Issue 7 addresses the importance of operational optimisation in the development evolution and demonstration of clean energy solutions.

1. E|MISSION Statement ™
EMAIL enquiries@our-
future.co.uk
ISSUE
7
The
‘Emission
Statement’
sets
out
to
provide
a
view
of
the
application
and
potential
for
carbon
mitigating
technologies
as
they
strive
to
find
commercial
value
propositions
that
are
considered
supportable
by
policy
makers,
treasuries
and
tax
payers.
The
aspiration
from
publishing
such
a
document
is
not
to
provide
an
oracle
or
prescriptive
roadmap
for
clean
technology
development.
Instead
it
is
offered
as
a
simple
pragmatic
framework
for
all
stakeholders
to
be
able
to
consider
such
developments.
Far
too
frequently
the
complexity
of
situations
is
over
analysed
to
the
extent
it
creates
barriers
to
progress.
As
with
the
‘Engineering
of
Things’
(“EoT”)
though,
simplification
and
the
pursuit
of
solutions
can
be
much
more
productive
and
is
the
foundation
with
which
the
‘Emission
Statement’
is
presented.
Operational
Optimisation
Operational
optimisation
is
the
last
of
the
enabling
criteria
to
be
considered,
because
by
default
its
predecessors
are
the
foundation
of
design
expectation;
but
that
doesn’t
mean
it
is
the
least
important.
In
fact
the
opposite
is
the
case.
Different
operators
can
yield
different
performances
with
the
same
equipment.
Just
consider
teammates
within
the
world
of
Formula
1
if
you
want
to
understand
that
point.
It
is
only
through
actual
operation
that
the
range
of
performance
and
associated
outturn
costs
can
be
illustrated,
developed
and
optimised.
Operational
Optimisation
is
the
feedback
loop
for
technology
development,
which
must
be
managed
appropriately
and
with
greater
detail
as
it
evolves
from
concept
to
an
integrated
commercial
operation.
The
below
graphic
demonstrates
the
phasing
and
the
position
of
prominence
that
Operational
Optimisation
holds
within
the
Emissions
Model.
It
is
impossible
to
deliver
innovation
without
this
iterative
validation.
©
and
™
GB
Management
Services
Ltd
GB
Management
Services
Ltd
offers
consultancy
services
related
emissions
reduction,
process
and
operations
improvement,
and
the
development
clean/renewable
technology
projects.
Contact
Details:
Grant
Budge
Mobile:
+44
(0)
7780
920504 Email:
gbudge@our-­‐future.co.uk
Risk
Management
Application Application Application Application
Technology
Design
Integration
Market
Operational
Optimisation
Technology
Design
Integration
Market
Operational
Optimisation
Technology
Design
Integration
Market
Operational
Optimisation
Technology
Design
Integration
Market
Operational
Optimisation
Bench&Scale
(2&to&3&Years)
Pro4totype Scale
(2&to&3&Years)
Pilot&Scale
(3&to&5&Years)
Commercial&Scale
(3&to&5&years)
TRL 8 to 9TRL 4 to 5TRL 3 to 4 TRL 6 to 7
ABBREVIATION:
TRL
is
Technology
Readiness
Level

2. ©
GB
Management
Services
Ltd
Contact
Details:
Grant
Budge
Mobile:
+44
(0)
7780
920504 Email:
gbudge@our-­‐future.co.uk
E|MISSION Statement ™
Development
Cost
Vectors
The
graph
to
the
right
illustrates
the
upper
and
lower
cost
vectors
for
each
of
the
technology
design
pathways.
While
this
has
been
referred
to
more
than
once
through
progressive
Emission
Statement
issues,
it
bears
restating
under
consideration
of
‘Operational
Optimisation’;
if
for
nothing
else
but
to
demonstrate
the
vector
gradients
as
we
progress
from
Demand
Reduction
through
to
Demand
Containment;
and
from
Bench
to
Commercial
Scale.
The
reason
being,
that
any
errors
in
proper
operational
evaluation
can:
• Eliminate
valid
technology
progression;
• Hide
the
true
costs
of
technology;
or
• Miss
optimisation opportunities.
What
we
are
seeking
to
highlight
here
is
that
the
only
criteria
that
provides
a
sanity
check
to
these
gradients
is
Operation
Optimisation.
Get
it
right
and
you
will
advance
with
a
lower
cost
gradient!
All
good
narratives
return
and
reintroduce
statements
made
at
inception.
The
Emission
Statement
is
no
different.
In
Issue
1
we
introduced
the
Engineering
of
Things
(“EoT”)
– a
basic
construct
for
project
development.
You
will
hopefully
have
noticed
that
through
each
criteria
review,
at
least
some
part
of
the
EoT has
been
introduced
for
assessment:
• Core
Process
Optimisation
is
a
central
skill
within
Application and
Technology
Design;
• Waste
Valorisation,
Waste
Energy
/Heat
Recovery
is
a
central
skill
within
Integration;
and
• Bi-­‐product
production
is
a
key
skill
within
Markets.
Operational
Optimisation
takes
the
architecture
of
the
EoT holistically
and
ensures
it
is
fit
for
purpose
to
progress
forward
to
the
next
stage
of
development
(i.e.
bench
scale
up
to
commercialisation);
focussing
on
each
element
in
turn.
Full
Circle
PAPS
CADS
Cost
Core%Process%
Optimisation
Waste
Valorisation
Waste%Energy%/%Heat%Recovery
Bi;Product%Production
Minimise External%Waste
Increase%Net%Energy%Efficiency
Net%Unit%Cost%of%Core%Product%Production
No
matter
what
industry,
in
our
experience,
plant
operations
personnel
always
hold
valuable
insight
to
support
transferring
theory
to
practice; and
their
inclusion
in
system
development
is
essential.
When
entering
a
phase
of
operational
assessment,
first
the
core
process
must
be
brought
to
a
point
that
it
closely
reflects
predicted
performance.
This
is
ensuring
capacity
is
at
design
levels;
that
reaction
rates
and
residence
times
meet
expectations;
that
raw
material
to
product
conversion
rates
are
as
predicted;
and
that
the
product
quality
is
consistent.
Utopia
is
when
for
a
known
feedstock,
the
operations
team
can
adjust
accordingly
to
maximise
core
process
performance.
Once
achieved,
operations
personnel
can
begin
to
focus
on
energy
integration
(i.e.
heat
exchangers,
electricity
production);
with
the
balance
of
solid
and
gaseous
wastes
being
considered
for
valorisation as
bi-­‐
products.
Each
layer
of
optimisation progressing
towards
demonstration
of
the
lowest
cost
of
production
for
the
implemented
scale.

