Category Archives: Global

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Contractor Health & Safety Partnership Program (CHSPP)

By now, most of you have heard about the Health & Safety Partnership Program that the North American Insulation Manufacturers’ Association (NAIMA) and the Insulation Contractors Association of America have entered into with OSHA. You have probably not heard much about the Contractor Health & Safety Partnership Program (CHSPP) which the NIA has entered into with OSHA. Although these programs are designed to accomplish the same end result concerning the use of synthetic vitreous fibers (SVF) in our industry, the CHSPP is significantly less onerous and it is focused for contractors in our industry.

As you can see from the following article submitted by Angus Crane, general counsel of NAIMA, NAIMA’s primary focus is the HSPP. NAIMA was the principle architect in this program and it was, as a result of working with NAIMA, ICAA, and OSHA, that the NIA Health & Safety Committee and subsequently the NIA Board of Directors determined that the HSPP, with modifications to fit our industry, would be appropriate for a working agreement with OSHA. As a result of this determination, the CHSPP was created.

The CHSPP does not create any new obligations for contractor members of the National Insulation Association. What this program does is recognize the warnings which are already contained in MSDSs issued by the manufacturers of SVF insulation materials to users of those materials when they are purchased. The MSDSs already establish a 1 f/cc permissible exposure limit for SVF materials. Under the OSHA hazard communication standard, this is sufficient to communicate the existence of a potential hazard to the users of SVF materials.

The CHSPP does create several obligations for the NIA. One of those obligations is to urge our members to cooperate with members of NAIMA in their efforts to gather data and develop information concerning the future use of SVF products. In addition, the NIA is committed to requesting that its members use and communicate information, developed and provided by NAIMA concerning the use of SVF products, to their employees. In the CHSPP, the NIA also agrees to communicate a recommended work practice to our members that they use personal respiratory protective equipment whenever they are removing SVF insulation materials which have gone to temperature and when they cannot demonstrate that their employees’ exposure to the SVF, which they are removing, is less than the PEL.

What is the CHSPP?

When the NAIMA approached NIA for it to participate in its Health & Safety Partnership Program (HSPP) concerning synthetic vitreous fibers, NIA reviewed the NAIMA proposal and determined that it was too broad and too restrictive for NIA’s contractor members. The NIA Health & Safety Committee, in conjunction with the NIA Board of Directors, drafted its own Health & Safety Partnership Program for contractors, which it designed specifically for members of NIA. The NIA program is titled “Contractor Health & Safety Partnership Program” (CHSPP) to eliminate confusion and/or misunderstandings which could have existed with NAIMA’s HSPP. The CHSPP is more advisory than it is mandatory and commits NIA to advising its members of the educational materials which will be produced by the members of NAIMA and to urging NIA members to use those materials.

What is the Health &
Safety Partnership Program (HSPP)?

The HSPP for SVF, rock wool, and slag wool is a compilation of NAIMA’s existing work practices and those of individual manufacturers into an organized information and training program. It is intended to formalize and consolidate existing industry worker protection practices by providing specific recommendations in training. Under the HSPP, NAIMA will provide work practices and training opportunities for employers and their workers. This will include training sessions and presentations at contractor events, as well as extensive promotion and development of brochures, posters, a training video, and other support materials.

What is the difference
between the CHSPP and the HSPP?

Both of these programs have been accepted and endorsed by the OSHA. The HSPP requires the manufacturers to be proactive in the development and communication of various types of training material and literature concerning the use of synthetic vitreous fibers (SVF) to the users of these products. Under the HSPP, NAIMA has also agreed to provide these materials, free of charge, to contractors and users. NAIMA has agreed to do air monitoring and other sampling with regard to SVF exposure and to develop better products which may ultimately warrant any type of work practices when using SVF unnecessary.

The CHSPP is a program developed specifically for NIA contractors. The CHSPP recognizes the efforts of NAIMA and the commitments made by NAIMA to further employee health issues. In the CHSPP, NIA has agreed to advise its members of NAIMA’s efforts and recommend to its members that they should use the materials made available by NAIMA when educating their employees concerning SVF. NIA has also agreed to encourage its members to continue to use engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection, or a combination thereof, to keep employee exposure to SVF below 1 f/cc over an 8-hour time-weighted average. Finally, NIA has agreed to recommend certain work practices to its members to employ when working with SVF products. Whereas the HSPP creates some mandatory obligations on the part of insulation manufacturers, the CHSPP is totally advisory with regard to making recommendations to NIA members.

Who was involved in the
development of the CHSPP and the HSPP?

The CHSPP was developed through the efforts of the NIA Health & Safety Committee and the NIA General Counsel. The position taken by NIA has been endorsed by both the Executive Committee and the Board of Directors. The HSPP was developed through the joint efforts of NAIMA, ICAA, and NIA.

Why do we need a CHSPP?

As a result of information developed from non-inhalation studies concerning SVF, SVF was identified as a potential carcinogen by different national and international organizations in 1993. Although no evidence existed to raise the level of concern for SVF beyond the potential carcinogen designation, this ranking came to the attention of OSHA, which put SVF on its regulatory agenda in December 1995. At that time, OSHA identified SVF as being a priority for rulemaking.

NAIMA approached OSHA with a concept of creating a voluntary standard or program to avoid the necessity of formal rulemaking for SVF. OSHA had taken the position that SVF should be treated much like asbestos for both insulation and removal purposes. After it was approached, OSHA agreed to permit NAIMA to develop a voluntary program to address OSHA’s concerns with regard to the SVF exposure.

In March 1998, NAIMA approached the NIA Health & Safety Committee with its proposal, which was identified at that time as a voluntary standard. The NIA Health & Safety Committee, General Counsel, and representatives of ICAA, reviewed this proposal and rejected it as not being supported by substantial medical documentation, and being overly broad and restrictive with regard to SVF insulation contractors. Although the road between March, 1998 and May 18, 1999, was at sometimes rocky, all participants finally agreed that some sort of voluntary guidance or program was needed to convince OSHA that formal rulemaking was not necessary.

Why does the CHSPP recommend exposure limit of 1 f/cc of air over an 8-hour time-weighted average?

The NIA Health & Safety Committee determined that it was in the best interest of SVF insulation workers to adopt an exposure limit that has been on most material safety data sheets that accompany SVF products for some time. Upon polling NIA members, we found the recommendation to be a relatively easy exposure level to meet and should not result in any hardship by NIA members.

Are there any situations where a respirator is recommended under the CHSPP?

There is only one situation in which the NIA agrees to recommend to its members that a respirator be used when working with SVF. This situation occurs during significant repair or demolition activity. Under these circumstances, NIA has agreed to recommend to its members that employees wear an NIA certified dust respirator, N95 series. This type of activity is defined as those actions involving removal of SVF that has gone to temperature or when the insulation has become unbonded. An exception to this is built into the CHSPP in which “respirators need not be worn when employees are performing noted demolition work, when the contractor is able to demonstrate, through appropriate air monitoring, that its employees are not exposed to respirable SVF in excess of the permissible exposure limit of 1 f/cc.” This exposure level must be demonstrated to a high degree of statistical confidence through a series of air monitoring data checks under similar working conditions. In addition, NIA recommends that its members require the use, by their employees, of the N95 series dust respirators whenever they are working with SVF and are exposed to more than 1 f/cc over an 8-hour time-weighted average.

Will this new Health & Safety Partnership Program change the enforcement power that OSHA has over contractors?

No. Neither the CHSPP nor the HSPP changes expand OSHA’s enforcement power over contractors.

Does the establishment of
a CHSPP or a HSPP mean that the historic products were unsafe?

No. NAIMA member companies stand behind the safety of their products when appropriate work practices are followed. Over 60 years of animal inhalation and human epidemiological studies have shown no causal association between cancer in humans and exposure to the synthetic vitreous fibers manufactured by NAIMA member companies.

When will actual
implementation of the CHSPP begin?

NAIMA and its member companies are currently developing the written support materials needed to educate key customers and their employees about the program. Complete implementation of the program will occur over a three-year period and NAIMA will continually provide written reports to OSHA updating the agency on the program’s progress. The CHSPP became effective on May 18, 1999, when it was signed by representatives of NIA and Mr. Charles Jeffress, OSHA Administrator.

NIA and NAIMA – Educating Contractors, and Users of Insulation through General work Practices

As part of the effort to communicate the provisions of the CHSPP, NIA and NAIMA have developed recommended work practices that will help industry participants understand the scope of the voluntary provisions regarding the handling of synthetic vitreous fibers (SVF).

1.0 General Work Practices Applicable to all Work Involving Synthetic Vitreous Fibers (SVF)

These recommended work practices are in addition to all applicable OSHA requirements. In accordance with OSHA’s HAZCOM Standard, employees must receive training for the safe handling of SVF insulation.

Limiting contact with fibers will reduce potential irritation; limiting exposure to SVF will reduce potential health risks. The following practices describe several methods that will make the handling of SVF safer and more comfortable.

2.0 Minimize Dust Generation:

2.1 Keep the material in its packaging as long as practicable and if possible.

2.2 Tools that generate the least amount of dust should be used. If power tools are to be used, they should be equipped with appropriate dust collection systems as necessary.

2.3 Keep work areas clean and free of scrap SVF material.

2.4 Do not use compressed air for clean up unless there is no other effective method. If compressed air must be used proper procedures and control measures must be implemented. Other workers in the immediate area must be removed or similarly protected.

2.5 Where repair or maintenance of equipment that is either insulated with SVF or covered with settled SVF dust is necessary, clean the equipment first with a HEPA vacuum or equivalent (where possible) or wipe the surface clean with a wet rag to remove excess dust and loose fibers. If compressed air must be used proper procedures and control measures must be implemented. Other workers in the immediate area must be removed or similarly protected.

2.6 Avoid unnecessary handling of scrap materials by placing them in waste disposal containers and equipment kept as close to working areas as possible which prevents release of fibers.

3.0 Ventilation:

3.1 Unless other proper procedures and control measures have been implemented, dust collection systems should be used in manufacturing and fabrication settings where appropriate and feasible.

3.2 Exhausted air containing SVF should be filtered prior to recirculation into interior workspaces.

3.3 If ventilation systems are used to capture SVF, they should be regularly checked and maintained.

4.0 Wear Appropriate Clothing:


4.1 Loose fitting, long-sleeved and long-legged clothing is recommended to prevent irritation. A head cover is also recommended, especially when working with material overhead. Gloves are also recommended. Skin irritation cannot occur if there is no contact with the skin. Do not tape sleeves or pants at wrists or ankles.

4.2 Remove SVF dust from the work clothes before leaving work to reduce potential for skin irritation.

5.0 Wear Appropriate Personal Protective Equipment:


5.1 To minimize upper respiratory tract irritation, measures should be taken to control the exposure. Such measures will be dictated by the work environment and may include appropriate respiratory protective equipment. See OSHA’s Respiratory Protection Standard.

5.2 When appropriate, eye protection should be worn whenever SVF products are being handled.

5.3 Personal protective equipment should be properly fitted and worn when required.

6.0 Removal of Fibers From the Skin and Eyes:


6.1 If fibers accumulate on the skin, do not rub or scratch. Never remove fibers from the skin by blowing with compressed air.

6.2 If fibers are seen penetrating the skin, they may be removed by applying and then removing adhesive tape so that the fibers adhere to the tape and are pulled out of the skin.

6.3 SVF may be deposited in the eye. If this should happen, do not rub the eyes. Flush them with water or eyewash solution (if available). Consult a physician if the irritation persists.

7.0 Safe Handling Procedures for Specific SVF Applications

7.1 Blown SVF In Attics:

*7.1.1 The installer blowing insulation in the attic must always wear a NIOSH certified dust respirator (certified N95 or greater). See OSHA’s Respiratory Protection Standard.

*7.1.2 No workers, unless they are wearing a NIOSH certified dust respirator (certified N95 or greater), should be permitted in the attic during or immediately after the SVF application. .

7.1.3 The blower should not use a bare hand to direct the insulation stream as it emerges from the blowing hose. A gloved hand or a deflector should be used instead.

7.2 Cavity Fill Insulation:

*7.2.1 The blower in this operation must always wear a NIOSH approved dust respirator (certified N95 or greater). See OSHA’s Respiratory Protection Standard.

*7.2.2 Other exposed workers who are in the immediate area when SVF is being applied to a cavity should wear a NIOSH approved respirator.

7.3 Batt, Blanket, and Roll Insulation:

7.3.1 Where possible, avoid tearing or ripping the product by hand. The materials should be cut with a sharp knife.

7.3.2 Workers installing batts overhead should wear appropriate personal protection equipment.

7.4 Pipe Board and Other Fabricated Products:

7.4.1 In locations which power saw, rout, sand, grind or employ other operations which generate dusty conditions, local exhaust ventilation should be used.

