Green Series

How food processors can successfully manage

water and utilities
Production demands are king, but processors can still find
efficiencies
 Discharge water is an area that processors need to pay attention to for both efficiency and regulatory concerns,
antiscalants making its way into discharge water. U.S. Water has developed PhosZero, an antiscalant that does n
image is of discharge water with no phosphorus.

Photo courtesy of U.S. Water

! PREV NEXT "

In an office building, there are all sorts of ways to reduce energy

April 9, 2018 and water usage.
Casey Laughman
Using daylight and outside air can cut energy and HVAC costs.
Aerators on sinks and low-flow toilets can reduce water usage.
HVAC set points can be raised to participate in demand-response
programs, power strips can be turned off at the end of the day to
prevent equipment from still drawing power, and high-efficiency
dishwashers in the breakroom can cut down on water usage.

But in food processing facilities, production demands make energy and

water efficiency entirely different challenges than they are in other
types of facilities, which means processors have to get creative when
they’re trying to improve their utilities management, save money and
meet corporate sustainability goals.

The office building comparison does apply in one important area: It

shows how energy and water have to be thought about differently in
food production plants and how processors have to make their case for
investments in equipment and training, without being able to take
advantage of something, such as new office lighting, having a six-
month payback.

There are ways to save energy and water in production, but they are
subordinate to production demands and regulatory requirements.
While office buildings have to comply with building codes, how
complex are those compared to FSMA requirements, other safety
regulations and customer demands for production practices that meet
certain standards?
“You can’t not get the food up to the kill temperature just to save
energy,” says Warren Green, vice president and manager of process
engineering for Hixson.

Green considers the steps involved in producing milk.

“It has to start cold, it has to get warmed up, then, if it’s traditional
white milk, you’ve got to bring it back down and refrigerate it again,”
he says.

All of that takes energy and water, and those demands grow
exponentially when you start adding in all the pieces of the production
process. That makes energy and water management and efficiency a
daunting task, but not an impossible one. Processors have options, and
understanding how those options can be taken advantage of is critical
to achieving savings in energy, water and the money required by both
of those things.

Measure twice, cut (costs) once

You’ve probably heard it a million times, and for good reason: You can’t
manage what you don’t measure.

You more than likely apply this concept to all aspects of your
production, even if you don’t put it in those terms. You measure how
many of a particular product come off of a production line damaged
during a run to make sure you’re within an acceptable failure rate. You
measure how much capacity you have during peak times and how much
wiggle room you have to expand production if necessary. You measure
the number of employees you have on a production line, how many
hours they work and how few you can get by with if circumstances
demand it.

You measure all those things, so that you can manage them, and your
utilities should be no different. It starts with looking at your utility bills
and asking two questions:

1. Why are we spending this much money on utilities?

2. What can we do to reduce the amount we spend?
That sounds pretty simple, and it is. But that’s just the starting point
for more complex questions, says Steve Tapper, food and beverage
industry consultant for U.S. Water. “In most cases, [processors] know
water in and water out, and not per their applications,” he says. “Most
plants are considerably off what the minimum requirements are and
what the maximum requirements are, but they don’t know that,
because they don’t have true measurement.”

This applies to energy as well. In both cases, it’s easy to find out the
top-line number of how much electricity, water and natural gas you’re
using. But how much electricity are your conveyor belts using? How
much water are you using for washdowns? How much natural gas are
your ovens and dryers using?

When you can answer those questions, then you have information that
you can really use to start finding efficiencies. Older equipment was a
“black box,” says Phil Kaufman, energy technology manager for
Rockwell Automation. You generally couldn’t pull any information
from it on how much energy it was using, so you couldn’t break down
energy usage by each step of the production process.

Now, each piece of equipment in your plant probably has reporting

capability—or, in the case of old machinery, could offer it if upgraded—
and all of that data can be evaluated to see how each piece demands
resources and how all of those resources add up.

“Whether it’s a machine or a pump or a valve, all of this information

now has some sort of energy content to it,” says Kaufman. “So, now
you’re getting this information, and the journey is to contextualize it
with manufacturing. You went from a black box to a lot of information,
and now the information needs context.”

