Singhvi, A., 2002. Multi-level planning of supply chains under uncertainty. MTech
dissertation, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay.
Singhvi, A., Madhavan, K. P., Shenoy, U. V., 2004. Pinch analysis for aggregate
production planning in supply chains. Computers & Chemical Engineering,
28(67), 993999.
Singhvi, A., Shenoy, U. V., 2002. Aggregate planning in supply chains by pinch
analysis. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 80(6), 597605.
SINTEF, 2009a. <www.sintef.no/Home> (accessed 12 June 2009).

340
SINTEF, 2009b. EOPS and EMPS. <www.sintef.no/Home/Petroleum-and-Energy/
SINTEF-Energy-Research/Software/EOPS-and-EMPS/> (accessed 23 April
2009).
SITE-int, 2009. PIL Web Pages. <www.proint.org/Site_int.html> (accessed 14
January 2010).
Smith, R., 1995. Chemical process design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Smith, R., 2005. Chemical process design and integration, Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
Smith, R., Kleme, J., Tovazhnyansky, L. L., Kapustenko, P. A., Uliev, L. M., 2000.
Foundations of heat processes integration. Kharkiv, Ukraine: NTU KhPI (in
Russian).
Smith, R., Linnhoff, B., 1988. The design of separators in the context of overall
processes. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 66(3), 195228.
Smith, R.,Varbanov, P., 2005. Whats the price of steam? Chemical Engineering
Progress, 101(7), 2933.
Solver.com, 2009. Solver.com Website <www.solver.com/selectqa.htm> (accessed
26 October 2009).
Sorak, A., Kravanja, Z., 2004. MINLP retrofit of heat exchanger networks
comprising different exchanger types. Computers & Chemical Engineering,
28(12), 235251.
Sparrow, R. E., Forder, G. J., Rippin, D. W. T., 1975. The choice of equipment sizes
for multiproduct batch plants. Heuristics vs. branch and bound. Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Process Design and Development, 14(3), 197203.
Spriggs, H. D., El-Halwagi, M. M., 2000. Pollution prevention through mass
integration. AIChE Symposium Series, 96(323), 367370.
SPRINT, 2009. Process Integration Software (Centre for Process Integration,
School of Chemical Engineering and Analytical Science, The University
of Manchester, U.K.). <www.ceas.manchester.ac.uk/research/centres/
centreforprocessintegration/software/packages/sprint> (accessed 26 October
2009).
Sricharoenchaikul, V., 2009. Assessment of black liquor gasification in supercritical
water. Bioresource Technology, 100(2), 638643.
STAR, 2009. Process Integration Software (Centre for Process Integration,
centreforprocessintegration/software/packages/star> (accessed 26 October
2009).
Stehlk, P., 2009. Contribution to advances in waste-to-energy technologies. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 17(10), 919931.
Steppan, D. D., Werner, J., Yeater, R. P., 1998. Essential Regression and Experimental
Design for Chemists and Engineers. <www.jowerner.homepage.t-online.de/
index.html> (accessed 1 March 2007).
Stern, 2006. Stern Review Report on the Economics of Climate Change. <www.
hm-treasury.gov.uk/stern_review_report.htm> (accessed 15 January 2010).
Stockholm Environment Institute, 2009. Community for Energy, Environment and
Development. <www.energycommunity.org/> (accessed 25 April 2009).
STREAM, 2009. The STREAM Modelling Tool. <www.streammodel.org/>
Taal, M., Bulatov, I., Kleme, J., Stehlik, P., 2003. Cost estimation and energy
price forecast for economic evaluation of retrofit projects. Applied Thermal
Takama, N., Kuriyama, T., Shiroko, K., Umeda, T., 1980. Optimal water allocation
in a petroleum refinery. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 4(4), 251258.
Tan, R. R., 2007. Hybrid evolutionary computation for the development of
pollution prevention and control strategies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(10),
902906.
Tan, R. R., 2008. An adaptive swarm-based simulated annealing algorithm for
process optimization. In PRES 2008/CHISA 2008, Summaries 4, pp. 12571258.
Prague: Czech Society of Chemical Engineering.
341
Tan, R. R., Cruz, D. E., 2004. Synthesis of robust water reuse networks for single
component retrofit problems using symmetric fuzzy linear programming.
Computers & Chemical Engineering, 28, 25472551.
Tan, R., Foo, D. C. Y., 2007. Pinch analysis approach to carbon-constrained energy
sector planning. Energy, 32(8), 14221429.
Ten Broeck, H., 1944. Economic selection of exchanger sizes. Industrial & Engineering
Thevendiraraj, S., Kleme, J., Paz, D., Aso, G., Cardenas, J., 2003. Water and
wastewater minimisation study of a citrus plant. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling, 37, 227250.
Tick, J., Kovcs, Z., Friedler, F., 2006. Synthesis of optimal workflow structure.
Journal of Universal Computer Science, 12, 13851392.
Timpe, C. H., Kallrath, J., 2000. Optimal planning in large multi-site production
networks. European Journal of Operational Research, 126, 422435.
Tjoe, T. N., Linnhoff, B., 1986. Pinch technology retrofit: Setting targets for an
existing plant. Chemical Engineering, 93(8), 4760.
Tokos, H., Novak Pintari, Z., 2009. Synthesis of batch water network for a brewery
plant. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(16), 14651479.
TOMLAB, 2010. MATLAB OptimizationTOMLAB. <http://tomopt.com/tomlab>
Tovazshnyansky, L. L., Kapustenko, P. O., Khavin, G. L., Arsenyeva, O. P., 2004.
PHEs in industry. Kharkiv, Ukraine: NTU KhPI (in Russian).
Townsend, D. W., Linnhoff, B., 1983. Heat and power networks in process design.
Part II: Design procedure for equipment selection and process matching.
AIChE Journal, 29(5), 748771.
Townsend, D. W., Linnhoff, B., 1984. Surface area targets for heat exchanger
networks. IChemE 11th Annual Research Meeting (Bath, U.K., April).
Triantafyllou, C., Smith R., 1992. The design and optimisation of fully thermally
coupled distillation columns. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 70(A2),
118132.
TRNSYS, 2009. A TRaNsient SYtems Simulation Program (University of Wisconsin,
Madison). <sel.me.wisc.edu/trnsys> (accessed 27 April 2009).
U.K. Government, 2007. Government Response to Kate Barkers Review of Housing
Supply: The Supporting Analysis (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister).
<www.odpm.gov.uk> (accessed 15 March 2007).
Umeda, T., Harada, T., Shiroko, K. A., 1979. Thermodynamic approach to the
synthesis of heat integration systems in chemical processes. Computers &
UML, 2010. Object Management GroupUML. <www.uml.org> (accessed 18
January 2010).
Unitec New Zealand, 2009. <www.unitec.ac.nz> (accessed 13 June 2009).
Universitt Karlsruhe, 2009. Institute for Industrial Production. <www.iip.kit.
edu/65.php> (accessed 18 June 2009).
Uryasev, S. (Ed.), 2000. Probabilistic constrained optimization: Methodology and
applications. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2009. How to Identify
Primary Opportunities to Save EnergyEnergy Saving Techniques. <www.
hud.gov/offices/cpd/affordablehousing/training/web/energy/techniques/
techniques.cfm> (accessed 5 August 2009).
U.S. DOE, 2007. U.S. Department of Energy, Industrial Assessment Centers, Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy. <www.iac.rutgers.edu/database> (accessed
30 September 2007).
Vclavek, V., Novotn, A., Dedkov, J., 2003. Pressure as a further parameter of
composite curves in energy process integration. Applied Thermal Engineering,
23(14), 17851795.
VALI III User Guide, 2003. Liege, Belgium: Belsim S.A.
van der Aalst, W. M. P., ter Hofstede, A. H. M. 2005. YAWL: Yet another workflow
language. Information Systems, 30, 245275.
Varbanov, P., 2004. Optimisation and synthesis of process utility systems. PhD
thesis, UMIST, Manchester, U.K.

