Energy share
Turbomachinery is the core energy consumer in air separation plants — small efficiency shifts flow straight into annual operating cost.
Energy Efficiency Retrofit
Restore every compressor to peak efficiency
25%Maximum savings
¥63.72MAnnual operating cost savings (single project)
1–3 yrTypical payback period
Why retrofit now?
When air separation and process gas compressors drift from design conditions, losses compound with electricity rates, steam prices, and annual run hours. Energy retrofits calibrate the entire train — not just a single component.
Efficiency drift
After years of service, flow paths, seals, heat exchange, and controls on legacy compressors typically fall below optimal performance.
Energy costs
Electricity and steam prices keep climbing — inefficient equipment becomes a margin drain.
Compliance pressure
Tighter energy and emissions targets push aging units from "running" to running efficiently.
Choose a retrofit path for your operating profile.
From full unit replacement to auxiliary fine-tuning — matched to your investment level and savings target
Full unit replacement
15-25%
For legacy trains with severe efficiency loss where operating cost already exceeds the lifecycle cost of a new unit.
- Scope
- High-efficiency turbomachinery replacement
- Payback
- Typically 1–3 years
- Value
- Maximum savings; rebuild reliability margins
Component upgrade
1-10%
When process changes reduce main compressor efficiency but foundations, drivers, and system boundaries remain usable.
- Scope
- Rotor, impeller, and flow path upgrades
- Payback
- Moderate investment; manageable outage window
- Value
- Targeted repair of primary efficiency losses
Auxiliary optimization
1-3%
For persistent small losses from aging heat exchange, seals, drainage, and resistance systems.
- Scope
- Heat exchanger materials, fin geometry, seal clearances, zero-leak steam traps
- Payback
- Light investment; fast to implement
- Value
- Recover long-overlooked incremental losses
Model the Gap. Don't Guess.
Break efficiency loss down to each component · actual vs. design conditions
Example: efficiency loss breakdown for a 50,000 Nm³/h ASU main air compressor at a steel mill
Main compressorPressure dropGearboxCoolerMotor
Total efficiency loss
17.3%
Every deviation is validated against field data and design conditions — retrofit scope defined at component level.
Real projects and data
Calculations based on ¥0.6/kWh or ¥150/ton steam at 8,000 hours/year. Every figure traces to documented field conditions.
2×43,000 Nm³/h ASU
18.5%
¥63.72M
25,000 Nm³/h ASU
25%
¥21.0M
30,000 Nm³/h ASU
18.5%
¥12.42M
50,000 Nm³/h ASU
17.5%
¥16.17M
40,000 Nm³/h ASU
17%
¥13.19M
20,000 Nm³/h ASU
13%
¥5.27M