7.5 Ceiling Tiles:

7.5.1 Cut or trim ceiling tile with a razor knife or a keyhole saw. Operations such as power cutting, power kerfing or using compressed air to remove dust is not recommended. The use of power tools with a dust collection system to cut ceiling tiles is acceptable.

7.5.2 Surfaces where SVF dust collects should be appropriately cleaned.

7.5.3 Workers should wear appropriate eye and head personal protection.

7.6 Spray Applied Fireproofing:

7.6.1 Practice good housekeeping procedures.

7.6.2 When the PEL of 1 f/cc on an eight hour TWA is exceeded, use a NIOSH certified dust respirator (certified N95 or greater).

7.6.3 When spraying mineral fiber fireproofing, wear appropriate personal protection equipment.

7.7 Bulk Unbonded Products (Manufacturing)

*7.7.1 Workers dumping or pouring unbonded, bulk, specialty filtration fiber products where engineering controls are absent should wear a NIOSH certified dust respirator (certified N95 or greater). See OSHA’s Respiratory Protection Standard.

7.8 SVF Product Removal

7.8.1 These recommended work practices are applicable for workers removing SVF products during significant repair or demolition activity [definition of “significant repair” and “demolition” to be supplied after discussion with NIA]. Additional precautions may be required if workers are also exposed to other products or substances. In such circumstances, follow any more stringent recommendations that apply to those products.

*7.8.2 Workers should wear a NIOSH certified dust respirator (certified N95 or greater) when removing SVF products as described in section 7.8.1. See OSHA’s Respiratory Protection Standard.

7.8.3 Practice good housekeeping procedures.

7.8.4 Where appropriate (i.e., in situations where an appreciable amount of dust is generated), dust collection systems may reduce the exposure to dust. If a dust collection system is used, follow the recommended work practices for ventilation.

7.8.5 Follow recommended work practices for selecting work clothing and appropriate personal protective equipment to be used during removal activity.

7.8.6 Use a light water mist on the SVF to minimize airborne dust during product removal and disposal.

*EXCEPTION FOR CHSPP

Respirators need not be worn when employees are performing the above indicated tasks when the contractor is able to demonstrate through appropriate air monitoring, that its employees are not exposed to respirable asbestos fibers in excess of the PEL. In addition, air monitoring data taken on previous jobs which are substantially similar to the job presently being performed by the contractor may be used to determine the necessity for wearing personal respiratory protective equipment. Substantial similarity in jobs shall exist when same type (bonded or unbonded) SVF insulation is being used, the methods for blowing the insulation or feeding the insulation into the blowers are the same, and general conditions of the work environment are the same.

Should you have any questions with regard to these programs and the implications they may have with regard to your business, please do not hesitate to contact NIA at (703) 683-6422, any member of the NIA Health & Safety Committee, or NIA’s general counsel, Gary W. Auman, at 937-223-6003.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Fiber Glass and Slag Wool Insulation: a Life-Cycle Approach

Recycled content is the most immediately noticeable,

environmentally beneficial feature of a product.

Preference for a design, product or service based solely on

this one attribute, however, can be misleading. The

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other

environmental experts recommend that a comparison of the

environmental properties of competing products employ a

life-cycle analysis.

A life-cycle analysis is an appraisal of the environmental

impacts connected with a product or service through an

examination environmental traits of the product during the

following stages: pre-manufacturing; manufacturing;

distribution/packaging; use, reuse, maintenance; and waste

management. In other words, life-cycle is a “cradle-to-

grave” assessment.

Responding to the recommendation of environmental experts,

the North American Insulation Manufacturers Association

(NAIMA) has developed this brochure outlining the various

life-cycle characteristics that specifiers should consider

in determining the most relevant attributes of an

environmentally preferable insulation product.

PRE-MANUFACTURING STAGE

An analysis of the pre-manufacturing stage should reflect

environmental effects associated with all pre-manufacturing

activities including raw material acquisition and

intermediate processing. For example:

Fiber Glass Insulation Is Made From Sand or Recycled Glass

  • Sand is a “rapidly renewable resource,” one that will

    always be in plentiful supply. Thus, the use of sand as

    a raw material does not impose any impact on a non-

    renewable natural resource.

  • Recycled plate and bottle glass is considered a

    secondary raw material. When used as a raw material,

    recycled glass is transformed into a product that saves

    energy and reduces pollution.

Slag Wool Insulation Is Made from Blast Furnace Slag

  • Slag wool insulation uses raw materials derived from a

    secondary source – blast furnace slag – and does not

    deplete any natural resources.

Caution: Some Secondary Materials May Indirectly Deplete

Natural Resources

When a secondary raw material is used, consideration

should be given to whether its use may indirectly

accelerate the depletion of a natural resource. For

example, by using recycled newsprint for insulation, the

manufacturers of cellulose insulation have removed

newsprint from the recycling stream and forced printers to

rely upon virgin, rather than recycled, newsprint. This

translates into a further loss of renewable raw timber

resources.

MANUFACTURING STAGE

Energy Consumption vs. Energy Saved

While the production of fiber glass and slag wool

insulation is energy-intensive, manufacturers have improved

energy efficiency substantially over the last decade by

using increasingly more sophisticated technology. It is

important to note that the energy used in production is

immediately replenished through the use of the final

product.

An evaluation of the manufacturing process should measure

inputs (such as energy consumption) and outputs (such as

air and water effluents).

Inputs

  • Nearly 33 trillion Btu of energy are consumed by fiber

    glass and slag wool producers annually to manufacture

    insulation products; however, insulation produced each

    year saves about 400 trillion Btu annually.

  • All insulation products installed in U.S. buildings save

    consumers about 12 quadrillion Btu annually or about 42

    percent of the energy that would have been consumed with

    no insulation in place. Twelve quadrillion Btu is

    almost 15 percent of the total national energy used; it

    is enough energy to supply the total energy requirements

    of Florida for 4 years.

  • A typical pound of insulation saves 12 times as much

    energy in its first year in place as the energy used to

    produce it.

Outputs

Most fiber glass and slag wool manufacturing facilities

utilize a closed-loop water recycling system making waste

water effluent discharges nonexistent. While manufacturing

facilities emit certain air pollutants, both the fiber

glass and slag wool industries will soon adopt maximum

achievable control technology (MACT) to help limit the

amount of air pollutants emitted into the atmosphere.

These new controls will supplement existing controls that

already substantially reduce potential air emissions from

the manufacturing process.

lutants emitted into the atmosphere.

PACKAGING AND TRANSPORTATION

Total Product Volume

A life-cycle analysis should consider the total product

volume it takes to accomplish an assigned task. For

example:

  • To insulate a typical 2,500 sq. ft. two-story home with

    an R-value of R-30 in the attic, and an R-13 in the

    exterior walls, requires 2,695 pounds of cellulose

    insulation, which is three times more material per house

    than fiber glass.

  • Because fiber glass insulation products are more compact

    than other insulation products, the packaging for fiber

    glass products requires significantly less material.

    For example, to insulate a typical 2,500 sq. ft. house

    requires 30 packages of fiber glass compared with 109

    cellulose insulation packages.

RECYCLABLE PACKAGING

Fiber glass and slag wool manufacturers now use recyclable

plastic packaging as a way to conserve resources.

Packaging is often coded for material identification, and

can be recycled in areas where facilities exist.

LESS ENERGY USED TO TRANSPORT MATERIALS

Due to the compact nature of fiber glass and slag wool

insulation, combined with compression packaging, the actual

amount of packaging material has been reduced and the

result is less scrap at the job site and in the waste

stream. Since fiber glass and slag wool insulation

products are so highly compressed, more insulation can be

shipped in each truck and the result is a reduction in the

energy required for transportation.

PRODUCT CHARACTERISTICS

Judging a Product’s Ability to Perform Its Intended

Function

Due to the compact nature of fiber glass and slag wool

insulation, combined with compression packaging, the actual

amount of packaging material has been reduced and the

result is less scrap at the job site and in the waste

stream. Since fiber glass and slag wool insulation

products are so highly compressed, more insulation can be

shipped in each truck and the result is a reduction in the

energy required for transportation.

R-Value

R-value is resistance to heat flow — the higher the R-

value, the greater the insulating power. Thickness of

insulation is only one factor that determines its R-value.

In fact, insulation should always be specified by R-value,

not thickness.

Fiber glass and slag wool insulations are high

performance products that yield a high R-value per inch,

which varies depending on density. The overall R-value

installed in the building is the measurement to look for,

not the R-value per inch.

Settling

A product’s R-value should not deteriorate over time. If

an insulation product settles, the installed thermal

performance is directly impacted. Therefore, specifiers

should consider a product’s ability to resist settling and

maintain its thermal performance for the life of the

building.

Water Absorption

In general, insulation will lose R-value when wet. Some

insulation is made of material that does not wick up and

hold water, but other insulations will absorb water and may

mat down causing permanent reduction in the thermal

performance.

Corrosion and Flame Resistance

Certain chemicals routinely applied as a fire retardant to

most cellulose insulations can cause the corrosion of pipes

and wires under some conditions. Flame resistance is

another performance feature that should be weighted in

selecting an insulation material.

  • Fiber glass and slag wool insulations are naturally non-

    combustible and remain so for the life of the product.

    Fiber glass and slag wool require no additional fire

    retardant chemical treatments.

  • Cellulose insulation is made of ground-up or shredded

    newspaper, and wood-based products are naturally

    combustible. To protect against fire hazards, cellulose

    insulation is heavily treated with fire retardant

    chemicals prior to installation. Typically, 540 pounds

    of fire retardant chemicals are added to cellulose

    insulation used to insulate a 2,500 square foot home.

    The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) mandates

    that cellulose packages carry a fire hazard warning for

    consumers and users.

USE, REUSE AND MAINTENANCE

Fiber Glass and Slag Wool Insulations are Reusable

Most modern buildings are subject to expansion, remodeling, or

some other type of renovation during their lifetime. Because of

this, the reusable nature of a product is a key factor in the

life-cycle analysis. For example:

  • Fiber glass and stag wool batt insulation can be removed

    easily and actually put back in place. In other words,

    they are reusable. This is not true of all insulation

    materials. Certain foams or aerated concrete require

    extensive chiseling to remove the insulation. Such an

    operation can result in loss of building materials that are

    damaged in the removal process and loss of the insulation

    itself.

  • Fiber glass and slag wool insulation require no

    maintenance. This eliminates the expenditure of energy or

    natural resources associated with maintenance operations.

  • In addition, fiber glass and slag wool insulation last for

    the life of the building if undisturbed. A long life

    expectancy saves money on replacements and retrofits, and

    also ensures that no additional material is entering the

    waste stream.

RECYCLED CONTENT

High Recycled Content

Not only do fiber glass and slag wool insulation products save

energy, they use a high percentage of recycled material which

further helps the environment. In addition to reducing demand

on virgin resources, using recycled materials saves landfill

space by diverting materials from the solid waste stream, and

reduces the energy used, and pollution emitted, during the

manufacturing process. Recent surveys on the amount of recycled

content in fiber glass and slag wool insulations include the

following facts:

Fiber Glass

  • The amount of recycled glass used by fiber glass insulation

    manufacturers in 1996 was over one billion pounds.

  • The use of recycled glass resulted in a savings of over 27

    million cu. ft. of landfill space at a density of 37

    lbs./cu. ft. (semi-crushed glass).

  • Many fiber glass insulation products now contain up to 40

    percent recycled materials, depending on the plant in which

    they are produced.

  • Fiber glass insulation manufacturers recycle more material

    by weight than any other type of insulation used the

    building and construction sector.

  • According to the Glass Packaging Institute, fiber glass

    insulation is the largest secondary market for recycled

    glass containers.

Slag Wool

  • The amount of recycled blast furnace slag used by slag wool

    insulation manufacturers in 1996 was more than one billion

    pounds.

  • The use of recycled blast furnace slag resulted in a

    savings of over 16 million cu. ft. of landfill space.

  • The slag wool industry consumes a significant portion —

    approximately 6 percent — of the blast furnace slag

    produced in the United States that might otherwise end up

    in a landfill.

  • The industry estimates that over 90 percent of their slag

    acquisition is new slag purchased directly from

    manufacturers. The remaining 10 percent is mined from

    waste disposal sites.

HEALTH ISSUES

Tested vs. Untested Products

An important feature of a life-cycle analysis is whether a

product or service poses human health risks. The EPA has listed

carcinogenicity and irritancy as attributes that justify

labeling a product as a human health risk. Consumer products of

all kinds currently carry these labels. Just because one

product has been thoroughly tested for carcinogenicity and

irritancy (e.g., fiber glass and slag wool insulations) and

another has not (e.g., cellulose insulation) should not imply

environmental preference for the non-tested product. Indeed,

the failure of a manufacturer adequately to test its product

should be a critical factor in determining that a product is not

environmentally preferable.

When evaluating alleged health hazards of a product, specifiers

should distinguish: a) between products that impose potential

risks in the manufacturing process, but not in use of the final

product, and b) between those products which pose risks in both

the manufacturing process and the final use of the product.