342
Varbanov, P., Doyle, S., Smith, R., 2004. Modelling and optimization of utility
systems. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 82(A5), 561578.
Varbanov, P., Friedler, F., 2008. P-graph methodology for cost-effective reduction
of carbon emissions involving fuel cell combined cycles. Applied Thermal
Engineering, 28(16), 20202029.
Varbanov, P., Kleme, J., 2008. Analysis and integration of fuel cell combined
cycles for development of low-carbon energy technologies. Energy, 33(10),
15081517.
Varbanov, P., Kleme, J., 2010. Total sites integrating renewables with extended heat
transfer and recovery. Heat Transfer Engineering, 31(9), 733741.
Varbanov, P., Kleme, J., Shah, R. K., Shihn, H., 2006. Power cycle integration and
efficiency increase of molten carbonate fuel cell systems. Journal of Fuel Cell
Science and Technology, 3(4), 375383.
Varbanov, P., Klemes, J., Friedler, F., 2007. Critical Analysis of Fuel Cell Combined
Cycles for Development of Low-Carbon Energy Technologies. Chemical
Engineering Transactions, 12, 739744.
Varbanov, P., Perry, S., Kleme, J., Smith, R., 2005. Synthesis of industrial utility
systems: Cost-effective decarbonisation. Applied Thermal Engineering, 25(7),
9851001.
Varbanov, P., Perry, S., Makwana, Y., Zhu, X. X., Smith R., 2004. Top-level analysis
of site utility systems. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 82(A6),
784795.
Vienna University of Technology, 2009. Invert. <www.invert.at> (accessed 25 April
2009).
Wang, Y. P., Smith, R., 1994. Wastewater minimisation. Chemical Engineering Science,
49(7), 9811006.
Wang, Y. P., Smith, R.,1995. Time pinch analysis. Chemical Engineering Research and
Design, 73, 905914.
WATER, 2009. Process Integration Software (Centre for Process Integration,
centreforprocessintegration/software/packages/water> (accessed 26 October
2009).
Water Footprint Network, 2009. <www.waterfootprint.org> (accessed 16 August
2009).
Werther, J., 2007. Gaseous emissions from waste combustion. Journal of Hazardous
Materials, 144(3), 604613.
Wikipedia, 2009. List of Chemical Process Simulators. <en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
List_of_chemical_process_simulators> (accessed 26 October 2009).
Williams, H. P., 1999. Model building in mathematical programming, 4th ed. Chichester,
U.K: Wiley.
WORK, 2009. Process Integration Software (Centre for Process Integration,
centreforprocessintegration/software/packages/work> (accessed 26 October
2009).
Xiangkun, M., Pingjing, Y., Xing, L., Wilfried, R., 2007. Synthesis of flexible multi-
stream heat exchanger networks based on stream pseudo-temperature with
genetic/simulated annealing algorithms. Journal of the Chinese Institute of
Chemical Engineers, 38, 321331.
Yamamoto, O., 2000. Solid oxide fuel cells: Fundamental aspects and prospects.
Electrochimica Acta, 45, 24232435.
Yang, H., Li, Y., Shen, J., Hu, S., 2002. Evaluating waste treatment. Recycle and
reuse in industrial system: An application of the emergy approach. Ecological
Modelling, 160(12), 1321.
Yin, Q., Smith, R., 2008. Incorporating reliability, availability and maintainability
(RAM) into process synthesis. AIChE 2008 Spring National Meeting (New
Orleans, LA).
Yin, Q., Valls, P., Zheng, X., Smith, R., 2009. Minimizing life cycle cost by
incorporating reliability, availability and maintainability (RAM) into process
343
design. In H. Alfadala, G. V. R. Reklaitis, and M. M. El-Halwagi (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 1st Annual Gas Processing Symposium. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Zamora, J.M., Grossmann, I.E., 1998. A global MINLP optimization algorithm for
the synthesis of heat exchanger networks with no stream splits. Computers &
Zecchin, A. C., Simpson, A. R., Maier, H. R., Leonard, M., Roberts, A. J., Berrisford,
M. J., 2006. Application of two ant colony optimisation algorithms to water
distribution system optimization. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 44,
451468.
Zhang, R., El-Mashad, H. M., Hartman, K., Wang, F., Liu, G., Choate, C., Gamble,
P., 2007. Characterization of food waste as feedstock for anaerobic digestion.
Bioresource Technology, 98(4), 929935.
Zhang, X., Sargent, R. W. H., 1996. The optimal operation of mixed production
facilities. Part A. General formulation and some solution approaches for the
solution. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 20, 897904.
Zhelev, T. K., 1998. Pinch principles for environment protection. In Proceedings of
the 8th International Summer School of Chemical Engineering (Sozopol, Bulgaria),
pp. 213216. Sofia: Institute of Chemical Engineering, Bulgarian Academy of
Sciences.
Zhelev, T. K., 2005a. On the integrated management of industrial resources
incorporating finances. Sustainable systems theory: ecological and other
aspects. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13, 469474.
Zhelev, T. K., 2005b. On the optimal synthesis of a micro polymerase chain reactor
system for DNA analysis. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, 20(B), 1579
1584.
Zhelev, T. K., 2005c. Water conservation through energy management. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 13, 14611470.
Zhelev, T, 2007. The conceptual design approachA process integration approach
on the move. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 50, 143157.
Zhelev, T. K., Bhaw, N., 2000. Combined wateroxygen pinch analysis for better
wastewater treatment management. Waste Management, 20(8), 665670.
Zhelev, T., Ntlhakana, L., 1999. Energy-environment closed loop through oxygen
pinch. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 23(Suppl.), 7983.
Zhelev, T. K., Ridolfi, R., 2006. Energy recovery and environmental concerns
addressed through emergypinch analysis, Energy, 31, 24862498.
Zhelev, T. K., Wagenknecht, M., Hartmann, K., Kauschus, W., 1985. Comparative
analysis of synthetic methods for the structuring of heat transfer systems.
Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift THLM, 27, 7089 (in German).
Zheng, X., Kim, J.-K., Smith, R., 2008a. Design of heat-integrated power systems
with decarbonisation. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, 25, 10891094.
Zheng, X., Kim, J.-K., Smith, R., 2008b. Heat integrated power systems with carbon
capture. 11th Conference on Process Integration, Modelling and Optimisation for
Energy Saving and Pollution ReductionPRES 2008 (Prague, 2428 August).
Zhu, X. X., 1997. Automated design method for heat exchanger networks using
block decomposition and heuristic rules. Computers & Chemical Engineering,
21(10), 10951104.
Zhu, X. X., ONeill, B. K., Roach, J. R., Wood, R. M., 1995. Area-targeting methods
for the direct synthesis of heat exchanger networks with unequal film
coefficients. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 19(2), 223239.
Zhu, X. X., Zanfir, M., Kleme, J., 2000. Heat transfer enhancement for heat
exchanger network retrofit. Heat Transfer Engineering, 21(2), 718.
A
ABB algorithm. See Accelerated
Branch and Bound algorithm
Accelerated Branch and Bound
algorithm (ABB), 157158
ADAS, Inside and Solutions, 297
Advanced Process Combinatorics,
Inc., 310
AEA Technology, 4
AIChE International Congress on
Sustainability Science and
Engineering (ICOSSE), 296, 309,
310
AIChE Journal, 310
algorithms:
combinatorial, 8
curve-fitting methods search, 30
descent-based, 30
deterministic search solutions, 2931
Fibonacci method search, 30
golden section method search, 30
gradient-based (local search), 2829
HENs, 19
line search, 30
LPR models, 29
MSG, 38
Newton method search, 30
NLP models and simplex, 29
nonlinear unconstrained problems
and search, 30
optimality conditions and global/
local search, 2829
P-graphs and, 38, 158
PNS solutions and starting state of
MSG, 192
primal, 31
process synthesis and heuristic, 13
14
PTA, 5660
SSG, 38
American Process Inc., 301, 305
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), 43
ant colony optimization stochastic
search method, 32
AO Sodrugestvo-T, 300, 303
Applied Thermal Engineering, 301, 307
aqueous streams, 23
arcs, 161
Artie McFerrin Department of
Chemical Engineering, Texas
A&M, 297, 301, 305
ASPEN, 202203
AspenTech, 297, 307, 310
audits of energy, 5, 6
availability:
optimization, reliability and,
186190
P-graph solution for energy system,
186
PI and integrating maintainability,
reliability and, 144146
azeotropic distillation systems:
maximal/optimal structure for
base-case synthesis, 175
optimal process synthesis and,
173176
P-graph representing structure of,
176
process steps incorporated into
base case, 174
residue of curve map, 175
B
Balanced Composite Curves (BCCs),
15, 6869
heat recovery targets, utility
placement and, 239
balancing technology, 7
barrier methods, 31
BAT. See best available techniques
Index
345

