Hello, and welcome to the Cemtech live webinar, our penultimate for the year. Very happy to be here to introduce our panel of speakers today who'll be speaking about energy efficiency in cement plants. But before we get started, and as you are logging in, a quick word about next year. We've already published our webinar program for next year, starting from the 6th of June. This is our invitation to you to take a look at the program, see if there's anything that you'd like to take part in, and get in touch. We'd love to hear from you. So that's next year's webinar program. Already filling up fast, so please contact us as soon as you can if you wish to speak.
A quick word about International Cement Review. We are a monthly publication. As well as organizing Cemtech conferences, we also publish the Cement Plant Operations Handbook, your guide to running cement plants, everything you need to know, the ultimate reference, really designed for people who are interested in the kinds of things we're talking about here on the webinar. So if you are not already subscribed, then I do urge you to go to cemnet.com/subscribe. Take a look at our offering and for those of you who do, you will receive your free copy of the Operations Handbook. We've sold thousands and thousands of these. It's now in its seventh edition.
It's an invaluable resource, and it is the source. So don't believe everything you read on the internet. Get your copy and you will have your ultimate guide to operating cement plants. For those of you who are more commercially minded, who are needing to understand markets, and how the global cement consumption trends are moving, then this is the product for you. The Global Cement Report published just earlier this year, surveying around 170, 75 countries with statistics, geolocated plants, and a wealth of information about the global cement industry. Take a look at that online as well. But that brings us neatly to this webinar on advanced energy efficiency strategies for cement plants.
And we're delighted to have a kind of combination of speakers from different parts of the equipment and solutions sort of landscape. We will be hearing from Klüber Lubrication, from Christian Pfeiffer, grinding specialists, and from CTP on waste heat recovery. But to kick us off with a topic that's at the forefront of many people's minds when they're thinking of the newer technologies that can help us with energy efficiency, we're going to hear from Optimative. They're a company that's well known in the cement industry for its autonomous AI optimization products.
They've been really at the forefront of this area for many years, and I'm delighted that we have two of their experts here with us to speak today and I'm going to ask them now to share their presentation while I make the introduction. I'll just take mine down now. So Montse Roy, who's a cement business unit lead for Optimative, will be speaking. She's an industrial engineer and head of the business unit with over 20 years of experience in industrial technologies, process automation, and business development. She holds a degree in industrial engineering from the University of Polytechnic of Catalonia and an executive MBA.
She's joined with Ignacy Rodriguez, who is services director at Optimative. He's a PMP certified industrial engineer with over 10 years of experience in manufacturing, operational excellence, consulting, and industrial AI. He holds an executive MBA and has extensive expertise in leading multidisciplinary teams and delivering AI driven optimization solutions for major industrial clients worldwide. In his current role, he oversees international project delivery, customer support, and innovation. So over to you. From data to results, this is Optimative. Thank you, Thomas, for the very kind introduction and hello to everyone and welcome.
Here, as Thomas was speaking, we are going to tell you how we are bringing data to results when it comes to optimization. So efficiency depends not only on the equipment performance, and many of the colleagues here will speak a lot on equipment performance, but also on quality and the real-time decisions that we are making during these operations. So even when we have a very stable process, there is hiding margin. Why? Because process is moving. There are adaptations to fuels, there are raw materials, and we can show you how with OptiWat, we are bringing this data to increase the throughputs and reduce the thermal consumption, which basically is efficiency, thermal efficiency. Yeah.
So on today's agenda, we're going to explain to you how we are using non-linear models to close this gap between your margin and the optimal point. We're going to show you some case studies, and Iganti will also explain to you how we measure these conditions and how we measure this performance. So when we have a very stable set point, we cannot fix this optimum. This optimum is moving. We have material moisture, we have rentability problems, we have changes in flow and characteristics of these flows that might be different. So every shift is leaving decisions to the others. So how we do this, how we get to this point.
Iganti is going to tell you about how we approach with this AI, these non-linear models with your data, and how our system is optimizing in real time all these modifications that your equipment, your material is suffering. So Iganti. All this we are doing it thanks to our tool that is called Optiva 7. But what is Optiva 7? Well, Optiva 7 is the tool used in Optimative that feeds from process knowledge and process data in order to obtain these optimized set points that are fed back to the plant. But it's just not this. It has some specifics that we consider that bring additional value. First of all, it's a tool that is what is called no-code.
So it's a tool that is designed for engineers that don't know about coding. They don't know Python, they don't know about AI, they don't know about data science, but they have the process knowledge. So this is a tool designed specifically for them. The second point is that it's not a black box AI. Everything that the AI is doing is fully transparent, and every decision that the AI is doing can be analyzed and understood. And finally, this is a tool that is integrated in the pre-existing infrastructure. It doesn't require additional hardware. It uses the signals that you already have, and it's integrated directly in your own DCS or in your own SCADA screens.
Finally, the adaptability and the flexibility of the tool allow us to work in various specific issues and pains that you have in your day-to-day operations for any specific issue from your plant. Let's see a little bit how does it work inside of a plant. Right now, the system that you might have is a control system that is connected to a process, and you have some operators or engineers that are feeding some set points to this control system. What we do with Optiva is we gather the data directly from the control system to what we call Optiva RTO, or the optimizer.
And with this data and using Optiva Studio, we develop a solution that really understands how the asset, how the process works, understands the relationship between the different variables, and understands the connections. Once we develop this solution that is like a digital twin of the process, we feed it to Optiva RTO, and the operators and engineers can interact with it to define what are their priorities, what is the KPI they want to optimize, what are the limits they want the system to respect, what are the process constraints that are mandatory to follow, and they can do it in a dynamic way. They can change it in real time.
This information, using Optiva RTO, is processed, and with that, it gives the optimal set points to the control system. That means that it will give to the control system what is the optimum value for the throughput, what is the optimum value for the separator, what is the optimum value for the fan, and so on. And it's not just that. The system will be fed by this process information, and it's going to be learning constantly. It's going to improve the models with time, and it's going to keep on bringing more and more value to the customer. But at the end, this is not just about having a new AI tool. It's about the value that this tool can bring. The tool is AI. The results are not AI.
Let's see how an actual deployment works. This deployment usually is divided in five steps, and it takes around 20 weeks. First, we work with the business and with the process engineers in order to identify what is the asset that we want to optimize and what is the KPI. The reasons to choose an asset or a KPI vary, but it can be, for example, because the plant is sold out and this is a bottleneck, or maybe the energy cost is very high, or maybe there is a need to reduce the CO emissions.
Then the team, working with Optiva Studio, will develop the solution, always talking with the plant, understanding what are the needs, what are the specifics that are needed in that specific plant, in that specific asset. Once this is developed around the end of week 12 We can deploy it in plant. This deployment usually includes a visit to the plant, and together with the people in the plant, we connect it to the existing DCS, and we test it. The objective is by the end of this commissioning phase, the system will be working in fully autonomous way, operating the asset. After this commissioning is done and the system is already providing results, you are not alone.
There is a maintenance phase where we will keep up adding more value, adding new functionalities, and fixing any potential issues. Once we have all this, the easiest thing to do is to replicate. We already have a solution that works, so it's very easy to replicate to other assets and add more value even faster. During all this process, there is a team that is assisting the project. Project managers, engineers, technicians, data scientists will be developing all this value. But we also have different models of working. First of all, the model. Usually, we provide the software and also the services.