Fiber Glass and Slag Wool Are Safe to Manufacture, Install and

Use

Fiber glass and slag wool manufacturers have funded over 50

million dollars of research at leading independent laboratories

and universities in the United States and abroad. In the past

ten years, there have been a number of comprehensive reviews of

research on the health aspects of fiber glass and slag wool by

U.S. and international organizations. These reviews have

concluded that fiber glass and slag wool have not been shown to

cause cancer or nonmalignant diseases in humans. Indeed, the

weight of scientific evidence demonstrates that fiber glass and

slag wool insulations are safe to manufacture, install and use

when practical recommended work practices are followed.

WASTE MANAGEMENT

Recyclable

Another factor of importance in a life-cycle analysis is whether

the product is recyclable. As mentioned previously, fiber glass

and slag wool insulations are reusable after the initial

installation and, therefore, are recyclable. Fiber glass also

has the capacity to be reclaimed from demolition debris and

recycled into new products. In fact, fiber glass trimming at

manufacturing facilities is routinely placed back into the mix

and converted into usable products. Not all insulation products

possess such a characteristic.

mmended work practices are followed.

SAFEGUARDING THE ENVIRONMENT

Fiber glass and slag wool insulation products make buildings

more energy efficient, reducing the amount of fossil fuel

combustion needed to heat and cool homes, businesses, and

factories, which, in turn, decreases the amount of sulfur

dioxide and carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere.

Because carbon dioxide is one of the principal “greenhouse

gases” contributing to global warming, and sulfur dioxide is the

major component of acid rain, insulation plays a significant

role in protecting the environment. For example, insulation

currently in place in U.S. buildings reduces the amount of

carbon dioxide emissions by 780 million tons each year.

The fiber glass and slag wool industries are also

safeguarding the integrity of the ecological balance by

manufacturing products whose components may be recovered and

reused at the end useful life of the product. Fiber glass and

slag wool insulations sustain the energy life-cycle by

transforming what might otherwise be waste products into

insulation material that can be used over and over again.

Indeed, from a life-cycle perspective, fiber glass and slag

wool insulation offer tremendous benefits to the environment and

complement policies which promote environmentally preferred

products.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Cellular Glass: Achieving an Environmental Balance

Specifiers of construction materials find themselves on the front

line of today’s environmental struggles. They need to know all the

implications of their product selections, both short and long-term.

While insulation materials constitute a relatively small part of

the overall cost of a building or plant, they determine a

disproportionately large share of a facility’s long-term

environmental impact.

For purposes of this discussion, the environmental impact of

thermal insulation falls into two categories: indirect and direct.

Indirect environmental impacts are those which reduce the amount of

energy consumed or lost through inferior or inadequate insulation.

Reducing energy losses reduces the demand for energy, thereby

conserving nonrenewable fuel supplies and reducing the amount of

pollutants, such as carbon dioxide (CO2) , sulfur dioxide (SO2) and

nitrogen oxides (NOx), released into the atmosphere through the

burning of fossil fuels.

Direct environmental impacts result from the insulation

manufacturing process itself, like the release of

chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) and hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) and

other potential ozone-depleting foaming agents, as well as from the

landfill disposal of spent insulation.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS

Most of the world’s environmental problems, including pollution,

ozone depletion, acid rain, global warming and waste disposal, can

be tied in one form or another to energy consumption.

Pollution Thermal insulation plays a significant role in both the

consumption and conservation of energy. The reduction of energy

demand through the use of energy-efficient construction practices

and insulation ultimately will reduce pollution from the burning of

fossil fuels for direct heating and generation of electricity.

Ozone Depletion According to the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA), a major use of HCFCs and other chemical foaming

agents in the United States is for the manufacture of plastic

insulating foams, including polystyrenes, phenolics, polyurethanes

and polyisocyanurates.

Acid Rain There are two ways to minimize acid rain formation: (1)

burn less fossil fuels; and, (2) remove the SO2 and NOx from the

combustion gases. Reducing energy demand and the burning of fossil

fuels by using energy-efficient building practices and insulation

to decrease will also have a positive carry-over affect on the acid

rain problem.

Global Warming The only realistic means of reducing production of

greenhouse gases is through the control of ozone-depleting agents.

Waste Disposal When designing and constructing buildings and

plants, careful attention must be paid to both the environmental

and economic life cycles of the insulation system. Both the

manufacture of building materials and the construction of buildings

and plants consume considerable amounts of energy. Specifiers of

building materials and construction practices need to ensure that

they are selecting efficiently manufactured materials, which will

provide maximum service life before needing to be replaced and

disposed.

By specifying and using insulation with a long life expectancy,

companies save not only money on replacements and retrofits, but

also ensure they are doing their part to reduce the waste stream.

BALANCING ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY

When selecting an environmentally responsible insulation, it is no

longer sufficient merely to select the required R-value. The

insulation must also (1) provide constant energy savings, (2) be

environmentally benign during manufacturing, (3) have a service

life that will ensure long-term performance and minimize

replacement and disposal in landfills, and (4) pose no health risks

to those handling or installing it.

Realistically, these concerns need to be balanced with concerns

of cost-effectiveness. The energy cost-effectiveness of an

insulation can be expressed in terms of cost savings. If the cost

of the energy saved by using a particular insulation is less than

the total energy used in its manufacturing, installation, planned

use, plus the energy used to recycle it, then it is not cost-

effective. Also, the amount or cost of pollution avoided by using

a certain type of insulation throughout its service life should be

greater than the cost of pollution resulting from its manufacture

and use. By carefully weighing all the factors and costs involved

in these two relationships, the overall environmental profile of an

insulation, or its “Environmental Balance” can be determined.

A PROPOSED EVALUATION TECHNIQUE

The following critical concepts should be kept in mind when

selecting an environmentally responsible thermal insulation. An

insulation’s energy cost effectiveness might be expressed in terms

of energy cost savings. If the cost of the energy saved by using a

particular insulation is less than the total energy used in its

manufacturing, plus that used to recycle it, then it is not cost

effective. This relationship can be expressed as follows:

Energy Cost-Effectiveness =

.

.

(Energy Saved)

____________________________

(Manufacturing Energy + Recycled Energy)
.

(If > 1.0, it is cost effective; if < 1.0, it's not.)

The amount or cost of pollution avoided by using a certain type of

insulation throughout its service life should be greater that the

cost of pollution resulting from its use. The pollution reduction

effectiveness of an insulation can therefore be expressed as

follows:

Pollution Reduction Effectivenes =

.

.

Pollution Cost Savings

______________________

Actual Pollution Costs
.

(If > 1.0, it is an effective anti pollutant; if < 1.0, it's not.)

By carefully weighing all the factors and costs involved in the

above two relationships, a particular insulation’s overall

environmental profile or Environmental Balance can be determined.

It can be expressed as follows:

Environmental Balance =

.

Energy Cost-Effectiveness

+ Pollution Reduction Effectiveness
.

(If > 2.0 excellent; between 1.0 & 2.0 good; if < 1.0 poor.)

The above relationships hold true only if the insulation is (1)

used in the proper way, (2) used in the correct thickness, (3) is

properly installed, and (4) it maintains its expected performance

and physical properties throughout its entire service life.

ACHIEVING ENVIRONMENTAL BALANCE WITH CELLULAR GLASS INSULATION

In discussing how insulation achieves environmental balance, three

critical attributes of the product must be evaluated: (1) its

environmental profile, (2) its service life and efficiency, and (3)

its environmental cost-effectiveness.

The environmental profile of an insulation depends on the following

four characteristics: (1) its raw materials; (2) its manufacturing

process, including gray energy, or, the energy expended during the

extraction, processing and transportation of raw materials; (3)

installation and related methods and materials; and, (4) its

disposal.

RAW MATERIALS AND THEIR PROCESSING

The Manufacturing Process insulation consists exclusively of minute

sealed glass cells, formed through chemically reacting finely-

ground oxidized glass with carbon at a high temperature. All the

raw materials used to make glass are naturally occurring

substances, commonly found in nature. None constitute a danger to

man or the environment.

The manufacturing of cellular glass insulation involves the

production of glass and a foaming (cellulating) process. This

process produces CO2, which becomes entrapped in the tiny glass

cells of the material. No additional foaming agents, HCFCs,

organic binders or potentially harmful substances are used that

might contribute to atmospheric pollution. In the finishing stage,

rough blocks of cellular glass are cut and trimmed to their desired

dimensions. During finishing, a certain amount of crushed glass or

glass dust is produced as well as a small quantity of hydrogen

sulfide (H2S). The glass dust is relatively heavy, so it is

classified as a nuisance dust. It is neither carcinogenic nor

likely to cause silicosis. Almost all of the dust and glass scraps

are collected and recycled in a melting furnace to make new glass.

Energy Use & Air Pollution Manufacturing of cellular glass

insulation is essentially a thermal process and uses considerable

energy, from both electrical and natural gas heating, to melt and

foam the glass. While heating with natural gas and generating

electricity with fossil fuels mean releasing air pollutants, the

pollution resulting from manufacturing is considerably less than

would result from increased energy use if cellular glass insulation

were not used.

Plant Energy Efficiency The plant recovers energy from both of its

most energy intensive operations: glass melting and cellulating.

In both operations, hot exhaust gases from the combustion of

natural gas are used to preheat the air used in the combustion

process.

Installation and Use The cutting and fitting required during the

installation of cellular glass insulation and related accessory

materials releases small quantities of entrapped gases (CO2, CO and

H2S) that might otherwise be considered harmful to the environment.

However, the quantities are too small even to be considered

atmospheric pollutants.

Disposal Because of the unique physical characteristics of

cellular glass insulation, it has a long service life. Typically,

the system on which the insulation is installed is replaced before

the insulation reaches the end of its life, or the site where it is

installed is demolished. When the insulation reaches the disposal

stage, will it have a detrimental impact on the environment?

Although all of the physical insulating properties of cellular

glass insulation are usually intact at the time of removal or

building demolition, it is not feasible to reuse this material as

an insulation. The time required to salvage, sort, clean, etc.,

would be economically prohibitive. Crushed cellular glass,

however, can be used as a fill material for roadways and as a

supplement to asphalt paving.

In most instances, cellular glass insulation ends its product

life in either a municipal landfill or in a construction-and-

demolition landfill. Crushing the insulation prior to disposal

reduces its volume by 5-7 times. Since it is inert and

environmentally benign, there is no danger to the ground water

regime.

SERVICE LIFE & ENVIRONMENTAL EFFICIENCY

While it’s possible to construct facilities to last 50 years or

more, construction practices today are turning out structures with

as little as a 20-year service life. The unusual composition of

insulation makes it uniquely resistant to all types of normal

insulation damage, including moisture absorption, thermal expansion

and contraction, fire, corrosion and vermin. Because of its long-

lived insulating properties, cellular glass insulation may even

extend the service life of a facility.

The environmental “bottom line” of any insulation is how much

energy pollution it saves or avoids through its use. In

calculating two scenarios using a particular brand of cellular

glass, we find that (1) by installing 2-inch-thick insulation on a

12-inch steam line operating at 400 F per 100 sq. ft. of pipe

surface, the energy pollution saved over a five-year period by

using the insulation equals 1,900 times the amount of energy as the

energy pollution created during the manufacture of the insulation;

and, (2) the energy saved by installing 4-inch-thick cellular glass

insulation per 1,000 sq. ft. of roof area over a 40-year life is

134 times of the energy-pollution created during the manufacture of

the insulation.

The Pittsburgh Corning -proposed decision-making process for

selecting cellular glass insulation involves three separate

evaluations, each assigned its own weight or number of points:

technical, economic and environmental. Out sales representatives

and engineers routinely assist in deciding which insulation

materials and systems are best or a particular application.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the environmental crises we are confronting today

cause us to re-evaluate the building practices of the last several

decades. No longer can we afford to be energy-inefficient or

environmentally unwise.

In order to make educated decisions about the environmental

characteristics and performance of any insulation product, contact

the manufacturer directly. Building materials, including

insulation, need to be environmentally safe during their

manufacture, installation, service life and disposal. In

additional, constructing buildings and facilities using energy-

efficient materials and methods to provide a service life of at

least 30 to 50 years is the only way we can achieve a level of

economic and environmental cost-effectiveness acceptable to

businesses, consumers and the community at large.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Steam Partnership: Improving System Efficiency Through Marketplace Partnerships

The Alliance to Save Energy, a national nonprofit organization based in Washington D.C. and the

U.S. Department of Energy are working with energy-efficiency suppliers to promote the

comprehensive upgrade of industrial steam systems. Like EPA’s Green Lights and DOE’s Motor

Challenge, the Steam Partnership program will encourage industrial energy consumers to retrofit

their steam plants wherever profitable. The Alliance has organized a “Steam Team” of trade

associations, consulting engineering firms, and energy-efficiency companies to help develop this

public-private initiative.

