Energy 267 (2023) 126630

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Gas microturbine as a main source of energy for industrial laundry –

feasibility study
Eva Konečná a, Vítězslav Máša a, *, Václav Miklas a, Rostislav Slovák a, Alexandra Jördening b,
Vladimír Blaha c
a
Institute of Process Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Brno University of Technology, Technická 2, 616 69, Brno, Czech Republic
b
Faculty of Mechanical and Process Engineering, Augsburg University of Applied Sciences, An der Hochschule 1, 86161, Augsburg, Germany
c
Laundry BLAHA V. S.r.o, Louky 477, 686 01, Uherské Hradiště, Czech Republic

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Handling editor: L Luo Professional laundry service is a leading solution for laundry maintenance in medical care, tourism, catering, and
other commercial services. Industrial laundry is a significant worldwide sector with high energy demand. In­
Keywords: dustrial laundries use steam for heating the washing water, drying and ironing. Combined heat and power
Gas microturbine production is a promising and straightforward way to produce energy for the whole process. A gas microturbine
Laundry
(GMT) is a source of heat and electrical power with an efficiency of up to 90%. The laundry process development
Process integration
could be associated mainly with eliminating steam production and improving water utilisation. This paper
Heat utilisation
Combined heat and power provides an overview of the latest trends concerning the laundry process, introduces the grey-box model of the
Techno-economic analysis laundry process with GMT, evaluates several scenarios using the hot flue gas to operate the laundry machines,
including their economy. GMT achieves the lowest operational cost and the highest primary energy savings
(25.9%) within the evaluated scenarios, with an overall efficiency of 80.3%. The payback period for the
greenfield project is 2.8 years and 5.8 for retrofit. It was found that GMT is an excellent source of electrical and
thermal energy for industrial laundries utilising the hot flue gas for direct linen drying.

1. Introduction
Due to the constant increase in the consumption of primary energy
sources and their limited availability, it is necessary to emphasize the
high efficiency of their use in the production of electricity and heat.
Political and social pressures have strived to reduce the use of fossil fuels
and greenhouse gas emissions while increasing the share of renewable
resources towards sustainable energy and environmental protection.
Achieving these goals leads to the concept of a low-carbon economy
planned for 2050 [1].
According to Malinauskaite et al. (2019) [2], in Germany and the
United Kingdom, natural gas consumption was reduced by 30% by
increasing the primary resource efficiency. This saving also contributed
to the reduction of peak loads and thus to the consumption that would
correspond to their coverage and the improvement of the stability of the
energy system. Despite these efforts, industries remain one of the main
consumers of primary resources. Further increase in the efficiency of
energy production and its use is a top priority.
One possible answer to the above trends is cogeneration units for
combined heat and power (CHP) production for maximal fuel uti­
lisation. Such systems can achieve an overall efficiency of up to 90%.
The integration is supported by subsidies for energy-efficient sources or
CHPproduction. Cogeneration sources include several technologies,
especially larger steam or gas turbines, smaller piston engines or pro­
gressive fuel cells. One of the most promising cogeneration sources are
gas microturbines (GMTs) due to their easy integration, low mainte­
nance costs and high efficiency of combined energy production of
80–90% [3]. Their specifics are, above all, very clean flue gases with a
temperature of up to 300 ◦ C. Another advantage of GMTs is the possi­
bility of using various gaseous fuels, such as biogas, landfill gas, etc.,
which ensures their applicability as a “green” energy source in the future
reduction of fossil fuels. Microturbines can be used both in smaller
commercial facilities and larger industrial plants due to the availability
of different output ranges. GMTs can be connected in parallel to increase
the overall power output, thus adapting the source to a certain extent of
a process by adding another microturbine. In some cases, the possibility
of island operation can be an advantage.
Consumption reduction initiatives impact all industries, especially
energy-intensive processes such as professional laundry care. The

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: masa@fme.vutbr.cz (V. Máša).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.126630
Received 23 February 2022; Received in revised form 14 December 2022; Accepted 5 January 2023
Available online 10 January 2023
0360-5442/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
E. Konečná et al. Energy 267 (2023) 126630