But the other model that we have is that we provide the software and the training so that the engineers of the customer themselves can use this tool to develop their solutions. Also, this system can work on premise in the plant itself, but it can be cloud-hosted. The model can be a one-off purchase, pure CapEx buying a license, but it can also be a subscription. And finally, we can use the interface of the system, of Optiva, but also all the interface can be integrated directly in the tools that your operators or your engineers already know, in your DCS, in your SCADA, so forth. Let's look at a case in a kiln. Let's say that we have a kiln, a container, and a cooler.
The kiln provides the clinker to the cooler that gives back some energy in form of hot air. In this specific case, we have some alternative fuels that are very unstable. We have different type of supplies, we have different qualities, we have different moisture. So we have some variety that is coming into the kiln. Also, in this case, let's suppose that we have a waste heat recovery system that is taking the excess heat from the exhaust of the cooler and using it for creating new electric energy. Optiva will sit on top of all the systems at the same time and will coordinate the kiln with the cooler with the waste heat recovery system, ensuring that all three elements are fully optimized.
With this, we can get some results, as, for example, reducing the heat consumption of the kiln. We can get an increase on alternative fuel usage, and we can also increase the amount of energy that recovered. But all this is worthless unless we ensure that the process respect the constraints. What are these constraints? Well, we have things like the quality, we have the emissions as CO2 or NOx, and we have many others, temperatures, clinker temperature, pressures, and so on. So the system will always ensure that keeps all these constraints that are defined by the plant inside of limits. Let's look at some case studies. So first case study, let's look at an example in a ball mill.
In this case, this customer had a sold-out plant, and these balls mills were the bottleneck of the process. At the same time, they needed to keep the quality in check. So what did we do? We installed the eye that was going to control four key variables. In this case, it was the feeder separator, the fan, and the water. And additionally, we developed a model that was able to control in real time, predict and control in real time this residual and blend. So instead of having a sample every two hours, the system was able to predict every minute. With this, the results of this project was around 4.7% reduction in specific energy.
We increased 7.1% the throughput of these mills, and because of that, the throughput of the plant itself. And finally, we managed to keep the quality in check and even reduce the standard deviation. Let's go to another example. In this case, it's a vertical raw mill. The problem here was a little bit different. In this case, they had very high energy costs, and also they had issues, vibrations, because there was a town very close. So what we did do? In this case, the system was controlling six different set points for this vertical raw mill. And additionally, we developed a solution with a nonlinear model that was able to control the vibrations of the mill based on the filling level.
As a result, we managed to reduce the energy consumption more than 6%. As a byproduct, increased the production of the system, and this specific asset has been working since 2018. It's one of the oldest that we have. Let's look at the last case. Again, in this case, the challenge that they had is that they had to increase the use of alternative fuels. Something that is very common in industry right now But they were afraid that increasing the use of the alternative fuels will increase also the energy cost and the specific energy cost. So to solve this, what we did, we controlled both the kiln and the cooler at the same time dynamically.
Seven variables in the kiln, seven variables in the cooler. And on top of that, we developed a system that was reacting dynamically to the availability and quality of the alternative fuels. The result, we reduced, we just not increased. We managed to reduce the specific thermal consumption more than 2.5%, and also we increased the substitution rate up to 15%. So at the end, all this translates to business value. We get lower energy per ton, we get more sellable tons, especially important in the solar market. And finally, the investment that no CapEx is required. It can be fully OpEx. With this, we have a very clear net margin, a very clear ROI.
And as an extra upside, we are reducing the CO emissions of the plant, which is key during the next years. But we are giving a lot of numbers. How do we actually manage to measure all this? Well, we use two different techniques. First one, we define a baseline, and then we compare it against the values once the system goes live. The second method, once the system go live, we do some test on/off, where the system will be on for a week and off for a week to ensure that the periods that we are using are as similar as possible. Basically, we define a KPI with the customer upfront. We identify periods that are a fair comparison. We write reports.
We then work with estimates, and all the process is always transparent with our customers. In fact, I can tell you that many times it's the customer the one that does the report themselves. Let's just recap very quick about what we have seen today. First, as of all, the optimum is continuously moving. As Montse was mentioning, it's never constant, and you have to follow it. We saw how OptiBAT 7 allow us to follow up this optimum in closed loop. Three, the need to always fulfill all the constraints of the process. And lastly, all this needs to be measured, not just promised.
With this, we can get real results, as we have been providing to different customers in energy, in throughput, in alternative fuels, and any other challenge that you may have. So now my question is for you, what would be the first asset that you will optimize if you have the chance? Thank you. Thank you very much, Ignasi and Montse. Very nice presentation and a good question to end with. Exactly what would you optimize in your plants? Nice lively discussion in the chat, and I see Montse has already answered all the questions. Yeah. Probably we could go a little bit through them because- Yeah... I was very short in the answers, and there was a lot of interest. So- Yeah.
Let's go- Maybe through that thing... through some of these questions. And if you haven't already looked, there's a Q&A button which allows you to ask questions and read the answers. The main question is, I think you've dealt with quite well is the base level and how you charge. And I think that's very clear. One interesting angle is how specific is the OptiBAT solution for each plant, and to what extent is it a generic product that's just applied, and to what extent is it customized to each plant? Well, the solution can be as customized as needed. We do work with some templates that allow us to work faster, but there is no limit on how customized it can be for the plant.
We have experienced very different challenges, and we are used to basically anything at this point. It seems that, as you explained at the beginning, it's designed so that the engineers in the plants can work on the software. But they don't need any programming experience. Is that correct? And to what extent do you see your clients engaging with that capability? It's fully no-code tool. I myself am not a programmer. I have been working with the program a lot. So yeah, it's designed fully for plant engineers. And we see that more and more customers want to do the product themselves. Obviously, this depends a lot on the size.
When you have a very big company that has a big corporate, they can train their own team to do their own deployment. But when you are with the smaller companies, maybe they prefer for us to provide the services directly. Okay. All right. Very good. In terms of the architecture, there's a very relevant question. You offer a solution of the hosting the software in the plant on premises and in the cloud. And is there any operational advantage to having the solution hosted in the cloud versus the premises?
And secondly, as anyone in Europe will know, in the last week, there's been big stories about freezers being hacked on a big scale across supermarkets, and the temperature's been increased to destroy all the food. So everyone is thinking in terms of what is the cybersecurity, what is the-- especially for industrial applications, how do plants protect themselves, and can they protect themselves in the cloud? You go. I go? Okay. I will be explaining. The reason precisely why we are doing on-premises deployment is because industrial companies are very aware of cybersecurity.
Yeah, so anything that is connected, as long as they are connected, they make better and better hackers, as we have seen with the case of the freezers. Yeah. So this is the main reason to have on-premises deployments at the moment. Yeah. Of course, we comply with every security requirements that our customers are requiring. But as we have seen, hackers get better and better, so yeah, the on-premise makes completely sense for that. Yeah. Okay. Interesting. Yeah. I will add that this decision is always on the customer side and their own cybersecurity teams that we always respect. And the cloud is usually a corporate cloud that has obviously their own measures.