Overview

Improving the energy efficiency of industrial steam plants is a significant opportunity for U.S.

industry to improve plant productivity and reduce many of the costs associated with

production. The Alliance to Save Energy estimates that roughly 2.8 quads (2,800 trillion Btu)

of energy could be saved through cost-effective energy-efficiency improvements in industrial

steam systems. The energy savings, worth approximately $6.3 billion (1995 dollars), could

be invested in new processes and equipment to improve productivity.

Unfortunately, several factors interfere with the efficient production of steam. First, many

boiler operators are not aware of steam-system efficiency opportunities and have not been

properly trained to look for them. Second, industrial plant managers often fail to recognize

the importance of the boiler house or appreciate steam’s role in the production process. When

this happens, boiler operators and maintenance staff soon get the message: “….efficient

operation of the steam system is not a priority.”

Finally, operators and managers are rarely aware of steam costs. Too often steam and other

utilities (e.g., compressed air and chilled water) are separated from the other factors of

production — both physically and in the financial accounting system. As a result, steam costs

are not assigned to individual processes or production lines. Instead, they are treated as a fixed

cost and assumed to be uncontrollable.

Energy-efficient steam systems, like efficient motor and lighting systems, can generate

significant savings through reduced fuel consumption. Improving energy efficiency is one of

the best and least capital-intensive ways of conserving energy and reducing the amount of

pollution that goes up the stack. The Alliance to Save Energy has found no lack of

information on specific steam technologies, however, there is little information on steam

system efficiency. The Alliance, the Department of Energy, and the energy-efficiency industry

are working to correct this situation through a public-private initiative focusing on steam-

system efficiency.

Why Steam Is Important

U.S. industry uses a lot of steam. In 1995, U.S. manufacturers consumed roughly 16.55

quadrillion Btu (quads) of energy for heat, power, and electricity generation. According

to the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners, approximately two thirds of all the fuel burned

by these companies is consumed to raise steam, representing approximately 9.34

quadrillion Btu of the 1995 energy total.

The U.S. manufacturing economy depends on over 54,000 large boilers to produce steam

for process use, to drive mechanical equipment (e.g., pumps and fans), and to generate

electricity. It costs U.S. industry approximately $21 billion (1995 dollars) a year to feed

these boilers.

After the fuels are burned, emissions are released into the atmosphere that cause air

pollution and global warming. Each year U.S. industry releases approximately 196 million

metric tons of carbon dioxide while producing steam. These emissions represent over 40 percent of all U.S.

industrial emissions of carbon dioxide and over 13 percent of total U.S. emissions.

Total demand for steam is projected to increase 20 percent in five major industries by 2015 (compared to 1990 levels), with demand in food processing and

chemicals being even greater. Industrial requirements for steam are increasing most rapidly in the “other” category, which includes rubber, plastics,

industrial machinery, and transportation equipment (See Figure 1).

The seven industries represented in DOE-Office of Industrial Technology’s Industries of the Future Program are among the most energy and waste intensive

in U.S. industry. These seven industries are aluminum, metal casing, glass, steel, petroluem refining, chemicals, and forest products. When OIT examined

the importance of steam in these industries, they found that on a weighted average basis, approximately 45 percent of their total energy consumption was

used to raise steam.

The proportion of total energy used for steam was especially high in forest products,

chemicals, petroleum refining, and steel (See Figure 2). There is a high degree of overlap

between DOE’s seven industries and the most steam-intensive industries, which include

chemicals, pulp and paper, food and kindred products, and petroleum refining.

Steam Energy Efficiency Potential

Because steam distribution losses can have a significant impact on boiler operations, the

efficiencies of boilers and their distribution systems are closely interrelated. For this

reason, we have defined the energy-efficiency potential for industrial steam systems as the

total of all the cost-effective efficiency opportunities in steam generation and distribution,

as well as in steam-system operation and maintenance. The Alliance estimates that a total

steam-system efficiency potential of 30 to 40 percent is available to industry.

There is a significant range of operating efficiencies for boilers, depending on the type of

fuel, the use of heat recovery equipment, and the operating load. Assuming boilers are in

good repair and properly maintained, the average efficiency of boilers ranges from 76 to 81

percent on natural gas, 78 to 84 percent on oil, and 81 to 85 percent on coal. These

efficiency levels can be improved by 2 to 5 percent, on average, with boiler tune-ups and

auxiliary equipment where economically justified.

Unfortunately, many boilers are not properly operated and maintained. Without proper

operation and maintenance practices, fuel-handling equipment can get worn, burners and

controls can get out of adjustment, boiler water and flue gases are not properly treated, and

hot condensate is not recovered. As a result of these conditions, steam-system efficiency

can be significantly reduced. As a rule of thumb, if a boiler has not been maintained for

two years, a 20- to 30- percent gain of efficiency is immediately possible through

maintenance.

Taking care of the steam-distribution system is often considered to be part of good steam-

system maintenance. In terms of efficiency, the two do overlap; however, individual

steam-distribution energy savings can be substantial and merit separate treatment. Steam

leaks, steam traps, and insulation are a few of the most rewarding energy-efficiency

opportunities. On average they can improve a steam-system’s energy efficiency from 10 to

15 percent. There are many examples in industry of even greater energy savings with these

technologies.

Based on the examples above, a total steam-efficiency potential of 30 to 40 percent

appears reasonable when using a systems approach. If all U.S. manufacturers improved the

efficiency of their steam systems by 30 percent, they would save approximately 2.8

quadrillion Btu of steam energy — enough to supply the total energy needs of Michigan for

a year, generate dollar savings of $6.3 billion (1995 dollars), and reduce emissions by 60

million metric tons of carbon dioxide and 30 thousand metric tons of nitrous oxide.

Steam-system efficiency is a global opportunity as well, representing an energy savings

potential that is five times greater than in the United States alone. Developing countries

dedicate a large portion of their scarce energy resources to generate steam. Many of these

countries are facing high growth rates, and it is uncertain where the energy will come from

to meet future demand. If the steam-efficiency technologies described here were more

widely adopted internationally, energy demand could be reduced by at least 14 quads and

carbon dioxide emissions could be reduced by over 250 million metric tons.

Industrial Steam Technologies

Industrial steam systems contain many cost-effective efficiency opportunities. Each

opportunity, by itself, may appear small, improving energy efficiency only a few

percentage points. However, the energy savings can add up quickly. Common examples

of steam-system efficiency opportunities are discussed below.

Opportunities in Steam Generation

Boilers. Boiler efficiency is the percentage of the fuel’s energy which is converted to

steam energy. Reducing waste-heat energy losses going “up the chimney” is probably the

greatest opportunity to improve steam-generation efficiency. Incomplete combustion and

heat loss from exterior boiler surfaces can also cause significant losses. Together, these

losses can reach 30 percent of the fuel input. The three basic strategies for minimizing

stack gas heat loss are the following:

  1. minimizing excess air in combustion
  2. keeping heat transfer surfaces clean
  3. adding flue gas heat recovery equipment where justified

Boiler losses can be reduced with combustion controls and waste heat recovery equipment

such as combustion air preheaters and economizers. The economics can be very attractive

with boiler efficiency increasing 1.0 percent for each 15 percent reduction in excess air,

1.3 percent reduction in oxygen, or 40oF reduction of stack gas temperature.

Emissions Monitoring. Using emissions monitoring equipment not only helps plant

operators track emissions, it can also lower plant energy bills. Researchers from North

Carolina State University evaluated the performance of continuous emissions monitoring

systems on industrial-boiler efficiency. The monitoring systems reduced excess air by 30

percent (under low fire conditions) and 15 percent (under high fire conditions). These

adjustments are projected to reduce stack loss by 1.4 percent. The resulting energy savings

were enough to achieve a simple payback of 2.5 years.

Opportunities in Maintenance and Operation

There are many opportunities to improve the efficiency of both boilers and the steam-

distribution system through improved maintenance and operation. A few examples are

discussed below.

Water Treatment. Water treatment is an important aspect of boiler operation which can

affect efficiency or result in plant damage if neglected. For instance, without proper water

treatment, scale can form on boiler tubes, reducing heat transfer and causing a loss of

boiler efficiency of as much as 10 to 12 percent.

Condensate Return. Recovering hot condensate for reuse as boiler feed water is another

important way to improve efficiency of the system. The energy used to heat cold makeup

water is a major part of the heat delivered for use by the steam system, requiring an

additional 15 to 18 percent of boiler energy for each pound of cold makeup water.

Controls. There have been great advances in boiler control technology as older pneumatic

and analog electronic control systems have given way to digital, computer-based

distributed control systems. These systems are more reliable and can extend boiler life.

Modern, multiple burner control, coupled with air trim control can result in fuel savings of

3 to 5 percent. For example, a boiler economic load allocation system optimizes the

loading of multiple boilers providing steam to a common header so as to obtain the lowest

cost per unit of steam. Honeywell Inc.’s Industrial Automation and Control Division

commonly recommends this technology to help customers reduce boiler fuel consumption

by 1 to 3 percent and improve performance.

Steam Distribution

The steam-distribution system is often the most neglected part of the industrial steam

system; yet, steam-distribution improvements are relatively inexpensive and easy to install.

Total steam-distribution losses are often considerably greater than the losses associated

with the boiler. Whereas a well-maintained boiler can be improved 5 percent, the

efficiency of steam distribution can often be improved by 10 to 15 percent (sometimes

more). Below are a few examples of steam-efficiency opportunities in the distribution

system.

Steam Leaks. A neglected steam-distribution system can be very costly. In such systems,

leaks will be found in the piping, valves, process equipment, steam traps, flanges, or other

connections. Fixing steam leaks is a simple, no cost/low cost opportunity to save energy

and money. Steam systems can realize a 3 to 5 percent efficiency improvement when

steam leaks are actively identified and repaired.

Steam Traps. Saving energy through a steam-trap maintenance program can seem “too

good to be true,” yet, the savings are often dramatic. In the absence of a maintenance

program, it is common to find 15 to 20 percent of a plant’s steam traps to be

malfunctioning. Energy efficiency gains of 10 to 15 percent are common when steam traps

are actively maintained.

Armstrong International estimates that, on average, each defective trap wastes over

400,000 pounds of steam a year, worth over $2,000. These savings can add up quickly,

especially for plants with many traps. For instance, a typical petrochemical plant will have

over 5,000 steam traps, and can save hundreds of thousands of dollars in single year.

Savings are also significant for medium-sized plants that often have a couple thousand

traps, and even small plants commonly have several hundred.

Insulation. A recent analysis estimated the economic conservation potential of thermal-

insulation related efficiency to be 5 percent or less of total industrial energy use. However,

plants audited under DOE’s Industrial Assessment Center program demonstrated a savings

potential ranging from 3 percent to as high as 13 percent of total natural gas usage on

average. When a Georgia-Pacific plywood plant in Madison, Ga., upgraded the

insulation on the steam lines to its dryers, the plant was able to

  • cut steam usage by approximately 6,000 pounds/hour
  • eliminate the use of purchased fuel
  • reduce CO2 emissions by 6 percent
  • achieve a 6-month payback on investment

Although information about specific steam technologies is readily available, there is little

public information that addresses the benefits of approaching steam plants as a system.

That is why a program is needed

  1. to promote greater awareness of the energy and environmental benefits of steam-system

    efficiency technologies

  2. to provide steam-plant operators with the tools and technical assistance they need to

    improve the efficiency of their steam plants.

Steam Partnership Program

The Alliance to Save Energy and the Department of Energy’s Office of Industrial

Technologies are developing a public-private partnership to address the efficiency needs of

industrial steam systems. Leading providers of energy-efficient steam products and

services are working with DOE and the Alliance to develop the program. As envisioned,

the program will have three basic components:

Steam Challenge

This program component would consist of a voluntary energy-efficiency program targeted

to the needs of industrial steam “systems.” Rather than promoting the energy savings of

any single steam-efficiency technology, this program will take a comprehensive approach

to promote greater awareness of energy efficiency and pollution prevention opportunities

throughout the steam system — from the burner to the boiler, to distribution, to the process,

and back to the boiler.

Modeled after DOE’s successful Motor Challenge Program, the Steam Partnership program

will invite industrial companies to take advantage of the program’s technical resources on

steam efficiency (see below). In addition, industrial companies will be encouraged to

make voluntary commitments to improve their steam plant’s efficiency wherever

profitable.

The Alliance is organizing a “Steam Team” of trade associations and companies from each

of the relevant steam-efficiency industries to support the steam-efficiency program.

Today, the Steam Team includes the North American Insulation Manufacturers

Association (NAIMA), the American Gas Association (AGA), the Council of Industrial

Boiler Owners (CIBO), Armstrong International, and Honeywell Inc. It is anticipated that

additional manufacturers (and associations) of other steam-related technologies, such as

boilers, water treatment, burners, heat exchangers, diagnostic analysis equipment, pumps,

and service providers, such as energy service companies and consulting engineering firms,

will be asked to participate. The Steam Team participants will develop a plan and

undertake activities to help promote the steam-system efficiency concept.