346
I n d e x
batch processes:
increase in value of objective
function, 160
infeasible solution generated by
MILP approach, 160
number produced of each
product, 280
optimal solution generated by
S-graph, 161
process optimization frameworks
and scheduling of, 159163
S-graphs and, 160161
BCCs. See Balanced Composite Curves
best available techniques (BAT), water
and, 107108
bilinear optimization problem, 27
binary variable, 27
biofuels, 3
biorefineries, green:
flowsheet of, 173
solution network for workflow
synthesis problem, 172
synthesis of, 171173
BIS (Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills), 297
black box (steady-state model), 2324
blue water, virtual, 109
bounding function, role in solving
MIP, 32
branch and bound approach, for
solving discrete problems, 31
budget-income-time pinch analysis:
CCs for project budget and income,
132
PI and, 131133
project budget and income with
time, 132
C
Canadian Society for Chemical
Engineering, 11
CAPE (Computer Aided Process
Engineering), 11
capital costs:
data extraction with operating and,
290292
heat transfer area, total cost
targeting and, 6970
carbon dioxide emissions (CO
2
), 138
139
costs related to, 2
FC-based systems and, 9
FCs, gas turbines and, 4
carbon footprint (CFP), 20
conclusions and further
information, 319320
carbon footprint (CFP) (Cont.):
defined, 2
PI application, 13
and product life-cycle assessment,
23
carbon neutrality studies, 2
Carbon Trust, 5
case studies/examples:
de-bottlenecking HI crude-oil
distillation system, 256262
energy efficiency in other food/
drink industries, 268271
energy recovery from FCC unit,
253256
heat pinch technology, 219226
heat/power integration in
buildings/building
complexes, 275277
industrial applications and, 253280
industrial utility systems synthesis,
271275
minimizing water/wastewater in
citrus juice plant, 262268
optimal design of supply chain,
277279
scheduling large-scale paint
production system, 279280
total sites, 226233
utility placement, 238246
water pinch technology, 247252
CCs. See Composite Curves
Center for Engineering and
Sustainable Development
Research, De La Salle
University, 297
Centre for Advanced Process
Decision-Making, Carnegie
Mellon University, 297
Centre for Process Integration,
University of Manchester, 8, 13,
297, 301, 305, 307
Centre for Process Integration and
Intensification, European
Community Project, 298, 302,
305, 307
Centre for Process Systems
Engineering, Imperial College
London, 298, 310
Centre for Technology Transfer in the
Process Industries, Bucharest, 298
CFP. See carbon footprint
Charles Parsons Institute, University
of Limerick, 298, 302, 305, 308
CHEMCAD, 205206
Chemical Engineering, Chemical
Equipment Design and
Automation (CHISA), 296
I n d e x
347
Chemical Engineering and Processing,
307, 310
Chemical Engineering Science, 307, 310
Chemical Engineering Transactions, 297,
307, 310
Chemical Process Engineering
Research Institute (CPERI), 302
CHISA. See Chemical Engineering,
Chemical Equipment Design and
Automation
Chiyoda Corporation, Energy Frontier
Business Development Office, 298
CHP. See Combined Heat and Power
(CHP) systems
CLIMA Congress, 296
CO
2
. See carbon dioxide emissions
cogeneration, 45
in advanced gas turbines/FCs, 4
application of PI/HI method to,
1213
in oil refineries, 45
Cold Composite Curve, 15
combinatorial algorithms, 8
combined analysis:
conferences, 306
journals, 307
projects, 308309
service providers, 307308
Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
systems, 4, 7
compact heat exchangers, 4
Composite Curves (CCs):
BCCs, 15, 6869
cold, 15
data precision and, 286
EGCCs and, 270
FCC process with, 254
GCCs and, 6064, 79, 221, 227, 229,
232, 235, 246, 270
heat recovery and constructing
total site, 99
heat recovery for multiple streams
and, 5154
hot, 15, 52
materials reuse-recycle and supply
chain, 138
regional resource management, 142
shifted, 63
utility placement and, 245
water minimization, WATER and
limiting, 266
water pinch technology and
limiting, 249
Computer Aided Chemical
Engineering, 307
Computer Aided Process Engineering
(CAPE), 11
Computer-Aided Systems Laboratory,
Princeton University, 310
Computers & Chemical Engineering, 310
Conceptual Design of Chemical Processes
(Douglas), 315
conceptual modeling:
data extraction about operating
units, 34
network/topology data
identification, 3435
conclusions:
better utilization of low-grade
heat, 319
books and key articles, 313315
development trends, 316320
energy planning, CFP and, 319320
hybrid energy conversion
systems, 317
integration of renewables and
waste, 317319
lecture notes and online teaching
resources, 315
maintenance scheduling,
maintainability and reliability,
316317
optimization and optimal design of
industrial processes, 315
PI and, 313315
top-level analysis, 316
Conference on Process Integration,
Modeling and Optimisation for
Energy Saving and Pollution
Reduction, 11
conferences, 11
combined analysis, 306
general information sources,
295296
HI, 301
mass integration, 304
optimization for sustainable
industry, 309310
continuous variables, 26
convex optimization problem, 27
cooling:
demand and data extraction, 50
HI parameter values for heating
and, 183
water, 51
COWI A/S, 298
CPERI. See Chemical Process
Engineering Research Institute
CPLEX code, 35
crude-oil distillation system:
changes in heat transfer area due to
retrofit, 260
de-bottlenecking heat-integrated,
256262