Nomenclature SEC kWh/kglinen specific energy consumption

η % efficiency
abbreviations
CAGR compound annual growth rate sub- and superscripts
CHP combined heat and power c cold
EOS equations of state DL dry linen
GCC grand composite curve e electrical
GMT gas microturbine el the reference value for electrical efficiency
HE heat exchanger fuel fuel
h hot
symbols H2O water
CAPEX $ capital expenditures i year’s number
CON kWh/y consumption min minimum
DCF $ discounted cash flow NG natural gas
DPB y discounted payback o overall
OPEX $ operating expense t thermal
P kWh/y power output T turbine
PES % primary energy savings time time fund
Q kWh/y energy V the reference value for thermal efficiency
r % discount rate

laundry process aims to re-use textiles and linen from hospitals, hotels
and households. The industrial process of laundry care differs from that
in the household, especially in the amount of linen processed and the
ratio of human labour to machinery. To convert dirty linen into a clean,
relatively large amount of energy, water and chemicals, is required. The
study by Máša et al. (2013) [4] reports a specific heat energy con­
sumption of 0.91 kWh/kgDL and specific electrical energy consumption
of 0.15 kWh/kgDL. Water used for washing must be heated up to 90 ◦ C.
During drying, moisture is evaporated from the linen, which is associ­
ated with supplying a large amount of heat. As well ironing where the
heat not only removes moisture but also loosens the fibres helping
flattens the linen. In laundries, where flatwork linen is processed,
ironing is the most energy-intensive process. The most common energy
sources for laundries are steam boilers and steam generators. The steam
produced is used not only for water heating but also for ironing ma­
chines and finishing operations. The output flow streams of the process
are gaseous emissions and wastewater, and there are many ways to reuse
these waste streams in the washing process [4].
Professional laundry care is an important sector linked to healthcare
and tourism. The market value of the dry cleaning and laundry sector is
approximately $70 billion [5] and is expected to grow by 4% CAGR over
the next five years [6]. In the light of current pandemic events, an
increased emphasis can be expected on the sanitation of linen, which is
associated with increased temperature of washing water or higher
consumption of detergents. Recently, a sharp rise in energy prices has
also been seen worldwide. Therefore, industrial laundries need to be
given increased attention, all the more so as there is considerable po­
tential for streamlining the entire operation. The main priority must be
to increase the energy efficiency of the process, with the critical step
being the correct design of the laundry’s energy system. With the
energy-efficient operation, it is possible to maintain a high quality of
laundry care while increasing the sustainability of the process.
In terms of research and development, laundries get bigger attention
in connection with energy and wastewater management (Fig. 1). Other
topics of CHP in laundries and microturbine stagnate. The combination
of GMT and the laundry process has been studied only by the authors of
this paper. This is a unique effort with great prospects for the efficiency
of the process and environment, as the results confirm. A review of all
the published articles shows that more attention is being paid to
household laundry and new opportunities for laundry sharing. Sharing is

Fig. 1. Results of SCOPUS database search based on keywords.

