- COVER SHEET - Conversion from the use of CFC-11 to water blown non-cfc technology in the manufacture of flexible molded polyurethane foam.

Transcription

1 Flexible Molded 1 - COVER SHEET - Number: F-3 Title: Application: Technical Clearance: FLEXIBLE MOLDED POLYURETHANE FOAM Conversion from the use of CFC-11 to water blown non-cfc technology in the manufacture of flexible molded polyurethane foam. Mike Jeffs OORG Foams Sector Advisor Ozone Operations Resource Group (OORG) Clearance Date: April 1997 Source: Montreal Protocol Unit Global Environment Division Environment Department 1818 H St. NW Washington, D.C Tel: (202) Fax: (202) Software: Microsoft Word, Version 6.0a 1. Introductory Overview 2. Generic Enterprise Baseline Information Checklist 3. Generic Template for Conversion 4. Generic Template for Incremental Operating Cost Calculation TABLE OF CONTENTS

2 Flexible Molded 2 5. Generic Plant Layout Diagram (tentative, if obtainable) 1. INTRODUCTORY OVERVIEW A. Background and Purpose of this Template Montreal Protocol project design templates have been in use by the Fund Secretariat and the implementing agencies (UNDP, UNIDO and the ) since early 1996 as a key resource in guiding technical decisions concerned with the selection of eligible technology options for various manufacturing production line activities, configurations, equipment specifications and costs. As such, the templates have been useful to local enterprise managers, international and local technical consultants, agency task managers, and local MP units alike by virtue of the fact that they provide a common framework and a measure of confidence to decision makers concerning the full array of both explicit and implicit Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund Executive Committee (EC) policy guidance on project eligibilities and grant financing allowances. Project design templates have been employed both as conceptual blueprints for investment project preparation and planning as well as as checklists to guide the World Bank s Ozone Operations Resource Group (OORG) technical reviews and clearances prior to project funding consideration by the EC. The purpose of periodic revision of the template is twofold: (1) to update and incorporate lessons learned to date in applying and using the template; and (2) to expand or revise the template as necessary in order to incorporate these advances. B. How to Use the Template Technology Transfer The template is set forth in a matrix layout within an outline format. The initial focus of the template (Section 1) is upon the key components which an enterprise must undertake for a successful technology transfer, namely, (1) the acquisition of the technology from a qualified technology supplier, (2) implementation of the technology through appropriate trials and validation testing at the plant site, (3) training of workers in the technology process, including safety elements, and (4) final commissioning and certification of successful implementation of the technology transfer. The actual requirements at any particular enterprise plant site will depend upon the existing baseline conditions. See the Generic Enterprise Baseline Checklist, attached. Once the baseline conditions have been ascertained, the appropriate approach to acquiring the necessary technology and associated justification is determined. In each case, a range of eligible costs has been estimated based upon experience to date with EC-approved projects of the same type. Note that the more technologically advanced and equiped the enterprise is, the less costly technology acquisition is likely to be. Equipment Specification The second focus of the template (Section 2) identifies the various equipment components which need to be either retrofitted or replaced. The existing baseline equipment specification and/or condition will determine whether it will need to be retrofitted or replaced. For example, if the existing foam dispenser (See Section 2.1) is a high pressure machine, a retrofit is the standard option. Alternatively, if the existing dispenser is a low pressure machine, it will have to be replaced by a high pressure machine of equivalent capacity in order to handle the higher viscosity and mixing ratio when using non-cfc technology as opposed to the CFC-11 which it replaces.

3 Flexible Molded 3

4 Flexible Molded 4 ENTERPRISE INFORMATION CHECKLIST FOR CONVERSION FROM CFC-11 TO NON-CFC TECHNOLOGY IN FLEXIBLE MOLDED POLYURETHANE FOAM MANUFACTURING 1. CHEMICAL CONSUMPTION AND UNIT PRODUCTION 1.1 ANNUAL ODP CONSUMPTION YEAR POLYOL ISOCYANATE CFC-11 REMARKS YEAR 1 kg kg kg YEAR 2 kg kg kg YEAR 3 kg kg kg LAST 12 MONTHS kg kg kg (Take the highest value from the three eligible calculations (average of the last three years, last calendar year, or last 12 months)). 1.2 ANNUAL UNIT PRODUCTION YEAR UNITS REMARKS YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 LAST 12 MONTHS (Take the highest value from the three eligible calculations (average of the last three years, last calendar year, or last 12 months)).

5 Flexible Molded 5 2. EQUIPMENT TYPE 2.1 FOAM DISPENSER (indicate high or low pressure) 2.2 MOLDS/MOLD CARRIER 2.3 MOLD RELEASE APPLICATOR 2.4 MOLD CONDITIONER BRAND NAME MODEL NUMBER EXISTING EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS CAPACITY AGE (YRS) OTHER INFORMATION 3. PLANT LAYOUT Provide a schematic plant layout that clearly identifies the relative position of all production and auxilliary equipment and any empty space that can be used for additional required equipment.