In addition, the Steam Team will develop educational tools and materials to help promote

energy-efficient steam systems, drawing from both existing information and newly

developed materials. The goal is to centralize steam-efficiency information that is

objective, technically competent, and easy to use. The Steam Team is considering a variety

of information tools and activities:

  • Developing a clearinghouse of existing information on individual steam technologies
  • Integrating existing information to promote efficient steam systems
  • Coordinating the use of training and educational materials for steam workshops
  • Developing Steam Efficiency Software Tools
  • Developing Steam System Auditing Procedures
  • Developing a Steam Efficiency Technical Assistance Hotline/Webpage
  • Providing a directory of Steam Technology Suppliers and Service Providers
  • Producing publications highlighting the potential savings in steam systems
  • Certifying Steam System Efficiency Surveyors (using the Internet)
  • Providing demonstrations of energy efficient steam technologies and practices

The Alliance plans to involve many organizations servicing the energy needs of industry to

help deliver the “steam efficiency” message. These organizations include the Association

of Energy Engineers, DOE’s Industrial Assessment Centers, state and local manufacturing

assistance centers, state energy offices, electric and gas utilities and industry trade

associations. Another major deliverer of the Steam Partnership Program would be the

marketing and sales staff of the energy-efficient product manufacturers participating in the

effort.

Centralizing public and private information on steam efficiency and developing tools to

match the needs of industrial end-users are important objectives of the Steam Partnership

program. Using both public and private resources, the partnership will be able to generate

greater awareness of steam efficiency and its economic, energy, and environmental

benefits.

STEAM PARTNERSHIP: CURRENT STATUS

On January 16, 1997, the Alliance to Save Energy and the Department of Energy’s Office

of Industrial Technologies met with representatives from ten key organizations to discuss

how the steam partnership program should be structured. The meeting participants

strongly supported the steam initiative and made the following recommendations:

Identify Industry’s Greatest Steam Information Needs

The Steam Partnership should determine what types of steam-efficiency information and

services would be most useful to plant operators and most likely to garner the support of

industrial decision makers. Over the next six months, the Alliance and DOE should work

closely with industrial steam users through focus groups and roundtable meetings to obtain

this information and draft a product development plan based on the results.

Centralize Steam Information

Many of the meeting participants have access to excellent steam information, such as case

studies, product descriptions, bibliographies, fact sheets, diagnostic software, product and

service provider lists, and educational and training materials. The Steam Partnership

should help make these resources available to a wider audience by developing a steam-

efficiency information kit and a dedicated steam-efficiency webpage.

Develop a Steam-Efficiency Diagnostic Tool

Several software tools are now available for individual steam technologies, such as steam

traps, insulation, and boiler controls. The Partnership should investigate linking these

software tools together and incorporating other steam “modules” (i.e., water treatment,

boiler tune-up, and common steam applications) in order to estimate comprehensive steam-

efficiency potential. By incorporating historical data, this steam software tool could also

be used to benchmark a particular steam system’s relative performance vis-…-vis an

industry average or best practice.

Raise the Visibility of Utility Cost

In terms of cost, it is important for the Steam Partnership to raise the visibility of supplying

utilities to the plant. Plant managers sometimes treat energy (which ranges from 3 to 13

percent of production costs) as a fixed cost, when in fact it is a variable cost that is very

much within their control.

Consider Non-Energy Benefits of Efficiency

In addition to energy cost savings, the Steam Partnership should highlight non-energy

benefits, or “co-benefits.” These benefits include the environmental benefits, worker safety

and health, and productivity improvements associated with steam efficiency. Public

recognition that comes from participating in a public-private program may also prove

compelling to industrial decision makers.

Conference Sessions on Steam Efficiency

To further promote the “systems” approach to steam efficiency, the Steam Partnership will

lead sessions at the Industrial Energy Technology Conference in Houston, Texas, on April

23-24, 1998.

PARTNERSHIPS WITH INDUSTRY

U.S. Department of Energy

The Office of Industrial Technologies (OIT) is part of the Department of Energy’s Office of

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. OIT creates partnerships among industry, trade

groups, government agencies, and other organizations to research, develop, and deliver

advanced energy efficiency, renewable energy, and pollution prevention technologies for

industrial customers. By using technology to save energy and cut waste, companies can

lower costs, boost productivity, and help prevent pollution.

It is anticipated that DOE will play a facilitating role in the Steam Partnership program by

contributing staff and resources to develop and distribute tools and information products.

DOE is interested in developing a centralized delivery system of steam-efficiency

information, incorporating the best resources from both the private sector and public

sector.

A program focusing on steam efficiency represents a continuation of 20 years of OIT steam

experience, including work with very low emission burners for boilers, industrial heat

pumps, process integration using pinch technology, and high-performance steam.

The Alliance to Save Energy

The Alliance to Save Energy is a national, non-profit research, education, and advocacy

organization located in Washington, D.C. Over the last 20 years, the Alliance has

developed a unique relationship with the U.S. energy-efficiency industry. The Alliance

works closely with the providers of energy-savings products and services to promote

greater investment in energy efficiency in order to achieve national environmental,

economic, and affordable housing goals.

The Alliance has started to alert energy-efficiency companies and other organizations that

serve the industrial sector about the Steam Partnership and has encouraged their

participation. Many have expressed interest and are working with the Alliance and DOE

to develop the program.

Many of the steam-efficiency equipment companies are interested in making steam-

efficiency resources available to their customers in the United States and internationally.

The Alliance is currently exploring how the steam partnership program could assist U.S.

efforts to expand the export of energy-efficient technologies. The Alliance’s experience

overseas indicates that upgrading industrial steam systems internationally is a great export

opportunity for U.S. energy-efficiency companies.

STEAM-EFFICIENCY RESOURCES

As mentioned previously, good information exists on individual steam technologies, but

there is little to be found on steam systems efficiency. The Alliance has collected some

preliminary information on steam efficiency. Below is a brief overview of information

resources that are currently available.

American Gas Association — a variety of publications relating to natural gas technologies,

industrial energy use trends, equipment profiles, and AGA’s Commercial and Industrial

Marketing Committee.

Industrial Gas Technology Commercialization Center — a variety of publications relating

to new natural gas technologies in the industrial sector.

Council of Industrial Boiler Owners — a wide variety of publications on environmental

emissions, cogeneration, boiler technologies, and alternative fuels. Currently drafting an

energy-efficiency handbook for power plant operators. CIBO has over 65 members

representing 19 major industries.

Honeywell Inc. — A Journal on Industrial Automation and Control, Honeywell’s Industrial

Energy Notes, case studies, and boiler diagnostic software.

DOE-OIT — Information on low emission burners for boilers, industrial heat pumps,

process integration using pinch technology, and high-performance steam.

Armstrong International — Three worldwide factory seminar facilities, 13 North American

sales representative facilities, four international sales representative facilities, eight co-

sponsored facilities, two mobile seminar vans, extensive library of videotapes, Armstrong

Preventive Maintenance software, CD-Rom, Trap Magazine, and database of steam-trap

performance.

CONCLUSION

The Steam Partnership is a unique opportunity to increase industry’s awareness of energy

efficiency, achieve major energy and cost savings, and improve productivity. Creating a

working partnership between the U.S. Department of Energy and the wide range of

companies servicing industrial steam systems is critical to the program’s success. The

three program components (Steam Challenge, Steam Team, and Steam Partners) represent

the core activities of the Steam Partnership program. While the program’s initial focus is

the U.S. industrial sector, there is interest in expanding the program to include other steam-

intensive sectors, such as schools, hospitals, municipal district heating systems, the Federal

government, and the international community.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Insulating Below-Ambient Indoor Systems in Warm, Humid Climates

This is a first in a series of regular columns on technical aspects of insulation. The author will attempt to answer questions from engineers, contractors, or anyone else with an interest in commercial or industrial insulation.

Q: What insulation system should engineers specify indoors for cold ducts and pipes in Florida-Gulf Coast area of the United States?

A: For an engineer who is experienced in specifying insulation on chilled water piping or air conditioning ducts in New England or Ohio or Oregon, it’s a whole different world in New Orleans or Miami or Charleston, South Carolina. Whereas in most colder climates air conditioning is used only seasonally, in the hot, humid areas of the United States the air conditioning is running most of the time.

Fibrous insulations with factory applied reinforced foil facers work well in Northern climates on chilled water piping and air conditioning ducts. Due to the higher (and year-round) humidity in the Southeast, fibrous insulation frequently is wet and moldy within a year of installation if it is not sealed vapor tight.

The prudent engineer will specify foam insulations for cold applications in humid climates. Hangers are critical in cold applications, so the engineer should give special consideration to hangers that do not penetrate the insulation.

If you specify cellular glass, be sure you have enough thickness to prevent condensation. The sections must be carefully sealed with a suitable bedding compound in all insulation joints. (My specifications contain specific brand names and numbers for insulation accessories). Staggering the half sections is a good idea. Fasten the sections with ½” wide aluminum or stainless bands on 9″ centers.

As for foam insulations, elastomerics are quick-just seal the joints with the manufacturer’s recommended adhesive. Urethanes, isocyanurates, and styrenes are not themselves vapor barriers, so a sheet vapor barrier (such as all service jacketing or 20-mil PVC) needs to be sealed air/vapor tight.

Florida Duct Reinsulation

Foam insulations are better able to withstand “feet” than fibrous insulations. When Fibrous insulations faced with thin foil-kraft laminates (such as ASJ or FSK) are walked upon, the foil cracks and tears and the perm rate of the vapor barrier is lost.

The insulation in the photos on page 20 became wet and moldy within a year. The insulation was 8 pcf density mineral fiber with an ASJ facer. The workmanship was good, but the application failed, partly because various trades walked on the ducts instead of using ladders.

The ducts (located on the central East Coast of Florida) are being reinsulated with black elastomeric foam sheets. This is the second reinsulation in 18 months; the original insulation fell off due to a failure of both the adhesive and the clips.

In summary, the keys to the successful insulation of cold pipes and ducts in hot, humid climates are good specifications and good workmanship.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Georgia-Pacific Reaps Benefits by Insulating its Steam Lines

Built in 1979, the Georgia-Pacific plant at Madison, Ga., uses Loblolly pine to manufacture plywood. The tree is abundant in the area. Most of the trees harvested are within a 180- mile radius of the mill. About 20 percent of the trees are grown on land owned by Georgia-Pacific and about 80 percent come from other privately owned lands. The plant runs 24 hours, 7 days a week, and employs approximately 400 people.

The process of making the veneer layers in a plywood panel begins when logs arrive at the mill in sections. They are immediately debarked and soaked in water at 180°F for six hours. This softens the logs and enables them to peel better. The softening process also allows the logs to pass through the lathe much easier and delivers the veneer layers at the right temperature to the dryer where they are dried at temperatures of 405°F.

From the dryers, the veneer layers go to the glue line where layers are sandwiched with glue and then pressed into a panel. From there the panels go to the saw line for trimming before banding and shipping.

Because the steam lines to the dryer were uninsulated, heat was radiating out and millions of Btu were being lost. The heat loss resulted in a loss of pressure and a reduction in temperature as the plywood moved down the line. The increased drying time needed caused the process to slow down significantly.

While Georgia-Pacific wanted to insulate the steam lines for energy conservation, improved process efficiency and personnel protection, the company also wanted the insulation for a more pragmatic reason—to eliminate dependence on purchased fuel. The plant normally uses wood bark and wood byproducts for fuel. However, at certain times of the year the bark is too thin for use as adequate fuel so additional fuel had to be purchased from an outside source.

Determining the Thickness of Insulation

Once the decision was made to insulate the steam lines, a computer program called 3E Plus created by the North American Insulation Manufacturers Association (NAIMA) was used to determine the insulation thickness required to insulate the 1,500 feet of saturated steam lines with temperatures operating at 437°F.

Computer projections estimated that insulation would significantly reduce the heat (Btu) loss along the steam lines leading to the dryers. This reduction in heat loss alone could increase the operating temperature by 15° and maintain the process temperature along the length of the lines. The combination of a higher temperature in the dryer lines and a more consistent process line temperature would result in a faster and more efficient veneer plywood process.

The Madison plant installed two-inch-thick fiber glass pipe insulation. Two inches is the thickness needed to reduce heat loss, maintain process temperature and bring the outside surface temperatures of the pipes down for personnel protection. Insulation footage was as follows: 120 feet of insulation on the twelve-inch process line; 200 feet on the eight-inch process line; 220 feet on the six-inch process line; 80 feet on the four-inch process line; and 350 feet on the 1-1/2-inch process line.

A major advantage of using mineral fiber insulation to insulate the steam lines was that no downtime was required. Several areas that could not be insulated while the line was running were insulated on schedule down days. Says Jackson, “We do dryer maintenance once a week so the dryer is shut down during that time. That’s when the insulation was installed on those areas that couldn’t be accessed while the dryer was running.”