2
E. Konečná et al.
one of the currently most discussed topics that affect more areas of
human activity, and laundry is no exception [7–10]. This approach has
many environmental and economic benefits; yet, it is targeted at end
consumers and could hardly be transferable on an industrial scale.
However, in less extensive applications, such as commercial or resi­
dential complexes, the energy system can be innovated by integrating a
CHP energy source, which will supply the energy to the shared laundry
in the building.
The development of new technical solutions is also focused primarily
on household washing. Examples of progressive technologies are ther­
moelectric laundry dryers or Linear Fresnel collectors, which, in the
future, can potentially be used on a larger scale in industrial laundries
[11,12]. Sustainability is another current topic of published studies in
the laundry sector, where it is discussed in terms of risks and economic
situation rather than energy efficiency [13]. An apparent exception is
the study of Cotton et al. (2020) [14]. However, their results are aimed
at households and for larger industrial laundries are not easily
applicable.
Wastewater is a present topic addressed in professional laundry care
because of the high-water consumption for the laundry operation. Ac­
cording to Ho et al. (2021) [15], the average laundry facility consumes
15 lH2O/kgDL. In the case of a laundry facility with a capacity of 2000 t/y,
it is 26,000 m3 of clean water; any recycling of water back into the
process can bring significant savings in operating costs. Several one-step
methods for water treatment have been designed for laundry water, and
for better efficiency, their combinations are studied further. The main
barrier to the wider integration of these systems into laundries is their
high sensitivity to the amount of textile fibre from the linen in the
wastewater.
Current technological trends in the laundry industry are aimed pri­
marily at the elimination of steam. The reason is the high investment
and operating costs of steam systems. The steam operated laundry ma­
chines have lower efficiency, longer ramp up time and are more
demanding in maintenance. For this purpose, machines (washing ma­
chines, dryers, ironers) are developed to use natural gas instead of
conventional steam heating [16]. Although this energy system is
decentralised, it achieves a lower consumption than the original steam
system. Steam elimination can be promoted by introducing oil man­
agement [17]. The technical literature is very brief in this field; how­
ever, thermal oil manufacturers offer a solution for the laundry industry.
The main advantages of oil management are a constantly flooded system
with a fast start-up to operating parameters, cheaper piping and its
maintenance (compared to steam management). On the contrary, the
risk of thermal oil leaking into the linen, the need to store a large amount
of oil and its degradation are among the shortcomings that need to be
considered.
In any case, it is necessary to choose the optimal source of energy,
both thermal and electrical, which will be the main driving force for all
laundry technologies; CHP units seem to be the answer to these re­
quirements. Máša et al. (2017) [18] outlined the benefits of GMT as a
promising source for laundries, and the present study builds on this
work. The main positives of GMT are clean flue gases with a high excess
of air, which can be used for all unit operations in laundries to eliminate
steam management. Proper integration into the laundry process would
maximise the potential of the GMT and improve the overall efficiency of
the process. Another advantage of the GMT is its relatively easy inte­
gration using the existing laundry equipment. Until now, according to
case studies, the integration of GMT into the laundry operation has only
been implemented in smaller laundries, where the flue gases have been
used exclusively for water heating. The application for a hotel laundry
was introduced, e.g. by Kolanowski (2004) [19].
The main purpose of this study is to present a yet unpublished study
of the complex integration of a GMT into a laundry operation with
highly efficient water heating and direct drying of linen. The secondary
goal is to reduce process steam consumption to a minimum or complete
elimination from the process. The theoretical concept of direct linen
3
Energy 267 (2023) 126630
drying with flue gases of a GMT and its experimental verification is
introduced. Based on theoretical and practical knowledge, a descriptive
model of a typical industrial laundry is created along with the scenarios
to evaluate the suitability of the GMT integration into laundries, both
from a technical and economic point of view. The study summarises and
presents the unique results of three years of systematic research.
2. Methodology
The following section summarises the procedure for evaluating the
suitability of a GMT as the main energy source for laundries. The
concept of direct flue gas drying and hot water heating is introduced in
more detail using a grey-box model, which is experimentally verified.
The results are then applied to a case study of an industrial laundry
compiled based on real data.
2.1. Concept of direct flue gas drying
The presented research builds on the long-term development of the
Laboratory of Energy Intensive Processes NETME Centre – New Tech­
nologies for Mechanical Engineering, a regional research and develop­
ment centre in Brno, Czech Republic. The laboratory is designed as a
fully functional model of a small industrial laundry with its own energy
source in the form of a GMT.
The main three elements of this technology are a gas microturbine,
an industrial tumble dryer and a flue gas-water heat exchanger. The
Capstone C30 microturbine [20] is a Brayton cycle cogeneration unit. Its
electrical power, electrical efficiency, flue gas temperature, and energy
are variables depending on the conditions at the installation site. In
particular, they depend on the ambient temperature, altitude or atmo­
spheric pressure, and the fuel inlet pressure. The most significant in­
fluence on the overall efficiency of GMT has the ambient temperature.
According to Ref. [21], the 30 kW GMT has a stable output for ambient
temperature in the range from − 15 ◦ C to 18 ◦ C. Increasing the tem­
perature above 18 ◦ C lowers the power output dramatically, therefore it
is necessary to operate the GMT in stable conditions with lower tem­
peratures. The unit produces about 23 kWe of electricity and about 70
kWt of heat in the flue gas during normal operation. GMT works with a
constant excess of air (approximately 6×), which causes an almost un­
changed flue gas composition across the power output. The differences
in the composition are in the order of hundreds to tenths of a per cent
and are usually considered constant. This fact and flue gas temperatures
of up to 300 ◦ C make them an excellent thermal energy source for direct
use.
The Primus DX55 tumble dryer has its own gas burner with an output
of up to 79 kWt [22]. It has a capacity of 55 kg of dry linen. Wet linen
(after spinning or pressing off residual water usually achieves a moisture
content of approximately 0.5 kgH2O/kgDL) is placed in a drying drum
that is then closed. The fan sucks ambient air through the combustion
chamber, where the oxidation of natural gas takes place. It burns part of
the oxygen and heats the drying air to a temperature of up to 270 ◦ C
[22]. This air continues through the drum, absorbing moisture from the
linen, and then leaves through the flue outlet into the chimney. The flue
gas concentration in the drying air is very low. GMT flue gases are also
formed by the oxidation of natural gas with atmospheric oxygen and
