foundry book

Towards Cleaner TechnologiesA process story in small-scale foundries

F O UNDRY P RO J E C T T E AM

Project facilitation/management

Somnath Bhattacharjee (till 2003) TERIJean-Bernard Dubois SDCUrs Heierli (till 1999) SDCPierre Jaboyedoff Sorane SA, SwitzerlandVeena Joshi SDCSiglinde Kalin (till 1996) SDCProsanto Pal TERIGirish Sethi (from 2003) TERI

Project implementation

Somnath Bhattacharjee (till 2003) TERIM S Brown (till 2004) M B Associates, UKD Bandhopadhyay Alstom/ABBRajeev R Bhatia (from 2003) Marketing ConsultantA S Ganguli Foundry consultantPierre Jaboyedoff Sorane SA, SwitzerlandJayanta Mitra (from 1999) TERIAbhishek Nath (from 1999) TERIProsanto Pal TERIB K Rakshit Foundry consultantSubroto Sinha (till 1999) TERIN Vasudevan TERI

Demonstration foundry unit

Bharat Engineering Works, Howrah

Collaborating foundry association/institute

IFA (Indian Foundry Association)IIF (The Institute of Indian Foundrymen)

Collaborating industry association(s) /institute(s)

IIF (The Institute of Indian Foundrymen)IFA (Indian Foundry Association)REA (Rajkot Engineering Association)ITCOT (Industrial and Technical Consultancy Organization of Tamilnadu Ltd)NITCON (North India Technical Consultancy Organization Ltd)MITCON (MITCON Ltd)

Collaborating NGO for techno-social programme at Howrah

IMSE (Institute for Motivating Self Employment)

Towards Cleaner TechnologiesA process story in small-scale foundries

Prosanto Pal

EditorsGirish Sethi

Pierre JaboyedoffVeena Joshi

NarratorR P Subramanian

The Energy and Resources Institute andSwiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, 2006

ISBN 8179930890

This document may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educa-tional and non-profit purposes without special permission, provided acknowledge-ment of the source is made. SDC and TERI would appreciate receiving a copy of anypublication that uses this document as a source.

Suggested format for citation

Pal P. 2006Towards Cleaner Technologies: a process story in small-scale foundries,edited by G Sethi, P Jaboyedoff, and V JoshiNew Delhi: The Energy and Resources Institute. 102 pp.

Published byT E R I PressThe Energy and Resources Institute Tel. 2468 2100 or 4150 4900Darbari Seth Block Fax 2468 2144 or 2468 2145IHC Complex, Lodhi Road India +91 Delhi (0) 11New Delhi 110 003 E-mail [email protected] Web www.teriin.org

Printed in India at I G Printers Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

Foreword vii

Preface ix

IN T R O D U C T I O N 1

Small and micro enterprises in India 1The protected years 2Liberalization challenges 3

The environmental imperative 4A partnership is forged 5

SDChuman and institutional development 5TERIglobal vision, local focus 6

The macro-level study 7The scope for intervention 8

Screening workshop, December 1994 9Getting started 11

Cluster-level intervention 11Finding the right technology 11Participatory technology 12Capacity building: key to sustainability 12

Structuring the interventions 13Action research 13

Competence pooling 15

CONTENTS

vi

C H A R T I N G T H E C O U R S E 17Overview 17Technology 19

The cupola 20Plan of action 22

Energy audits 23Exploring technological options 25Shift in focus to Howrah 27Institutions and their roles 28Competence pooling 31Pollution control system: finding a designer 31Identifying local consultants 32Selection of sites for demonstration 32

I N T O T H E F I E L D 35Pre-demonstration activity 35

Energy and environmental audits 35HFA withdraws from project 38DBC: getting the design details right 38Pollution control system: selection and design 41

Design, fabrication, and erection 41Demonstration: right the first time 44

Energy saving and other benefits 45Environmental performance 46BOP, and benefits of bucket charging 47

Spreading the word 50Lessons during early replications 52

Widening the horizon 57Dissemination of technology 57Social action 71

T H E WAY F O R WA R D 85

B I B L I O G R A P H Y 89

C O N T R I B U T O R S 95

A B B R E V I AT I O N S 101

Contents

Very few people know that small-scale foundry units in India make the manholecovers used in Kolkata and New York City, the chassis of ABB electric motors,and several parts of the Mercedes Benz car. These are just a few examples of therange of products made by the Indian foundry industry for markets within thecountry and abroad.

Energy is one of the important inputs in a foundry unit. It is used for meltingiron in a cupola, and constitutes about 12%15% of the total cost of production.Hence, optimal utilization of energy is vital for the profitability of a foundrysoperations. However, a majority of small-scale foundries in India use outmoded,low-efficiency cupolas that in addition generate considerable quantities ofgreenhouse gases and particulate emissions. Public awareness about the dangersof air pollution has greatly increased in the last few decadesparticularly afterthe Stockholm Conference of 1972 and subsequent conferences at the global level.In response to public interest litigation, the Supreme Court of India has orderedvarious small-scale industriesincluding foundriesto meet emission norms byadopting pollution control measures, or else face closure.

TERI (The Energy and Resources Institute), with the support of SDC (SwissAgency for Development and Cooperation) and in collaboration with Indian andinternational experts, has demonstrated an energy-efficient divided-blast cupolaand a most effective pollution control system for Indian foundries. Thedemonstration unit at Howrah has yielded coke savings of 35% and reducedparticulate emissions to levels far below the most stringent norms. To date, TERIhas provided technical assistance to almost a dozen small-scale foundry units indifferent parts of the country for replicating the improved cupola. A foundry unitlocated in West Bengal has successfully averted the threat of closure by adoptingthe projects new pollution control system.

FOREWORD

viii

The credibility attained through these technology interventions has allowedTERI and SDC to broaden the scope of their activities beyond energy andenvironment issues, to include the socio-economic dimensions related to thewell-being of the workforce. Rather than adopt an activist mode of socialintervention, the project partners have consciously chosen a middle path thatstrikes a balance between technological and social dimensions. The project hasbeen successful in creation of a workerowner forum at Howrah so that sensitiveissues such as work environment, skills-upgradation, and medical benefits forthe workforce can be brought to the discussion table. The project has alsopromoted knowledge-sharing platforms among stakeholders, and hascollaborated with the Institute of Indian Foundrymen in strengthening itswebsite.

All these achievements have been made possible through the pooling ofcompetence in diverse areasfoundry technology, marketing, energymanagement, environmental technology, and social issues. SDC has shown greatflexibility during the course of the interventions carried out. This has enabled theproject to adapt its action plan on an ongoing basis to overcome the challengesposed by rapid changes in the external environment and to meet the needs of thetarget group.

In 2005, TERI and SDC launched an initiative titled CoSMiLE (CompetenceNetwork for Small and Micro Learning Enterprises). CoSMiLE brings the variousinterventions by SDC and TERI in the SMiE (small and micro enterprises) sectorunder a common umbrella. In essence, CoSMiLE is a dynamic and informalnetwork, comprising players bound together by a keenness to learn and shareknowledge in order to bring about socio-economic development in the SMiEsector. In the years to come, efforts will be made to strengthen and extendCoSMiLE to enable widespread adoption of the improved cupola and pollutioncontrol technologies, and to bring socio-economic benefits to the foundryworkforce.

R K PachauriDirector-General, TER I

Foreword

SDC (Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation) has been working inIndia since 1961. Although a relatively small donor organization, SDC laysemphasis on building and nurturing long-term partnerships with localorganizations to address both local and global concerns. In 1991, SDC estab-lished a Global Environment Programme to support developing countries inimplementing measures aimed at protecting the global environment. Inpursuance of this goal, SDC India, in collaboration with Indian institutionslike TERI (The Energy and Resources Institute), conducted a study of theSMiE (small and micro enterprises) sector in India to identify areas in whichto introduce technologies that would yield higher energy efficiency andreduce greenhouse gas emissions. Four energy-intensive areas were selectedfor intervention: one of them was the foundry industry.

There are about 5000 foundries in India; the majority of them are small-scale units. These units produce high-value castings that are used in a varietyof industrial activities, in India and abroad. Small-scale foundries also pro-duce a vast range of low-value castings such as manhole covers, drainagepipes, and so on that form a vital part of civic infrastructure. The small-scalefoundry industry is a huge employment provider; an estimated half-a-mil-lion people find jobs as skilled, semi-skilled, or casual workers in grey ironfoundry units.

Most foundries depend on cupolas that operate with low energyefficiencies and generate high levels of greenhouse gases and particulateemissions. The foundry workforce faces diverse problemsharsh workingconditions, health hazards, poor wages, and contract/bonded labour.

SDC and TERI entered into partnership to address a number of issuesrelated to the foundry industry with a focus on energy and environment.

PREFACE

xTheir work during the period 19952000 focused on development and dem-onstration of an energy-efficient divided-blast cupola and a highly effectivepollution control device for small-scale foundries. Thereafter, the work hasfocused on laying the groundwork for widespread dissemination of thesetechnologies, and on undertaking pilot social action initiatives to improvethe lives of foundry workers in Howrah.

