Assessment of energy efficiency measures in the petrochemical industry in Thailand Thanapol Tantisattayakul a , Jindarporn Soontharothai b , Nantamol Limphitakphong b, c , Chanathip Pharino b, c , Orathai Chavalparit b, c, * , Premrudee Kanchanapiya d a Faculty of Science and Technology, Thammasat University, Thailand b Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand c Research Unit of Environmental Management and Sustainable Industry, Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand d National Metal and Materials Technology Center (MTEC), National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA), Pathumthani, Thailand article info Article history: Received 3 March 2016 Received in revised form 13 July 2016 Accepted 13 July 2016 Available online 15 July 2016 Keywords: Energy conservation Greenhouse gases mitigation Petrochemical industry abstract Petrochemical industry is one of the most important industries that contribute to Thailand's economic growth. Its energy consumption and greenhouse gas emission were approximately 170,000 TJ and 8300 ktCO 2e /year in 2010. This research assessed 35 energy conservation measures implemented in the Thailand's petrochemical industry, categorized into the six following categories: 1) steam saving and steam loss reduction, 2) steam optimization, 3) cogeneration, 4) power saving by efficient chillers, 5) energy efficiency, and 6) waste energy recovery. The analyses were performed in energy, environmental, and economic perspectives using five indicators: 1) reduction in energy intensity, 2) reduction in carbon intensity, 3) energy consumption reduction on investment,4) greenhouse gas emission reduction on investment, and 5) abatement cost. The results show that, from energy and environmental perspectives, the cogeneration is the most capable of reducing energy consumption and greenhouse gas emission which accounted for 82% of the total reduction, followed by the waste energy recovery and energy ef- ficiency categories. From economic point of view, the most cost effective measure category was steam saving and steam loss reduction, followed by waste energy recovery and energy efficiency categories. The cogeneration category is found to have the low cost effectiveness due to its high investment required. The abatement costs of the energy conservation measures was calculated to assess the economic feasibility. Almost all measures were economically feasible, except for some measures under the energy efficiency category. To encourage non-cost-effective measures, carbon credits should be promoted to cover the implementation cost of the measure. The results in this research will be useful for industrial sector, petrochemical companies, and other interested parties for transformation towards industrial sustainability. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction An increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions could lead to greater warming, which, in turn, could have an impact on the world's climate, leading to the phenomenon known as climate change (VijayaV.S. et al., 2012). Thailand was ranked 23rd in the world in GHG emissions in 2009 (IEA, 2009a) and as a Non-annex I party (developing country) has fulfilled its obligations and commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to address climate change. The 11thNa- tional Economic and Social Development Plan (2012e2016) in- cludes “management of natural resources and the environment toward sustainability” as one of the important development topics, under which various issues will be addressed, including creating a low-carbon society, energy awareness and preparing for climate change and natural disasters (NESDB, 2011). The supported key policies that have greatly contributed to GHG mitigation include energy efficiency, energy switching from fossil fuels and coal to natural gas, improvements in the public transportation network, and promotion of energy saving practices and renewable energy use (Chollacoop et al., 2013). * Corresponding author. Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand. E-mail addresses: orathai.c@chula.ac.th (O. Chavalparit), premrudk@mtec.or.th (P. Kanchanapiya). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Cleaner Production journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.078 0959-6526/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Journal of Cleaner Production 137 (2016) 931e941