represent even cleaner drying medium than the gas burner flue gases. In
addition, the GMT flue gases have a similar temperature to that of a
built-in gas burner and can be used without any technical modification
of the dryer. The dryer capacity was chosen to match the GMT output, so
the GMT flue gases can replace the gas burner fully.
A flue gas-water tube heat exchanger is used to preheat the hot
water. It is a stainless-steel HE with a heat transfer area of 4.12 m2. The
HE uses GMT flue gas as a hot medium (inlet temperature of 300 ◦ C) and
water as a cold medium. The heated water from the HE is stored in an
insulated storage tank and subsequently used for washing processes.
From the GMT, the flue gases are led through a pipe equipped with
E. Konečná et al.
controlled valves allowing the flow to be directed as needed. Both direct
flue gas drying and water preheating in a HE is interconnected and can
operate independently and simultaneously.
In industrial laundries, mainly terry linen is dried, therefore a very
limited number of drying programs are used. Other laundry is ironed.
Using two-state control (on-off control), the temperature of the dryer
output is kept below 93 ◦ C (stream {6} in Fig. 2). The drying process is
finished at a defined relative humidity of this stream, e.g. 3%. The
drying programme of the dryer is the same for both heating options
(build-in gas burner, GMT flue gas) and no modification of the dryer
takes place. In the case of GMT-based drying, the temperature is
controlled by means of two air dampers. The first controls the supply of
flue gas to the dryer (Mixer 1 in Fig. 2) and the second the intake of
ambient air (stream {5} in Fig. 2). The only driving element is the built-
in dryer exhaust fan. This control is applied only in the last stage of
drying when the humidity of the laundry decreasing.
2.2. Grey-box model of the drying process
A grey-box model was created to analytically verify the concept of
microturbine flue gases as a medium for direct linen drying and water
heating. The grey-box model combines a theoretical structure with
experimental data.
Process simulators ProMax [23] and CHEMCAD [24] have been
applied to model the laundry system. Since the results of both were in
close agreement, the decision to use ProMax for the final model was a
matter of the authors’ preference. This model is based primarily on the
material and energy balance; to achieve accurate results, the data are
compared and refined according to operational data. Certain simplifi­
cations have been made.
• air is modelled as a mixture of three components: nitrogen (78 mol.
%), oxygen (21 mol.%) and argon (1 mol.%),
• the heat capacity of linen and its mechanical properties are
neglected,
• parameters that might vary significantly across real laundries
(pressure drops of piping and heat exchangers, heat losses) are set to
zero in the model.
Fig. 2. Grey-box model.
4
Energy 267 (2023) 126630
They led to a minimal accuracy loss while improving the calculation
speed and model handling. The last simplification can be easily adjusted
in the model if applied to a real-world case study. The model’s small set
of five components (nitrogen, oxygen, argon, carbon dioxide, water)
provides an opportunity to select from a relatively large number of
equations of state (EOS). There is typically a trade-off between accuracy
and speed. Given the complexity of the model, the calculation time is a
crucial parameter to keep the model easy to use. For this reason, the
well-recognized Peng-Robinson EOS was selected. While some de­
viations were observed (e.g., 1–2% differences in specific heat capacity
of liquid water), they are relatively small compared to input parameters
uncertainties in the model. GERG-2008 [25] was also tested. Even
though it is superior to the Peng-Robinson EOS for many applications, it
seems to have a significantly overpredicted cooling effect of water
evaporation when mixed with air and could not be used.
Fig. 2 shows a diagram of the final grey-box model design. The flue
gas stream {1} from the GMT is divided using a valve (mixer 1) into flow
streams which enter the HE {3} or the dryer {2}. The stream {10}
represents the amount of water discharged from the linen later in the
dryer. The stream {5} is the intake air from the surroundings, outlet
stream {6} is the flow of moist outlet air behind the tumble dryer,
streams {8} and {9} represent the water flow at the inlet and outlet of
the HE. The stream {7} from mixer 2 is a mixture of wet air after drying
{6} and cooled flue gas {4}.
The GMT model itself was not included in the model because it would
cause unnecessary model inaccuracies without undue benefit. GMT
operation with constant output without control is assumed because the
microturbine has the highest efficiency at full output and, at the same
time, the number of start-ups is limited [18]. The final amount of elec­
trical production, or flue gas production, was verified experimentally
and added to the results from Pro Max.
2.3. Experimental verification of microturbine flue gas utilisation for
drying and water heating
To verify direct flue gas drying and hot water heating, the experi­
mental verification was performed in the laboratory on the experimental
technology described in chapter 2.1 Concept of direct flue gas drying. In
the first step of the experimental verification, the tested linen of terry
E. Konečná et al.
towels weighing 40 kg (in the dry state) was dried by flue gases. The
monitored values were connected with flue gases from the GMT: tem­
peratures behind the combustion chamber of the dryer and temperatures
behind the drum, values of relative pressure in the combustion chamber
and behind the dryer filter, overpressure behind the fan, and relative
humidity in the dryer outlet. The parameters of the GMT and the posi­
tion of the flue gas outlet valve and the flue gas inlet dryer valve were
also recorded.
The experiment was carried out in air-conditioned laboratory with
constant ambient conditions – ambient temperature of 22.61 ◦ C, atmo­
spheric pressure: 99.23 kPa, relative humidity: 17.06%.
After this verification, the interoperability of the system with hot
water heating was tested. Additional drying cycles were measured,
when at the time of loading/unloading of the linen into/from the dryer,
the flue gas stream was completely redirected to a HE for preheating the
water for further use in the laundry. During drying, the temperature
under the dryer drum was monitored. Previous measurements have
shown that its maximum should not exceed 93 ◦ C. While the experi­
mental verification, the composition of the GMT flue gas was measured.
For the measuring of the temperatures the thermocouple type OMEGA
TQMSS-125G-12 was used, precise laboratory scale was used for
weighing of the laundry, pressure was measured with pressure gauge
type Siemens D-76181 Sitrans P, the relative humidity in the dryer outlet
was measured with build-in measuring device, and gas analyser Infralyt
50 was used to measure the flue gas composition. The natural gas con­
sumption was not compared because of different approaches to energy
generation – GMT produces electricity and heat using natural gas,
tumble dryer produce only heat for laundry drying.
The experiments described above confirmed the concept of the use of
flue gases from the gas microturbine for direct drying of linen and water
heating.
2.4. Descriptive model of an industrial laundry for energy analysis
Thanks to the successful verification of the direct drying and water
heating concept, it is possible to consider the integration of GMT in the
laundries with a larger processing capacity, i.e., industrial laundries.