Working with small foundry units was not easy. Several challenges wereencountered by the project team while intervening at the lower end of theindustrial ladder. Accessing geographically dispersed units proved difficult,especially since no data were available regarding them and their operations.The small foundries are reluctant to consider new ideas, wary about chang-ing their ways of doing things. Even after the improved technologies weresuccessfully demonstrated, their acceptance was inhibited by these walls ofwariness. Low priority was given to environmental issues at the unit level;this hindered replication of the pollution control system. All this was com-pounded by recessionary trends in the Indian foundry industry and highprices of important raw materials like pig iron and coke.

Despite these challenges, the project has been successful in replicating thedivided blast cupola among several foundry units in different parts of thecountry. It has also promoted dialogue among different stakeholders on avarious issues concerning energy efficiency, environmental improvement,and social aspects concerning the workforce.

This book is a process document: a brief, non-technical account of theprocess by which SDC and TERI have worked in partnership to successfullydevelop and demonstrate energy-efficient and environmentally-friendlytechnologies for the foundry industry, and the measures taken to aid replica-tion of these technologies and to improve the socio-economic conditions offoundry workers.

The process is still continuing on. It has taken place in phases, and eachphase has involved several playersamong them experts and consultantsfrom India, Switzerland and elsewhere; academic institutions; industryassociations and individual foundry units; government bodies; NGOs; andothers. Each player has brought unique skills and capabilities to the process;each has had a special role to play; each has worked according to an indi-vidual agenda. Yet, their combined efforts have helped move the processtowards achieving the partners common goals.

The book highlights technological problems encountered by the projectstaff and their resolution, as well as socio-economic issues that have had tobe confronted and tackled. It describes the experiences of project teams and

Preface

other stakeholders in the field, and discusses both their achievements andtheir setbacksfor lessons may be drawn from these by future researchersand others interested in the field.

This book is primarily intended as a guide/reference document for re-searchers, NGOs, academic institutions, donor organizations, policy-makersand others who might be interested in setting up projects and programmesaimed at development and dissemination of cleaner technologies in othersmall-scale industries sectors in India and in other developing countries.

Veena Joshi Jean-Bernard DuboisFocus-in-Charge Deputy HeadRural Energy and Housing Natural Resources andSDC, New Delhi Environment

SDC, Berne

Preface xi

INTRODUCTION

SMALL AND MICRO ENTERPRISES IN INDIA

In India, small and micro enterprises or SMiEs comprise a wide variety ofunits, ranging from tiny artisan-based cottage industries and householdenterprises to small-scale manufacturing firms. There is great diversityamong themin their patterns of ownership, organizational structures,technologies, financial status, and other characteristics. However, SMiEshave a few common features as well. In general, an SMiE is managed by itsowner(s) in a personalized way; it has a relatively small share of the marketin financial terms; and its small and independent nature makes it relativelyfree from outside control in decision-making. SMiE operators and workersusually acquire their skills by tradition; these skills are transmitted throughthe generations with minimal change or upgradation.

The SMiE sector plays a vital role in the Indianeconomy. It manufactures a vast range of prod-ucts, mobilizes local capital and skills, andthereby provides the impetus for growth anddevelopment, particularly in rural areas and small towns. The SMiE sector isnext only to agriculture in providing employment; in 2003/04, small-scaleindustries alone employed around 27 million people.1

SMiEs are found in clusters all over India. There are many historical rea-sons for the clustering of unitsavailability of fuels and raw materials,access to pools of semi-skilled labour, proximity to markets, and so on.Besides an estimated 2000 artisan-based rural SMiE clusters, there are an

SMiEs form the backboneof Indias economy

1 Annual Report, 2004/05. Ministry of Small-scale Industries, Government of India.

2 A process story in small-scale foundries

estimated 140 clusters within or in the periphery of urban areas in India,with at least 100 registered units in each. These urban SMiE clusters varysignificantly in size; some clusters are so large that they account for 70%80%of the entire countrys production of a particular item. For example,Ludhiana produces 95% of Indias woollen hosiery, 85% of sewing machinecomponents, 60% of its bicycles and bicycle-parts, and accounts for over halfof Punjabs total exports. Similarly, Tirupur in Tamil Nadu has thousands ofsmall-scale units engaged in spinning, weaving, and dyeing of cotton gar-ments; this city alone accounts for around 60% of Indias total cotton knit-wear exports.2

In general, cost factors weigh much more for anSMiE owner than issues such as energy efficiencyand pollution. Hence, an SMiE uses the cheapestfuels that are available in its locality. Because of theeasy availability of biomass such as fuelwood,leaves, husks, and assorted agricultural wastes,almost all rural SMiEs burn fuelwood and other biomass for energy. Forinstance, each year an estimated 438 000 tonnes of fuelwood are used up forcuring tobacco leaf; 250 000 tonnes for tea drying; and 100 000 tonnes for silkreeling. Urban SMiEs too burn fuelwood; about 1.72 million tonnes offuelwood are used each year by fabric printing units.3 Coal and petroleum-based fuels, such as kerosene and diesel, are used mainly by urban SMiEs,because these fuels are much easier to obtain in urban areas than in ruralareas. SMiEs also burn highly polluting low-grade fuels such as spentmachine oils, lubricants, and used tyres.

THE PROTECTED YEARS

Recognizing the vital role played by SMiEs in production of goods and inemployment generation, the Indian government took several measures fromindependence onwards to provide fiscal, credit, marketing, and infrastruc-ture support to the SMiE sectoreven as the nation followed a path of indus-trialization that emphasized the building of heavy industries, primarily in

Costs weigh muchmore for SMiEs thanissues such as pollu-tion and energy effi-

ciency

2 Albu M. 1997. Technological learning and innovation in industrial clusters in the south. Paper No. 7.Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex, Brighton.3 Kishore VVN et al. 2004. Biomass energy technologies for rural infrastructure and village poweropportunities and challenges in the context of global climate change concerns. Energy Policy32(2004), 801810.

Introduction 3

Protective state poli-cies have proved to bea mixed blessing for

SMiEs

the public sector. From 1967 onwards, the government reserved certain itemsfor exclusive manufacture by small-scale industries. Forty-seven items werereserved to start with: that number has grown over the years, and at present,there are over 500 items reserved for the small-scale industrial sectorranging from wood and leather products to glass and ceramics; from rubber,paper, and fabric products to spices, foods, and electrical appliances. Thanksto the governments support policies, the small-scale industrial sector todayforms the backbone of Indias manufacturing capacity. It contributes overhalf of Indias entire industrial production in value-addition terms, andaccounts for one-third of export revenues.

But the governments policies have proved to be a mixed blessing forSMiEs. The policies were primarily intended to ensure the survival of SMiEs,to protect the jobs of those employed in them, and to increase the overallproduction of the sector (rather than the productivity of individual units) tocater to the demands of a growing indigenousmarket. Scant attention was paid by the state toimprove the operating practices of units, or to helpthem modernize their technologies through ex-change of ideas or by indigenous R&D (research anddevelopment) efforts. In the technical institutes andengineering colleges, there is a lack of interest in studying small-scale indus-trial processes such as drying of agro-products and food processingeventhough these activities are of great socio-economic importance (in terms ofrevenue and employment generation), use up huge amounts of energy, andgenerate vast amounts of pollutants.

On the one hand, SMiEs were insulated against healthy competition frommedium and large-scale enterprises within and outside India; on the other,they were unable to access information on technological advances madeelsewhere, and had neither the incentives nor the resources to conduct theirown R&D. Outdated and inefficient technologies, compounded by poormanagement practices and declining labour productivity, steadily ate awaytheir profits and slowed down industrial growth. By the early 1990s, theSMiE sector suffered from widespread technological obsolescence, lowproductivity, and an inability to access or adopt better technologies.

L I BERAL IZAT ION CHALLENGES

In 1991, a new Industrial Policy paved the way for liberalization of theIndian economy. Since then, the market has been opened up in stages to


individual/private entrepreneursIndian andforeign. The government is progressively withdraw-ing from the commercial and manufacturing sectors,even as the private sector is moving in to fill thespaces vacated. Where there was state control and state monopoly, there arenow new opportunities for private players; where there were fixed pricesand protected markets, there is now competition and the free play of marketforces. Thus, liberalization has created new opportunities in trade, invest-ment, and manufacturing for Indian and overseas investors.

However, liberalization has considerably increased the problems of theSMiE sector. The reason is simple: the new market paradigm favours thestrong and punishes the weak. For decades, the sector survived primarilybecause it had been shielded from the competitive currents of both indig-enous and global markets. Since 1991, that protective framework has steadilybeen dismantled, and now SMiEs have to face competition not only frommedium and large enterprises in India, but also from imports. In todaysliberalized economy, the survival and growth of SMiEs depend on theirability to become competitive, that is, to improve productivity and quality ofproducts, and to develop new products to keep up with changing demands.This in turn means that they must use better technologies and methods ofoperation. But these are precisely the tasks that they are incapable of doingon their own. Having functioned for five decades within an overly protectiveeconomic and industrial framework, they lack the flexibility, technical capac-ity, and resources to change the ways in which they function.