348
I n d e x
crude-oil distillation system (Cont.):
flowsheet of, 257
initial HENs for, 259
modified HENs for, 261
pinch analysis results for
operating points of
preheating phases, 258
curve-fitting methods search
algorithms, 30
cutting planes, for solving discrete
problems, 31
Czech Society of Chemical
Engineering, 11
D
Dansk Energi Analyse A/S, 297
data extraction:
avoiding pitfalls, 283292
calculating heat loads and
temperatures of extracted
streams, 289290
changes in specific heat capacities,
286287
conceptual modeling, 34, 40
estimating capital and operating
costs, 290292
example process flowsheet, 49
extracting at effective temperatures
and, 289
extracting utilities and, 288
extraction of cold stream and, 288
from flowsheet heat loads, 290
forced and prohibited matches, 289
generating utilities and, 288289
heat losses and, 288
heating and cooling demands, 50
HI and, 48
integrated placement of processing
units and, 234238
keeping streams separate when
necessary, 289
plus-minus principle with soft, 291
precision, 285286
rules /guidelines, 287289
soft data in plant/process
flowsheet, 290
streams, 284285, 289290
data validation technology, 7
decarbonization, 142143
decision variables, 25
DEFRA (Department for
Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs), 298
Department of Chemical and
Biochemical Engineering,
University of Denmark, 302
Department of Chemical and
Environmental Engineering,
University of Nottingham
Malaysia, 298
Department of Chemical and Process
Engineering, Rzeszow
University of Technology, 302
Department of Chemical Engineering:
Auburn University, 297
MIT, 298
University of Maribor, 298
University of Massachusetts, 308
University of Monash, 302, 305
University of Pretoria, 298
Department of Computer Science and
Systems Technology, University
of Pannonia, 299, 310
Department of Energy, U.S., 300
Department of Energy and Climate
Change, U.K., 299
Department of Energy and
Environment, Chalmers
University, 299, 302
dependent variables (in process
optimization), 25
descent-based algorithms, 30
detailed audit, 6
deterministic search algorithm
solutions:
constrained nonlinear p
roblems and, 31
solving continuous LPR
problems and, 29
solving continuous NLP problems
and, 2931
solving discrete problems and, 3132
unconstrained nonlinear problems,
30
diagrams:
CCs, hydrogen networks and
hydrogn surplus, 124
FCC grid, 255
heat pinch technology and
calculated grid, 222
HENs and grid, 83, 84
IT-domain/UML, 24
materials resue-recycle and interval
flow rate, 136
MRPD, 116117
onion, 48
utility placement and preliminary
grid, 241
water pinch technology and
minimum water flow rate, 250
distillation processes:
appropriate placement against
GCCs, 79
I n d e x
349
distillation processes (Cont.):
distillation column and, 78
extended pinch technology and,
7780
heat pump placement across utility
pinch, 77
refrigeration systems and, 77
dividing-wall distillation
technology, 4
Dubrovnik Conference on Sustainable
Development of Energy,
Water and Environment
Systems, 296, 301
E
EC. See European Community
ECCE. See European Congress of
Chemical Engineering
Ecological Modelling, 307
EEBPp/U.K. See Energy Efficiency
Best Practice Programme
EGCC. See exergy grand composite
curve
emergy-pinch analysis, 126129,
130131
EMINENT 2, 214, 303
emissions/effluents:
CO
2
emissions, 138139
FCCC system boundary and
processing steps, 184
flowsheet and P-graph of FCCC
system, 184
materials, streams and, 185
minimizing, 183186
types of, 23
energy:
audits of, 5, 6
low-temperature, 143144
recovery case study, 253256
renewable, 2, 34, 216218, 317319
superstructure for low-
temperature, 143
targets, 5154
Energy, 301, 307
energy efficiency:
basic pinch technology and, 5069
Carbon Trust recommendations,
56
CFP and, 319320
defined, 3
EGCC for meat-processing plant
and, 270
extended pinch technology and,
6981
food/drink industries and, 268271
heat recovery pinch and, 5456
energy efficiency (Cont.):
HENs synthesis and, 8196
importance of optimization, 2
improvement studies, 11
PI basics and, 4750
PI for improving, 45104
Pinch Technology and, 3, 14, 5069
proposed utility system matched to
process GCCs, 270
technology examples, 4
total site energy integration and,
96104
U.K residential data (1971), 8
Energy Efficiency Best Practice
Programme (EEBPp/U.K.), 6
Energy Information Administration,
USA, 299
Energy Research Group, University of
Waikato, 299, 302
Energy Science and Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology,
299, 302
energy systems:
flowsheet and hP-graph, 177
optimal retrofit design and, 177179
optimization and synthesis of,
176179
simple HI and, 176177
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), U.S., 300, 303, 311
EPA. See Environmental Protection
Agency
equation construction, 3537
ESCAPE. See European Symposium
on Computer Aided Process
Engineering
EUBIONET 3, 304
Europe Energy Efficiency
Conference, 296
European Community (EC), 8
European Congress of Chemical
Engineering (ECCE), 296
European Federation of Chemical
Engineering Working Party, 11
European Integrated Pollution
Prevention and Control
Bureau, 299
European Symposium on Computer
Aided Process Engineering,
295, 310
European Symposium on Computer
Aided Process Engineering
(ESCAPE), 11
evaluation tree, of MILP, 3132
EVECO Brno, 299, 302
exergy grand composite curve
(EGCC), 270

350
I n d e x
F
Faculty of Technology, Lappeenranta
University of Technology, 302
FCC. See Fluid Catalytic Cracking unit
FCCC. See Fuel-Cell Combined Cycle
(FCCC) subsystems
FCs. See fuel cells
Fibonacci method search algorithm,
30
flow-rate targeting:
MRPD and, 116117
MRPD for pure/impure fresh
resource, 117
flowsheeting simulation packages:
ASPEN, 202203
CHEMCAD, 205206
gPROMS, 204
HYSYS and UniSim Design, 203
PRO/II, 206
software tools, 202206
flowsheeting simulation tools, 39, 40
optimization technology and, 7
flue gases, 23
Fluid Catalytic Cracking unit (FCC):
CCs and, 254
energy recovery case studies/
examples, 253256
grid diagram of chosen retrofit
option, 255
process example, 21
FOB (Free On Board) cost estimate
method, 16
food industry, HI application, 13
footprints:
carbon, 23, 13, 20, 319320
water, 108111, 320
Fraunhofer Institute for
Environmental, Safety and
Energy Technology
(UMSICHT), 299
Frontline Systems, 209
fruit juice case study, 111112, 117118,
119
fuel cells (FCs):
CO
2
emissions and, 4, 9
cogeneration in advanced gas
turbines and, 4
Fuel-Cell Combined Cycle (FCCC)
subsystems, 89
emission/effluents and, 184
G
GA technique application (stochastic
search method), 32
GAMS, 35, 206207
gas turbines, advanced, 4
gaseous waster streams, 23
GCCs. See Grand Composite Curves
general information sources. See
information sources, general
genetic programming stochastic
search method, 32, 33
Global Footprint Network, 299
global optimality, 2829
global warming, 11
golden section method search
algorithm, 30
good housekeeping approach, water/
wastewater, 5
Gover transformation reformulation
technique, 42
gPROMS, 204
gradient-based (local search)
algorithms, 2829
Grand Composite Curves (GCCs):
appropriate placement of
distillation against, 79
construction and multiple utilities
targeting, 63
heat pinch technology and, 221
processing units and, 235
proposed utility system matched
to, 270
relation between SCCs and, 64
threshold problems and, 6061
total sites for process A, 227, 229,
232
total sites for process B, 229, 232
utility placement and, 246
utility placements and, 6162
graph-theoretical approach, 35
gray box (steady-state model), 2324
green biorefineries, 171173
green water, virtual, 108
greenhouse gas emission:
CFP and, 2
reduction methods, 34, 5, 11
grey water, virtual, 109
H
heat:
better utilization of low-grade, 319
integration and data extraction, 48
steam, 5051
heat engines:
appropriate placement of, 72
configuration, 71
HI of energy-intensive processes
and, 7172
integrating steam turbine above
pinch, 72
I n d e x
351
Heat Exchanger Networks (HENs),
1213
achievable target calculations, 39
algorithms, 19
CCs and, 15
compact, 4
completed design, 89
completing design, 8792
conventional flowsheet, 82
cost estimation and, 16
data extraction design
considerations, 40
design above pinch, 88
design above process pinch and
design below pinch, 88
design below process pinch and
design procedure, 8387
of the FCC process (example), 21
feasible heat exchanger match
above pinch, 86
general process flowsheet to
represent, 82
grid diagram and implications of
pinch, 84
grid diagrams for, 83
heat recovery and, 4547
Heat Recovery pinch concept and,
1415
hot/cold streams with, 89
hybrid approach, 9596
implementing matches with, 47
infeasible heat exchanger match
above pinch, 86
key features of resulting
networks, 96
mass balances/problems, 36
matches, 4647
MER for, 39
multistream, 4
pinch design method, 8193
pinch design principle and, 85
retrofitting of, 1617, 21
spaghetti-type topology (of heat
transfer), 15
splitting above pinch and, 89
splitting and trivial tick-off, 91
splitting below pinch and, 90
splitting to enable CP values for
essential matches and, 91
superstructure approach, 9395
supertargeting of, 1516, 17
synthesis, 8196
synthesis methods, 14, 19, 3840
tick-off heuristic and, 87
Heat Integration (HI), 78
building complexes, power and,
275277
conferences, 301
crude-oil distillation system and
de-bottlenecking with, 256
262
distillation processes and, 7780
energy-intensive processes and,
7180
Gantt chart of optimal solution, 183
globally optimal schedule for case
study, 181
heat engines and, 7172
heat pumps and, 7277
HENs and, 1213
IEA definition, 12
journals, 301
methodology dissemination, 113
parameter values for heating/
cooling, 183
power systems and, 142144
process CCs for hospital complex,
276
process stream data of hospital
complex, 276
production schedules, 180183
projects, 303304
recipes for products, 182
scheduling data for case study, 180
S-graph representing recipe for
case study, 181, 182
Heat Integration tools:
HEAT-int, 195
HEXTRAN, 199200
SITE-int, 198
software and, 195201
spreadsheet-based, 200201
SPRINT, 195
STAR, 195198
SuperTarget, 200
WORK, 198199
heat pinch technology:
calculated grid diagram and, 222
calculated MER heat cascade, 221
case studies, 219226
exchangers violating pinch, 224
existing HENs and, 220
first problem, 219224
GCCs, 221
load-shirt path identified, 222
minimum allowed temperature
difference, 225
optimal HENs and, 226
process stream data, 224