3. ©
GB
Management
Services
Ltd
Contact
Details:
Grant
Budge
Mobile:
+44
(0)
7780
920504 Email:
gbudge@our-­‐future.co.uk
E|MISSION Statement ™
The
easiest
way
to
frame
Operational
Optimisation
is
to
provide
an
illustration
of
all
potential
interactions
and
how
they
can
ultimately
make
or
break
a
strong
solution.
For
ease
of
ensuring
that
every
level
of
interaction
is
illustrated
we
provide
a
generic
Demand
Containment
technology
– a
process
plant
that
requires
gaseous
direct
thermal
heating
for
its
core
production
process. Under
this
scenario,
switching
to
hydrogen
as
a
source
of
energy
has
been
considered
technically
feasible.
In
the
below
diagram,
we
have
illustrated
the
primary
material
flows,
key
operational
nodes
(ie
boxes),
node
operational
control
criteria/objectives
and
the
background
colours denote
the
element
of
the
EoT being
progressed.
The
challenge
of
Operational
Optimisation is
that
as
the
design
develops
from
bench
to
commercial
scale,
consideration
of
cause
and
effect
on
the
cascade
of
process
controls
becomes
ever
more
important.
Illustration
-­‐ Demand
Containment
Central(process(needs(to(ensure(
1.#Homogeneous#thermal# activation
2.#Material#fluidity#through# vessel
3.#Uniform# residence#time#
4.#Consistent# product# quality
5.#Economic# raw#material#consumption
Hydrogen(production( &(CO2 separation
1.#Consistent# conversion# efficiency
2.#Consistent# product# quality
3.#Uniform# residence#time
4.#Economic# raw#materials#consumption
NATURAL
GAS
H2
APPLICATION
PRODUCT
CO2 Gas(Cleaning
1.#Consistent# product# quality
Integrated(Power(Production
1.#Optimise energy#conversion#
efficiency
Solid( Waste(Utilisation
1.#Consistent# product# quality
2.#Maximise conversion# efficiency
Waste(Heat(
Integration
BYE
PRODUCT
SOLID
WASTE
GASEOUS(
WASTE
Residual( Waste
1.#Asses#tertiary#
product#
applications
Residual( Solid(Waste
1.#Minimise landfill
CO2 Utilisation
1.#Homogeneous#activation
2.#Material#fluidity#through# vessel
3.#Uniform# residence#time#
4.#Consistent# product# quality
5.#Economic# raw#material#consumption
Residual( Gaseous(
Waste(Emitted
BYE
PRODUCT
Residual( CO2
Stored
ByEProduct
The
challenge
for
2050
emissions
reductions
is
the
evolution
of
such
process
flows
and
Operational
Optimisation
experience
to
allow
lowest
cost
delivery
of
the
required
low
carbon
world.
While
the
above
illustration
makes
this
progression
appear
complex,
we
would
remind
you
of
the
Application
and
Technology
Plan
profiled
in
Issue
4;
which
was
founded
on
logical
combined
benefits,
accepted
technology
merits
and
with
a
forward
view
on
least
risk
pathway
for
Operational
Optimisation.
It
doesn’t
need
to
be
Complex.
There
is
so
much
more
that
could
be
analysed and
profiled
within
the
various
scenarios
for
Operational
Optimisation of
low
carbon
energy,
but
for
simplicity,
we
feel
the
above
is
sufficient
to
identify
the
criterias importance.
In
Issues
8
and
9,
we
will
take
all
we
have
presented
and
profile
the
associated
value
and
risks.
Closing
Statement