The aim is to assess the benefits of integrating this CHP system for the
entire laundry sector. Thus, the Pro Max software was used to create a
Fig. 3. Scheme of the general laundry process.
5
Energy 267 (2023) 126630
descriptive model of an industrial laundry with GMT. Thanks to the
versatility of this descriptive model, it is possible to assess multiple
variants of GMT integration and define all their potential advantages
and disadvantages, including specific data for technical and economic
analysis.
As mentioned earlier, GMT has the highest efficiency at full output,
at the same time, the number of its start-ups is limited. For this reason, it
is appropriate to choose a laundry with continuous operation, with a
smaller number of downtimes and larger capacity. A laundry with a
capacity of 10 tons of linen per shift was chosen as the general repre­
sentative of industrial laundries. This model case study is not based on
estimates but on the experience from many laundries and the previous
laboratory research, and the data of the world’s leading manufacturers
of laundry technology [26,27].
A characteristic product range of linen was created to determine
specific energy consumption, washing temperatures, and laundry pro­
cessing methods, reflecting a general laundry facility with a capacity of
10 tDL/shift, one 8-h shift per day. The descriptive model very realisti­
cally reflects the real process of professional laundry care. The diagram
in Fig. 3 clearly shows the flow of the linen through the laundry process,
which is used in various modifications by laundries worldwide and
corresponds to the proposed case study.
2.5. Process integration and gas microturbine selection
The study aims to use a GMT as the main heat source in an industrial
laundry. Before this expensive energy source can be implemented, it is
essential to minimise heat consumption in the process. Process inte­
gration is a convenient way to achieve energy-efficient laundry opera­
tions and pave the way for the GMT to replace steam heating. Process
integration (pinch analysis) is an optimisation methodology for reducing
the energy consumption of industrial processes by finding their ther­
modynamically achievable minimum [28]. This methodology also in­
cludes procedures for maximising the use of heat sources.
The first step in process integration is the analysis of hot and cold
flow streams. After the analysis of flow streams, the so-called targeting is
performed – finding the minimum energy intensity of the process. For
this step, the determination of ΔTmin is necessary. This minimum tem­
perature difference should not be exceeded anywhere in the process; it
E. Konečná et al.
was found (via computations) at 15 ◦ C. In order to determine the min­
imum values of heat consumption and losses, the table problem algo­
rithm was performed. When drawing the composite curves of the ideal
state at ΔTmin and the common state for the industry, it was found out
that the space for energy savings in this process is enormous, as seen in
Fig. 4. It is evident that the values of Qh (red curve), and Qc (blue curve),
are significantly higher than the found minimum. By shifting the cold
stream curves, it is possible to achieve a more significant overlap of the
curves and thus increase the heat recovery in the process. This can be
achieved by using HEs between the individual flow streams.
The standard equipment of laundries almost always includes a HE to
preheat the washing water in the tunnel washer using low potential heat
of wastewater. This is the reason for the small overlap of the hot and cold
stream curves. If the HE is not used, Qh and Qc increase. The use of a full
ideal network of HEs to achieve minimum losses is not possible in actual
operation. The reason is forbidden matches of the process when it is
impossible to use the heat from the machine and manual ironing
released to the surroundings. For this reason, the minimum achievable
heat consumption increases. Based on the results of the pinch analysis, a
suitable power variant of the GMT will be selected.
With the optimised process, the next step is a selection of suitable
GMT power range to cover required consumptions. As mentioned above,
for efficient GMT operation and its high combined efficiency, the full
potential of the flue gases in the process must be used. To achieve an
economically advantageous GMT, it is necessary to maximise its
utilisation.
In this case, the GMT power output is designed to cover average
consumption with minimal energy surpluses. This way the dynamic
behaviour of the plant, such as machine start-up, peak loads, changes in
production and the associated variations in energy consumption, etc., is
not considered. This is possible with detailed archive operational data;
as well as, to determine the accumulation of energy or, conversely, the
addition of an auxiliary source.
2.6. Scenarios
The model laundry with a capacity of 10 tons of linen per shift is
equipped with complete machinery for professional laundry care, both
for processing flatwork linen and garments. To confirm the suitability of
the gas microturbine for laundry operation, three scenarios were created
that reflect current trends in the laundry industry.
Fig. 4. Composite curves diagram.
6
Energy 267 (2023) 126630
Default optimised laundry (Fig. 5) with standard laundry technology,
and a steam boiler as a source of heat was proposed as a basis for
comparing the scenarios. The process integration was performed with
the recommendation of four HEs for maximum heat recovery between
individual flow streams (described in the 3.2 Process integration of the
model laundry). In the technical and eco nomic analysis, only in­
vestments in HEs are considered.
All of the three scenarios include the process integration performed
and will be compared with the help of thorough technical and economic
evaluation.
Scenario GMT: Laundry with gas microturbine.
In this case, the steam source is replaced by a selected GMT (Fig. 6).
This completely eliminates steam management. The flue gases from the
microturbine are the main heat source for laundry operations. For the
direct use of flue gases, there is no need for significant technological
modifications to laundry facilities that otherwise use conventional gas
heating. The flue gases are used for hot water heating of the washing
process, direct drying of linen, and ironing machines. Direct use of flue
gases is also possible in the tunnel finisher; this is based on the similarity
of the machine with the tumble dryer, where the process medium is a
mixture of flue gases and air.
Scenario OIL (with two alternatives): Laundry operated on thermal
oil with process integration.
Following the findings of the current state-of-the-art, a new type of
primary heat transfer medium (thermal oil) was designed for the second
and third scenarios. This option also represents a way to exclude steam
management. Based on the technical parameters, the Paratherm™ HE
Heat transfer fluid [29] was chosen as suitable for laundry operations
due to its high operating temperatures (up to 315 ◦ C). In addition to a
GMT and a suitable HE – scenario OIL + GMT (Fig. 7), a gas burner –
scenario OIL (Fig. 8) is also considered for oil heating.
2.7. Technical and economic analysis
The benefits of individual scenarios can be assessed based on selected
technical and economic indicators. The operating parameters required
for the analysis were obtained from the descriptive model and related
calculations.
The key operating parameter of the laundry process is heat con­
sumption. This is also decisive for the selection of a suitable GMT power
variant. The heat consumption value is obtained from the laundry
E. Konečná et al. Energy 267 (2023) 126630