352
I n d e x
heat pinch technology (Cont.):
second problem, 224226
utility requirements and cost, 225
heat pumps, 7
configuration, 73
and, 7277
placement against heat recovery
problem, 74
procedure for sizing, 74
sizing example, 7576
heat recovery:
constructing hot CCs and, 52
constructing total site CCs and, 99
evaluation of multiple streams,
5154
heat exchange and, 4547
heat exchange matches and, 4647
between hot/cold stream, 51
implementing matches with, 47
limits for process, 54
problem and partitioning, 5556
problem identification and PI
basics, 4850
via steam systems, 99100
targeting, 100
thermodynamic limits on, 51
variation of targets with, 53
heat recovery pinch:
energy efficiency and, 5456
HENs and, 1415
limits for process heat recovery
set by, 54
trade-off between investment and
energy costs with, 54
heat transfer:
area, capital cost and total cost
targeting, 6970
enhancement and pressure drop,
146148
Heat Transfer Engineering, 301
HEAT-int, 195
Hebling Technik, 308
HENS. See Heat Exchanger Networks
HEXTRAN, 199200
HI. See Heat Integration
high-temperature FCs
(MCFC/SOFC), 4
hill climbing stochastic search
method, 32
Honeywell, Canada, 311
hospital complex example, 21
Hot Composite Curve, 15, 52
hot oil utilities, 66
Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) Department, U.S., 3
HUD. See Housing and Urban
Development
Hungarian Chemical Society, 11
hybrids:
approach, 9596
energy conversion systems, 317
hydrogen networks
CCs and hydrogen surplus diagram
with, 124
PI and, 123125
HYSYS/UniSim Design, 203
I
ICheaP. See Italian Conference on
Chemical and Process
Engineering
ICOSSE. See AlChE International
Congress on Sustainability
Science and Engineering
IEA. See International Energy
Agency
ILOG ODM, 209210
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry
Research, 310
industrial applications:
case studies and, 253280
de-bottlenecking heat-integrated
crude-oil distillation system,
256262
energy efficiency in food/drink
industries, 268271
energy recovery from FCC unit,
253256
heat/power integration buildings
and building complexes,
275277
minimizing water/wastewater in
citrus juice plant, 262268
optimal design of supply chain,
277279
scheduling large-scale paint
production system, 279280
synthesis of industrial utility
systems, 271275
information hiding, 39
information sources, general:
conferences, 11, 295296, 301, 304,
306, 309310
further reading and, 295311
general, 295301
HI, 301304
journals, 297, 302, 304305, 307, 310
industry, 309311
I n d e x
353
information sources, general (Cont.):
projects, 301, 303304, 306,
308309, 311
service providers, 297301,
302303, 305306, 307308,
310311
Institute for Scientific Research,
University of Guanajuato, 299
Institute of Process and
Brno University, 299, 302
integer programming (IP) model,
25, 27
integer variables (in process
optimization), 26, 27
International Energy Agency (IEA),
300
energy monitoring techniques
and, 3
Heat Energy definition of, 12
IP. See integer programming
Italian Association of Chemical
Engineering, 11
Italian Conference on Chemical and
Process Engineering (ICheaP),
296, 301, 306
J
Journal of Clean Technologies and
Environmental Policy, 304, 307
Journal of Cleaner Production, 297,
305, 307
Journal of the Chinese Institute of
Chemical Engineers, 310
Journal of Universal Computer
Science, 310
journals:
general information sources, 297
HI, 301
industry, 310
K
KBC Energy Services, 300, 303, 305
key performance indicators (KPIs), 7
KKT (Karush-Kuhn-Tucker)
optimality conditions, 28
L
Laboratory for Analysis and Synthesis
of Chemical Systems, Institut de
Chimie-Btiment B6, 303
Laboratory for Industrial Energy
Systems, Ecole Polytechnique
Federale de Lausanne, 300,
303, 311
Lagrange multipliers, 28
laws, second thermodynamic, 51
legislation, water, 106107
Lehrstuhl fr Technische
Chemie A, 300
life-cycle assessment, 23, 20
LINDO, 208209
line search algorithm, 30
linear optimization problem, 27
linear programming (LPR) models, 25
absence of integer variables and, 27
branch and bound method solution,
3132
convex, 28
deterministic algorithm
solutions, 29
equation construction, 35, 36
Simplex Method (algorithm)
solution, 29
Linnhoff, Bodo, 3, 13, 283, 294, 313314
local optimality, 28
Loss Prevention and Safety Promotion
in the Process Industries, 304
LPR. See linear programming models
M
maintainability:
maintenance scheduling, reliability
and, 316317
PI, integrating reliability,
availability and, 144146
mass balances, 3637
mass integration:
conferences, 304
design for low-temperature energy
systems, 144
flow-rate targeting with MRPD,
116117
304306
journals, 304305
MRPD applied to fruit juice case
study, 117118
new process design methodology,
145
projects, 306
software, 201202
summary, 122
water, minimizing use and
maximizing reuse, 106113