This doesn't mean that it's a open cloud, obviously. Mm-hmm. Okay. Well, that's all we have time for just now. It's a fascinating area. I know that you have on your slide since 2008, and I think you said one of the first products was the VRM optimization eight years ago. So, we talk about AI as a new technology, but it's fast becoming a more mature technology, and one that is well-proven in the marketplace. So, thank you very much for sharing that with us. And I'm sure there'll be questions. We will be distributing the slides, by email later. We will be-- Sorry, Thomas. We will be answering the open questions for a few minutes while the other presentations are going. Yeah.
If you've got any other questions, then do add them to the list. But for now, both of you, Montse, Ignati, thank you very much. Thank you to you. Thank you, Thomas, and everyone. Okay. So, that's a great way to get us started. And we're gonna carry on now, with our next presenter, Michele Catraro from CTP in Italy, Technical Director, and a mechanical engineer. Michele, if you'd like to share your slides, that would be great. Michele has over 35 experience in industrial energy systems, thermal engineering, and power generation.
Throughout his career, he's developed extensive expertise in the design and construction of industrial steam boilers, thermal oil systems, and waste heat recovery solutions, as well as the operation and management of power generation plants. His technical expertise includes thermal energy recovery and power generation technologies, particularly steam Rankine cycle or SRC, and organic Rankine cycle, ORC systems. Since joining CTP team in May 2023, he's focused on advancing industrial energy recovery and efficiency solutions. So he's gonna present Following the Energy Path. Michele, if you'd like to get going, the floor is yours. Okay. Good evening, everybody.
Thank you for your kind presentation. Now, a little brief presentation of CTP. CTP is an Italian engineering company, located in Bergamo in north of Italy, and is a part of Industrial Group that also includes CTN Group, that is a manufacturing facilities located in Turkey, in Adana. Our core business focus on the two main areas, air pollution control systems, particularly fabric filters and waste heat recovery, WHR. By combining CTP team's engineering experience with CTN manufacturing capabilities, we operate as an EPC contractor, delivering a complete turnkey solution.
And our scope covers the entire project life cycle from engineering and procurement, manufacturing of civil works, installation, electrical and electro-instrumental systems and final commission. This integrated approach allow us to develop solution tailor-made to any specific requirement of each industrial plant. Now, tomorrow we will talk about WHR, what is a WHR? We know that in many industrial processes, a significant amount of thermal energy is released without being used. This energy is often discharged into the atmosphere and- is a lot, is a waste. The waste heat recovery system are designed to capture part of this otherwise lost energy and transfer it in a useful perception.
How does it work? How does the WHRC system work? The core components of WHRC system is a specially designed, tailor-made heat recovery boiler, which transfers thermal energy from the waste heat source to a secondary fluid. Depending on the application of this secondary fluid, it may be, for instance, hot water, superheated water, steam, saturated steam, or superheated steam, or thermal oil, for instance. Once recovered, the thermal energy can be used in two different ways. The first option is to reuse heat directly as heat whenever the industrial process has a suitable thermal demand. Typical example is a paper mill that has a huge request of low-pressure steam.
The second option is to convert it into electricity. Anyway, in both cases, the principle is very simple. It's the same energy that would otherwise be lost becomes a useful energy. It's clear that by reducing these losses, we improve the overall energy efficiency of the cycle of the plant. So this can give important benefit, an economical benefit through the reducing energy cost and environmental benefit to lower associated CO2 emissions. The key concept is very simple. It's that to produce additional energy, we make a better use of the energy already available in the process.
So now, if you want to convert the thermal recovered energy in electricity generation, we can use a thermodynamic process known as the Rankine cycle. The Rankine cycle consists of four main components and four main steps. The first step, we have the evaporator. The evaporator transfers heat given by an external source to the working fluid inside the Rankine cycle, and giving this external thermal source, we cause in the evaporator the change of phase from liquid to vapor. Then we have the second step. The vapor expand through a turbine.
So this is the second step, the second component of the cycle, and generating mechanical energy that is quickly converted into electrical energy by a connected electrical generator. After leaving the turbine, at the stage of the turbine, the vapor enters in a condenser. It is the third step and the third component of the cycle. And in this case, the cycle release heat to the external. And finally, we have the pump station that increase the pressure of the liquid before it returns in the evaporator, completing the cycle. Depending on the kind of fluid work inside the Rankine cycle, we distinguish between two main technology.
We have the ORC, so-called ORC, organic Rankine cycle, where the working fluid is an organic compound, such as, for instance, cyclopentane. In a steam Rankine cycle, SRC, the working fluid is water and steam. In this slide, you can see the difference between the two cycle. The cycle, as I said, is the same. We have the four phases, the four components, as I said before. We know that in organic Rankine cycle, normally, the Rankine fluid doesn't work directly with the heat exchanger, but there is an intermediate fluid transferring the heat from the heat exchangers from...
It is an intermediate fluid and normally is thermal oil, and the circuit of thermal oil bring the heat from the heat exchanger and transfer, we will see later or clearly, and transfer this heat to the ORC. The choice between these two technology, ORC Or SLC depends on several factors, economical and technical. For instance, it's the investment cost, expected payback, water availability, for instance, because SLC doesn't require the water. But probably the most important thing is the characteristics of the waste heat source in terms of temperature, flow variation, and these physical parameters, process parameter, play an important role in determining the most suitable solution.
Anyway, in both configurations, the energy supplied to the cycle, to the ranking cycle in the evaporator originates from the recovery heat by the waste heat source. Now, it's clear that waste heat recovery can be applied to many industrial processes. In this, today, I want to focus on the cement industry. Why? Because CETP has extensive and very big experience in this sector, having supplied numerous fabric filtration systems and several waste heat recovery installations. And moreover, cement production is particularly interesting because it involves high-temperature processes that generate a significant quantity of recoverable thermal energy. We can now go to the slide.
In this slide, we can see very simplified cycle of the cement. There are two areas in the process of the cement production where there are potential source of where to take the waste energy. The first one is the preheater tower, the PH, where the exhaust gas leaving the kiln system after passing through the precalciner and cyclone tower, typically reach the temperature approximately 308, 400 degrees. In the conventional configuration, these gases are cooled before entering in the filtration system by a gas cooling tower. Then there is another point.
The second point is the AQC, the air quenching cooler area, where during the clinker cooling, hot air temperature are around, also in this case, about 400 degrees and is available source. Also, in this case, normally this heat is removed through a cooling system before to be discharged. And in this case, we have a big exchanger with big fan, and there is the cooling of the air quenching is made by ambient air. CETP therefore install heat recovery boilers at these two locations, allowing thermal energy from these different sections of cement production to be collected in the circuit of thermal oil and used.
But we have, in this case, a double advantage because we use energy that otherwise is lost. But moreover, we reduce the need for conventional cooling energy. All the electrical energy used for the pumps or for the gas cooling tower and the fan for the heat exchanger in AQC is eliminated. So in this case, in other words, we not only recovery energy that would otherwise be wasted, but we also reduce energy required otherwise to dissipate this energy. So this is a double advantage. But it's clear that identifying a source of waste heat is all the first step.
Design a reliable waste heat recovery system requires a detailed understanding of the operating conditions and a knowledge of the physical constraints on the existing plant in the cement application, and these challenges are particularly significant. Let's start now, for instance, let's see the characteristic of the process gas. In the preheater section Sorry. Okay. In the preheater section, the exhaust gas... I'm sorry. No. No, it's better. Okay. In the preheater section, the exhaust gas contains a large quantity of dust. We are talking about 180 or 100 grams over normal cubic meter.
