DECREASING ENERGY INTENSITY IN MANUFACTURING

Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program

Committee for Review of the Department of Energy’s Industrial Technologies Program

Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program DECREASING ENERGY INTENSITY IN MANUFACTURING Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program Committee for Review of the Department of Energy’s Industrial Technologies Program Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 FIFTH STREET, N.W. WASHINGTON, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Contract No. DE-AT01–04EE650009 between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of Energy. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number 0-309-09574-3 Copies of this report are available in limited quantities from: Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design 500 Fifth St., N.W. Washington, DC 20001 202–334–2589 bmed@nas.edu http://www.nationalacademies.org/bmed Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624–6242 or (202) 334–3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2005 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M.Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm.A.Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V.Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M.Alberts and Dr. Wm.A.Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY’S INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES PROGRAM JOSEPH G.WIRTH, Chair, Mount Shasta, California VIOLA L.ACOFF, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa ALEXIS G.CLARE, Alfred University, Alfred, New York KEVIN A.DAVIS, Reaction Engineering International, Salt Lake City, Utah NICHOLAS J.GIANARIS, General Dynamics Land Systems, Sterling Heights, Michigan JOANNA R.GROZA, University of California, Davis WARREN H.HUNT, JR., Aluminum Consultants Group, Inc., Murrysville, Pennsylvania GEORGE D.PFAFFMANN, Ajax Magnethermic TOCCO, Madison Heights, Michigan PETER H.PFROMM, Kansas State University, Manhattan WILLIAM H.PLENGE, Potomac Services International, Inc., Harwood, Maryland JEFFREY J.SIIROLA, Eastman Chemical Company, Kingsport, Tennessee T.S.SUDARSHAN, Materials Modification, Inc., Fairfax, Virginia RICHARD E.TRESSLER, Pennsylvania State University, University Park COURTNEY A.YOUNG, Montana Tech of the University of Montana, Butte Staff BONNIE A.SCARBOROUGH, Program Officer MARTA VORNBROCK, Research Assistant

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program BOARD ON MANUFACTURING AND ENGINEERING DESIGN PAMELA A.DREW, Chair, The Boeing Company, Seattle, Washington CAROL L.J.ATKINS, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico GREGORY AUNER, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan RON BLACKWELL, AFL-CIO, Washington, D.C. THOMAS W.EAGAR, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge ROBERT E.FONTANA, JR., Hitachi Global Storage Technologies, San Jose, California PAUL B.GERMERAAD, Intellectual Assets, Inc., Saratoga, California THOMAS HARTWICK, Snohomish, Washington ROBERT M.HATHAWAY, Oshkosh Truck Corporation, Oshkosh, Wisconsin PRADEEP K.KHOSLA, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania JAY LEE, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee DIANA L.LONG, Robert C. Byrd Institute for Flexible Manufacturing, South Charleston, West Virginia MANISH MEHTA, National Center for Manufacturing Sciences, Ann Arbor, Michigan NABIL Z.NASR, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, New York ANGELO M.NINIVAGGI, JR., Plexus Corporation, Nampa, Idaho JAMES B.O’DWYER, PPG Industries, Allison Park, Pennsylvania HERSCHEL H.REESE, Dow Corning Corporation, Midland, Michigan HERMAN M.REININGA, Rockwell Collins, Cedar Rapids, Iowa LAWRENCE RHOADES, Extrude Hone Corporation, Irwin, Pennsylvania JAMES B.RICE, JR., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge VINCENT J.RUSSO, Dayton, Ohio DENISE F.SWINK, Germantown, Maryland ALFONSO VELOSA III, Gartner Consulting, Tucson, Arizona BEVLEE A.WATFORD, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg JOHN F.WHITE, Altarum, Ann Arbor, Michigan Staff TONI G.MARÉCHAUX, Director

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program This page intentionally left blank.