The environmental imperative

The SMiE sector also has to contend with a new challenge: environmentalregulation. SMiEs largely use low-grade fossil fuels or biomass such asfuelwood for energy. These fuels are burned using inefficient equipment andtechnology, releasing pollutants that are harmful to health as well as to theearths atmosphere. The last two decades have brought a new and growingawareness across the world about environmental pollution and itsadverse effectsparticularly after the United Na-tions Framework Convention on Climate Change orUNFCCC was signed at Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Indiahas joined other nations in enacting laws to curbpollution. However, SMiEs do not have the technicalability or the resources to modify/change their

The liberalized marketfavours the strong and

punishes the weak

SMiEs do not have thetechnical ability orresources to modify

their inefficienttechnologies

Introduction 5

inefficient technologies, or to install pollution control equipment to meet thestandards set by the new laws. Thus, the threat of closure constantly loomslarge over them.

Clearly, SMiEs need help to survive in todays liberalized economy.Closure of these units would threaten the very existence of millions of peoplewho depend on them for their livelihood, particularly in rural areas. It isagainst this backdrop that two organizations SDC (Swiss Agency for Devel-opment and Cooperation) and T E R I (The Energy and Resources Institute) decided to intervene in partnership in the SMiE sector.4

A PARTNERSHIP I S FORGED

SDChuman and institutional development

SDC is part of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. It focuses onpoverty alleviation. Towards this mission, it supports programmes thatpromote good governance, helps improve working conditions, aims at solv-ing environmental problems, and provides better health-care and educationalopportunities for the most disadvantaged sections of society.

SDC has worked in India since 1963. Initially, SDC focused on the areas oflivestock and animal husbandry; later, its interventions expanded to covervocational training and SMiEs. In 1987, it began to work in the field ofsericulture. From the outset, SDCs interventions paid great attention totraining and teamwork, and in ensuring the participation of local people inprojects to make them sustainable. In the course of its work in India, SDC hasclearly outlined four areas: poverty, civilsociety, human rights, and sustainable use ofnatural resources. It recognizes that these areasare closely linked to one another; that develop-ments in one have an impact on the other areas;and that all the areas together have afundamental role to play in addressing the issue of sustainable development.

From 1991 onwards, SDC became particularly concerned with the effectsof liberalization on Indias poor. It recognized that in an increasingly market-driven scenario, even as government withdraws from key sectors of theeconomy, NGOs (non-governmental organizations) and private institutions

4 Formerly, the Tata Energy Research Institute.

SDC has beenparticularly concerned withthe effects of liberalization

on the poor


play an important role in the development process. Interventions to alleviatepoverty successfully, therefore, require partnerships with NGOs and otherprivate bodies. Hence, SDC has introduced the principles of HID (humanand institutional development) into all its interventions. In essence, HIDaims at building strong partnerships with individuals, organizations andinstitutions, and in developing and enhancing partners skills through moti-vation, training, access to information, and exchange of ideas.

Global Environment Programme

In 1991, the Swiss Parliament sanctioned a special grant to SDC on the occa-sion of Switzerlands 700th anniversary. One of the aims of the grant was toaddress global environmental problems. SDC accordingly set up a GlobalEnvironment Programme or GEP to support developing countries in further-ing the goals of the UNFCCC. Under the grant, SDC initiated a study andcooperation programme in India for the phasing out of CFCs(chlorofluorocarbons) in the refrigeration sector. It also co-financed a marketdevelopment programme for photovoltaics along with the World Bank.

SDC recognized that there existed enormous potential for energy conser-vation and environmental protection in the Indian small-scale industrialsector. It thereupon sought and identified two institutional partners to imple-ment its energyenvironment programmes in the country: TERI and DA(Development Alternatives). Both TERI and DA are NGOs based in Delhi.

TERIglobal vision, local focus

T E R I was established in 1974 through a corpus of a few Tata Group compa-nies. Initially, T E R I funded and supported research in the fields of energyefficiency and renewable energies in academic institutions. Thereafter, itsactivities expanded to hardware research in renewable and rural energies(first at its Field Research Unit in Pondicherry, and later at its research facil-ity in Gual Pahari, near Delhi), and to documentation and dissemination ofenergy-related information. T E R I works at both micro- and macro-levels.For instance, it provides environment-friendly solutions to rural energyproblems; helps forest conservation efforts by local communities; promotesenergy efficiency in Indian industry; shapes the development of the Indianoil and gas sector; finds ways to combat urban air pollution; and tacklesissues related to global climate change.

Introduction 7

Among other achievements, T E R I has ac-quired considerable expertise in conductingenergy audits in various industrial sectors. Theinstitute has highly skilled human resourcesequipped with state-of-the-art instrumentationand software for gathering and analysing en-ergy-related data.

Like SDC, T E R I strives to make its pro-grammes participatory, that is, they are undertaken with the full involvementof local communities, and they tap local skills and traditional wisdom inorder to ensure their adoption and success. T E R I, too, lays great emphasison training, capacity building, and education. It clearly recognizes the linksbetween degradation and depletion of natural resources on the one hand,and increase in poverty on the other. Its activities are guided by the principlethat the development process can succeed, and be made sustainable, onlythrough the efficient utilization of energy, sustainable use of natural re-sources, large-scale adoption of renewable energy technologies, and reduc-tion of all forms of waste.

By 1992, T E R I had worked for nearly two decades in the field of energy,environment, and natural resources conservation. It was the largest develop-ing-country institution working to move human society towards a sustain-able future. It had unique skills in conducting energy audits. Above all, themodel of development pursued by T E R I corresponded well with the oneenvisaged by SDC. Thus, SDC decided to intervene in the fields of energyand environment in India in partnership with T E R I.

THE MACRO -LEVEL STUDY

In 1992, SDC initiated a study of energy consumption patterns in the IndianSMiE sector in order to help identify areas for intervention. Pierre Jaboyedofffrom Sorane SA, Switzerland, was mandated as an international consultantto assist SDC in coordinating the exercise. SDC collaborated with T E R Iin conducting energy sector studies in SMiE areassuch as foundries, glass-making, and silk-reeling.SDC had already been working with DA in thebuilding materials sub-sector, which included thebrick-making industry.

The macro-level study revealed that the energyefficiency of Indian SMiEs (that is, the efficiency

TERI focuses on energyefficiency and

sustainabledevelopment. . . TERI

recognizes the links be-tween poverty and deple-tion of natural resources

Many SMiEs have lowenergy efficiencies. They

are also energy-inten-sive: the cost of fuel

makes up a large portionof production cost


with which they extract and use energy from fuels) is much lower than thatof their counterparts in industrialized nations. Besides having low energyefficiencies, many SMiEs are highly energy-intensive: that is, the cost of fuelmakes up a large portion of production cost. Examples include foundries,food-processing units, forging units, and industries that manufacture glass,ceramics, and bricks. At the same time, SMiEs employ large numbers ofworkers. If these units are to remain competitive, it is essential to find waysto increase their energy efficiency and thereby reduce the burden of fuel costs.

But herein lies a challenge. To increase energy efficiency, an SMiE mustmake changes in its technology and operating practices. But such changesrequire the investment of time and moneyboth scarce resources in thesmall-scale sector! Unlike medium or large-scale units, small-scale units havelimited financial and human resources, and they operate with slender profitmargins. They might show willingness to adopt changeprovided thechange offers benefits in terms of increased productivity and profits. Butthey do not have the capacity or resources to initiate or invest in change.

The scope for intervention

SDC recognized this challenge faced by the SMiE sector, and saw in it anopportunity for intervention. Improving the energy efficiency of small-scaleunits particularly those in energy-intensive areas would be the best wayto increase their productivity and profitability. It would also translate intoreduced consumption of non-renewable fossil fuels and wood, and lower theemissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants by the units.

How could energy efficiency be increased? The answers would varyamong different SMiE sub-sectors, and indeed among units within a particu-lar sub-sector. Better methods could be found to burn a fuel and to use itsenergy; alternate fuels might be identified, that were readily available andthat yielded the same amount of energy at minimal or no extra cost and withless pollution; systems could be devised to recover and reuse heat and en-ergy generated during the manufacturing process; and so on. Whatever bethe mechanism, increased energy efficiency wouldtranslate into a higher yield of product for the sameamount of fuel consumed, and thereby improve aunits performancein terms of resource consump-tion, environmental impact, and productivity.

However, it was clear that an intervention toimprove energy efficiency would be sustainable onlyif it addressed the following imperatives:

SDC recognized thechallenges faced by theSMiE sector, and the

opportunity tointervene with

improved technologies

Introduction 9

the SMiEs must be enabled to meet environmental laws and regulations; they must be made economically competitive, particularly in energy-

intensive categories; and the quality of their products must be upgraded, and their markets must be

preserved/enhanced.