And coming from the combustion of alternative fuels, so with the most rich side, these dust are sticky and may cause deposit on heat exchanging surface. More of the gas coming from the combustion, as I said, of alternative fuel may contain sulfur compounds that can create a risk of cladding and corrosion, which must be carefully considered during the boiler design. In the AQC section, also the dust quantity are more or less the same quantity, about 80 grams, but are completely different because this is hot air, so it's not that much, and the dust are generally dry and abrasive, creating additional challenges for the heat exchanger surface.
Now to address this condition, several engineering parameters must be carefully selected during the design. And this, for instance, includes this design must be taken into account appropriate footing factors coming from experience, tube types, and arrangement spacing between tubes, vertical and horizontal, opportunity velocity into the tube bundles that are different for the AQD and for the PH boiler. And for each boiler, moreover, it's essential also to evaluate and calculate the acid dew point temperature of the gas and maintain a suitable gas and tube cleans temperature above this dew point acid temperature to avoid the risk of acid condensation and corrosion.
Moreover, cleaning system are also integrated into the boiler design to help maintain heat transfer performance during the operation. All these design choices are based on the specific process condition and on experience gain from our yet installed plant. But it's clear that the process condition are only a part of the challenges because the other scope of design is to integrate the WHR inside the existing plant. In fact, in most cement plants, the WHR system must be installed within existing industrial facilities, where the available space is often extremely limited, and this introduce several additional constraints.
For instance, the available footprint normally is not so big, so this may require the design of the boiler with a vertical configuration. Also, the gas inlet and outlet connection, the so-called tie-in, are frequently located at considerable heights, requiring carefully design of supporting structure. The duct routing is very important also because we have to optimize, reduce it as possible the routing, but we have also consider all the constraints and also provide a suitable slope on the duct to avoid dust accumulation inside.
And at the same time, the design must take into consideration the existing building silos, conveyors, pipe rack equipment such as fan, pumps, cable trays, and also underground. There are also other constraints like galleries, tunnels, or existing structure foundation. Also, the logistic is important. The installation In the design, we have to consider how the equipment will be transported to the plant, where cranes can be positioned, and how the different components can be lifted and assembled safely. For this reason, a detailed site survey is the first step to start for a good engineering process.
In particular, by using digital survey technologies, we can create a three-dimensional point cloud of the existing facility, and this information can be integrated into our 3D engineering model, allowing us to identify suitable equipment allocation and optimize duct routing before installation begins. Another important aspect is the modularization, and it is our way to operate because we prefer to make job prefabricated pieces instead to have a big part of boiler with very big dimension. Why? Because the modules are road transportable on site, and they can go inside the plant to place on the foundation.
And with this approach, moreover, we reduce the individual weight and so reduce the dimension of the crane to lift this. And this, in clear, facilitates the installation and the placement of the cranes inside restricted spaces, as I said before. So the meaning of my speech is the objective of the design is not only simply to design an efficient heat exchanger, but develop a solution that can operate integrated into the existing plant. Once we have identified the waste heat source, and we have designed the boiler, the next step is to select the most suitable technology for electrical production.
As I said before, the choice depends largely on the characteristics of the available thermal energy. In the cement plant, exhaust gas and hot air temperature are relatively moderate comparing this with other industrial properties. Moreover, both temperature and gas flow may vary depending on the operating condition. All this variation make it more challenging to generate superheated steam at the stable and high temperature required to feed the steam turbine. And for this reason, CTB team, generally, in this kind of application in the cement factory, prefers the organic Rankine cycle.
In our typical configuration, we have a so-called PH boiler and the AQG boiler, recovery boiler that transfers the recovered thermal energy to, as I said, intermediate fluid, the thermal oil. And the thermal oil, normally, we reach temperature approximately 300, 310, and this temperature supplies the ORC unit where the recovered heat is converted into electricity. This configuration allows us to combine the energy recovered from the two main heat sources and make it available for the power generation. The result is an integrated waste heat recovery system designed around the actual characteristics of the cement production process.
So to the end, waste heat recovery is an opportunity to improve industrial energy efficiency by making better use of the thermal energy that is already available. But achieving a reliable and effective energy recovery requires much more than installing a boiler. It requires a complete understanding of the process, careful equipment design, right technology selection, and effective integration into the existing plant. It is where the engineering experience make a difference and From process efficiency to waste heat recovery, the objective is to transform unused and used thermal energy into a measurable industrial value. This is all. Thank you, everybody, for your attention.
Thank you very much, Michele, for that presentation. Very interesting technology. Great value now as well, especially with energy prices so high and so elevated. I'm sure the interest in this kind of technology is strong at present. A couple of questions. I guess the most obvious one is, which method is more energy efficient, ORC or SRC? You did describe some of the differences between the two systems, but maybe you could comment on that. And also from the perspective of installation, what is the footprint of ORC compared to SRC in the plant? How does the size vary between the two technologies? The size of the ORC plant, you mean? Yes. The footprint depends on the power.
It's clear that the ORC is a compact unit. Probably the component that has the most important dimension is the condenser because we know in the cement factory the water is not used, so we use air-cooled condenser. And this could be added some important dimension. But anyway, in our plant, we also arrange this big component, for instance, on the top of the turbine room, reduce its footprint. So we study all the solution to reduce the footprint and while the boilers necessary are placed in a very close place, normally the ORC unit is placed not so far because it's clear we are also to reduce the oil piping routing, to reduce also the pressure drop and the power of the pump.
But we prefer to, if it's possible, to install the ORC in a free area and a bit combining the free area with the distance of the PH and AC boiler. Okay. And in terms of the relative efficiency of the two systems? Yes, this is a good question. In terms of efficiency, it's clear the efficiency of the ORC depends on the thermal oil temperature that depends by the wasted source temperature. In the cement factory, as I said in my presentation, we can give the ORC a thermal oil with a temperature of 300, 310.
And 310 is a good temperature for thermal oil because, for instance, a good thermal oil has a maximum operating temperature of 304 or less, and so we stay a little bit lower and giving the oil at this temperature to the ORC, normally the efficiency is around 20, 22%. Okay. The efficiency of the ORC. Yeah. Okay. Well, Michele, thank you very much for your presentation. There are still some more questions in the Q&A. Please take your time to answer them and we'll be distributing the slides after the meeting. But for now, Michele, thank you very much. Thank you very much, and bye-bye. Thank you. Okay, great. Okay.
Now it's time to move into a slightly different area, and I'm very pleased to introduce Ana Goncalves, innovation manager at Christien Pfeiffer. She's a chemical engineer and innovation manager with nearly a decade of international experience in the cement industry. She holds a bachelor's and master's degree in chemical engineering from the Federal University of Minas Gerais in Brazil. Hopefully I pronounced that roughly right. You did, yeah. Throughout her career, Ana has gained extensive expertise in process engineering, plant optimization, grinding technologies, and project management, working across Europe, Latin America, and Australia.
