Energy & Environment

Energy has a significant impact on our ecological footprint. In our efforts to reduce our ecological footprint, in manufacturing our products we pay much attention to ways of reducing our energy consumption. Energy savings not only result in a reduced ecological footprint, but also lead to cost savings.

Since 2009, Teijin Aramid has participated in the MJA-3 covenant, which involves long-term agreements between the Dutch government and companies on improving energy efficiency. The objective is to achieve an annual average of 2% energy efficiency savings. The implementation of these agreements are defined per location in an Energy Efficiency Plans (EEP).

In 2017, we drew up our third EEP, this time for the period 2017-2020. For this new period, we are striving to achieve additional energy savings of 6.5% in our production processes and an additional saving of 1.5% in the value chain, thanks to the application of our strong and light materials.

We express our energy consumption by means of the Energy Efficiency Index (EEI). This is the total energy consumption per tonne manufactured product per site, compared to 2005.

In 2017, all locations worked in accordance with the EEPs and achieved corresponding energy savings. The slight increase of our EEI in Emmen is mainly due to the fact that we have now included the energy consumption of compressed air and cooled water. This is new compared to previous years. The decline in Arnhem is due to the savings achieved, combined with the effect of a more constant pulp production.

We are gradually seeing that, over the years, the ‘low-hanging-fruit’ measures to reduce energy consumption have all been taken, which makes it increasingly difficult to achieve the EEP targets in conventional ways. To keep making progress, in 2017, we increased our focus on the process of decarbonization. How can we reduce our direct CO2 emissions further in the future? The Teijin Aramid Energy Strategy Team is considering our current position and sorting out the questions to which we still need to find answers. In 2018, we will work on formulating a program to give shape to decarbonization.

In 2016, we calculated the product carbon footprint, the average eco-profile of our Twaron yarn and pulp.

1) GWP = Global Warming Potential
2) Other impact categories are available on request

In order to be able to make a good comparison, the current GWP values are based on a fixed set of data: the average production data from 2012 to 2014. The scope of these product carbon footprints is ‘from cradle to factory gate’, covering the extraction of raw materials, the production of intermediate materials, and the production of our end-product Twaron. The transport of end-products to the customers, the use phase, and the end of life of the products are not included.

The footprint was not recalculated in 2017, as we were making the necessary preparations to improve our calculations. For 2018, we are planning to update the eco-profiles of Twaron yarn and Twaron pulp, based on primary production data retrieved for the years 2015-2017. The updated eco-profiles will again be calculated on the basis of the ‘cradle-to gate’ principle, just as it was three years ago. In addition, for these updated eco-profiles, we will also incorporate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from biogenic sources.

Over the past few years, we have been working hard on the implementation of energy reduction targets in our production plants. We therefore expect to see an improvement in the eco-profiles of average Twaron yarn and average Twaron pulp. That is why we wish to quantify the magnitude of the effect of the application of targets on our product carbon footprints.
The effect of achieved and planned energy reductions on our product carbon footprints is reflected in the graph below.

In order to minimize and control our emissions to the air, we have various installations in place, such as filters, activated carbon, and scrubbers. We have optimized our processes as far as possible. Nevertheless, we have several emissions to the air. All our emissions, including variations compared to previous years, are well within the legally permitted levels.

Significant deviations are explained below. All deviations are within the standards permitted.

Polymer dust
In Delfzijl, the wet end-product is dried using warm air, which leads to polymer dust being released to the air. This dust is captured in filter bags. In 2017, the total amount of polymer dust increased, mainly due to an increase in the production level. In addition, there were two small incidents with the filters.

NMP
We use NMP as a solvent for the polymerization of aramid. We subsequently separate the aramid and NMP. We then purify and reuse the NMP for the next polymerization round. The increase in emissions in 2017 is mainly due to a higher production capacity, combined with an incident that led to the release of approximately 50 kg NMP to the air.

In Arnhem, NMP is also used, but on a smaller scale and not continuously. Small losses may occur here. In 2017, this production was limited, which explains the low emissions.

Aniline
Aniline is one of the building blocks for the production of PPD. The process has been designed in such a way that the emissions are manageable and minimal. In Delfzijl, an additional 30 kg of Aniline was emitted following an incident, caused by a faulty flange gasket. The flange gasket concerned was replaced immediately.

Dichloromethane (DCM)
Even though our processes that use DCM are basically designed to emit no significant quantities of DCM, there are always small DCM emissions caused by ‘diffuse’ sources. Maintenance can have a significant positive effect on these diffuse emissions. The 2017 emission values fit within this policy. In 2016, these emissions were higher due to a large-scale maintenance shutdown.

Freon 507
Freon 507 is used as a cooling medium in Arnhem and Emmen. We measure our emissions when we refill the cooling medium by measuring the required amounts.

In Emmen, the emissions mainly concerned regular diffuse emissions. In addition, there were two small leaks, which became apparent during checks and were instantly repaired.

In Arnhem, the additional emission of Freon was mainly caused by leaks in one or more gaskets. This was discovered during the periodic maintenance. The leaks were sealed and the Freon was replenished.

In order to minimize and control our emissions to water, we have various installations in place, such as filters, separators, activated carbon, strippers, and water purification plants. However, as in the case of emissions to air, there are also some emissions to public waters. All these emissions are well within the legal standards.

In Delfzijl, one part of the wastewater is discharged directly into public water. The other part is sent to a local wastewater purification plant for further treatment. In Emmen and at our production location in Arnhem, all production and wastewater is sent to a water purification plant on site, prior to discharge into public waters.

The table below shows our emissions into public water, which are all well within our permitted levels.

All emission levels are within our normal range of operation, and no incidents occurred.

Sulfate
The figures for Arnhem refer to the emissions at our Research location at Velperweg.

In the manufacturing of our products, we aim to recycle materials as much as possible within our processes. Our production processes include various closed loops. This not only results in reduced emissions, but also, and more importantly, maximizes the extent to which we can reuse our material streams.

In spite of our closed loop approach, our production plants still produce waste that we cannot reuse. At all our locations, this waste is either offered for external recycling or sent to incinerators. A small part is discharged as landfill (indicated in the figure below as ‘discharge’).

The increase in discharged waste is a direct consequence of a change in the processing of sludge from the sulfate treatment plant at our water purification facility in Emmen. Until 2017, this material was offered for incineration. In 2017, our waste management operator started discharging this material for landfill.

All our factories make use of industrial water. Nevertheless, additional fresh water is still needed in our production processes and facilities. We report on our water consumption by means of the water consumption index per location. This is the water consumption per tonne of production, compared to our reference year of 2005.

The huge decrease in water consumption at Converting in Emmen cannot be easily explained. In 2017, we repaired a malfunctioning water meter. The water meter now shows structurally lower water consumption than before, even though there have been no changes in the production process. It is not yet clear what has caused the difference in measurements.

In Arnhem, we also see a significant decrease. There were several causes for this. As part of the production process in Arnhem, the water supply is now switched off during stop periods. This has certainly led to some savings, but the exact extent of these savings has not been measured. In addition, our test facility, a major water consumer, only ran minimally in 2017.