There are a lot of ways to take advantage of that information, and they
range from upgrading or maximizing the capabilities of equipment to
offering improved training and focus on the operator’s role. But they
all start from the point of measurement, says Brett Robison, strategic
business leader in food and beverage industry for U.S. Water.

“You’ve got to measure,” he says. “You’ve got to measure quantity, and

you’ve got to measure the quality of the water you’re using in each
application. Once you do that, then you can look at prioritizing areas of
emphasis.”

Perspectives and priorities

Identifying and tackling those areas of emphasis may seem daunting,
and it can be overwhelming to think about how many individual
components there are in a production plant and how much electricity,
natural gas or water each one might be using. But if you start with good
data, it becomes a lot easier to make an evaluation of how efficient a
process is and how you can improve upon it.

For example, regulations require a certain amount of fresh water to be

used per bird processed in poultry plants. Do you have the data on how
close you are to that standard? You obviously can’t be below it, but you
don’t have to be 25 percent above it. Or if a kill step requires a
temperature of 180°F, are you going to 180°F or 181°F, or even higher
than that? If you can nail down how close you are to the goals you have
to hit, then you can determine if you’re hitting them in the most
efficient manner possible. One extra degree in an oven may not seem
like a big difference, but start thinking about how much extra energy it
requires over an entire production shift, work week, month or year, and
it adds up.

Another element of the regulatory aspect is requirements for elements,

such as discharge water, especially when it comes to materials in the
water. Local, state and federal regulations all require water to contain
“less than X” amount of different materials, and ensuring water doesn’t
break those rules can require energy investments.

“Things like phosphorus, for example, are getting more and more
tightly regulated,” says Robison. “Just because we were able to keep it
at 2 ppm for a decade coming out of the plant, maybe it’s going to
[hypothetically] be .5 ppm next year.”

Phosphorus is a common ingredient in antiscalants, and many states

prohibit any discharge of phosphorus, much less 2 ppm. U.S. Water has
recently developed an antiscalant that does not use phosphorus.
Phosphorus discharge is just one example of how the potential for
future tightening of regulations is another argument in favor of
processing something like discharge water as efficiently as possible. If
the regulations are going to tighten, you don’t want to get caught with
a process that isn’t efficient and is suddenly costing you huge amounts
of money, because you never bothered to evaluate that process.

So, the first step is ensuring that you’re hitting your required targets as
efficiently as possible. The next is taking a look at your processes from
both a big-picture and a detailed perspective to see if there’s anything
you can do to improve their overall efficiency, and not just saying,
“We’re meeting regulations, so we’re good.”

From a big-picture perspective, you can start with things such as

whether you can shift some of your production to a different time of
day. Peak demand hours put a lot of strain on the grid and result in big
charges on your electric bill, so can you schedule a production run for
second or third shift? Or, if you can’t do that, can you find other ways
to trim down your energy usage during peak hours?

Two charts from a Rockwell Automation white paper showing the

difference between a manufacturing operation with large efficiency swings
and one that is focused on high- efficiency operations.
Charts courtesy of Rockwell Automation

Your utility and your machines will both offer you data to help evaluate
your peak usage. The machines can tell you how much you’re using in
each part of the process; the utility can tell you how much your usage
during those times is costing you. Getting hit with a big demand charge
for a spike in usage during peak hours can cost literally thousands of
dollars.
“Just cognizance and knowledge that those charges are out there is
kind of like step 1, and step 2 is ‘Is there really something that we can
do substantively in our day-to-day operations?’” says Hixson’s Green.
“Some just don’t have that luxury, and others might have a little bit
more float in their schedule where they can shift things.

“But from a manufacturer’s perspective, if they’ve got a shipment, and

they’ve got to make product, they don’t let a demand charge get in the
way. Production is king, and they’ve got to be able to make product
when they need to make product.”

One equipment-based solution that can help is variable speed drives

and motors. Having to start a motor from 0 to 100 percent during peak
time is a budget buster. Ramping up a variable speed drive that’s
already running or only having to start a motor from 0 to 20 percent is
a whole lot more efficient and will cost a whole lot less money. By
having variable speed equipment available, you can meet production
needs or sudden increases in required capacity while still having some
level of control over the cost of doing so.