354
I n d e x
mass integration (Cont.):
water integration and, 105106
water minimization via
mathematical optimization,
118122
water pinch analysis introduction,
113116
material recovery pinch diagram
(MRPD):
flow-rate targeting and, 116117
fruit juice production, limiting
water data and, 117
MRPD for pure/impure fresh
resource, 117
materials reuse-recycle:
construction of interval flow rate
diagram, 136
material balance in aggregate
planning, 137
property pinch analysis and,
133136
supply chain CCs and, 138
mathematical modeling suites:
MATLAB, 210211
MATLAB alternatives, 211
mathematical optimization
fruit juice production, MRPD and
network design, 119
illustrative example of brewery
plant, 120122
introduction to, 118119
water minimization via, 118122
Mathematical Programming (MPR)
approach, 8, 14
model building/optimization
and, 24
model nonlinearity and, 4142
Network Pinch and, 17
network-related information
transformation, 35
PI and, 14
process optimization frameworks
and, 151153
process synthesis major steps
and, 153
superstructure formulation,
3536, 38
tools for designing chemical
processes, 20
MATLAB, 24, 29, 210211
Maximal Energy Recovery (MER), 39
Maximal Structure Generation (MSG)
algorithm, 38, 157158, 192
MCFCs. See molten-carbonate fuel
cells
Mechanical Engineering Faculty,
Paderborn University, 300
MER. See Maximal Energy Recovery
MILP. See mixed integer linear
program
MINLP. See mixed integer nonlinear
program
MIPSYN, 207208
mistakes. See pitfalls
mixed integer linear program (MILP),
25, 29, 160. See also successive
mixed integer linear program
convexity case-by-case
evaluation, 28
described, 27
deterministic methods for
solving, 3132
global optimality and, 29
nodes/evaluation tree of, 3132
mixed integer nonlinear program
(MINLP), 25, 27
deterministic methods for solving,
3132
model building and optimization,
2425
components, 2425
examples, 24
IT-domain diagrams/UML
diagrams, 24
model creation, 3343
conceptual modeling, 3435
evaluating adequacy and precision,
4243
graph-theoretical approach, 35
handling model nonlinearity, 41
handling process complexity, 3840
mass balances, 3637
objective function choice, 3738
object-oriented modeling, 3839
P-graph framework, 35
process insight application, 4041
Modelica modeling language, 24,
211212
molten-carbonate fuel
cells (MCFCs), 4
MPR. See Mathematical Programming
(MPR) approach
MRPD. See material recovery pinch
diagram
MSG algorithm. See Maximal
Structure Generation algorithm
multiple utilities targeting:
construction of GCCs and, 63
I n d e x
355
multiple utilities targeting (Cont.):
pinch technology and, 6169
utility placement options, 6369
utility placements, GCCs and, 6162
multistream heat exchangers, 4
N
network evolution:
loops, paths and, 93
splitting and advanced tick-off
with, 92
splitting procedure above pinch, 92
network optimization, 8
Network Pinch method, 1617, 21
network/topology data identification,
3435
Newton method search algorithm, 30
NLP. See nonlinear programming
(NLP) models
nodes, of MILP, 3132
nonisothermal stream mixing, 287
nonisothermal utilities, 6566
Nonlinear and Mixed-Integer
Optimization: Fundamentals and
Applications (Floudas), 315
nonlinear programming (NLP)
models:
absence of integer variables and, 27
convexity case-by-case evaluation, 28
penalty methods for solving
constrained, 31
simplex algorithm for
problem-solving, 29
numerical targeting, 5660
O
objective function, 25
object-oriented modeling, 3839
oil crises (19731974, 1979), 14
onion diagram, 48
open-source DWSIM chemical process
simulator, 24
operating costs, 290292
optimal process synthesis:
azeotropic distillation systems and,
173176
classification of optimization
methods, 167
heterogeneous flowsheets and, 169
171
optimization and, 167176
reaction network synthesis and,
167169
optimal process synthesis (Cont.):
steps for composition of maximal
structure, 169
synthesis of green biorefineries
and, 171173
optimal workflow structures:
P-graph, 171
plausible activities for, 170
synthesis of heterogeneous
flowsheets and, 169171
optimality conditions:
global search algorithms, 2829
local search algorithms, 28
optimality problems, stochastic
search methods for solving,
3233
optimization:
availability, reliability and, 186190
combined PI and, 165190
emissions/effluents minimized
and, 183186
methods with optimal process
synthesis, 167
network, 8
optimal design of industrial
processes and, 315
optimal process synthesis and,
167176
optimal scheduling for throughput,
profit, security and, 179183
optimal synthesis of energy
systems and, 176179
process synthesis and role of,
165166
summary, 190
tools for efficient implementation of
PI, 166167
water minimization via
mathematical, 118122
optimization, sustainable industry:
conferences, 309310
journals, 310
projects, 311
optimization packages,
general-purpose:
Frontline Systems, 209
GAMS, 35, 206207
ILOG ODM, 209210
LINDO, 208209
MIPSYN, 207208
optimization technology:
application, 9
flowsheeting simulation tools, 7
HENs retrofit, 1617

356
I n d e x
optimization technology (Cont.):
PI integration attempts, 13
sustainable industry and, 309311
OSL code, 35
oxygen pinch analysis, 125126
oxygen-water pinch analysis, 128129
P
paint production system, scheduling,
279280
parity plots, 43
Parliamentary Office for Science and
Technology, U.K., 2
penalty methods, for solving
constrained NLP, 31
PEPNET, 304
performance targets, 48
P-graphs, 89
algorithms and inputs/outputs
from, 158
availability and solution for energy
system, 186
azeotropic distillation systems
structure and, 176
emissions/effluents flowsheet
and, 184
mathematical engine, 157158
model building/optimization
and, 24, 35
MSG/SSG algorithms, 38
optimal retrofit design, maximal
structure and, 179
optimal workflow structures, 171
process representation via, 154155
process structure of operating units
and, 155
process structure violating axioms
and, 157
reduction in search space,
combinatorial axioms
and, 157
significance for structural process
optimization, 155157
structural process optimization
and, 153158
symbols of process elements
and, 154
PI. See Process Integration (PI)
Pinch Analysis:
benefits of using, 4041
data extraction and, 283284
for HI, 41
PI example, 21
pinch design method:
completing designs and, 8792
design procedure and, 8387
pinch design method (Cont.):
HENs representation and, 8183
network evolution and, 9293
Pinch Express, 283
Pinch Technology:
energy efficiency and basic, 3, 14,
5069
energy efficiency and extended,
6981
heat recovery pinch and, 5456
heat transfer area, capital cost,
total cost targeting and,
6970
and, 7180
multiple utilities targeting and,
6169
numerical targeting, PTA and,
5660
process modifications and, 8081
setting energy targets, 5154
threshold problems and, 6061
Pinch Technology (Linnhoff and
Vredeveld), 3
pitfalls, 281282
data extraction, 283292
integration of renewables,
fluctuating demand and
supply, 292
interpreting results, 293
making results happen, 293294
steady-state and dynamic
performance, 292293
PNS solutions:
graph-based process optimization
tools and, 191193
starting state of MSG
algorithm, 192
power:
cogeneration, 101102
integration, building complexes
and HI, 275277
water, 3
wind, 3
PRES. See Process Integration,
Modelling and Optimisation for
Energy Saving and Pollution
Reduction
pressure drop, 146148
primal algorithms, 31
Problem Table Algorithm (PTA):
heat cascade for process data, 59
numerical targeting and, 5660
process streams data, 58
temperature shifting to ensure
feasible heat transfer and, 57
I n d e x
357
process design:
onion diagram and, 48
PI, energy efficiency and, 4748
Process Design Center, Netherlands,
303
Process Integration, Modelling and
Optimisation for Energy Saving
and Pollution Reduction (PRES),
295, 301, 306
Process Integration (PI):
application of, 7, 9
audit procedure, 6
avoiding pitfalls, 281294
benefits of, 1820
data extraction, steps of, 34
defined/described, 12
examples, 2022
further applications of, 123150
HI component, 78
history and development of, 1214
improving energy efficiency and,
45104
MPR approach to, 14
needs for, 1112
Network Pinch, 1617
optimization and, 165190
optimization integration attempts,
1314
role in industrial sustainability, 20
targeting heat recovery and, 1415
thermodynamic roots of, 1415
Process Integration (PI), energy
efficiency and:
basic pinch technology, 5069
basics, 4750
extended pinch technology, 6981
heat recovery problem
identification and, 4850
HENs synthesis, 8196
HI and, 47
hierarchy of process design and,
4748
introduction to heat exchange and
recovery, 4547
performance targets and, 48
total site energy integration, 96104
Process Integration (PI), further
applications of:
budget-income-time pinch analysis,
131133
combined analysis II, 131142
decarbonization, 142143
design and management of
hydrogen networks, 123125
energy-water, oxygen-water,
pinch-emergy, 126131
Process Integration (PI), further
applications of (Cont.):
heat-integrated power systems and,
142144
integrating reliability, availability
and maintainability, 144146
local integrated energy sectors and
extended total sites, 148149
low-temperature energy, 143144
materials reuse-recycle and
property pinch analysis,
133136
oxygen pinch analysis, 125126
pinch analysis of supply chains,
136138
pinch used to target CO
2
emissions,
138139
pressure drop and heat transfer
enhancement in, 146148
regional resource management,
139142
summary, 149150
Process Integration Ltd., 300, 303, 305,
308, 311
process modifications:
hot and cold streams with, 81
plus-minus principle and, 80
process network model construction,
3637
process optimization, 2343
classes of problems, 2628
conditions for optimality, 2829
continuous/integer variables
and, 26
creating models, 3343
decision/dependent variables
and, 25
defined, 25
deterministic algorithm solutions,
2931
deterministic methods for solving
discrete problems, 3132
generic optimization problem, 26t
integer/binary variables and, 27
mathematical problem formulation,
2526
model building and, 2425
objective function component, 25
stochastic search methods, 3233
process optimization frameworks:
mathematical programming,
classical approach and, 151153
scheduling of batch processes and,
159163
structural process optimization,
P-graphs, 153158