SCREENING WORKSHOP , DECEMBER 1994

To discuss the results of the macro-level study and finalize its strategy forintervention in the energy sector, SDC organized a Screening Workshop on89 December 1994 in New Delhi in collaboration with TERI. The workshopbrought together scientists, policy-makers, government representatives,NGOs, representatives of industrial associations, and experts in diversefields, ranging from biofuels, foundries, and forestry to renewable energy,glass-making, and silk.

The workshop adopted a unique approach. First, a total of 11 options forintervention in the energy sector were presented to an Advisory Panel,whose members represented the collective wisdom in India on policy issuesrelated to energy. Each Panel member examined and ranked the options inorder of preference. The options were: foundries (Agra); glass industries(Firozabad); silk-reeling ovens; alternate building materials; brick kilns;building energy efficiency; solar photovoltaics; solar water heaters; oil fromJatropha curcas (bio-diesel); diesel pumpsets; and biomass.

Thereafter, sectoral experts used the rankings of the Advisory Panel todiscuss the options in detail, and to suggest to SDC the possible areas foraction. Certain criteria were applied in order to identify the best areas forinterventions. The criteria included energy intensity; potential for energysavings; potential for replication; importance of the SMiE sub-sector con-cerned, particularly in terms of the number of workers employed and theirsocio-economic status; non-duplication of efforts; techno-economic viabilityof measures proposed; and compatibility with SDCs India Country Programme;and potential partners, and their ability and willingness to cooperate.

Finally, based on the participants recommendations, SDC selected thefollowing four areas in which to intervene with technologies designed toimprove energy efficiency, environmental performance, and productivity:1 foundries;2 sericulture (with wood gasifiers for improving thermal efficiency of silk-

reeling ovens);3 glass industries; and4 brick manufacture.


A list of dos and dontssuggested by the Screening Workshop

for the foundries sub-sector

Introduction 11

GETT ING STARTED

While structuring their interventions and drawing up their work plans, theproject had to consider a few vital issues.

Cluster-level intervention

At what level should the interventions be undertaken? On a national scale?Or at unit level? If so, where?

The idea to intervene at cluster-level sprang from the Screening Work-shop. Units producing similar goods, and possessing great similarity inlevels of technology and operating practices, are found in close proximitywithin a typical SMiE cluster. Therefore, it was felt that the best way tospread an improved technology would be to first demonstrate its benefits toa few representative units in a cluster. Ideally, these units should be chosenby local industrial associations. Where such formal groups did not exist, theunits should be identified by other bodies familiar with the cluster profile(such as district industries centres). Once the selected units realized theadvantages of the new technology and adopted it, other units in the clusterwould tend to follow suitand dissemination of the technology would be rapidand effective. Therefore, each intervention took place initially at cluster level.

Finding the right technology

Which technology is best suited for a particular sub-sector? Obviously, it shouldbe a technology that uses less energy and results in less pollution than theexisting technology. It should retain the existing quality of the product, and ifpossible improve upon it. Yet, the answer is not as simple as finding and import-ing the best technology available in the world that meets these requirements.The selected technology must be acceptable to local people; it must be easy forthem to use (perhaps with training); and it must suit local conditions.

In India, unemployment is high and capital is scarce. Therefore, the new/improved technology should be affordable; and it should minimize theimpact on the existing workforce in terms of loss of jobs. Itshould not depend on external inputs or non-localresources to function, except at the initial stages.Like existing technologies, it too should work onfuels and raw materials that are locally and readilyavailable at affordable prices. As far as possible, it

The selectedtechnologies must be

acceptable to localpeople, easy to use, and

suit local conditions


should resemble the technology already being used in the area; for thiswould help make it acceptable to and easily adaptable by local people.

Therefore, in selecting a technology for intervention, existing technologieshad to be evaluated in India and elsewhere to identify which among themcould be adapted/modified to meet the standards set for energy efficiencyand environmental performance. Thereafter, from among the available op-tions, the most appropriate one, that is, the one most suited to adaptation tomeet local needs and conditions, had to be selected and developed for dem-onstration and eventual dissemination.

Participatory technology

To succeed in the long-term, a technology should not only be appropriate. Asfar as possible it must build on, and be built upon, the skills and knowledgeof local people; it should be adapted/developed with their full participation.This approach to technology development gives the beneficiaries a sense ofownership over the technology; they become confident in its use. By itsvery nature, participatory technology is developed on the basis of collectivelearning, sharing of ideas and traditional wisdom, and R&D based on com-munity needs. Since it works closely with the community and at a deep levelof society, participatory technology has the potential to bring about profoundsocial change.

To ensure the participatory development of technologies, the projectteams worked closely with unit owners and workers, industry associations,local government institutions, NGOs, and other bodies at the field level.

Capacity building: key to sustainability

The success of any intervention is measured by its sustainability. This in turndepends on the capacity of the recipients to absorb the new/improved tech-nology. The recipients should be able to continue to adapt and innovate thetechnology long after the intervention project has endedto cope with andovercome whatever challenges the future might bring. Here, it is importantto recognize that technology is not just about equipment and tools. It is apackage of knowledge that enables the recipients to use the equipment andtools to produce specific products of specific quality.

In other words, it is not enough merely to develop a new technology andto demonstrate its benefits. Local people should be given the information

Introduction 13

and skills that they require to use the technology in the long-term. Theyshould learn the benefits of exchanging ideas and sharing experiences, andhow this would help them manage changes without depending on externalsources for help. Capacity building, therefore, formed a vital component ofthe projects interventions.

STRUCTURING THE INTERVENT IONS

Having considered all the above issues, SDC and TER I structured each inter-vention as a package of parallel and ongoing measures that are listed below. Perform energy audits (Box 1). Learn, during the energy audits, about

things beyond energysuch as existing operating practices, quality offuel, and so on.

Search for suitable solutionsto achieve the benchmarks set for energyefficiency and environmental performance.

Develop and demonstrate an improved technology, in terms of energyand environmental performance and other parameters. Fine-tune thedeveloped technology for wider dissemination.

Help other units to upgrade and adapt their existing technologies asrequired.

Seed the markets, that is, help make the technologies available via localsuppliers; promote measures to reduce their costs and increase their up-take.

Increase the number of partners and collaborators in the field, andstrengthen their capabilities by ongoing HID so as to promote dissemina-tion of the technology.

Make efforts to establish a regular policy dialogue between various play-ers in each area (industries, institutions, government bodies, etc.).

Conduct studies on the socio-economic conditions in the clusters con-cerned. Devise strategies for the improvement of working conditions inthe clusters.

Identify new areas for R&D activities, for future interventions.

ACT ION RESEARCH

In each area, the projects work followed the dynamic and cyclic pattern ofaction research, with activities taking place in three broad and overlappingphases:


BOX 1Energy audit andSankey diagram

An energy audit is a kind of baselinestudy. It examines the pattern ofenergy use in an existing industrialprocess, and provides data on cer-tain parameters. These data are thenmulled over, and some or all of themare used as yardsticks to evaluateother technological options. The

Sankey diagram shows, at a glance,the amounts of input heat used in dif-ferent parts of a process (Figure 1).Thus, the Sankey diagram is a simplebut powerful tool to identify areas inwhich energy efficiency might be im-proved.

Figure 1A typical Sankey diagram for a

cupola melting furnace

Introduction 15

developing a plan of action based on reconnaissance (the recce phase); taking actions according to that plan (the pilot phase); and assessing results of the actions, to formulate and take further action (the

assessment phase).

For the sake of clarity, various activities have been described sequentiallyas far as possible in this book. In reality, though, action research does nottake place according to a neat timeline. Action research is a dynamic frame-work: a process of continuous planning, experimentation, assessment, andlearning that cuts across timelines, and that involves frequent and extensiveinterplay between different phases and the players in those phases. Actionresearch does not achieve targets and goals by linear paths, but by a series ofiterations and loops.

Competence pooling

The development of an appropriate participatory technology requires manyspecialized skillsin fields ranging from energy management to pollutioncontrol, from engineering and equipment design to training, market research,and market development. Therefore, each intervention took the shape of atechnology package that was developed and implemented by a multi-disci-plinary team, comprising experts and consultants from India and abroad,technology providers, engineers, and others (Box 2). These specialistspooled their competencies and adapted equipment designs and operatingpractices to local conditions and to suit the requirements of the localoperators.


BOX 2Competence poolingputting

the pieces together

When the T E R I teams started out ontheir interventions more than a dec-ade ago, they did have a lot of exper-tise with energy audits. Most of theseenergy audits were focused on largeand medium industries. But when theteams began analysing brick kilns,foundries, glass furnaces, and silk-reeling units, they soon realized thatthe complexities of these small andmicro enterprises were no less thanthe former; often, they were evengreater.