Fig. 5. Layout of optimised steam laundry.

Fig. 6. Layout of scenario GMT.

monitoring system and must be related to the amount of linen processed.
The value of heat output [kWt] for technical and economic analysis is
obtained from the descriptive model and corresponds to the output of
the discussed heat source (steam boiler, GMT or gas burner). Based on
the output of the source, the consumption of natural gas [m3] is deter­
mined. Another important operating parameter is the water consump­
tion [m3], needed for the steam. Furthermore, the electrical input [kWe]
must be determined as the sum of the inputs of the individual machines.
The total electricity consumption [kWh] is then the product of the
average electrical input and the number of operating hours.
Specific energy consumption (1) SEC [kWh/kgDL] related to kg of
processed dry linen is given by natural gas consumption CONNG [kWh/
y] and electricity consumption CONe per laundry processing capacity
CAPDL [kgDL] and CAPtime [y]:

7
E. Konečná et al. Energy 267 (2023) 126630

Fig. 7. Layout of scenario OIL + GMT.

Fig. 8. Layout of scenario OIL.

(CONNG + CONe ) (CAPEX) and operating costs (OPEX) are determined, including the
SEC = (1)
CAPDL • CAPtime purchase of gas, electricity and water. The cash flow and payback pe­
riods of each proposed scenario are evaluated.
The overall efficiency (2) of the selected source ηo [%] indicates the
Total gas costs consist of the purchase price of the gas itself, gas
ratio of energy produced, electrical power Pel [kWh/y] and heat energy
distribution prices, service fees, gas taxes and reserved capacity prices.
Qt [kWh/y], to the amount of used fuel CONNG [kWh/y]:
Electricity costs are obtained similarly, i.e., as the sum of the electricity
Qt + Pel purchase price, the price of electricity distribution, operator service fees,
ηo = • 100 (2)
CONNG the contribution to renewable energy sources and CHP, and the elec­
tricity tax. The cost of water consists of water, sewage and water
Economic parameters are evaluated for two possible variants: the
treatment. This cost structure is used by default in EU countries. Specific
construction of a new laundry facility (greenfield project) and optimi­
cost values were set for conditions in the Czech Republic.
sation (retrofit) of the existing one. In both cases, investment costs