6 Flexible Molded 6 Draft: April 10, :56 AM FLEXIBLE MOLDED POLYURETHANE FOAM PROJECT DESIGN TEMPLATE (F-3) Clearance Date: 1997 APPLICATION: Flexible Molded Polyurethane Foam DESCRIPTION: 1. Production unit consisting of one foam dispenser with accessories (molds, mold carrier, release agent applicator, mold oven with boiler). 2. Scaling Factor: TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER: The enterprise has to acquire the technical knowledge to apply non-cfc technology. This consists of four potential components: 1. Acquisition of actual technology; 2. Implementation of the technology on site through trials and validation testing; 3. Instruction of relevant personnel in process and safety; 4. Proof of successful implementation through commissioning/certification. 1.1 TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION: To provide the enterprise with the required knowledge of the CFC free process. DESCRIPTION 1. Description of the technical ability of each company includes number of engineers, chemists, licenses, technology transfer agreements, etc. 1. In-house. 1. Company has the capability to apply new technology with in-house capacity with minimum additional training. 1. Preferred solution based on economy. No need for additional capacity building. US $0-$5,000 2.Chemical/Equiment supplier. 2. Application experts from supply companies. 2. Preferred when in-house capacity is insufficient. US $0-$5,000 3.Third Party Experts 3. Technology transfer delivered through a third party individual or company arranged by the enterprise or the implementing agency, or from affiliated enterprise. 3. Required when options 1 and 2 cannot be exercised. US $10,000 to $20, License 4. Company will enter into formal license agreement which includes provision of technology transfer. 4. Most expensive option as royalties are involved. Frequently secondary advantages for the company occurs. Max. US $20,000. Additional cost borne by company.

7 Flexible Molded TRIALS/TESTING: To establish the suitability of the technology and the equipment. DESCRIPTION 1. Description of enterprise's capability to perform small scale/industrial scale trials. 1. Conducted by enterprise itself. 1. Company will conduct trials in-house with own staff and equipment. 1. Justified when confidentiality is involved. For reimbursement of costs, good record keeping is required. Chemicals only. US $2,000-$5, Description of product range which establishes the number of trials needed. 2. Cooperation with chemical supplier. 2. Chemical supplier will oversee trials. This may include pre-trials at supplier's site. 2. Preferred solution, as supplier is responsible for the quality of the chemical and mechanical components. 3. Under guidance of third party. 3. Third party will oversee trials. This may include participation of supplier. 3. Required when insufficient supplier support and in-house capacity are available. 1.3 TRAINING: To instruct relevant staff and production personnel on the new technology including all process and safety aspects. DESCRIPTIONS 1. Description of enterprise's inhouse training capabilities. 1. Conducted by enterprise. 1. Company will conduct trials in-house with own staff and equipment. 1. Justified when confidentiality is involved. For reimbursement of costs, good record keeping is required. Included in Trials, Testing and Training 2. Conducted by supplier(s). 2. Chemical supplier will oversee trials. This may include pre-trials at supplier's site. 2. Preferred solution, as supplier is responsible for the quality of the chemical and mechanical components. 3. Conducted by third party expert(s). 3. Third party will oversee trials. This may include participation of supplier. 3. Required when insufficient supplier support and in-house capacity are available.

8 Flexible Molded CERTIFICATION/COMMISSIONING: Needed to objectively ascertain that the applied technology is effective and the individual project elements implemented. DESCRIPTIONS 1. None 1.By enterprise 1. Enterprise certifies/ implementing agency confirms. 1. In case of in-house technology transfer. US $0-$5,000 2.By supplier(s) 2. Supplier(s) certifies/ enterprise confirms. 2. In case of supplier(s) provided technology transfer. 3. Third party expert. 3. Expert certifies/ enterprise confirms. 3. In case of third party technology transfer. 2.0 EQUIPMENT: The enterprise has to retrofit or replace existing equipment to apply successfully the CFC-free technology. This consists of four potential components: 1. Foam Dispenser 2. Molds/Mold Carrier 3. Mold Release Applicator 4. Mold Conditioner 2.1 FOAM DISPENSER: To proper dispense and mix the chemical reaction components and to apply the reaction mixture in the production molds. DESCRIPTION 1. Current dispenser is high press (>100 bar). 2. Current dispenser is low pressure (<100 bar). 1. Capable for new process or minor retrofit. 1. Adjustments to mixhead and metering circuit if required to cope with the new technology. 1. No retrofit as a standard (only if confirmed that his is not related to insufficient maintenenace of the equipment). US $0-$5, No dispenser. 2. Replacement by high pressure dispenser. 2. High pressure dispenser of equal capacity and other baseline conditions (timers, filing procedures, etc.). 3. Low pressure mixer cannot cope with the higher viscosities of the polyol blend. US $80,000 to $130, Introduction of high pressure dispenser. 3. High pressure dispenser of minimum required capacity. Enterprise to participate in the costs up to the costs of 3. Manual mixing cannot be tolerated from an industrial hygienic point of view. The company has to participate in US $40,000 to $90,000

9 Flexible Molded 9 a similar low pressure dispenser. the costs as it is responsible for the unacceptable baseline condition.