In her current role, she focuses on developing innovative and sustainable grinding solutions, particularly promoting the use of supplementary cementitious materials and advancing low-carbon cement production. So Ana, the floor is yours. Please share your presentation and over to you. Thank you very much And yeah, hello to all of you joining today. I would like to start with a very simple question. What's stopping you from getting the most out of your kiln? And let's see if by the end you can give an answer. Yeah? So when we talk about efficiency, we normally immediately think about increasing performance and lowering energy consumption. But the reality is not that straightforward. Yeah.
We know that the typical strategies to increase production and to lower energy consumption normally come at the cost of product quality, and then sometimes it looks like energy consumption, especially thermal consumption in the kiln, must be a little bit sacrificed for us to allow for the use of alternative materials and meet the targets of environmental emissions. So a lot of the time, it seems like the only solutions for the limitations in operation when we are pursuing efficiency are actually investing in upgrades that are costly and time-consuming, so we just keep on going as we can until we can invest.
This means that we define what we can or cannot sacrifice and what are the issues that we can or cannot accept to define the limits that cannot be trespassed during operation, and we call that our normal operation. But it's easy to forget as we go to the day-to-day, that normal does not mean optimal. It just means that we or someone in the past, at some point tried to do some change, and based on the results, they decided that the best approach was actually to accept it and try to make the best out of the unavoidable. Then we convince ourselves that it's just how it is, and that it's normal. That's nobody's fault. Yeah. This is human nature.
We don't even realize that we are giving up too soon. But at some point, it starts feeling like a waste of time to keep looking, and the attempts to improve are sometimes also costly, so we just move to trying to cope with it. But every once in a while, we are reminded that things are not as normal as we have gotten used to, and then we are forced to explain that it's not ideal, but... How many times have you guys heard it or even said it yourselves, one of those? Yeah. "The plant has its own personality." "That's normal for the kiln." "The operators know how to handle it." "It's an old plant." Yeah. All of those are true.
Either recently or in the past, there was somebody or the plant team that tried to, and struggled to find the reasons for some of the odd behaviors or recurring issues. Yeah. And most likely, a lot of improvement have already been achieved in this process. But some things stay. Yeah. So it's a healthy exercise to ask ourselves every now and then if we are getting the most from the kiln or if we just got used to what's been happening. So when we talk about optimization, we have to do it systematically. Yeah. When we are doing this exercise of making this question, and we typically will get some topic out of it. Yeah.
We know that it's important to learn from the past and to avoid to try again, do the same that has been done before, and reaching the same results. So trying again should only be done when we have good reason for it. Yeah. And the reason here is the keyword. So no optimization is actually real without diagnosis. Optimization starts with troubleshooting. And how do we do the systematic approach for troubleshooting, especially when the obvious has been already ruled out? So we look into what we are trying to achieve and ask, "What is stopping the kiln from getting there?" So once we identify and define the what, then the investigation start, and we should exhaust the whys.
Do not stop until we cannot branch any more explanations from the analysis. Only then you actually reached the actual root cause to be addressed. Everything before that is treating the symptom. Then once we've found that, then we choose how to address it. There's normally more than one way of fixing something, and what we choose depends on the context, on weighing the risks, and checking what it takes to apply it. Yeah. It's not a decision to be made alone. Yeah. It's a teamwork, and a shared decision is a shared outcome. So you try, you learn from the results, and you repeat until improve.
It sounds really nice on paper, but then we know that things are not so nice and beautiful in real life, and then we often find ourselves chasing our own tail and being caught in traps set by our own brains. So, for example, when you look at this information, stressed people use more their smartphones. Can you really tell if smartphones are stressing people out, or if they're just a tool being more used by the stressed people? To relax a little bit. This is a typical trap of causation. It's a causation fallacy, and it lies in the fact that it's not always easy to connect cause and consequence with the amount of information from which we start.
And the more eager we are to find the answers, the more prone we are to be caught in the trap. So we need to be careful about correlations and fast conclusions. And the best way of finding if some conclusion is correct is to try to prove it wrong. So when we look into some typical correlations that can happen, there are some examples in the screen. What can we do to test them? So we ask ourselves: Can we find exceptions for this? Can we find reproductions of the situation? Do we have all the information that we need in order to solve or to establish this as the most likely cause? Can we explain the technical reasoning behind this theory?
And is this actually the root cause, or is it maybe another consequence with a deeper origin? Only after we manage to answer all of these questions, we can be sure that we found a real problem. And when we manage to successfully pass the point of the why, the next trap is going for the easy solution, which is not always the easiest to implement. So let's check. Imagine a system where the ID fan is maxed out most of the time. We say we have to do it to keep the process stable. We cannot decrease, and we also cannot increase production, or it gets difficult to handle disturbances. The obvious response is to consider a larger fan. But let's go through the steps that we discussed.
Let's benchmark the operation, ask the whys, and maybe we can find out that there is a lot to be done before the investment step. Could the gas distribution be improved? Are there unnecessary restrictions? Are the cyclones' operating conditions close or far to their design range? Et cetera, et cetera. Depending on the diagnosis, adjustments to the process or even some small mechanical modifications might actually release additional operating margin, and changing the ID fan would have never treated the problem, only the symptom.
It might have helped the plant to increase some production or handle disturbance more easily, but it's not really being effective in the origin, in the source way of the word, because there will be more electrical energy expenditure and most likely a higher thermal energy expenditure as well. So sometimes improving the performance of the existing equipment can be actually more effective than increasing installed capacity, installing new equipment. So another easy trap that we fall is also forgetting to look for what is out of our zone of expertise. For example, me as a process person, I'm looking at a refractory issue, and I immediately think it's related to thermal load.
However, when we forget the mechanical side, we forget that it could also be mechanical fatigue due to shell deformation. So when we make sure that the mechanical health is being closely followed and assessed by the right measurements, we make sure to avoid a huge blind spot in the analysis. And a kiln can be operating within its usual process parameters and still have mechanical conditions that deserve attention. So following the mechanical parameters and making important measurements are important even if we are not trying to troubleshoot something. So you've done it.
You got the plant team together, you analyzed the problems, you found the whys, you tested the solutions, and you've gotten good results. The plant now is operating better than before and maybe even better than the design conditions, like this example from Heidelberg in Turkey. So the plant reached unstable and sustainable operation at a performance 4.3% above the design by themselves. So after this success, how often would you ask yourself again that question? Have you triggered the kiln's full potential? So you've already learned that normal doesn't mean optimal. You challenged the normal, and you're much better now. So it's time to learn that better also does not mean optimal.
So what is optimal? Optimal is when you have exhausted the possibilities for improvement, at least for your target parameters. And when is that? So when we're talking about a process as complex as clinker and cement production, you can go a lifetime trying. Yeah, that sounds nice, huh? But it's not the end of the world because there's a lot we can do within this lifetime. Once you already got better, why not ask, what if there's even more to achieve? So let's go back to our example in Turkey. What if I told you that Christian Pfeiffer had a team of kiln experts that had only one week To look into this plant and check for optimization opportunities.
And in less than seven days of specialized optimization with no mechanical intervention, they have achieved a further performance increase of 6.4%, more than the already improved operation. So 6.4% relates to the 1,800 tons per day, which is already above design. So that actually means 11% improvement from design performance. The math of all the benefits from it is a lot. So how? Yeah, how did they get to this? Our favorite answer at Christ and Pfeiffer is it depends. Every plant has its own set of challenges to overcome and to get to this better-than-better type of improvement. And the thing is that the higher the improvement, the more challenging is to get there.