358
I n d e x
process optimization tools,
graph-based:
PNS solutions, 191193
S-Graph Studio, 193195
Process Pinch, 21, 22
process synthesis:
heuristic/algorithmic methods of,
1314
major steps and mathematical
programming, 153
optimizations role in, 165166
P-graph synthesis, 89
process system engineering, 11
A Process Integration Primer
(Gunderson), 295
processing units:
CCs for process in problem 5, 234
data extraction and integrated
placement of, 234238
GCCs for process in problem 5, 235
process flowsheet for base-case
design and, 234
stream data for pinch analysis
and, 237
PRO/II, 206
projects:
general information sources, 301
HI, 303304
industry, 311
property pinch analysis, materials
reuse-recycle and, 133136
PTA. See Problem Table Algorithm
R
recipes, 161
HI, 181182
S-graph example, 162
S-graph representing case study,
181
reconciliation technology, 7
refrigeration, 7
levels, 6768
systems and distillation
processes, 77
utility systems and, 271
WORK and composition options/
ideal profiles with, 199
reliability:
maintenance scheduling,
maintainability and, 316317
optimization, availability and,
186190
reliability (Cont.):
PI and integrating availability,
maintainability and, 144146
renewable energy:
carbon neutrality and, 2
energy system sustainability
from, 34
energy systems and integrating,
216218
integration of waste and, 317319
software for analyzing integration
of, 216
Renewable Energy, 301, 307
residual plots, 43
resource management, regional:
CCs and, 139141, 142
flowchart of algorithm for, 140
PI and, 139142
regional energy supply-deficit
curves and, 141
surplus-deficit curves, 141
Resources, Conservation & Recycling,
297, 305, 307
retrofit design, optimal:
characteristics, operating unit costs
and, 178
energy systems and, 177179
flowsheet for considering
absorption, 179
P-graph of maximal structure, 179
revenue, maximizing, 179180
S
SA. See simulated annealing
SCCs. See Shifted Composite Curves
scheduling:
batch processes and process
optimization frameworks,
159163
frameworks, suitability, limitations
and S-graphs, 159161
graph of solution minimizing
makespan, 280
large-scale paint production
system, 279280
number of batches produced of
each product, 280
optimization, throughput, security
and optimal, 179183
reliability, maintainability and
maintenance, 316317
S-graphs and framework for, 161163
School of Chemical and
University of Nottingham
Malaysia, 305, 308
I n d e x
359
School of Chemical Engineering,
Purdue University, 311
Scilab computational package, 24
Scottish Environment Protection
Agency (SEPA), 300
screening and scoping audits, 56
search algorithms, for nonlinear
unconstrained problems, 30
second law of thermodynamics, 1415
segmentation, 286287
SEMPRA ENERGY, 3
SEPA. See Scottish Environment
Protection Agency
service providers:
297300
HI, 301303
industry, 311
S-Graph Studio, 193194
S-graphs:
batch processes and, 159163
example recipe, 162
framework for scheduling, 161163
HI and recipe for case study with,
181, 182
recipe for two batches, 162
scheduling frameworks, suitability
and limitations, 159161
solution for recipe under NIS
policy, 162
Shifted Composite Curves (SCCs), 63
relation between GCCs and, 64
simple heat integration, 176177
simplex method algorithm for LPR
problems, 29
simulated annealing (SA) stochastic
search method, 32, 33
simulation tools, 39
for process industry, 24
SITE-int, 198
SMILP. See successive mixed integer
linear program
SOFCs, 4
software tools:
balancing/flowsheeting simulation
for energy-saving analysis,
215
emerging trends, 212215
flowsheeting simulation packages,
202206
general-purpose optimization
packages, 206210
graph-based process optimization
tools, 191195
software tools (Cont.):
HI tools, 195201
integrating renewable energy into
other energy systems, 216218
mathematical modeling suites,
210211
Modelica, 24, 211212
other, 211218
overview of available, 191
WATER, mass integration software,
201202, 266
Solution Structures Generation
algorithm (SSG), 38, 157158
specifications, 25
spreadsheet-based tools, 200, 201
SPRINT:
HI tools and, 195, 286
software interface, 196
SSG algorithm. See Solution
Structures Generation algorithm
STAR, 286
graphical user interface, 196
HI tools and, 195198
steady-state models, 2324
steam:
heating with, 5051
system and heat recovery, 99100
stochastic methods:
error minimization tools and, 43
optimization problems and, 3233
streams:
aqueous, 23
CCs and heat recovery for
multiple, 5154
data extraction and, 284285, 289290
emissions/effluents, materials
and, 185
heat exchangers and multi, 4
heat recovery between hot and
cold, 51
structural process optimization:
mathematical programming and,
153158
MSG, SSG, ABB and, 157158
P-graph symbols of process
elements and, 154
P-graphs and process structure of
operating units, 155
P-graphs and process structures
violating axioms, 157
P-graphs mathematical engine and,
157158
P-graphs significance for, 155157
process representation via
P-graphs, 154155
reduction in search space,
combinatorial axioms and, 157