10 Flexible Molded MOLDS/MOLD CARRIER: Higher hold temperature requires the use of metal molds for proper heat conduction. The mold carrier should be capable to carry the related higher weight. DESCRIPTION 1. Current molds are metal. 1. No change. 1. N/A 1. N/A N/A 2. Current molds are epoxy/fiberglass. No mold carrier or carrier of sufficient weight bearing capacity. 3. Current molds are epoxy/fiberglass. Mold carrier has insufficient weight bearing capacity. 2. Replacement 2. Medical replacement molds of equal design. 2. The new process requires generally mold temperatures between degrees C. Non-metal molds will not transmit the heat sufficiently. US $500 to $5, Replacement; reinforcement. 3. Metal replacement molds or equal design; reinforcement of mold carrier to cope with high weight. 3. the new process requires generally mold temperatures between degrees C. Non-metal molds will not transmit the heat sufficiently. These are higher in weight and the mold carrier needs therefore a higher weight bearing capacity. US $10,000 to $15,000

11 Flexible Molded MOLD RELEASE APPLICATOR: To facilitate the release of the foam parts from the molds. Release agents frequently contain solvents with an ODP (MCF) and should in such a case be replaces. DESCRIPTION 1. Current release agent is non- ODS. 1. No Change 1. N/A 1. N/A 1. N/A 2. Current release agent has an ODP. 2. Replacement 2. Replacement by... (hydrocarbon; water) applied through...(mention the type of applicator). 2. The new process eliminates additional ODP. US $0-$10, MOLD CONDITIONER: For temperature conditioning of the molds. This can be done through: 1. A mold oven. 2. An integrated mold conditioning system (water or electric). DESCRIPTION 1. Currently no heating system. 2. Currently a heating system (describe system and capacity). 1. Mold oven. 1. Mold oven of sufficient capacity to preheat molds to degrees C. Tunnel or chamber, depending on mold carrier system. 1. When the new foam system requires elevated mold temperatures and such requirement is not part of the current foam system. US $10,000 to $20,000 depending on design. 2. No action. 2. N/A 2. N/A 2. N/A 3. CONTINGENCY: For exchange rate changes, price increases and other unforeseen circumstances that increase incremental capital costs: 10% of incremental capital costs. 4. INCREMENTAL OPERATING COSTS (IOC): The enterprise will incur changes in formulation costs based on different chemical prices and relative consumption. Table-1 provides a calculation sheet for these costs. IOC should be calculated even if the enterprise will not claim these costs.

12 Flexible Molded 12 WATER BLOWN FLEXIBLE MOLDED FOAM TECHNOLOGY INCREMENTAL OPERATING COSTS 1. METHOD OF CALCULATION THE EXISTING, APPROVED, MC TEMPLATE HAS BEEN USED AS A REFERENCE FOR IDENTIFICATION OF THE DIFFERENT COST ELEMENTS AND THEIR IMPACT ON THE IOC. 2. ELEMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION - PRICES USED ARE DDU, DELIVERED, EXCLUDING ANY APPLICABLE DUTIES AND TAXES - A DIFFERENT SURFACTANT IS REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE PROPER CELL STABILIZATION - EXTRA ENERGY CONSUMPTION, RELATED TO THE REQUIRED COOLING AND THE USE OF HIGH PRESSURE PUMPS IS REFLECTED - ONLY THAT PART OF THE PRODUCTION THAT CURRENTLY USES CFC-11 WILL BE TAKEN AS PRODUCTION - COSTS OF ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE ARE ASSUMED TO BE 5% OF THE PERTINENT INCREMENTAL EQUIPMENT LESS THE VALUE OF REPLACED EQUIPMENT - INCREMENTAL YIELD LOSSES ARE TREATED IDENTICALLY TO THE APPROVED MC TEMPLATE

13 Flexible Molded ASSUMPTIONS ITEM PRICE US$ CONSUMPTION BEFORE (/y) CFC-11 POLYOL ISOCYANATE ENERGY PRODUCTION TO BE RECONVERTED 3.1 OTHER PARAMETERS ASSUMED CONSUMPTION AFTER (/y) INFORMATION SOURCE ITEM VALUE INFORMATION SOURCE INVESTMENT IN EQUIPMENT EXCHANGE RATE CFC-11/ISOCYANATE RATIO1 INCREMENTAL YIELD LOSS/Y MC TEMPLATE MAINTENANCE 5% OF INCREMENTAL INVESTMENT COST MC TEMPLATE 4. IOC CALCULATIONS (x 1,000 US$) COST ITEM YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 TOTAL : CFC-11 POLYOL ISOCYANATE TOTAL POST PROJECT: POLYOL ISOCYANATE INCREMENTAL ENERGY INCREMENTAL MAINTENANCE TOTAL IOC 1 Ten parts by weight (pbw) CFC-11 are replaced by one pbw water. This requires equimolar amounts of isocyanate. As a change in (the functionality of the) polyol and isocyanate index can also impact the use of isocyanate, it is recommended to contact the system supplier on this matter.

14 DISCOUNT FACTOR NET PRESENT VALUE (NPV) Flexible Molded 14