The switch at this point is very hidden. It's not found by analyzing data sheets, operation history, reading all the books. Learning where to look actually requires finding points that were neglected and challenging concepts that we have learned and sworn by for years or even decades. And this comes after experiencing different types of operation conditions, being allowed to test, making mistakes, and learning from them. And even building this knowledge and experience to learn where to look can take years to achieve. And the daily operation doesn't stop and wait for you to do all of those side quests. More often than not, there's not much room for testing and even less for making mistakes.
We need to ensure reliability to protect our equipment, to avoid unnecessary shutdowns. And handling those everyday tasks are already a full-time job, and they should be. Otherwise, we'll have new problems and new troubleshootings. And more than that, variations in common everyday topics are blinding us from finding better solutions, and they are taking most of the available resources. We are doing better, but we are back to the beginning. We are accepting things as they are because the solutions now seem to be even more unreachable than before. So once more, we are looking for quick and dirty solutions to handle everyday problems.
Quick and dirty, fast, rough, temporary solutions that are fast rather than permanent, but they end up being permanent as we go because they are easy to cope with. But what if we actually try quick and clean? So instead of spending years trying to learn all the secrets, investigating the plant problems, and implementing the solutions, why not having it all done in a month instead? When you get experts to come to the plant, they are able to perform a focused study without being distracted by the plant routine, and they will look into the problems with trained eyes for you and letting you know afterwards. So how is it done? We have basically two phases. The main phase and is phase one.
It's the most important, and it is implementing the process-related adjustments during operation. So they go through all of those systematic investigation steps that we talked about. They find the hitting points, and they implement it together with the plant and the operators. It's the phase with the biggest impact, and it takes about one month. Now, phase two is more about the mechanical measurements and small mechanical modifications. But a lot of phase two depends on the plant's needs and targets. Sometimes, most of it might not even be needed after you already achieved it in phase one.
But after performing the mechanical measurements in hot condition, there might be some small modifications to be proposed to take place during the kiln's overhaul. They fit into the shutdown program, and they do not require new equipment. The mechanical measurements are on-site during operating conditions, and they evaluate the health of the kiln shell, shaft, and gears. They're specialized measurements that normally are not typically performed by the plant, but they are critical to identify issues such as deformation and misalignment, which can lead to serious unplanned shutdown if they're left unaddressed.
The service experts are also providing the plant with a benchmarking report to compare the plant's operation with similar plants worldwide. And finally, to allow the plant to maintain its benefits or the benefits of the optimization and to work under continuous automatic improvement, there's also the option of implementing a multivariable control system that works as an autopilot to the plant to ensure the kiln is always operating at the best possible parameters, so the operator doesn't have to do it alone. And how much? Well, there's no risk to the plant because the price is based on results.
The performance test after the implementation is done and proves what improvements have been achieved. And then the measured difference from the baseline to the performance test results are what defines the final price. If the difference is less than 3%, it's free of charge. And any indirect improvements from this optimization or future improvements that the plant achieves based on this first step are not charged. But why do I mention that? Remember the plant in Turkey? Which was already better and achieved further 6.4% improvement with the optimization experts in less than seven days.
They actually moved on from what they learned from those experts to a continuous implementation that managed to increase even more. And the final result was actually an 8.2% improvement from the original conditions, which was already optimized. Now, this is a total of 12.9% higher than designed performance. And more, they actually did that while also improving thermal substitution from 30 to 37%, and with proved measured clinker quality improvement. So none of those side benefits were charged because they were not part of the contracted targets, and no further investment or mechanical intervention was needed.
It's also interesting to see that the mechanical measurements have found four important critical mechanical points, the kiln axis misalignment, longitudinal fissures, tension levels, and gear problems. And the experts have provided a report of nearly 200 pages with all the details. So, let's go back to the original question. Have you reached your kiln's full potential, or what's stopping you from that? The answer, as we've seen, is not really obvious because the process is not as simple as it seems. If we want to challenge the kiln, we need to challenge ourselves first.
And at Christian Pfeiffer, we understand that in all of our areas of expertise, we actually work to make sure we understand what is the best that a plant can achieve and find a way to get there. This is why our motto is challenge accepted. So we invite every one of you to accept the challenge with us and finally get the best out of your kiln. So, thank you very much. Ana, thank you very much for that presentation. And the first thing that occurred to me is, is this a new direction for Christian Pfeiffer? Because kilns have not traditionally been at the heart of the offering. So, can you tell us a little bit about that? Yeah.
At the moment, it's not that we would like to move for being a supplier of kiln solutions, and it's actually an opportunity that we've realized that we look into Europe. We have a lot of idle operation. We're not really looking so much into new equipment, new plants. Yeah. But optimizing what we already have is a very important topic. And we have the expertise for that. So why not addressing this and making sure that we can provide this extra support and handle the full chain of operation and production? So this is basically the summary of it. Yeah. And you're looking at process as well as the mechanical condition of the kiln. It's a kind of 360 analysis that you're- Yep... taking at.
And a great case study from Heidelberg. Are you using AI, or is this boots on the ground and is it good old-fashioned process knowledge? Yeah. This is also a very good question, and it's something that we even find it funny when we are nowadays not really talking about AI or not really talking about digitalization. Of course, we do offer the possibility of having the system control, but it's not the main point. So the thing is, we have to take care of not falling into those traps. And one that I have not mentioned so deeply is we rely so much on digitalization that sometimes we forget the very basics.
And by addressing those very basics and improving process-wise, hands-on, we can actually get the most out of the technology that we apply above that. I fully agree. I think it's often that we're carried away in looking at areas that are automated and AI is sitting on top of the fundamentals, the fundamentals of the kiln process or the grinding process, and being able to optimize those first is essential. And then AI- Yep... can do more work afterwards and push for more efficiencies. But it's great to see this new offering. Thank you very much for the presentation and- Thank you... as usual, we'll be sending around the slides afterwards.
And get in touch with Christian Pfeiffer for your kiln optimization needs. Thank you very much, Ana. Thank you. And that brings us to our final presentation for the session, and one that's going to take us into lubrication. And I'm really pleased to be able to welcome Ahmet Senar, who is head of global cement at Klüber Lubrication, based in Munich, Germany. With over a decade of experience in technical sales and business development, he holds a master's degree in materials engineering and has an extensive expertise in cement industry applications.
In his current role, Ahmet leads global growth initiatives and supports regional teams in delivering advanced lubrication solutions that improve operational efficiency, reduce energy consumption, and enhance equipment reliability And Ahmet is joined with Rodion Rodionov, marketing development manager at Klüber Lubrication, who specializes in energy efficiency within the cement industry. His work focuses on developing data-driven approaches to measure and demonstrate the impact of advanced lubrication on industrial energy consumption.
Combining process data and statistical modeling and expertise in rotating equipment, he helps customers identify lubrication-related energy savings while accounting for variations in operation conditions. So this leads on very nicely from our last presentation. So over to you, Ahmet and Rodion, with Unleashing Energy Efficiency with Specialty Lubricants. Thank you. Hello. Thank you very much for the kind introduction, Thomas. And hello, everyone. Good afternoon.