8
E. Konečná et al. Energy 267 (2023) 126630

The CAPEX for the construction of a new laundry includes the

costsi − DCFi
complete equipment of the laundry according to the selected source, i.e., DPB = (5)
DCFi − DCFi+1
steam or gas. Another item is its own heat source, i.e., the price of the
GMT and related distribution with the HEs based on the process inte­
3. Results
gration. On the contrary, construction costs are not considered. In the
case of a laundry retrofit, the investment costs are mainly associated
3.1. Experimental verification of microturbine integration for drying and
with the integration of selected HEs and the cost to rebuild the heat
water heating
management system. For the scenario with the integration of GMT, the
investment costs also include the purchase of GMT and HE of gas or oil
The GMT integration for drying and water heating in the laundry was
laundry equipment. Due to the high costs for both variants, a loan for
experimentally verified. The stream of the flue gases was redirected to
their integration is expected; therefore, interest is also included in
the heat exchanger between the linen’s input and output to the tumble
CAPEX.
dryer and used for water heating.
The economic balance also includes profits, which are formed by the
A comparison of the continuously controlled drying with flue gas
sale of surplus electricity in the case of GMT and bonuses for the support
from GMT (orange curve) and the conventional tumble dryer cycle (blue
of CHPand decentralised generation. To determine these profits, it is
curve) can be seen in Fig. 9, where the advantage of direct drying is
necessary to quantify the primary energy savings PES [%] (3), where the
evident. It is the stable temperature of the drying air throughout the
cogeneration source is compared with the reference sources. In the case
whole cycle. The oscillation of the dryer cycle is caused by the on-off
of GMT, the thermal efficiency is compared with a gas steam boiler. The
control of the gas burner. Therefore, the cycle time was reduced by up
central network power plant is the reference source for the assessment of
to 4 min. As was mentioned above, the temperature under the dryer
electrical efficiency:
⎛ ⎞ drum was monitored during the experiment and should not exceed
93 ◦ C; therefore, the temperature was set to a maximum of 92 ◦ C.
⎜
⎜ 1 ⎟
⎟ During the experiment, four drying cycles were performed in a total
PES = ⎜1 − ⎟ • 100 (3)
⎝ ηTq
+ ⎠ ηTe of 134 min. The flue gas stream was four times redirected to the HE
connected to the water tank. Loading of the dryer and washer-extractor
ηVr ηEr

took 10 min each time. The water in the tank with a volume of 3 m3 was
where ηTq is thermal efficiency of CHP unit, ηTe is electrical efficiency of then heated by 10 ◦ C up to 44 ◦ C in a total of 40 min.
CHP unit, ηVr is a reference value of thermal efficiency and ηEr is a Also, during the experimental drying, the composition of flue gases
was measured, the average values for the time period are given in
reference value of electrical efficiency (for this study ηVr = 0.83 and ηEr =
Table 1.
0.3 based on the EU Directive [30]).
The GMT flue gases successfully dried the linen consisting of towels;
The parameters described above are evaluated using the discounted
thus, the experiment results proved the GMT flue gases as a suitable heat
cash flow (DCF) (4) and the discounted payback period (DPB) (5). The
transfer medium for the laundry that can be utilised as a drying air and
DCF is compared to investment into the conventional “unoptimised”
hot stream for preheating the water for the operations in the process.
steam laundry. Therefore, the DPB is then an additional time period for
the investment’s payback to the unoptimised laundry. The DCF is
determined by the difference between the profit and costs. Profit in­
cludes only the optimisation earnings and costs difference in the in­
vestments to conventional “unoptimised” laundry and the proposed
Table 1
scenario. The discount rate r set at 5%, i stands for the year’s number.
Composition of GMT flue gas.
∑
n
(profit − costs)i CO ppm 0
DCF = (4)
i (1 + r)i CO2 % 1.6
NO ppm 2.0
The discounted payback period is then calculated as: SO2 ppm 1.5
O2 % 18.1

Fig. 9. Comparison of tumble dryer and direct flue gas drying cycle.