Instead of reinventing the wheel,T E R I decided to call in specific ex-perts to fill up the lack of knowledgein the many technology-related do-mains. This strategy of compe-tence pooling has proven to be veryeffective. Typically, technology spe-cialists are excellent at analysing andrunning processes; but they are notvery interested in things like energyefficiency. On the other hand, energyspecialists like TERI and myself per-haps tend to underestimate some of

the technology-related hurdles. By in-teracting closely with one another,and with the industry associationsand the pilot plant unit workers, wewere able to develop technologiesadapted to the needs of SMiEs.

The more the different compo-nents of the intervention progressed,the more specific the demands for ex-pertise became. The interventionprocess is like a puzzle. After somany years of work, it has becomeevident that for the successful com-pletion of the process, the pieces ofthe puzzle made up of knowledgeand expertise have to be puttogether in the correct way. Compe-tence pooling is like many mindscoming together to move a body in achosen direction. The concept cutsacross, indeed holds together, all theinterventions by SDC and TERI in thesmall-scale sector.

Pierre JaboyedoffSorane SA

CHARTING THE COURSE

OVERV IEW

Foundries can be broadly classified into ferrous and non-ferrous foundries.Ferrous foundries can be further divided into iron foundries and steel foun-dries. Iron foundries were selected for intervention in the project. Hence,foundries in this book refer to iron foundries unless stated otherwise.

Foundries make iron castings. The castings are used in a variety of appli-cations. Some of the major end-use markets for castings are municipal cast-ings (such as manhole covers, grates, and so on), sanitary pipes and fittings,automotive applications, and engineering components like casings forpumps, compressors, and electric motors. Figure 2 shows some products thatuse castings made byfoundry units.

There are about5000 foundry units inthe country. Almostall units are in thesmall-scale sector.Most foundries arehomegrown unitstheir management,investment, andtechnology are largelyindigenous. Collec-tively, they produceabout four milliontonnes of castingsannually. While theiroutput predominantlycaters to domestic

Figure 2Some products

made by foundries


markets, a small percentage is exported. The foundrysub-sector provides direct employment to an estimatedhalf-a-million people.

Foundries are located mainly in clusters. The indus-try is highly fragmented: that is to say, although unitsoccur in clusters, they operate largely in isolation. While units form looseassociations at the cluster level, there is little formal sharing among them ofinformation related to technology, operating practices, and so on. The clus-ters vary in size: some have less than 50 units, while others have over 500units. Some of the major foundry clusters in India are shown in Figure 3.Typically, each cluster specializes in producing castings for specific end-usemarkets. Profiles of a few clusters are listed below.

Foundry units arelocated in clusters,but operate largely

in isolation

The Howrahcluster has ap-proximately 300foundries. Mostof the foundriesin Howrah pro-duce low-value-added castingssuch as manholecovers andsanitary pipes.

The Coimbatorecluster consists ofabout 500 foun-dries. These unitsproduce castingsmainly for thetextile and pump-set industries.

The Belgaumcluster hasaround 100 foun-dries. They arefamous for pro-ducing high-precision castingsthat are used by

Figure 3Location of major foundry

clusters in India

Charting the course 19

industries in Puneto manufacture automotive parts, oil engines, electricmotors, pumps, and valves.

The Kolhapur cluster has about 250 foundries, catering mainly to theneeds of local industries such as sugar mills and manufacturers of ma-chine tools and oil engines.

The Rajkot cluster has approximately 500 foundries. These units mainlyproduce grey iron castings for the local diesel engine industry. The cast-ings are also used by automotive and textile industries, and by manufac-turers of pumps, valves, and machine tools.

TECHNOLOGY

A foundry processes a wide range of iron-containing materials to produceiron castings of high purity. Figure 4 shows the typical operations in a foun-dry unit. Melting is by far the most energy-intensive stage in the operation ofa foundry. It is also the stage that generates maximum pollution. Hence, it is

Figure 4Typical operations in

a foundry


blown (blasted) into the cupola through the tuyeres. As the charge melts, thelimestone combines with the impurities present to form a slag, which floatson top of the heavier molten iron beneath. The slag is removed through aslag hole; the iron is tapped through a tap hole lower down, and mouldedinto castings.

Cupolas use coke as fuel. A cross-section view of a cupola is shown inFigure 6.

The energy efficiency of a cupola is measured in terms of the amount ofmetal charged/molten metal produced by one tonne of charged coke. Thiscan be denoted either as a ratio or as a percentage, known as CFR or cokefeed ratio. The lower the CFR, the more efficient is the cupola.

during the melting process thatways must be found to improveenergy efficiency and reducepollution.

The cupola

The conventional cupola is themost common type of meltingfurnace used by foundries inIndia. In essence, this is a hollowvertical cylindrical furnace(Figure 5). It has a single row ofpipes known as tuyeres, throughwhich air is blown in at roomtemperature. Such furnaces arehence called cold blast cupolas.A number of iron-containingmaterials such as pig iron, castiron scrap, and foundry returns(the scrap iron that circulateswithin the foundry; usuallymade up of rejected castings) areloaded into the cupola eithermanually or by a mechanicalcharging device. Limestone isadded as a fluxing agent. Air is

Figure 5Conventional cupola in

operation


dry cupolas are SPM (suspended particulate matter) and SO2.

Emission standards for cupolas

In 1990 itself, the CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board) had introducedstandards for SPM emissions from foundry cupolas. The SPM emissionnorms for cupolas were based on their melting rates, measured in tph (tonnesper hour). The maximum allowable SPM levels were set at 450 mg/Nm3

(milligrams per normal cubic metre) for cupolas with capacities lower than

Figure 6Cross-section view showing zones

and temperatures in a cupola

Emissions from cupolas

Foundries are a major source ofemissions. Cupolas are chargedwith a wide range of ferrous materi-als. Many of these materials containmetallic oxides and non-metalliccompounds in the form of looseparticles. Within the cupola itself,the materials rub against one an-other and against the refractorylining of the furnace. This leads tothe generation of more particulatematter.

When coke is burned in thecupola, it produces hot gases mainly CO2 (carbon dioxide), CO(carbon monoxide) and SO2 (sul-phur dioxide) and leaves a resi-due of fine ash. CO2 is the principalgreenhouse gas that affects theearths climate (Box 3). As the hotgases rise they pick up some of theash, as well as the tiny particlesgenerated by the charge materials.The particles are carried out of thecupola by the gases, and can beseen in the form of a characteristicplume above the stack. Hence, themajor pollutants emitted by foun-


3 tph, and 150 mg/Nm3 for cupolas with capacities equal to or more than 3tph. However, these norms have not been adhered to by most foundries, norare they enforced strictly by the state pollution control boards.

PLAN OF ACTION

Since the initial aim of the project was to improve energy efficiency of small-scale foundry units, the cupola melting process was targeted for achievingthis goal.

BOX 3Climate change and

UNFCCC

In recent decades, industry has comeunder intense pressure to reduce en-vironmental pollution. This is be-cause of the growing evidence thatpollution from human activity has ad-verse effects, not only on health butalso on the earths climate. Fossil fu-els such as coal, oil, and natural gasmeet most of the energy used by in-dustry, transport, households, andalso generate electricity. The burningof fossil fuels generates greenhousegases, primarily carbon dioxide.These gases slowly build up in the at-mosphere and create a greenhouseeffect, leading to a rise in averageglobal temperatures. This phenom-enon, known as global warming, islikely to bring about irreversible anddestructive climate change acrossthe planet; indeed, there is evidencethat this process has already begun.

Nations across the world have rec-ognized the threat. In June 1992,154 countries signed the United Na-

tions Framework Convention on Cli-mate Change, or UNFCCC. This wasan international environmental treatyproduced at the United Nations Con-ference on Environment and Develop-ment or Earth Summit held in Rio deJaneiro in 1992. While the UNFCCCrecognized the threats posed bygreenhouse gases, it did not make itmandatory or set targets for indi-vidual nations to reduce their green-house gas emissions. However, itincluded provisions for updates(called protocols) that would setmandatory emission limits. The KyotoProtocol, adopted in 1997, is themost well-known update to theUNFCCC. A total of 162 countrieshave since ratified the Kyoto Proto-col. This is a legally binding agree-ment under which, by 2012,industrialized countries must reducetheir collective emissions of green-house gases by certain percentagesbelow the emission levels in 1990.


Energy audits

In order to ascertain the causes and extent of inefficiency in energy useamong foundries, TERI conducted energy audits in representative units inthe Agra foundry cluster in 1993/94. Almost all of them used the conven-tional cupola; a few used a sub-optimal kind of divided-blast cupola or DBC.As described later, a DBC has twin rows of tuyeres, one below the other.

The audits revealed that the CFR was 1:3.2 (31%) in a conventional cupola,and 1 : 5.3 (19%) in a DBC. These CFRs compared poorly with the best levelsachieved abroad of about 1:10 (10%). Thus, there was a large potential forimproving furnace efficiency; specifically, to reduce coke consumption byalmost half by proper design of the cupola and adoption of BOP (best operat-ing practices) (Figure 7).