My name is Ahmet Sener, and today I'm joined by my colleague, Rodion Rodionov, and today, together, we would like to share some different perspectives on the lubrication and its potential on the contribution to energy savings in cement production. So for those who may not be familiar with the Klüber Lubrication, we are a one-stop shop lubricant supplier for all the applications in the cement industry. We have dedicated professional cement expert team, which is available for you all around the world to improve your machine uptime, improve energy efficiency, and improve total cost of ownership. So without further ado, let me start with a very basic, simple question.
Why do we lubricate our gearboxes or all the equipments in general? So this is a billion-dollar market, and we have been doing this for decades, if not centuries. So there must be a reason behind, right? So traditionally, the answer has been quite straightforward. We lubricate our equipment to prevent wear, to reduce risk of failures, to ensure reliable operation. And as this is the target, traditionally, we think if nothing breaks down, we consider lubrication a successful operation, right? But is this really enough? We believe there is more to lubrication than simply preventing failures. We can do more than that.
And the lubrication can play more important role than the preventing wear, so it can improve the energy efficiency. And when you think about the large gearboxes used in the cement plants, all these grinding equipments, we are talking about equipments operating at the power levels between three to 6,000 kilowatts, and these equipments are running day and night. They are running 6,000 to 8,000 hours every year, and at this scale, even a small improvement in energy efficiency can translate into significant energy savings. So we say the real opportunity is not hidden in the maintenance budgets, it is hidden in the energy consumption.
And that's why we believe it is more important to look at the lubrication from broader plant-wide perspective. So while the industry continues to follow this traditional approach when it comes to lubrication, the same industry, cement industry, are facing five major challenges that are emerged relatively recently. So first, cement industry accounts 8% of global CO2 emissions, creating pressure to decarbonize. Second, grinding processes consume significant amounts of electricity. Third, decarbonization efforts can further increase the electricity demand. Fourth, rising energy prices put additional pressure on the operating costs.
And finally, regulations and standards like ISO 50001 are pushing producers to improve energy efficiency. Together, these challenges make energy efficiency both an environmental and economic priority. So, okay, so far it was a bit abstract. Let's start with a real-life example to make it easier for you to grasp the concept. So a typical cement mill, which is driven by a 5,000 kilowatts power drive, and simply switching from conventional mineral oil to energy efficient formulation from Klüber portfolio. And this is a real case, and in this case, customers saved 3.1% of electricity.
Sounds small, but when you calculate all those costs and impact of this tiny 3.1% of savings, actually customer was able to reduce the specific energy consumption by 1.2 kilowatt hours per ton, almost 400 tons of CO2 saved per year in scope 2 emissions, and close to €150,000 are saved. So this is a typical win-win case. So it doesn't have to be an expensive case to improve the energy efficiency, or it doesn't have to be a big investment needed. But how does it actually work? So we don't have a cheat code. So it is actually simple physics behind. In the big gearboxes, we have this absorbed dry power. And this dry power, some of it goes to waste.
It goes to heat, it goes to friction, sound, and vibration, and a portion of it goes to the actual work. So we are interested in this part, and if we can minimize this part, finally, we can reduce the absorbed dry power while keeping the output same. Yeah. So here we are looking for specific energy consumption and improving the specific energy consumption part. And this is what we call positive sum lubrication. So lubrication delivers more than just preventing the wear. It actually creates a value for your daily operations. And let's look at the why energy efficient lubricants can actually reduce energy consumption. It is simple coefficient of friction.
This chart compares three different product lines of Klüber Lubrication. So first one is the mineral oil. All three of us are our products. This is a typical mineral oil, and right now, I'm sorry to say, but more than 90% of the industry still continue to use mineral oils in the big gearboxes. If we compare it with the energy efficient formulation of MPAO-based Klüber synt MECH 4-N series, there we see a big drop in the coefficient of friction. And if we go even further with the polyglycol-based oils, then we have even further reduction of the coefficient of friction. So in principle, it's simple. Lower friction means lower energy losses inside the gearbox. That's it.
And in large cement gearboxes operating hundreds and thousands hours per day, thousands of hours per year, even a small efficiency can translate into significant energy savings. Okay, so what are the main target applications? 60% of the plant's electricity cost goes to grinding, and grinding is ball mills, vertical roller mills, and roller presses. All cement plants, we all have these equipments. And these equipments have big gearboxes. For example, like a typical one, like a 5,000 kilowatts, it consumes annually 30,000 megawatts, and electricity cost of the single mill is €3 million. And 3% of €3 million is €90,000, which is a significant financial return. Yeah.
So small percentages create big impact on these big consumer equipments. Let me summarize the financial savings in one simple table. There, for example, here you have 3,000 kilowatts of power rating of the gearbox and you save 3%. Then you have $75,000 of savings. So it is very simple. And typical energy efficiency project land on 2% to 4% of savings, and typical gearbox rating is between two to four, sometimes even 5,000 kilowatts. So your savings will be closer per project, per year, will be closer to €100,000. That's the reason why payback time is usually less than one year. So in simple terms, lubrication is paid once, but energy losses are paid for every operating hour.
Therefore, energy efficiency with the lubricant doesn't have to involve a difficult trade-off between upfront investment and the long-term savings. To explore this more into detail, I would like to hand the presentation over to Rodion. So Rodion, stage is yours. So do you hear me well? Ahmet, do you hear me well? Very good. So dear colleagues, you know better than anyone that cement industry is under constant pressure to optimize the production, and therefore you are always looking for opportunities to improve the efficiency. And a lot of improvements were already implemented, and a lot of money were already invested, and you are looking for new projects.
Some energy efficiency optimization measures require big investments, some can be comparably cheap. And according to a study you can see in the link on the bottom of the slide, study by the University of Florence and Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy, and Sustainable Economic Development, there were many different technological opportunities implemented to improve energy efficiency in Italian cement market, and they investigated this. And for example, in average, optimization compressed air system requires, in average, €77,000 investment per project. I have a technique-- Yeah, here it is.
For example, in average, optimization of compressed air system requires, in average, €77,000 investment per project. And you can save 300 megawatt hours a year. Upgrade of electrical equipment such as a high-efficiency motor, so powerful inverters to be installed will cost you roughly half a million per project, and you will save 3,000 megawatt hours a year. And you can see that there are a lot of different optimization measures. And how do you think how much it will cost to upgrade your big gearbox for big grinding machine from conventional mineral gear oil to Klüber energy efficient one?
And in average, according to our internal statistics, different sizes of gearboxes, I included different power, in average considered, and you invest Per project in average €20,000, which is relatively cheap in comparison with other projects. And how effective it will be, you will save around 600 megawatt hours a year. So it means that such a project will be the one of the cheapest and effective way to save energy among known energy efficiency measures that cement factories usually implement. And there is... Just a second. I have a technical issue. In other words, how many kilowatts you can save per one invested euro?
If you invest in air compressors, you will save four kilowatt hour per one invested euro. If you upgrade your electrical motors, it is seven kilowatts hour per one invested euro. An energy efficiency project proposed by Klüber Lubrication will help you to save 29 kilowatt hours per one euro of investment. So, this study says that 55 energy efficiency projects were estimated, and it was found out that usually payback time is quite long. 10% of the projects have more than 10 years of payback time. 30% of the projects, they have from 5 to 10 years payback. And only 7%, which is four cases out of 55, had a payback less than one year.