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program Preface For more than a decade, the Department of Energy (DOE) has supported the Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) as one element in achieving its overall mission and goals. The mission of the ITP is to decrease energy intensity in the U.S. industrial sector through a coordinated program of research and development, validation, and dissemination of energy efficiency technologies and operating practices. At the request of the DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the National Research Council (NRC) established the Committee for Review of the Department of Energy’s Industrial Technologies Program. Committee members were selected from industry, academia, and government laboratories for their knowledge and experience with the Industries of the Future and supporting areas within the ITP. An overall review of the ITP was conducted by the committee on May 19–21, 2004, with ITP managers in Washington, D.C. Information from that review forms the primary basis for this report. The committee was tasked to do the following: Evaluate the overall ITP strategic plan as contained in the Multi-Year Program Plan (MYPP), including whether the strategic plan is appropriate, has reasonable and achievable goals, and reflects the needs of the DOE and the broader U.S. industrial community; Evaluate the technical quality and appropriateness of individual subprogram plans by reviewing both the decision-making process and each prospective portfolio, including the following: how focus areas and barriers were identified; whether appropriate data sources were used; whether the data used (studies, roadmaps, industry expertise) support the selection of focus areas and barriers; whether the focus areas and barriers are the highest priority or most appropriate related to the ITP’s mission; how the R&D pathways were determined and whether these pathways are likely to result in achieving program goals; whether the prospective subprogram portfolios are the right ones to achieve the goals of the ITP; whether there are unnecessary research areas or gaps in research; and whether there is a reasonable mix of near-, mid-, and far-term research; and Determine the prospective value of the MYPP and planning processes, including the likelihood that the program will achieve its goals; whether there is a good plan to carry out the program; how well the program is connected to the users, including non-ITP researchers; and the capacity to develop lessons learned for future interdisciplinary research activities. This report contains the committee’s assessment of the ITP strategy, how effectively it is being implemented, and the likelihood of achieving its program goals. It includes the committee’s conclusions

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program concerning the ITP and its subprograms, as well as recommendations on how to strengthen the overall program and improve each of the subprogram areas. I wish to thank the committee members for their enthusiasm, dedication, and insights in conducting the reviews and in preparing this report. The committee operated under the auspices of the NRC Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design and was ably assisted by Bonnie Scarborough and Marta Vornbrock of the NRC staff, for which the committee is also grateful. Questions or comments should be directed by e-mail to bmed@nas.edu or by fax to the BMED at (202) 334–3718. Joseph G.Wirth, Chair Committee for Review of the Department of Energy’s Industrial Technologies Program

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program Acknowledgments The Committee for Review of the Department of Energy’s Industrial Technologies Program extends its thanks to the following individuals for their considerable efforts in sourcing, consolidating, and presenting so much information: Jordan Blackman, Technology and Management Services, Inc.; J.Michael Canty, Industrial Technologies Program (ITP), Department of Energy (DOE); Isaac Chan, ITP, DOE; Sara Dillich, ITP, DOE; Simon Friedrich, ITP, DOE; Buddy Garland, ITP, DOE; Robert Gemmer, ITP, DOE; David Godfrey, Atlanta Regional Office, DOE; Ehr-Ping HuangFu, ITP, DOE; Ramesh Jain, ITP, DOE; Elliott Levine, ITP, DOE; Dickson Ozokwelu, ITP, DOE; James Quinn, ITP, DOE; Scott Richlen, ITP, DOE; Thomas Robinson, ITP, DOE; Peter Salmon-Cox, ITP, DOE; Paul Scheihing, ITP, DOE; Brian Valentine, ITP, DOE; Gideon Varga, ITP, DOE; and Harvey Wong, ITP, DOE. This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Daniel Berg, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Geoffrey Boothroyd, Boothroyd Dewhurst, Inc.; William F. Brinkman, Princeton University; Robert H.Doremus, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Neil E.Paton, Liquidmetal Technologies; Bhakta B.Rath, U.S. Department of the Navy; Herman M.Reininga, Rockwell Collins; and Peter A.Thorn, Weyerhaeuser Company. Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Robert A.Frosch, Harvard University. Appointed by the NRC, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program This page intentionally left blank.

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program Contents     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   1 1   INTRODUCTION   11      Industrial Technologies Program,   11      Committee for Review of the Department of Energy’s Industrial Technologies Program,   15      Organization of the Report,   16 2   PROGRAM-LEVEL EVALUATIONS   17      The Energy Policy Context,   17      Strategic Plan of the Industrial Technologies Program,   19      Multi-Year Program Plan of the Industrial Technologies Program,   20      Corporate Strategy of the Industrial Technologies Program,   21 3   EVALUATION OF INDUSTRY OF THE FUTURE SUBPROGRAMS   26      Industries of the Future,   26      Aluminum,   27      Chemicals,   30      Forest Products,   32      Glass,   34      Metal Casting,   36      Mining,   37      Steel,   40      Overarching Recommendations for Industry of the Future Subprograms,   42 4   EVALUATION OF CROSSCUTTING SUBPROGRAMS   44      Combustion,   44      Sensors and Automation,   47      Industrial Materials of the Future,   49      Supporting Industries,   50      Software Tool Development,   52      Technology Delivery,   54      Regional Offices,   56 5   CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS   58     REFERENCES   61

OCR for page R1
Decreasing Energy Intensity in Manufacturing: Assessing the Strategies and Future Directions of the Industrial Technologies Program     APPENDIXES   65     A   Committee Biographical Information   67     B   Agenda of May 19–21, 2004, Meetings   71     C   Abbreviations and Acronyms   74