Causes of low energy efficiency

Poor furnace design

In general, most cupolas are poorly designed. As a result, large amounts ofheat are wasted. For optimum performance, a cupola must be correctly andproportionately sized. It must also operate with the correct air blast volumesand pressures. These factors apply irrespective of whether the furnace is aconventional cupola or a DBC.

Figure 7Amount of molten metal that can typically be produced,

per tonne of coke, in (a) conventional cupola; (b) sub-optimal DBC;and (c) optimal DBC with BOP


Poor operating practices

In most foundries, instruments to monitor and regulate important processparameters such as blast volume and pressure are absent. Often, units do notmaintain proper records of process data such as amounts of coke andcharge loaded, numbers of castings produced and rejected, causes for rejec-tion, and so on even though such data are vital to ensure operational con-trol and efficiency. In many foundries, the charge materials are liftedmanually for loading into the cupola. This is not only a physically taxingtask but it also poses major hazards to workers, for they are exposed to heatand high levels of CO at the cupola charging door (Figure 8).

Non-uniform size of charge material

The charge is generally made up of metallic pieces of varying size. Very largepieces create gaps and spaces within the cupola. Hot rising gases pass too

Figure 8Manual charging

with baskets


easily and too fast through these spaces, preventing the properpre-heating of charge material above the melting zone. Also, large piecescan get lodged in the cupola shaft, and prevent other charge material fromdescending into the melting zone. On the other hand, very small pieces tendto pack tighter, and restrict the upward passage of hot gases. This increasesthe internal pressure in the cupola, and restricts the blast rate. The results:low melting rate and wastage of fuel.

Exploring technological options

The energy audit results were discussed and validated by experts from CastMetals Development Limited, UK,5 a BCIRA (British Cast Iron ResearchAssociation) group company, and from Sorane SA, Switzerland. Potentialsolutions were also discussed with them. Options such as induction furnace,arc furnace, oxygen enrichment of blast air, and hot blast cupola were stud-ied and rejected: all require installation of expensive equipment, and the firsttwo in particular require large quantities of electric power. The DBC,therefore, emerged as the best option to improve energy efficiency at a mod-est investment.

DBC: how it works

When coke is burned within a cupola, a relatively cool reduction zoneforms about 1 m (metre) above the tuyeres. The drop in temperature in thisregion is because of the combustion reaction that leads to the formation ofCO. This reaction is endothermic, that is, it absorbs heat. The relative cool-ness of the reduction zone results in a drop in furnace core temperature, andthus lowers the efficiency of the cupola.

A DBC reduces CO formation by introducing a secondary air blast at thelevel of the reduction zone. Thus, a DBC has two rows of tuyeres, with theupper row located about 1 m above the lower row. This divided blast sys-tem gives a DBC the following advantages over the conventional cupola.

5 John Smith of Cast Metals Development Ltd visited Agra in 1993/94, and examined and validatedthe results of the energy audits that were then conducted. He also participated in the December 1994Screening Workshop. When the project shifted its activities to Howrah, Michael (Mike) S Brownrepresented Cast Metals Development Ltd. Subsequently, Mike set up his own consultancy firm M B Associates and continued his association with the project in this capacity.


It reduces coke consumption by about 25%. It increases tapping temperature by about 50 C. It increases the melting rate.

A schematic of a divided blast cupola is given in Figure 9.Before construction of a demonstration plant based on the DBC concept,

the project decided to demonstrate BOP to foundry operators. Some of theareas that the project planned to cover under BOP were: optimization of blast rate; bed preparation; sizing the raw material; and charging practices.

Figure 9Sketch of DBC, showing

two rows of tuyeres


Shift in focus to Howrah

Having identified the technology, the next step was to identify a site where itcould be demonstrated. Initially, the project had decided to intervene inAgra, where it had conducted energy audits.

However, in 1995/96, the Supreme Court of India pronounced a numberof landmark judgements on environmental pollution in the Agra region(Box 4). With the banning of coal and coke within the Taj Trapezium Zone,the industrial situation in the Agra cluster underwent a drastic change.Foundry-owners in the cluster were faced with the prospect of imminentclosure. Many units chose to move out of the Taj Trapezium Zone. Under thecircumstances, the project decided initially to concentrate on the Howrahcluster, one of the oldest and largest clusters in India.

Box 4Pollutionmonumental

damage!

The Taj Trapezium is an area ofabout 10 400 km2 (square kilome-tres), covering parts of Uttar Pradeshand Rajasthan states in India. At itscentre lies Agra, city of the Taj Mahal.Besides the Taj, the Trapezium ishome to over 40 protected monu-ments including other World HeritageSites such as Agra Fort and FatehpurSikri.

The Trapezium also has severalSMiE (small and micro enterprises)clusters: notably, the glass industrycluster at Firozabad, and the Agrafoundry cluster. From the 1970s on-wards, public concern grew acrossthe world at the damage beingcaused to monuments by air pollutionfrom industries in the area, and fromthe Mathura oil refinery. Norms wereestablished for control of industrial

emissions in the years that followed,but enforcement was lax.

In response to a PIL (public inter-est litigation) filed in this regard, theSupreme Court of India delivered alandmark judgement on 30 Decem-ber 1996. The Court banned the useof coke or coal in a large number ofpolluting units within the Trapezium.At the same time, the Court orderedGAIL (Gas Authority of India Limited)to supply natural gas to units thatcould adapt their technologies to usethis far more environmentally benignfuel. While TERI helped glass indus-tries in modifying their furnaces touse natural gas efficiently, almost allthe foundries in the Agra cluster wereforced to close down or relocate toareas outside the Trapezium.


At that time, SDC was already supporting SIDBI (Small Industries Devel-opment Bank of India) in a cluster modernization initiative in Howrah. Itwas felt that shifting the SDCT E R I technological intervention to Howrahwould also complement the ongoing collaboration between SDC and SIDBI.However, this did not materialize. The reasons may be best understood bylooking at the different approaches of the two initiatives. While the projectfocused on coming up with a benchmark longer-term solution, SIDBI wasmore concerned with helping the smaller foundries deal with the immediatechallenge posed by enforcement of environmental standards.

The project itself could not develop a solution for smaller foundries as theoperational culture in the typical small foundry did not match with thebenchmarking approach adopted by the project.

Initially, the focus was on improving the energy efficiency of foundryunits in the Howrah cluster by demonstration of BOP, and if necessary,adoption of the DBC. In early 1996, discussions were held with representa-tives of industry associations at Howrah. Based on the discussions, a detailedaction plan was drawn up by the project. In the meanwhile, pollution controlbecame the primary concern in Howrah as well (Box 5), with the SupremeCourt stipulating deadlines for foundry units in Howrah to put up gascleaning systems.

Under the circumstances, the project modified its plan of action to addressthe needs and immediate concerns of the entrepreneurs in the cluster. Inorder to save time, the project decided to skip the planned demonstration ofBOP, and instead directly start with demonstration of an optimally designedDBC. It was felt that BOP could be clubbed along with the technology dem-onstration. In parallel, the project decided to begin the exercise of designinga suitable pollution control system.

Institutions and their roles

While planning the intervention at Howrah, the project contacted most of thekey institutions active in the foundry cluster. This was important for forgingpartnerships and understanding cluster dynamics. Several institutionsplayed an important role in the Howrah foundry cluster in 199597. Some ofthem are listed below. Local foundry associations: namely, IFA (Indian Foundry Association),

and HFA (Howrah Foundry Association). IIF (The Institute of Indian Foundrymen). R&D laboratories/universities such as NML (National Metallurgical

Laboratory, Jamshedpur) and BE College, Sibpur (Howrah).


Financial institutions such as SIDBI. CPCB. WBPCB. Local consultancy firms.

The complex interactions among them, and between them and the project,are depicted in Figure 10.

Box 5Situation in

Howrah

In January 1996, the CPCB (CentralPollution Control Board) sent a noticeto various foundry associations in In-dia, asking them to take immediatesteps to curb air pollution; specifi-cally, to meet the emission norms setfor SPM (suspended particulate mat-ter). The WBPCB (West Bengal Pollu-tion Control Board) issued similarnotices in leading Kolkata newspa-pers. As mentioned earlier, the normsfor SPM emissions were based onwhether the cupolas melted morethan or less than 3 tph (tonnes perhour). Owing to practical problems inmeasuring the quantity and rate ofmolten metal produced by a cupola, itwas mutually agreed between theWBPCB and the local foundry asso-ciations that a cupolas internal di-ameter would be used as a yardstickto determine its melting rate.

The CPCB and WBPCB stressedthe need for pollution control atsource (implying the use of energy-ef-ficient technology). This led mostfoundries in Howrah to convert theircupolas to divided-blast operation.Many units believed that conversionof their cupolas to DBCs (divided-

blast cupolas) would be adequate tomeet emission norms, and save themthe costs of installing pollution con-trol systems. However, on 12 April1996 the Supreme Court ordered theWBPCB to report on the progressmade by foundries in installing per-manent pollution control systems.The WBPCB conducted a series of in-spections in the Howrah cluster inMayJuly 1996. Several units withoutpollution control systems were or-dered to close down. This createdpanic in the cluster, and units rushedto install pollution control systems.