Immediate Results

The personnel at the Georgia-Pacific plant were pleased with the results of the insulation project.

Improved Process Efficiency.

The lines to the mill’s four dryers have all been insulated, and according to Darryl Jackson, boiler superintendent at the Madison plant, “Gauging the increase in throughput has proven to be a bit more complex than we first thought. A more accurate gauge of the effectiveness of the insulation is the steam usage. The insulation has allowed us to cut our steam usage by approximately 6,000 lbs./hour. This is equivalent to saving about 18 tons of fuel per day. I can track these numbers with a totalizer so I know exactly what the dryers are pulling at any given time.”

Dependence on Outside Fuel Eliminated.

By insulating the piping, Georgia-Pacific has been able to eliminate the purchase of fuel. “Currently we are selling some of our excess fuel to a paper company,” says Jackson.

Reduction in Pollutants.

By reducing fuel consumption, the Madison plant has been able to reduce the amount of ash being generated and estimates that the energy saved through insulation has reduced the amount of C02 emissions by 5 to 6 percent.

Increased Personnel Protection

Prior to installing the insulation, the piping in the Madison plant had a surface temperature of approximately 400°F. With insulation, the surface temperature has been reduced to approximately 85°F—a safer level for personnel protection.

In addition to insulating the steam lines, Georgia-Pacific also replaced 70 steam traps. According to Jackson, “We’ve probably gained 10 percent condensate return from replacing the thermal dynamic traps. By increasing the condensate by 10 percent, our savings will be approximately $86,000 per year based on an $8 per ton fuel cost.

Georgia-Pacific estimates that the amount of energy saved by insulating the steam lines to the dryers and installing new steam traps is approximately 7,212,000 Btu per hour.

Payback on Initial Investment

Calculating how long it takes to pay back an initial insulation investment is an integral part of Georgia-Pacific’s energy management program. Based on the results realized, the payback period at Madison was approximately six months.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

The Lisbon Declaration on Carbon Dioxide Reductions

The international insulation industry promotes insulation during the Kyoto climate change conference.

The following paper was submitted in December 1997 by international insulation associations to the Conference of Contracting Parties of the UN International Framework Convention on Climate Change in Kyoto, Japan. The insulation associations involved in the presentation were the North American Insulation Manufacturers Association, European Insulation Manufacturers Association, Fibreglass and Rockwool Insulation Manufacturers Association of Australia, Asociacion Mexicana de Fabricantes de Aislamientos Termicos y Acusticos de Fibras Minerales, A.C., Canadian Association of Man Made Vitreous Fibre Manufacturers, Glass Fibre Association of Japan, and Rock Wool Industrial Association of Japan.

Since the Second Assessment Report of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) there can no longer be any real doubt about the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on the global environment. The greenhouse effect, in particular from CO2 emissions, requires urgent action. Space heating and cooling of buildings in both Western Europe and North American are major contributors to CO2 emissions.

One of the most efficient and quickly achievable means of cutting CO2 emissions is to reduce energy use. In the residential and commercial building sector, the most effective energy saving can be accomplished through the use of a readily available energy efficiency technology – thermal insulation. Thermal insulation simply reduces the transfer of heat (and cold) through building structures or envelopes. Thermal insulation not only reduces energy use and therefore CO2 emissions (see tables hereafter) but, in addition, the right insulation products also provide thermal comfort, acoustic insulation and fire protection. The same benefits hold true for the industrial/manufacturing sector.

The following tables give an indication of the massive use of energy for space heating and of its corollary, i.e., the massive potential for savings.

Table 1 summarizes the energy savings already realized in the United States. Table 2 illustrates the potential for reducing carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) if all American homes were to be insulated to the Council of American Building Official’s 1992 Model Energy Code, a recognized minimum energy efficiency code in the United States.

Similarly for Europe, households account for a quarter of the CO2 emissions; with space heating accounting for 60 to 80 percent of emissions. As illustrated in Table 3, there is an annual saving potential of approximately 310 million tons of heating-related CO2 emissions in Europe which could be realized by the application of state-of-the-art thermal insulation.

If one calculates the potential for improved insulation in the buildings sector alone in Europe and the United States, a reduction of 450 million tons of CO2 is attainable on an annual basis.

Additional emissions reductions can also be realized through the use of thermal insulation in Mexico. According to an assessment of industrial savings from insulation conducted by the Mexican Petroleum Institute, the equivalent of 8 million barrels of oil could be saved annually if Mexican industrial plants were insulated according to the existing Industrial Insulation Code. The net result of effective use of thermal insulation in Mexican industrial facilities would be a 2.6 percent reduction in the usage of fossil fuels; in turn, reducing emissions of contaminant gases by 2 million tons per year.

Further significant savings are also evident in the residential and commercial sectors. The Mexican Federation of Engineering Colleges estimated savings in fuel consumption between 5.3 and 13.2 million barrels of oil equivalent, if residential and commercial buildings were insulated as specified in each code as applicable to each building type. This will have the effect of eliminating between 2 and 5 million tons of CO2 emissions into the atmosphere.

Table 4 (on the facing page) illustrates projected yearly savings based on recommended energy codes in Mexico.

In Australia, households account for 16 percent of all CO2 emissions with space heating/cooling accounting for 25 percent of these emissions. As detailed in Table 5, there exists an annual saving potential of approximately 3 million tons of heating/cooling related CO2 emissions in Australia which could be realized by introducing thermal insulation.

Justification for use of Thermal Insulation

One main advantage of thermal insulation is that it represents proven technology combined with a well-established manufacturing base and sound installation techniques. The use of thermal insulation represents good business practice; and is a prime example of a “no regrets” policy which employs a technology that pays for itself in terms of reduced energy costs and increased environmental benefits. In addition, the benefits from insulation far outweigh the cost of production with a ratio of energy savings to energy investment of 12 to 1 per year. This means that for every Joule or Btu invested in the manufacture of thermal insulation, 12 Joules or Btu in energy saving is realized in every year of service.

Despite the many and considerable benefits that accrue, there are a number of challenges in providing adequate levels of thermal insulation; none of them, however, is of a technical nature. First, many decision makers are poorly informed about the benefits of improved insulation and are thus often short of immediately available funds for capital investment. Second, in many countries, building energy codes or regulations are not efficient and often only apply to a new construction or, in some cases, there are no energy codes at all. Third, building codes are frequently poorly enforced. Finally, most homes represent existing house stock, and insufficient attention is paid to thermal insulation needs when renovating the dwellings.

All these challenges can be remedied by the application of available insulation technology, the implementation of good standards, economic analyses and incentives. The Kyoto Conference can agree on binding commitments by industrialized countries in the following areas:

Quantitative CO2 reductions for the next decade in respect of space heating and cooling;

The establishment of ongoing education campaigns for purchasers of new and existing homes, as well as for the financial community;

The implementation of appropriate building energy codes which recognize the environmental benefits of energy reduction for both new construction and renovation work;

The enforcement of building energy codes;

The provision of tax incentives for energy-efficiency capital investment directed toward first-time home buyers.

Feasibility

The manufacturing and installation processes of insulation are well-known, and require no expensive research. More intensive uses of thermal insulation can begin today, giving immediate and long-lasting results for the entire lifetime of a building. The use of thermal insulation has no negative impact on the competitiveness of national industry. In fact, insulation has a positive effect on the balance of payment.

Financial Implications

The proper use of thermal insulation for new buildings as well as the retrofitting of existing buildings increases their value. As such, thermal insulation represents a capital gain for home or building owners. As for public costs, little is required from the public purse other than tax incentives, which will obviously be limited.

Joint Implementation

High on the agenda for the Kyoto negotiations is the joint implementation of the Treaty. In this respect, the Kyoto Conference presents a valuable opportunity for thermal insulation. The quality of building stock in Central and Eastern Europe is poor, much of which is in need of improvement and considerable renovation. Joint implementation by the EU together with Central and Eastern Europe can be targeted toward thermal insulation with relative ease. Similarly, the opportunity exists for joint implementation by the United States and other nations.

EURIMA
European Insulation Manufacturers Association
375 Avenue Louise
1050 Brussels
BELGIUM
Phone: +32.2.626.20.90
Fax: +32.2.626.20.99

NAIMA
North American Insulation Manufacturers Association
44 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 310
Alexandria, VA 22314
USA
Phone: +1.703.684.0084
Fax: +1.703.684.0427

FARIMA
Fibreglass and Rockwool Insulation Manufacturers Association of Australia Inc.
Level 12
124 Walker Street
North Sydney NSW 2060
AUSTRALIA
Phone: +61.299.56.53.33
Fax: +61,299.59.47.86

AMFATAFM
Asociacion Mexicana de Febricantes de Aislamientos Termicos y Acusticos de Fibras Minerales, A.C.
Descartes 104
Nueva Anzures 11590
MEXICO, D.F.
Phone: +91.255.08.22
Fax: +91.203.47.39

CAMMVFM
Canadian Association of Man Made Vitreous Fibre Manufacturers
1 Yonge Street, Suite 1801
Toronto, Ontario M5E 1W7
CANADA
Phone: +1.416.363.7845
Fax: +1.416.369.0515

GFA
Glass Fibre Association of Japan
Kitamura Building

17-15 Nishi Shimbashi 1-Chome
MINATO KU – Tokyo 105
JAPAN
Phone: +81.3.3591.5406
Fax: +81.3.3591.5408

RWA
Rock Wool Industrial Association of Japan
Tanpei-Nihonbashi Building
7-10 Nihonbashi 3-Chome
CHO-KU – Tokyo 105
JAPAN
Phone: +81.3.5202.1471
Fax: +81.3.5202.1473

For a printed copy of the Lisbon Declaration, contact the North American Insulation Manufacturers Association by mail at 44 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 310, Alexandria, VA 22314, by phone at (703) 684-0084, by fax at (703) 684-0427 or at its website at www.naima.org.

Moving Forward

By Mike Wildman

The agreement reached in Kyoto to set binding targets and timetables to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is a significant step toward addressing global warming. Even President Clinton reinforced the importance of energy efficiency in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and reiterated “the commitment of the United States to use the tools of the free market to tackle this difficult problem.”

Now, as the focus shifts toward implementation efforts in this country, as well as around the world, the role of market-based solutions takes on even greater prominence. It is especially important that the significant and immediate contribution of existing technologies, such as thermal insulation, be recognized. In residential and commercial buildings, and industrial applications, adequate use of thermal insulation – a cost-effective, readily available, proven technology that pays for itself by reducing energy costs – can immediately reduce the level of CO2 emissions into the atmosphere.

NAIMA looks forward to working with those involved in the program and processes aimed at reducing CO2 emissions. As an industry, insulation manufacturers are committed to a more energy-efficient future and to contributing positively to climate change efforts.

Mike Wildman is the chairman of the Commercial and Industrial Committee of the North American Insulation Manufacturers Association, and he is the marketing manager, industrial/commercial, for Knauf Fiber Glass GmbH, Shelbyville, Ind.

Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Today

By Kenneth Mentzer

The Lisbon Declaration shows that thermal insulation offers significant savings in the building sector – both residential and commercial. But the energy and environmental benefits don’t stop there. Equally impressive are the energy savings and CO2 emission reductions that can be achieved in the industrial and manufacturing sector through the use of adequate levels of insulation in steam systems.

In the United States, approximately one-third of all fuel burned by industry is used to produce steam. For example, in the United States, a Georgia-Pacific plywood manufacturing facility recently reported phenomenal results from the addition of fiber glass insulation to 1,500 feet of industrial steam lines.

Thanks to the improved insulation of its steam lines, Georgia-Pacific

  • Saves over 7 million Btus per hour.
  • Cut its steam usage by approximately 6,000 pounds an hour, the equivalent of saving 18 hundred tons of fuel per day.
  • Eliminated the outside purchase of fuel altogether.
  • Reduced the amount of CO2 emissions by over 5 percent.

Georgia-Pacific represents just one example of the enormous savings that can result from the use of industrial insulation. This example could be multiplied tens of thousands of times over in manufacturing industries around the world.

Good Business Sense

The value of insulation is clear – appropriate use of thermal insulation means reduced energy use which, in turn, leads to lower operating costs, improved productivity and comfort, and significantly lower air contaminant emissions.

Economically, thermal insulation simply makes good business sense in the building and industrial/manufacturing sector in every way:

The manufacturing and installation processes of insulation are well-known and require no expensive research.

Effective use of insulation can begin today – providing immediate and long-lasting results over its lifetime.

Thermal insulation has no negative impact on the competitiveness of national industry. In fact, by lowering operating costs, insulation enhances competitiveness.

From the point of the individual home or building owners – thermal insulation means money in their pockets. A 1996 study in the United States found the current insulation levels save consumers nearly $84 billion a year in heating and cooling costs – which translates to about $780 per household.