And I believe that many cement producers actively looking for exactly this opportunity, and Klüber Lubrication is glad to fill this gap with our energy efficiency project. So Klüber energy efficient gear oil is one of the most effective ways to save electrical energy, and not only the fast in terms of payback, but also it's very fast in terms of implementation. How long does it take to install, for example, a new big electrical motor to drive a mill? To upgrade a production line? How much production time is lost as a result? A lot of time and efforts you need to make these changes. And what about the oil change?
You stop your mill for a maximum of one day to drain the old oil and then fill it with the new one. You push the button, and you start saving right here, right now. You can see on this slide our reference list. Just a moment. Our reference list in cement industry. You can see that we already made a lot of energy efficiency project together with our energy efficient oil, and all these projects related to different grinding equipment such as roller press, ball mills, vertical roller mills worldwide. Everywhere we changed conventional mineral gearbox oil to Klüber energy efficient one, and you can see that absolutely different gearbox types you can meet in cement industry, we already dealt with.
So we have an experience. And energy efficiency, if you sum up all these numbers and you find the average of energy savings, will be good 4%. And you can see that the payback period is always less than one year. So how do we prove it? Of course, it's important to measure. Savings must be measured and validated. And one of the most common question we get, how do you verify the energy savings? And I have to say that we compare the machine performance with the standard lubricant against the performance with the optimized Klüber lubricant under comparable operating conditions.
Although these conditions are always varying, and process parameters which we were having yesterday is not equal to today operating conditions. But, and this is a challenge, and we need to compare apples to apples and not apples to pears. And our calculation methodology, analysis methodology follow internationally recognized standards such as IP MVP, which is International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol, and ISO standard 50015. And importantly, that our calculation methodology is certified by the third party, by TÜV Süd organization, which is independent German certification body. So this makes the final savings and the result transparent and credible.
Our energy efficiency report also support applications for government subsidies if it's relevant for your country. So, how to unleash efficiency with special Klüber gear oil? Select Klüber Lubrication as a partner, and we together will find the best candidate at your factory to save electricity. We will calculate the benefits you can get from the project. Then we will run the pilot, and the result will be professionally proved and validated and reported. You will be satisfied and happy with the result and ready to multiply this positive experience. So for the first step No need to put a lot of efforts. Visit our energy efficiency landing page for the contacts exchange.
You will find the QR code to scan on the last slide. What does this mean for the cement... Just a second. What does this mean for cement industry? If we scale this opportunity globally, our estimation is that global cement industry can save up to one billion euros in electricity cost by using energy efficiency lubricant on grinding mills. So, you can have a look what is the potential for different customers. Find your company on the slide if you can, how much could your company save? And, depending on the company, you can see that the potential ranges from around two million euros to 50 million euros.
So when we look beyond one gearbox or one mill, we can see that a relatively small improvement in efficiency can create a very significant impact and industry scale. So, here is our last slide. You are welcome to visit our landing page, scanning the QR code. The question is, could one of your gearboxes offer a similar opportunity as we just discussed? And we have seen that with the right lubricant and efficiency improvement of 3% or even more, it can be possible. We have prepared a resource hub where you can explore the real examples, learn more about measurement and verification approach, and use our calculator to estimate the potential savings for your own application.
So simply scan the QR code, have a look and see what opportunity could be for you. And of course, if you would like to discuss a specific gearbox or application, please get in touch with us. And thank you very much for your attention. Thank you very much, Rodion and Ahmet. That was a really intriguing presentation, and you've done your homework. Thank you. As we say, if you look after the pennies, you save your pounds. So it's amazing how you're looking at these incremental savings, but multiplied over the scale of the cement industry and you end up with many millions in savings. And you've really illustrated that very clearly indeed.
I guess the big differences with the Klüber Lubrication is the product. It's the polyglycol product versus the mineral lubrications, and offering that lower friction and therefore the savings in energy. How has this been developed and why is it taking so long for the industry to shift from mineral-based lubricants? Okay. Thank you, I will take it. So maybe this traditional view is widely accepted, and it is, I would like to maybe refer to the honest presentation. It is what it is. This is how we do it. So this is how it is accepted, but actually it doesn't have to be how the industry should approach the same problem. Because here, now, energy costs are much higher.
Maybe in the past, maybe 20 years ago, 10, 15 years ago, energy costs were much lower, so it did not pay off. But right now, energy costs are higher. Carbon dioxide emission pressure is higher on the producers. So now, the payoff of this investment is much higher. Because these lubricants, okay, we have new product lines of lubricants. Of course, they are much more efficient than the ones we had 30 years ago. But still, now it makes much more sense to jump on this train and having this, starting to saving this investment, getting the payoff of these investments, I would say. Yeah. I think that's a very good point. And these savings are multiplied dramatically when the oil prices rise.
In terms of the application of the lubricants and their lifetime, how does it compare to the mineral alternatives? And under the conditions in the cement industry, do they cope better with the kind of the dust and all the usual problems that we see? Very good question. Actually, I've been working for Klüber for 12 years. My colleague here, he's working for 15 years. So when I first started 12 years ago, this energy efficiency was kind of a niche discussion. So this is something that we offer on top.
But these synthetic oils, they were already energy efficient, by the way, because we were offering these lubricants into market as, "Hey, you will have lower friction, hence you will have lower pitting, longer equipment lifetime, and so on." So this is how we protected the equipment that we have. So this was the main offering of this lubricant, right? So now it is a different story because When you compare the difference between these two, this energy savings is actually much higher. And going back to your question, actually, that is correct because synthetic oils have at least two to three times higher, longer lifetime, so that even this pays off.
But we are looking for much shorter payback times, like less than one year. So if you only focus on the lubricant lifetime, the payback time will be 10 plus years. This is not what we want. But we are interested in having this investment back in less than one year, ideally. Yeah. Well, it's a fascinating presentation and it will be distributed, and you'll be able to go and look back at some of the points that were made. And really, the calculations are real eye-opener. I'm sure it will, especially the comparison against thermal power or pressure systems and the comparisons to cost-effectiveness per kilowatt hour per euro.
It's a really interesting look at the way that we can save energy in cement plants, save costs, and of course, asset protection is still critical as well. So well, thank you both, Ahmet and Rodion, for that excellent presentation. Just one final word before we finish. I have seen a couple of open questions. I know we ran out of time, so I invite the visitors who asked those questions, please go into these resource up there. You will be able to reach us because you will have our contact data. I would be happy to have a one-to-one conversation with you so that we will touch the base of all the details. Right? Fantastic. Of course. And look out for the email.
You'll also get this presentation with the contacts in your inbox in the next day or two. So thank you, not only to Klüber, but to all our participants who have taken part in the presentations today. It's been a great opportunity to learn, as usual, so much from the experts that we have and that we're lucky enough to be able to platform on the CemTech Live webinars. So thank you very much. Thank you to all of you. We'll be back in a month's time for our last webinar of the year. It's incredible to think that we're already at the end of 2026. But keep with us and we'll be talking about emissions monitoring. It'll be on the 2nd of December.
And then we'll start again next year, of course, going through all of the different aspects of cement plant operations. So thanks to all our speakers. See you next time. Keep in touch, look out for the email, and you will receive your slides from each of the presentations that we've heard today. Thank you very much. Thank you. And see you next month.