By the time the project entered thefield in Howrah, many units had al-ready converted their conventionalcupolas to DBCs (of sub-optimal de-sign). In most cupolas, the inner re-fractory linings had been increasedto reduce the cupola diameters to be-tween 3234 inches, correspondingto a melting rate of 3 tph. The reasonwas simple: this permitted SPM emis-sions at the less stringent norm of450 mg/Nm3 (milligrams per normalmetre). Also, most units had installedpollution control systems of somekind or the other.


Figure 10Interactions between various players

in the Howrah cluster in 199597


Competence pooling

The project was already working in close partnership with Sorane SA, Swit-zerland and Cast Metals Development Ltd, UK. In setting up the demonstra-tion plant, the project brought together local and international experts inmany disciplinesproject management, foundry technology, energy manage-ment, cupola operations, and environmental technology. Pierre Jaboyedoff ofSorane SA was instrumental in arranging the technical tie-ups with CastMetals Development Ltd. The project implementation strategy was drawn upin close consultation with him. He was also a key figure in other areas ofintervention by the project: notably, the glass industry sub-sector. M SBrown, representing Cast Metals Development Ltd, brought his considerableexpertise in cupola design to assist the project.

This approach of pooling competencies assisted considerably in over-coming the challenges and setbacks that arose, whether these were techno-logical (as when components had to be redesigned), or procedural (such asdelays caused by local suppliers and vendors).

Before building the demonstration plant at Howrah, the immediate chal-lenges to be addressed were to identify a firm to design a suitable pollution control system; to select local consultant(s) for supervision of fabrication, installation, and

commissioning activities; and to select site(s) for demonstration.

Pollution control system: finding a designer

The project explored various options to get the pollution control systemdesigned by reputed institutions, both at the local level at Howrah and at thenational level. Several institutions were working to develop pollution controlsystems. The project explored tie-ups with some of them. Towards this,dialogues were initiated with NML and C-Net (a local consultancy firm) atHowrah. However, it was found that the systems being designed by theseand other institutions were aimed at meeting the less stringent emissionnorm of 450 mg/Nm3 (Box 6). Instead, the project took a long-term view anddecided that it would develop a pollution control system to meet the moststringent emission norm of 150 mg/Nm3.

Towards this end, the project approached ABB to provide pollution con-trol system design. ABB was then one of the most reputed suppliers of pollu-


tion control systems for industries in India. The project approached thesenior management of ABB with a request to provide the design as a socialgesture, to help the cause of protecting the environment. It was a specialfavour that was being sought from ABBthe small-scale industrial sector isnot an interesting market for the firm, because designs tend to be copiedwithin this sector. ABB agreed to design a pollution control system for theproject. The role of ABB would mainly be measurement of process param-eters and design of a pollution control system. The fabrication and procure-ment of the equipment was the responsibility of the project.

Box 6Pollution control:

other initiatives in Howrah

NML had a field station at Howrah.The local office of the CPCB en-gaged NML to develop a cyclonesystem for pollution control, anddemonstrate it at Crawley & Rayone of the most technologicallyprogressive foundries in theHowrah cluster. Dr A C Ray wasone of the directors of Crawley &Ray; he was held in high esteem bythe small foundry owners, whowere mainly affiliated to theHowrah Foundry Association orHFA.

NML was also engaged by the IFA(Indian Foundry Association) to de-velop a suitable cyclone system forits member-foundries. NML devel-oped and duly installed a cyclonesystem at Shree Uma Foundries (P)Ltd, Liluah, Howrah.

The BE College, Sibpur, was en-gaged by the WBPCB to developpollution control devices for foun-dries in the Howrah cluster. In De-cember 1995, the BE College

designed a wet scrubber systemwith the assistance of theWBPCBs R&D Cell, and installedthe system at Bharat EngineeringWorks.

A number of other foundries in thecluster installed pollution controlsystems that were essentially cop-ies of the systems installed atCrawley & Ray or at Bharat Engi-neering Works. In the wake of theinspections conducted by theWBPCB in MayJuly 1996, the IFAinformed its members through acircular that the wet scrubber sys-tem was effective in meeting SPMnorms. Accordingly, a large pro-portion of IFA-affiliated foundriesinstalled wet scrubbers.

About 30 members of the HFAadopted dry cyclone systems forpollution control, based on a sys-tem designed by C-Net, a local con-sultancy firm. This design was inessence a copy of the system in-stalled at Crawley & Ray.


Identifying local consultants

The project contacted local foundry institutions such as IIF, IFA, and HFA toidentify local foundry consultants who could be engaged for implementationof the project. The major tasks of the local consultants would be day-to-daysupervision of the fabrication and installation activities, including interactionwith the entrepreneur; review and approval of bills/invoices of materialpurchases; and feedback on progress. After installation, the local consultantswould assist in commissioning the plant and training the operators in BOP.

Initially, the project interacted with A C Ray of Crawley & Ray to discussthe possibility of engaging him as a local consultant. Ray had considerableworking experience in the Howrah cluster, and the HFA foundries held himin high esteem. However, the project found that Rays profile did not quiteconform to the role envisaged by the project for a local consultant.

Subsequently, the project interacted with key office-bearers of the IIF toidentify a suitable candidate. These meetings helped identify BirendraKumar Rakshit a mechanical engineer with several decades of experience inthe foundry industry as a local consultant. Rakshit proved invaluableduring the fabrication and installation activities. Before commissioning theDBC, the project felt the need for a person with competence in refractorylining and operation of the cupola. Rakshit suggested the name of such anexpert A S Ganguli who had acquired considerable hands-on experiencein cupola operations and maintenance while working with a large-scaleautomotive foundry near Kolkata.

Selection of sites for demonstration

In order to maximize the involvement of local foundry owners in the devel-opment and demonstration of technology, one of the project strategies was towork closely with both the foundry associations in the Howrah cluster.Accordingly, it was decided to work with both HFA and IFA. HFA representsthe very small local foundries, which are owned by second-generationBengali entrepreneurs. On the other hand, IFA mainly represents, and ismanaged by, the larger and more progressive small-scale foundries in theHowrah cluster. Most of the IFA foundries are owned by first-generationentrepreneurs who came to Kolkata from other states in the 1950s60s. Eachof these foundry associations was requested to nominate one foundry fromamong their members in which to install and demonstrate the new technol-ogy. The units identified were


IFABharat Engineering Works; and HFALakshmi Foundry Works.

Agreement for cooperation

To encourage the entrepreneur, the initial hardware costs of the demonstra-tion plant were decided to be borne by the project. However, once the tech-nology was successfully demonstrated, it was agreed that the foundry unitwould buy the installed equipment and machinery at a pre-determined price.On his part, the entrepreneur agreed to allow others to visit and study thedemonstration plant on a long-term basis, to help in spreading awareness.

INTO THE FIELD

PRE -DEMONSTRAT ION ACT IV I T Y

Initially, the projects aim was to develop, install, and demonstrate the ben-efits of DBC technology in foundries using conventional cupolas. This deci-sion was based on the energy audits it had conducted in the Agra cluster.However, the project found that many units in the Howrah cluster includ-ing the two units nominated by IFA and HFA used cupolas that already hadtwin rows of tuyeres, which gave the benefits of divided blast technology toa limited extent.

Energy and environmental audits

It was essential to assess the performance of the DBC design that foundriesin Howrah were already using. Therefore, the project conducted energy andenvironmental audits of the existing DBCs in the two nominated foundries inJune 1996. Assistance was taken from ABB to conduct the environmentalaudits and assess their results. The methodology and results of the energyaudits were discussed with Mike Brown, the foundry expert from CastMetals Development Ltd, UK.

The audits revealed that in both units, the cupolas performed belowoptimal level because of deficiencies in their design. For instance, the cupolaat Bharat Engineering Works was found to have a CFR of 1:7.5, or 13.6%,indicating room for improvement. The SPM emissions at source (that is,before the pollution control device) varied between 11702200 mg/Nm3.These measurements helped in determining DBC specifications and design-ing the required pollution control system for demonstration. As it turnedout, the results of the audits at Lakshmi Foundry Works were skewed by


deviations from normal procedure made without the knowledge of theproject team (Box 7).

A particle size analysis of the SPM collected was done. In general, thesizes of the particulates and their distribution influence the selection of anappropriate pollution control device. The analysis revealed that a substantialpercentage (about 16%) of the SPM was made up of fine particulates lessthan 5 microns in diameter (see Figure 11); these particles are the most harm-ful to health, and the most difficult to clean.

Correction of the design deficiencies in the existing cupolas would haverequired their extensive retrofitting. Instead, the project decided that itwould be better to build a new DBC equipped with a proper pollution con-trol system for each unit, and then demonstrate BOP.

Mechanical charging system

During the audits, it was observed that the charge materials were beinglifted and loaded into the cupolas by labourers, who carried the charge

BOX 7Two days of hard

workup in smoke!