Another possibility is taking advantage of the off hours for things, such
as ice building, even if you can’t shift production. By making ice at
night, during times of lower demand, you can use it during the day to
help cool without having to make it on the fly.

Investing in efficiency
New equipment can offer huge advantages in terms of not only the
information it can provide, but in its operating efficiency. But that
leads to a bit of a conundrum for food processors: If you’re buying a
piece of equipment that has an expected lifespan of 15 or 20 years, will
it still be efficient as it approaches the end of its service time?

The answer, as it so often is, is “maybe.” A big capital investment now

might be top of the line in terms of efficiency, then be outdated
halfway through its expected lifespan. Unfortunately, there’s no way to
predict whether that will be the case, so processors have to be willing
to take that risk.
Even if a big capital investment means sacrificing some efficiency
opportunities down the road, there are other ways to still get the most
out of your production process overall. A dryer may last 20 years, but
other components of the production line may not, so they can be
replaced with more efficient options as they reach the end of their
operating life.

All of that means that processors need to do as much as they can up

front to be sure that they’re getting a piece of equipment that can help
them hit their efficiency targets over a reasonable timeframe. Data is a
huge part of that, of course, and having more of it available helps make
the business case for spending more up front to maximize long-term
savings.

When making the case for upgrades, large or small, processors can take
some steps to increase their chances of approval. The one that comes
to mind for most people is being able to show a relatively short
payback, because as more people become familiar with efficiency and
sustainability initiatives, they become more open to the idea of “pay
more now, but save much more over time.” When the people making
the financial decisions are open to that idea, then having a projection
backed by data makes it an easier sell to spend more money up front.

“People are still trying to make good business decisions, but they’re
trying to get a little more data-driven in their decision-making,” says
U.S. Water’s Robison. “You might walk into an old, old plant, but
they’ve got five new pieces of equipment that they just invested
millions and millions of dollars in. Well, sometimes, you’ve got to work
with what you’ve got; sometimes, you may have to put a plan together
to say, ‘This is somewhere where we might want to look at investing
capital at some point in time, because here’s the payback.’”

Operational efficiency
Equipment, data collection, measurement and strategy are all
important, but any or all of them can be ruined by inefficient
operations. To go back to the office building example, giving employees
access to the thermostats may cut down on complaints, but it probably
won’t do your heating bill any favors.
 A similar concept applies to plant operations. Automation and controls
can help by managing elements of the process efficiently, but operators
need flexibility to do their jobs. To keep that from ruining your best-
laid plans, you need to evaluate how operators do their jobs not only
from a production-efficiency standpoint, but from a resource-
efficiency standpoint as well, says Kaufman.

“Every operator’s different,” he says. “Even though there’s a lot of

automation, everybody sets up and tweaks things differently. We find
different operators are very good at their job, and then we find out ‘oh,
they leave everything on over lunches,’” which wastes energy.

“We want everybody to be like Joe [as an operator], but when we look at
the energy, we want everybody to be like Nancy.”

Training is key to making sure your operators are imitating the best
parts of both Joe and Nancy. Operating-efficiency training helps make
sure that they aren’t wasting time or resources by adding or duplicating
steps, and energy-efficiency training helps make sure they understand
when to shut down equipment or take other steps to ensure resources
aren’t being wasted.

Also, make sure your documentation of operating procedures includes

energy aspects.

Processors that put in the time and effort to operate efficiently will see
real results in terms of meeting goals and regulatory requirements.

For more information:

Hixson, www.hixson-inc.com
U.S. Water, www.uswaterservices.com
Rockwell Automation, www.rockwellautomation.com

Recent Articles By Casey Laughman

Improved sugar rebagging helps company find
sweet success

How a pasta maker has maximized packaging

efficiency

200 Million eggs recalled due to potential

Salmonella
California Federal Milk Marketing Order
delayed
APHIS announces supplemental requirements
for citrus fruit from Colombia
Copyright ©2018. All Rights Reserved BNP Media.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing
Casey Laughman is the Senior Editor of Food
Engineering magazine. He has almost two decades’
experience as a writer and editor for mainstream and
trade publications. He spent several years as a writer
and editor for two news services before becoming the
editor of a legal publication and managing editor of a
trade magazine that covered the commercial facilities
market.