The benefits of insulation also far outweigh the cost of production with a ratio of energy savings to energy investment of 12-to-one per year. That means for every Btu invested in the manufacture of thermal insulation, 12 Btus in energy savings are realized in every year of service.

Clearly, everyone wins with thermal insulation. As a practical energy-efficiency technology that can have a measurable and immediate impact on global climate change, thermal insulation is an available technology offering a solution that must be recognized.

The potential for energy and environmental savings from improved building and industrial insulation must be accomplished. To do otherwise would be to overlook a readily available and cost-effective energy efficient technology that offers immediate return in terms of reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

Kenneth Mentzer is executive vice president of the North American Insulation Manufacturers Association, Alexandria, Virginia.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

The Role of Insulation in Noise Control

A significant source of noise at pipeline facilities is piping radiated noise. Although the noise generation is due to the internal geometries and flow conditions of the rotating equipment or due to the orifices or valves, the acoustical radiator is the piping. Piping and compressor casings on numerous gas turbine-driven turbocompressor packages as well as piping at meter stations and regulator stations have been treated using acoustical laggings, as a retrofit as well as during design.

However, very little information exists in the industry regarding the acoustical performance of site-installed acoustical lagging systems. With the advent of innovative testing techniques, installed lagging system insertion losses have been obtained. Insertion loss is a method of testing and comparison developed for piping and equipment. Significant experience has been gained regarding material selection and system performance. As opposed to the massive panels typically used for acoustical enclosures on turbocompressor packages, acoustical laggings utilize lightweight and often removable materials.

THE PROBLEM

Radiated noise from natural gas transmission compressor stations, meter stations and regulator stations is a problem of increasing concern, due to stricter regulatory enforcement as well as due to greater public awareness of noise as an environmental problem. For example, U.S. legislation by the FERC set maximum levels at 55 dBA Ldn; and similarly, Canadian legislation by the AEUB in Alberta and by the MOE in Ontario set maximum Permissible Sound Levels from gas transmission operations between 40 to 50 dBA Leq, based on the ambient noise environment.

One component that is a predominant contributor to environmental noise is the gas piping associated with centrifugal compressor packages at gas turbine-driven compressor stations. Noise is generated by the turbulence of the rotating wheel or impellers of the large turbocompressors but only a minimum amount of this noise is then radiated by the sufficiently thick compressor casing. The primary noise radiator is the relatively thin-walled process piping which is the focus of this article.

The solutions to the piping-radiated noise problem are acoustical silencers and acoustical laggings. The contractual responsibility for silencer design and supply is usually accepted by the silencer O.E.M. or by the equipment packager, attempting to achieve an overall acoustical performance requirement that usually has been specified by the gas transmission company as the purchaser. As in-line silencers typically have unacceptable pressure drops imposed upon the gas stream, acoustical pipe lagging becomes the preferred alternative.

The responsibility for piping-radiated noise is not addressed by any packager, supplier or O.E.M. Furthermore, acoustical lagging performance is not designed by or guaranteed by material manufacturers or by industrial insulation contractors. The responsibility is usually left to the facility owner as part of his design, hereby being the gas transmission company. In similar industries where centrifugal compression is utilized, such as in gas-processing plants and petrochemical complexes, the same approach occurs.

A lot is known about the acoustical performance of silencers, but relatively little is known about the acoustical performance of laggings. However, the acoustical performance of acoustical lagging systems must be known so the gas-transmission companies can specify material requirements to achieve their intended performance requirements.

MEASUREMENT OF RADIATED NOISE

The common descriptor for rating the acoustical performance of a layer of lagging material is laboratory-tested sound transmission loss, yet this is not relevant for the installed performance of multiple-layered systems that are in physical contact with a vibrating source. A lagging systems’ sound insertion loss more characteristically describes the installed acoustical performance. We believe that the most appropriate means to determine an acoustical lagging system’s insertion losses over the audible sound frequency range is by field testing.

In order to determine the noise-reduction requirements for an existing facility, the preferred approach is to first measure and then quantify the noise source radiation characteristics. For gas-piping radiated noise, one should rely on site measurements. This is because turbocompressor and flow measurement equipment manufacturers do not typically have data available during the equipment procurement process, and those responsible for the piping design many times do not have sufficient information to carry out the acoustical calculations necessary.

Compressor-generated noise is a function of the compressor wheel configuration and geometry; the amount of piping-radiated environmental noise is a function of piping characteristics such as wall thickness, the extent of above-ground piping, and the types of support structures. Therefore, when conducting site measurements to choose acoustical lagging systems, one should concentrate on the amount of noise being radiated, without concentrating on its generation. In essence, the main aspect of consideration is determining how much noise should be attenuated by the lagging system.

The most accurate method of quantifying the piping-noise contribution at existing facilities is to isolate the predominant sources one at a time, and determine their radiated sound power levels. With these goals, a standard microphone placed nearby the noise source is not a reliable approach, as one runs a great risk of contamination of the measurement due to other nearby extraneous noise sources. To assist, we have used advanced sound measurement techniques. For example, the sound-intensity measurement technique utilizes a directional microphone probe, which can isolate the amount of acoustical energy originating from a defined noise source surface. Its measurement results exclude the effects of other nearby noise sources.

The results of a sound-intensity analysis on the suction and discharge piping as well as on the gas generator, power turbine and compressor casing of a turbocompressor package have previously been reported using this technique (Frank and Milner, 1995). This analysis showed the relative ranking of the various noise sources, gas piping was number one, with the discharge and suction piping ranking second and third, respectively.

Alternatively, we have had considerable success using an acoustical pipe-box measurement technique. The technique utilizes the result of noise measurements obtained inside a sealed box that straddles the pipe to determine the effect of that individual pipe’s noise-radiation characteristics, isolated from other nearby noisy pipes. Figure 1 shows a schematic of the acoustical pipe box on a pipe. The result of either the sound-intensity or pipe-box measurements are islolated sound power levels of the piping noise sources, expressed in terms of the acoustic power per lineal meter of pipe.

Based upon past experience, it is possible to estimate the amount of noise that would be produced by gas piping at proposed facilities before start-up. This means that potential noise problems can be detected during the facility design process, and noise control recommendations can then be implemented during the equipment procurement and construction phase. The accuracy of such theoretical predictions may not be as good as having conducted site measurements,. however, they are generally within the range of +/-5 dBA. The advantage of using facility design recommendations is that the problem is solved before it occurs, which usually justifies the initial capital costs spent to ensure that project design criteria are met.

ACOUSTICAL LAGGING SYSTEMS

Acoustical laggings consist of combinations of insulations and jacketings. The insulation must be porous to function acoustically, which means it is usually a porous fibrous material, such as mineral wool, glass-fiber or E-glass. Rigid or closed-cell materials should not be used for acoustical applications, as they provide extremely little noise reduction, and in some cases can actually increase the amount of noise radiated from insulated piping. For “thermo-acoustical” lagging systems, which is when noise control is required for cold service piping, combinations of first cellular glass and then mineral wool can be used as the insulation layers, to provide the thermal protection directly over the piping, and then provide the acoustical requirements thereafter.

Acoustical jacketings differ from conventional jacketings, in that they have a limp mass layer adhered to the outer metal jacket material. These limp mass layers usually consist of sheet lead or impregnated vinyl, which are thoroughly bonded to the outer jacketing which is usually aluminum. The use of lead is beginning to be questioned in certain regions, due to potential lead contamination during the installation process and due to potential ground water contamination if the lead were to leach out into rain water. Alternatively, some impregnated vinyls are not as suitable in very cold climates due to cracking if the pipes are walked on during unit shut-downs.

The porous fibrous insulation provides absorption of the airborne sound, and it structurally decouples the outer jacketing layer from the radiating pipe wall. The laminated jacketing provides additional mass for reduction of sound transmission. In addition, the composite of two materials laminated together damps out vibratory energy which would otherwise reradiate at critical resonant frequencies.

In some lagging systems, a septum layer is also utilized for increased performance at higher frequencies. This septum layer consists of an intermediate limp mass layer sandwiched between two layers of insulation, which are then covered by the acoustical jacketing. Acoustical pipe lagging visually appears similar to thermally insulated piping once installed. Figure 2 presents a schematic of an acoustical lagging system installed over a pipe.

The advantages of acoustical pipe laggings are as follows:

  • they are relatively inexpensive when including labor and materials
  • they can be installed relatively easily during facility operations without requiring equipment shut-down, and
  • no pressure drop occurs as it does with in-line silencers. Alternatively, the disadvantages of acoustical pipe laggings are the following:
  • they must be somewhat resilient to function acoustically, thus they are damage prone,
  • they are susceptible to moisture buildup in certain climates, so there is a potential for pipe wall corrosion, and
  • they are generally not removable and reusable, thus inspection for corrosion protection is not easy.

Vapor barriers and moisture barriers can be installed to mediate corrosion. The most successful applications have used bituminous materials installed between the insulation layer and the jacketing layer to prevent moisture from penetrating into the insulation and thus reacting with the pipe wall.

As an alternative to acoustical laggings, acoustical blankets are often used. Acoustical blankets contain materials similar to acoustical laggings, except the jacketings are silicone-impregnated fiberglass or Teflon-impregnated fiberglass cloths. These resemble what are known as turbine blankets, which are widely used on steam turbines in the petrochemical industry. Figure 3 presents a schematic of an acoustical blanket installed over a pipe.

An advantage of acoustical blankets is that they are designed for removability and durability. This feature provides easy access for critical locations such as valves which require frequent servicing or for compressor stations where management requires frequent inspections to monitor for corrosion. Alternatively, disadvantages of acoustical blankets are they provide slightly lower acoustical performance compared to that of acoustical laggings, and they also have higher costs than laggings.

As a compromise between acoustical laggings and acoustical blankets, removable covers are often used. They are manufactured out of semi-rigid frames using lightweight lagging materials. Although removable covers feature ease of removability and durability, they cost more than acoustical laggings.

LAGGING SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

As acoustical performance data do not exist with manufacturers or contractors, independent studies have been conducted to determine comparable acoustical performances of various lagging and blanket systems. Laboratory tests performed by a couple of acoustical jacketing manufacturers revealed various properties of insulation materials, such as density and rigidity, that affected acoustical performance (Holton, 1976). We recently conducted a detailed study of the relative performance of ten different acoustical pipe lagging systems and three different acoustical blanket systems (acknowledgment is hereby given to Pacific Gas Transmission for supporting this project and to NOVA Gas Transmission for availing a compressor station).

With a turbocompressor operating at a manual set-point to maintain consistency of the noise source, we first conducted acoustical measurements at specifically determined points at various locations along a bare compressor discharge pipe. The pipe was then treated with specifically chosen acoustical lagging systems, and then retested. The difference between the before and after measurements yielded the pipe lagging system’s acoustical insertion losses. This work allowed us to determine the specific acoustical performance of lagging systems typically used, compared to other lagging systems which were believed to have enhanced performance.

Figures 4 and 5 present the results of the insertion losses determined for the 10 pipe lagging systems assessed. These data represent a plot of the noise that is attenuated versus sound frequency. We observed that minimal performance occurs at low frequencies, and the best performance occurs around 2,000 Hz. As most piping-radiated noise from centrifugal compressors occurs between 1,600 to 2,500 Hz, and most piping-radiated noise from flow meters and pressure-reducing regulators occurs between 1,000 to 2,000 Hz, the frequency range of the lagging system performance well covers the frequency range of the noise source. We also observed that a significant variation in performance between different lagging systems occurs around 2,000 Hz, potentially due to a coincidence dip as a result of lagging system stiffness and thickness. Thus, the proper lagging system selection is important.

The results of these tests and other similar studies have determined the following conclusions:

  • Typical laggings perform best for mid-and high-frequencies, commencing above 250 Hz;
  • Insulation greater than a 2-inch thickness provides little additional improvement;
  • Lagging systems with a thicker or heavier jacketing having greater skin rigidity do not perform as well as other systems with thinner or lighter jacketings having less rigidity;
  • Lagging systems where the mass layer and the outer jacketing layer are not laminated or which have been delaminated provide significantly poorer performance, as compared to the intended system design having laminated mass barrier and jacketing; and,
  • The provision of the septum layer provides worthwhile enhancement for mid and high frequencies, generally above 1,000 Hz.

In a similar manner, Figure 6 presents the results of the insertion losses determined for the three acoustical blanket systems assessed. The relative variations in performance centered around 2,000 Hz. Therefore similar conclusions were drawn as were for the pipe lagging systems.

Further work in these areas is needed, including an investigation of the comparative effects of insulation type and density, and more detailed work regarding the effect of insulation thickness. In conclusion, choosing the acoustical pipe lagging system or the acoustical blanket system that meets the performance requirements, without over-performing, can greatly optimize needed performance versus costs.

Figure 7 presents plant process area or compressor station yard measurements both before and after noise control with acoustical pipe lagging, which shows that noise reductions in the neighborhood of 25 dBA are achievable.