At the start of the intervention in theHowrah foundry cluster, a baselinehad to be established for environ-mental pollution at the two chosenfoundries. It was a challenging task,requiring measurement of emissionsto be taken with great accuracy.

After nearly two days of hard workat Lakshmi Foundry Works a mem-ber of HFA, run by Sunil Kundu we,the members of the project team,were tired but happy. The measure-ment results we had obtained were ofgood quality, and we felt that we haddone a fine job.

What a surprise it was, then, whenthe British consultant Mike Browncame up and told us that the wholeexercise was meaningless! It turnedout that Kundu, the foundry owner,had decided to substitute the Indiancoke normally used in his cupola, andwhich contains a lot of ash, with Aus-tralian coke which is much more ex-pensive, but does not contain muchash. In doing so, Kundu had com-pletely skewed the results of ourmeasurements

Pierre JaboyedoffSorane SA

Into the field 37

material in baskets. The materials were not weighed before charging. Theproject decided to incorporate a mechanical charging system, known as skipbucket charger (Box 8). In essence, the charge material is loaded into abucket. The bucket is then mechanically winched up along rails and tippedto empty its contents into the cupola. This system would make weighing ofcharge material easier. At the same time, it would reduce the drudgery ofmanual loading.

Figure 11Particulate emissions from a typical cupola

prior to cleaning in a pollution control system


HFA withdraws from project

Unfortunately, after the initial baseline audits, HFA decided to drop out ofthe project (Box 9). Its nominee unit, Lakshmi Foundry Works, could not waitfor the demonstration plant to be set up as it was under enormous pressurefrom the WBPCB to install a pollution control system on its existing cupola atan early date. Under the circumstances, the project had no choice but to setup its demonstration plant in the IFA unit alone, that is, at Bharat Engineer-ing Works.

DBC: getting the design details right

The demonstration cupola was designed for a specific ID (internal diameter)specification, since the entrepreneur S C Dugar, proprietor of Bharat Engi-neering Works wanted a 34-inch ID cupola. The basic design of the demon-

BOX 8Lesseningthe load

I used to work with Crawley & Ray, awell-established foundry in Howrah.We switched over to cupola meltingfrom oil-fired reverberatory meltingpractice in the year 1973, after theworldwide oil crisis. We had to man-age a 27-inch cupola in a smallspace, measuring 15 feet by 15 feet.The cupola did not have a ladder pro-vision. We used to carry charge mate-rials in wheelbarrows from the yardand lift the loaded wheelbarrows byelectrical lift up to the loading plat-form. The charge material was di-rectly fed into the cupola by tilting thewheelbarrows. This was an extremelylaborious task. In the 1980s, we de-cided to adopt the skip bucket charg-ing system. We adopted the design

guidelines from the Wellman Incan-descence Booklet. For the electricalcontrol system, my experience in theelevator industry was of immensehelp.Since then, I have been associatedwith design, fabrication, installationand operation of nine skip bucketcharger systems. Out of these, five in-stallations were carried out by myown organization, BBL Enterprise. Ihad the privilege of being associatedwith T E R I in two such installations,at Howrah and Nagpur. My experi-ence as a user has helped me up-grade the design from time to time tomake it more user-friendly.

Niranjan SahaBBL Enterprise

Into the field 39

BOX 9An opportunity

lost

From our initial interactions with thetwo foundry associations in Howrah the IFA and the HFA it was clear tous that they were very different fromone another in terms of ideology, or-ganization, management styles,knowledge of foundry technology,and environment technology.

There are a significant number ofunits with dual membership of bothassociations. However, with its cen-trally located office in Kolkata, IFA ismuch more visible to decision-mak-ers than HFA, which operates from adingy one-room office in Howrah.

While planning our intervention atHowrah in 1996, we decided to workwith both the associations. Henceboth IFA and HFA were requested tonominate a foundry unit where ademonstration plant would be set up.While IFA was quick to capitalize onthe offer, HFA dilly-dallied and finallydecided to opt out of the interven-tion. The reason given by HFA for opt-ing out was that they could not wait

for six months (the anticipated timeof completion of the demonstrationplant at that time). Besides, the HFAclaimed, its member-units had al-ready decided to spend 50 000 eachon a cheaper pollution control systembeing offered by a local consultingfirm, C-Net.

HFAs backing out was a great dis-appointment for the project team, forwe had set our hearts on helping outthe smaller foundries. We did ap-proach other HFA-member units toadopt the proposed technology. How-ever, given their small size and lackof resources, it became obvious to usthat the project would have had tomake many compromises in terms ofquality of material and plant layout.This would have gone against theprojects aim: namely, of demonstrat-ing a technology that would set thebenchmark for best energy and envi-ronmental performance.

Prosanto PalTERI

stration cupola was done by Mike Brown. The drawing is reproduced inFigure 12.

The DBC design paid particular attention to the following aspects. Specification of the blower, that is, the blast rate and pressure delivered

(Figure 13). Dividing the supply of blast air to the top and bottom row of tuyeres in

the correct proportion. Minimizing the pressure drop and turbulence of the combustion air


Figure 12Mike Browns original drawing of

the demonstration DBC

Figure 13Desired and undesired air flow

patterns in a cupola

Into the field 41

through proper sizing and design of the blastmains, windbelt, and tuyeres.

Parameters like tuyere area and number of tuyeres. Matching the well capacity to the ladle size. Providing greater stack height for better heat exchange between ascending

hot gases and descending charge materials. Material specifications, such as the thickness of mild steel plates used in

cupola shell and base plates.

During fabrication, installation, and equipment selection, the emphasiswas to get the demonstration right the first timefor this would establishthe credibility of the technology, and greatly facilitate in its eventual dissemi-nation in the cluster and beyond. Hence, no compromise was made on de-sign specifications or the quality of materials used in the equipmentinstalled.

Pollution control system: selection and design

Several methods are available to clean cupola exhaust gases. These includecentrifugal separators, low-energy scrubbers, fabric filters, and high-inten-sity scrubbers. Centrifugal separators such as cyclones, and low-energyscrubbers like spray towers or wet caps (as they are commonly called in thelocal foundry industry), are not very effective in removing fine particulatesless than 5 microns in size. After examining various options, the projectdecided to adopt a high intensity scrubber such as the venturi scrubber ,which could meet the 150 mg/Nm3 norm for SPM with certainty (Box 10).Although the operating principle of a venturi is simple, optimizing its designis a complex process.

DES IGN , FABR ICAT ION , AND ERECT ION

To save time, it was decided to design and fabricate the DBC and the pollu-tion control system in parallel. Ideally, the complete designs of both DBC andthe pollution control system should have been ready when fabrication wastaken up. While the DBC design was completed by August 1996, the venturiscrubber design was done in stages by ABB; the complete design was madeavailable only in August 1997. As a consequence, although the cupola wasready for commissioning by early 1997, it could not be run without a pollu-tion control system in place (Figure 15).

The emphasis was toget the demonstrationright the first time


BOX 10The venturi scrubber

system

A venturi is like two funnels joinedback-to-back by a narrow tube calledthe throat. (Figure 14). Hot gas fromthe cupola is sucked into the venturithrough the wide mouth on one sideof the venturi (called the inlet). A pow-erful fan called an induced-draft or IDfan creates the suction. As the gaspasses through the throat, its velocityincreases considerably; simultane-ously, it loses a great amount of pres-sure. Water is injected into theventuri throat. When the water meetsthe hot, high-velocity gas, it mixeswith the gas to form a very fine, fast-moving mist. So thorough is the mix-

ing process that the tiny water drop-lets entrap most of the particulatesin the gas.

The mist exits the throat of theventuri through the wide mouth at itsother end (called the diffuser). In do-ing so its velocity falls greatly, evenas its pressure increases again. Themist is passed through a devicecalled dewatering cyclone; this de-vice removes the water particlesalong with the particulates adheringto them. The remaining gas, now dryand cleaned of almost all particulatematter, is allowed to escape throughthe chimney.

Figure 14(a) View of venturi scrubber system at the demonstration unit

(b) Schematic of the system

(a) (b)

Into the field 43

Other unexpected delays arose in finalizing the designs and getting equip-ment fabricated on schedule. For instance, in May 1997, the need arose for asoil load-bearing test to be conducted for preparing the civil foundationdrawings of the chimney for the pollution control system. This test could beconducted only in July 1997at the height of the monsoon. The test reportwas received in August 1997, after which the civil drawings were finalized.In October 1997, excavation work began to lay a base for the chimney.However, high sub-soil water levels in the post-monsoon period hamperedwork. The erection of the chimney, along with other support structures andcivil work, could be completed only in April 1998, and the pollution controlsystem was finally erected in June 1998 (Box 11).

Figure 15The demonstration DBCready

before the pollution control system


DEMONSTRAT ION : RIGHT THE F IRST T IME

The demonstration plant was ready for commissioning in July 1998 (Figure16). It was decided to commission the DBC first, and ensure that it operatedsatisfactorily before

foundry book

Documents