360
I n d e x
successive mixed integer linear
program (SMILP), 42
sunflower oil production, 21
superstructure approach:
HENs synthesis and, 9395
loop and path in heat exchanger
network, 93
spaghetti fragment and, 94
SuperTarget, 200, 283
supertargeting, 1516, 17, 70
supply chain:
activities in optimal, second/third-
best business processes, 279
case study, optimal design of,
277279
CCs and materials reuse-recycle,
138
cost of activities in case study, 278
potential activities in case
study, 277
Systematic Methods of Chemical Process
Design (Biegler et al.), 315
T
Tabu search, 32
TAPPI EPE (Engineering, Pulping and
Environmental Conference), 296
targeting procedures, 39
targets:
energy, 5154
variation of heat recovery, 53
Thermal Energy, Norwegian
University of Science and
Technology, 300, 303
thermodynamics:
limits on heat recovery, 51
roots, 1415
second law, 51
threshold:
HENs design cases, 60
low and high, 61
problems and GCCs, 6061
throughput:
maximizing, 179180
optimal scheduling for profit,
security and, 179183
tools:
complexity management, 39
flowsheeting simulation packages,
202206
HI, 195201
mathematical modeling suites,
210211
MPR and designing chemical
processes, 20
optimization and efficient
implementation of PI, 166167
tools (Cont.):
optimization packages, 206210
PI efficient implementation, 166167
PNS solutions and graph-based
process optimization, 191193
PNS solutions and S-Graph Studio,
193195
process industry and simulation,
24, 39
software, 191218
spreadsheet-based, 200, 201
stochastic methods and error
minimization, 43
topology data identification, 3435
Total Food, 296
total sites:
combined site heat sources for
problem 3(c), 230
data extraction, 107
data for process A, 227
data for process B, 227
energy sector with heat and
power, 148
GCCs for process A, 227, 232
GCCs for process B, 229, 232
heat recovery targets for
problem 4(a), 232
heat source and sink segments
from GCCs for Process A, 229
heat source and sink segments
from GCCs for Process B, 229
local integrated energy sectors and
extended, 148149
marginal steam prices for utility
system with, 103
optimized utility system and, 103
for problem 4(b), 233
for problem 4(c), 233
problem table for process A, 228
problem table for process B, 228
profiles, 9799
profiles for problem 3(c), 230
stream data for process A, 231
stream data for process B, 231
total sites energy integration, 96
advanced total site optimization
and analysis, 102104
data extraction, 97
heat recovery pockets, construction
of total sites profiles and, 98
heat recovery via steam system, 99100
power cogeneration, 101102
profiles, 9799
schematic of industrial total site, 97
I n d e x
361
trends:
conclusions, further information
and development, 316320
software tools and emerging,
212215
tri-generation, 5
U
UK Energy Research Centre, 300
UMSICHT. See Fraunhofer Institute
for Environmental, Safety and
Energy Technology
Uni-Sim Design/HYSYS, 203
UniSim process modeling
(Honeywell), 24
United Kingdom:
Department of Energy and Climate
Change, 299
Energy Efficiency Best Practice
Programme, 6
Energy Research Centre, 300
heat exchange case study, 4
Parliamentary Office for Science
and Technology, 2
residential energy consumption, 8
universities. See service providers;
specific departments
University College London Energy
Institute, 300
A User Guide on Process Integration for
the Efficient Use of Energy
(Linnhoff et al.), 313
utility pinch, 64, 77
utility placement:
appropriate, 246
available utilities and, 239
BCCs and heat recovery targets, 239
CCs, 245
constraints for placing hot oil
utilities and, 66
constructing GCCs for streams and,
63
exploiting GCCs pocket for utility
substitution with, 68
GCCs and, 246
generating steam below pinch, 67
heat cascade intervals and stream
population, 244
HENs design above process pinch
and, 242
HENs design below process pinch
and, 241
options and multiple utilities
targeting, 6369
utility placement (Cont.):
placing refrigeration levels for pure
refrigerants, 68
preliminary grid diagram and, 241
problem table, 245
process streams and, 239, 243
process streams with missing data
filled in, 240
properties of nonisothermal hot
utilities and, 65
relation between GCCs and
SCCs, 64
using GCCs to target for single/
multiple steam levels and, 64
utilities available and, 243
utility systems:
case study, synthesis of, 271275
configuration data for total
site, 272
operating scenarios for total
site, 272
optimal, 274, 275
sensitivity analysis for reducing
emissions, 274
superstructure of industrial, 273
temperature changed with
refrigeration levels, 271
total site profiles and candidate
steam pressure levels, 272
V
variables:
continuous/integer, 26
decision/dependent, 25
LPR and absence of integer, 27
vertical heat transfer, 15
Vredeveld, D. R., 3
VTT Technical Research Centre of
Finland, 303, 306
W
walk-through audit, 6
Warsaw University of Technology,
300, 303
waste, integration of renewables and,
317319
Waste Management, 307
wastewater, 23
minimizing water usage and,
111113
optimization of use approach, 56
overview of measures, 111112
treatment, 112113
WATER, 201202, 266

362
I n d e x
water:
BAT, 107108
citrus juice plant, minimizing
wastewater and, 262268
common usage operations, 109
cooling, 51
footprint, 108111, 320
integration, 105106
legislation, 106107
minimizing usage and waste,
111113
minimizing use and maximizing
reuse, 106113
optimization of use approach, 56
pinch analysis introduction, 113116
power, 3
quality, 128
Water Footprint Network, 306
water footprints, 320
virtual blue water, 109
virtual green water, 108
virtual grey water, 109
virtual water consumed while
processing food industry
products, 110
water minimization and, 111112
water minimization:
existing water network and, 264
fruit juice production, MRPD,
network design and, 119
limiting CCs generated by WATER
and, 266
via mathematical optimization,
118122
summary of four design options,
267
superstructure for water/
regeneration reuse in brewery
plant, 121
wastewater in citrus juice plant
and, 262268
water footprints and, 111112
water network after pinch analysis
and, 265
water reuse opportunities in
brewery plant, 121
water networks:
achievable target calculations, 39
mass exchange and, 1718
water pinch analysis:
limiting CCs and, 115
mass integration and, 113116
problem data for water-using
operations, 114
treatment system design and, 115
water pinch technology:
combined limiting water profiles,
248
connecting operations
directly, 252
data for water-processing
operation, 247
design grid for water system
and, 251
design strategy, 250
diagram used to target minimum
water flow rate, 250
flowsheet representation of water
system design, 252
limiting CCs and, 249
limiting water profiles for, 247
minimum wastewater targeting
and, 248
removing water mains, connecting
sources and sinks, 252
streams connected with water
mains and, 251
whiskey distillery, 22
wind power, 3
WORK:
HI tools and, 198199
refrigeration composition options
and ideal profiles, 199
World Bioenergy, 296
World Congress of Chemical
Engineering, 296
World Renewable Energy Congress:
Innovation in Europe, 296
World Sustainable Energy Days, 296

Jiri Klemes, Ferenc Friedler, Igor Bulatov, Petar Varbanov-Sustainability in the Process Industry_ Integration and Optimization (Green Manufacturing & Systems Engineering)-McGraw-Hill Professional (20

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Jiri Klemes, Ferenc Friedler, Igor Bulatov, Petar Varbanov-Sustainability in the Process Industry_ Integration and Optimization (Green Manufacturing & Systems Engineering)-McGraw-Hill Professional (20

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Sustainability in the

FIGURE 4.27 Enthalpy intervals.

FIGURE 4.43 The plusminus principle.

Starting reactants Final products

Q5 Steam Product / Output

W Power product Product / Output Electrical power to

Potrebbero piacerti anche

Jiri Klemes, Ferenc Friedler, Igor Bulatov, Petar Varbanov-Sustainability in the Process Industry_ Integration and Optimization (Green Manufacturing &amp; Systems Engineering)-McGraw-Hill Professional (20

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Jiri Klemes, Ferenc Friedler, Igor Bulatov, Petar Varbanov-Sustainability in the Process Industry_ Integration and Optimization (Green Manufacturing &amp; Systems Engineering)-McGraw-Hill Professional (20

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Sustainability in the

FIGURE 4.27 Enthalpy intervals.

FIGURE 4.43 The plusminus principle.

Starting reactants Final products

Q5 Steam Product / Output

W Power product Product / Output Electrical power to

Potrebbero piacerti anche

Jiri Klemes, Ferenc Friedler, Igor Bulatov, Petar Varbanov-Sustainability in the Process Industry_ Integration and Optimization (Green Manufacturing & Systems Engineering)-McGraw-Hill Professional (20

Jiri Klemes, Ferenc Friedler, Igor Bulatov, Petar Varbanov-Sustainability in the Process Industry_ Integration and Optimization (Green Manufacturing & Systems Engineering)-McGraw-Hill Professional (20