There are five recommended steps for the gas transmission company engineer to follow in order to achieve effective acoustical performance from lagging systems. They are as follows:

  1. Measure, or quantify from past experience, the amount of noise radiating from the gas piping;
  2. Assess the performance, from data available from acoustical lagging system insertion loss tests, that will be required to meet the project design goals;
  3. Issue detailed installation specifications (not performance specifications), including generic material requirements and a listing of approved material suppliers;
  4. Include specification of specific treatment locations, including pipe supports; and,
  5. Include provision for inspection and testing, to ensure that all required treatment locations are covered.

Successful acoustical pipe-lagging installations have achieved 25 dBA noise reduction from gas piping, based upon before and after measurements at gas-processing plant and compressor-station facilities. Noise-control engineering on gas piping is a predictable science, where achievable results utilizing lagging systems with known acoustical performance can produce cost-effective noise-control installations.

REFERENCES

Frank, L.D., and Milner, G.J., 1995, “Isolation of Major Noise Sources on Natural Gas Turbomachinery Packages,” ASME Paper 95-GT-86.

Holton, K., 1976, “Acoustical Insulation,” Construction Specifier.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Changing the Frequency of Occupational Noise Exposure

Noise-induced hearing loss from unwanted or undesirable sound was first documented centuries ago in a study by Ramazzini titled “De Morbis Artificium Diatriba,” and published in the year 1700. This study described how workers hammering copper “have their ears so injured by that perpetual din that workers of this class became hard of hearing and, if they grow old at this work, [they would become] completely deaf.”

Before the Industrial Revolution, very few people were exposed to high levels of noise in the workplace. The approach of the 20th century brought the widespread use of steam power as the primary energy source to fuel machinery of the hungry Industrial Revolution. This changed what, how and where the people would work. Along with all of the obvious benefits of the Industrial Revolution, there were many changes and “side effects” with which to deal. Among the side effects was the elevation of excessive noise from a mere annoyance to a serious occupational health hazard.

The medical world’s attention to noise as an occupational hazard began when the workers who fabricated the new steam boilers were found to develop serious hearing loss in such large numbers that the phenomenon became known as “Boilermaker’s Disease.” It was soon apparent that the increased mechanization of industry would proliferate the noise problem. The medical community had to understand what the occupational health hazards of excessive noise were and how they could be prevented or reduced. Although the number one effect of excessive noise exposure is hearing loss, other adverse non-auditory effects have been documented in the workplace including, but not limited to, psychological stress, poor job performance, hypertension and industrial accidents.

NOISE-INDUCED HEARING LOSS

The ear is a non-selective organ, meaning you cannot select what to hear, so the ear is exposed to all the sounds within ear-shot” including continuous, loud and potentially dangerous noise. The ear is especially adapted and most responsive to the pressure changes in sound production. When the ear is exposed to excessive noise levels (above 85dBA) for an extended period of time, inner ear damage can result.

The ear is divided into three subdivisions-the outer, middle and inner ear. The outer and middle ear collect and transmit all sound pressure to the inner ear where the receptors for hearing are located. The receptors (hair cells) are arranged in several rows along the length of the basilar membrane, one of the two partitions which spiral around the bony cochlea. In the cochlea, mechanical energy from sound pressure is transformed into electrical energy that is carried by the auditory nerve to the brain.

Excessive noise exposure will injure the hair cells along the basilar membrane and result in noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL). At first, excessive exposure to high levels of noise causes only a temporary threshold shift (TTS), which is measured by testing a person’s hearing before and after noise exposure. This shift is temporary because pre-exposure hearing levels normally return within a few hours after exposure. But repeated exposure over the years can result in a permanent threshold shift (PTS), which is an irreversible sensorineural hearing loss.

Additional research has shown that a combination of noise exposure and certain physical or chemical agents (e.g. vibration, organic solvents, carbon monoxide, ototoxic drugs, and certain metals) may have negative effects on hearing. Although there are other causes of hearing loss in addition to excessive occupational noise, such as normal aging, disease, loud music, gun shooting, lawn-mowing, and so forth, excessive industrial noise remains the number one hearing problem in the American workplace.

MANY U.S. WORKERS EXPOSED TO EXCESSIVE NOISE LEVELS

Over a three-year period in the early 1980s, the National Institute of Safety and Health (NIOSH) conducted the National Occupational Exposure Study (NOES). This study was designed to provide benchmark data on the occupational safety and health conditions in the American workplace.

For the purpose of the study all workers exposed to noise levels of 85dBA or greater were considered to be noise-exposed, regardless of the duration. Using the data collected from the different economic sectors and applying these percentages to the 1993 Bureau of Census Report, NIOSH estimated that the number of “at risk” noise-exposed workers in the United States to be approximately 30 million workers. Special Trade Contractors were rated number four on the NIOSH list with an estimated 2,113,347 noise-exposed workers. The large number of potentially exposed workers led to the development of current occupational regulation regulations.

NOISE CONTROL LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

The military (U.S. Air Force) was the first organization to establish occupational noise regulations for members of the armed forces in 1956. Although safety and health standards had been issued by Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act of 1936, the act did not establish excessive noise limits and did not acknowledge the existence of an occupational hearing-loss problem.

  • New regulations were promulgated under the Walsh-Healey Act in 1969 (41 CFR 50-204.10) for the purpose of hearing conservation and defined noise limits for occupational noise exposure. Only firms with supply contracts valued at $10,000 or more with the U.S. Government were covered by the new law. Additional public laws were passed under the Service Contract Act and the Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969 (Public Law 91-173).
  • In 1970 Public Law 95-164, known as the Occupational Safety and Health Act, was enacted creating the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) within the Department of Labor. OSHA was now the law enforcement agency responsible for protecting the health and safety of the majority of the private sector American workforce.
  • It presented a recommended exposure limit (REL) of 85 dBA for an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) and methods for measuring and calculating noise, as well as providing a hearing conservation program. This document also acknowledged that NIOSH could not determine the technical feasibility of obtaining the REL, and 15 percent of those exposed to the REL over the course of a lifetime would develop noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL).
  • Since NIOSH was unable to determine the technological feasibility of the REL established in the criteria document, OSHA adopted the existing Walsh-Healey exposure limit of 90 dBA, 8-hour TWA, with a permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 5 dBA for general industry (29 CFR 1910.95).
  • For the next nine years, NIOSH studied the problem and continued to research existing data, until finally OSHA amended the noise control standards in 1981 (46 Fed. Reg. 4, 078) and again in 1983 (48 Fed. Reg. 9,738) to include specific requirements for a hearing conservation program to limit exposure to occupational noise at 85 dBA and above.
  • Not all industries are covered by the amended OSHA standards, specifically the Hearing Conservation Amendment does not cover the transportation, oil and gas well drilling/servicing, agriculture, construction or mining industries. For example, the construction industry is covered by another OSHA noise standard (29 CFR 1926.52), and the mining industry is covered by four separate standards (30 CFR 56; 30 CFR 57; 30 CFR 70; 30 CFR 71) which are enforced by the Mine Safety and HealthAdministration(MSHA).

Most recently NIOSH has issued “Criteria for a Recommended Standard Occupational Noise Exposure Revised Criteria 1996,” August 12, 1996. This document is available through NIOSH. (Editor’s note: For more information on the Construction Occupational Noise Standard (29 CFR 1926.52) and the General Industry Occupational Noise Standard (29 CFR 1910.95), see the article entitled “Hearing Protection: It’s the Law!” beginning on Page 24 in this edition of Insulation Outlook.)

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOUND

When vibration or turbulence causes pressure changes in the air or other medium our perception of sound begins. Pressure changes in the air create waves that are transmitted away from the vibrating or turbulent source toward the receiver (your ears) in the form of compression and rarefaction of molecules. Your ears in turn translate these waves into what we call “sound.” How the sound will effect the receiver depends on three physical principles: amplitude, frequency and duration.

Amplitude

Sound pressure level (SPL), is expressed as decibels (dB), and is a measurement of the amplitude of the pressure change that produces sound. We perceive this amplitude as loudness. Sound measuring instruments use “weighted networks” to modify the sound pressure level. When measuring the effect of sound on people the A-Weighted Network (dBA) is commonly used to express exposure limits. When ever you see “dB” used without the suffix “A,” this usually implies that no network has been used.

REFERENCES

ISO (1990). International Organization for Standardization, “Acoustics Assessment of Occupational Noise Exposure and Estimation of Noise-Induced Hearing Impairment.” Geneva, Switzerland: ISQ-1999.

OSHA (1989). Industrial Hygiene Field Operation Manual. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety And Health Administration, OSHA instruction CPL 2.45B.

NIOSH (1995) Preventing Occupational Hearing Loss-A Practical Guide. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 96-110.

NIA Sites > Insulation Outlook Magazine > Global

Sound Control 101

Insulation materials frequently are used to control noise problems. Noise is defined as an unwanted sound (for some of us, this is the basic definition of several types of so-called music). Sound (noise) is generated by, among other things, combustion, reciprocating engines/compressors, impact or water hammer, high velocity flow through pipes or ducts, gears, and bearings.

Sound is a vibration that travels along a path to a receiver (such as your ear). Sound consists of the vibration of various frequencies. It travels through air at about 1,100 feet per second, much faster through water or steel.

Sound is measured in decibels. The decibel is a logarithmic ratio that expresses the intensity of a sound’s loudness. Table 1 provides the decibel levels of various familiar sounds.

The sound levels in Table 1 are taken close to the source of the noise. The more distance there is between the source and the receiver, the lower the sound level.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) says that constant noise over 90 decibels (dB) in the workplace is not good for people. Options include wearing ear plugs or reducing the noise level at the source. This is where the insulation contractor can pick up some business-by reducing noise.

Methods and Materials

Sound transmission is reduced by the following methods and materials:

  • Absorption-fibrous materials, open cell foams
  • Mass-concrete, lead
Path barriers-flexible couplings, seal air holes

Fiberglass has been a leading sound-absorbing material for the past 40-50 years. Fiberglass duct liner, ceiling tiles, batts, and blankets are mainstays of the acoustical industry. Keep in mind that if the noise you are trying to control is a low-frequency rumble, the thickness of the fiberglass absorber must be greater than if the noise is a high frequency whine.

If you build a concrete wall (which provides plenty of mass) between the noise source and the receiver, but then allow the electrical contractor to install back-to-back outlets, the wall will be acoustically compromised. If air can flow from the sourceto the receiver, noise will alsotravel to the receiver. The caulk-type fire sealants that evolved from the nuclear power industry are ideal for acoustical sealing of holes in walls or floors.

If you build a wall of two-by-fours and drywall, the wall acts like a drum head and the sound passes through the wall with minor dB losses. Take the same wall, fill the cavity with fiberglass, then put 1/2” of drywall on one side of the studs and two layers of drywall on the other side of the studs. The added mass of the extra layer of drywall-but more importantly, the imbalance-causes the two sides of the wall to vibrate at different frequencies, and the wall no longer acts like a drum.

Lead is a terrific acoustical barrier because it is limp and does not vibrate (much) and hence effectively blocks the sound as long as it is sealed airtight. As with holes in vapor barriers, air holes in noise control barriers cause failures in the acoustical system. Making the enclosure airtight requires caulks, sealants, and adhesives-materials that insulation contractors use.

When you combine fiberglass, lead, and adhesives you have an optimum system for many industrial noise problems. Some manufacturers combine lead with PVC plastic to reduce costs. Sprayed-on fireproofing, such as rock wool or even sprayed-on cellulose, can also be an effective sound absorber.

Frequently, plastic pipes are insulated to control noise that was seldom a problem when cast iron pipes were used for similar drains. If the pipes are noise generators, it could be more effective to insulate them with calcium silicate instead of fiberglass due to the greater mass (weight) of calcium silicate. For the same reason, stainless steel jacketing (with the joints sealed) is a better sound barrier than aluminum jacketing.

Filled asphalt or other thick mastics are used on sheet metal as a “damper” or deadener in some applications. Sheet metal ducts in air handling systems pose two problems that need to be addressed for noise control: reducing fan noise and preventing “cross talk.” These problems can be addressed by isolating the fan with flexible connectors and installing duct lining in the supply and return ducts.

In summary, insulation contractors have all of the materials at their fingertips to control noise: fibrous insulations, mastics, tapes, and jacketing.

TABLE I

Sound Intensity

Sound Source Power
(Watts) 		Decibel Level
(dB)
Ramjet at takeoff 100,000 180
Turbojet at takeoff 10,000 170
WW II fighter plane 100 150
Large Orchestra 10 140
Chipping Hammer 1 130
Radio, LOUD 0.1 120
Centrifugal (13,000CFM)fan 0.01 110
Vane Axial fan 0.0001 90
Average talking 0.00001 80
Average Radio 0.000,001 70
Typical office 0.000,000,01 50
Whisper 0.000,000,001 40