9
E. Konečná et al.
3.2. Process integration of the model laundry
The process integration presented previously was performed to find a
potential for streamlining the laundry process. The entire integration is
shown in Fig. 10, where the grand composite curve (GCC) represents the
above-discussed utilities and enthalpy change within temperature in­
terval. The figure shows that the process can be equipped with a single
heat source; GMT consumes fuel (Qfuel) and produces electricity (Pe),
while the rest of the energy in the form of flue gases is used. The flue
gases can be cooled down to a temperature of 35 ◦ C, higher than its dew
point.
The overall heat and electrical consumption of model laundry were
determined to be 1417 kWt and 166 kWe, respectively. Using the pinch
analysis methodology, these heat exchangers for waste heat utilisation
were proposed.
I. water-water HE using the waste heat from the wastewater of a
tunnel washer for preheating of the rinsing water,
II. air-air HE using the cooling outlet air to preheat the inlet drying
air for the dryer,
III. air-water HE using the cooling wet outlet air by the ironer to heat
the water for tunnel washer,
IV. air-air HE using the cooling wet air on the outlet preheating the
inlet air for tunnel finisher.
HEs I. are commonly used in laundries. Laundries also extensively
use the water-water HE with the washer-extractor to preheat the
washing water for them; however, it is not used optimally due to its low
performance and high investment and operating costs. It is beneficial for
plants with a predominance of linen washed on washer-extractors. All
the others proposed above are also used in the laundries; however, not in
the designed network, as seen in Fig. 11. The list of cold and hot streams
in laundry is seen in Appendix A of the manuscript. It is clear that the
optimal system is approaching the minimum, using a small number of
HEs.
Therefore, the requirements are the heat output of the source of 740
kWt and the electrical output of 166 kWe (see Fig. 10.). The process, in
Fig. 10. Integration of GMT to optimised laundry process with the grand composite curve.
10
Energy 267 (2023) 126630
this case, will have heat losses of about 264 kWt. If the pinch analysis
was not made, the heat demand would be significantly higher, and GMT
with higher power output would be selected, which is not beneficial for
the economy of the process and GMT operation.
Based on the technical information available from Capstone Green
Energy, a performance chart of microturbines was compiled. Two series-
connected Capstone C200S microturbines meet the required thermal
and electrical output with an electrical output of 2 × 200 kWe, which
will be used as the main source for the laundry described above.
3.3. Technical and economic analysis of proposed scenarios
Results were obtained through the simulation of each scenario in the
ProMax software with the developed descriptive model of the industrial
laundry. For better orientation, overview tables of the technical and
economic indicators are provided. The following scenarios have been
analysed.
• Scenario GMT: Laundry with gas microturbine
• Scenario OIL + GMT: Laundry operated on thermal oil with gas
microturbine
• Scenario OIL: Laundry operated on thermal oil with thermal oil heating
As seen in Table 2, the scenarios including the GMT, have a higher
natural gas consumption than optimised steam laundry; however, the
electrical power is generated as well, and there is no need to buy it from
the grid.
Moreover, the water consumption dramatically decreased, from 309
m3 in optimised steam laundry to 21 m3 in all the other scenarios due to
the lack of steam boilers. Therefore, the only water needed is water for
the washing process itself. The overall efficiency is best in the optimised
steam laundry; however, the calculation does not consider heat losses of
the heat distribution system. The heat losses in steam piping and the
steam condensate are higher than the losses of flue gas or thermal oil
distribution; therefore, it is assumed that the overall efficiency of opti­
mised laundry can be even lower than that of the scenarios with utilising
the GMT depending on the length of the heat distribution. Scenarios
E. Konečná et al. Energy 267 (2023) 126630

Fig. 11. Designed heat exchanger network.

Table 2 Table 4
Technical comparison of proposed scenarios. Economic evaluation of retrofit for scenarios.
CONNG CONel CONW SEC ηo RETROFIT

[MWh/ [MWh/ [m3/ [kWh/ [%] CAPEX OPEX PES DPB

y] y] y] kgDL]
[$1000] [$1000] [%] [y]
optimised laundry 2075.0 304.6 309.8 1.03 81.9
scenario GMT 558.5 121.1 25.93 5.8
scenario GMT 2265.2 304.6 21.1 1.00 80.3
scenario OIL þ GMT 573.9 124.2 25.93 6.3
scenario OIL þ GMT 2235.1 365.5 21.1 0.98 79.6
scenario OIL 428.3 158.8 10.40 8.7
scenario OIL 1817.9 365.5 21.1 0.95 75.0

CAPEX of $60,100 for the proposed HEs, OPEX of $155,200, DPB of 1.3
using the GMT are within 2% of the overall efficiency. Scenario OIL has
the lowest overall efficiency of 75% due to the lower thermal efficiency years and PES only 1.1%, both the greenfield project and retrofit.
All the scenarios have a promising discounted payback period (DPB)
of the thermal oil heater and missing electrical power production.
The retrofit for the scenario GMT is also technically easier because within 3.2 years for the greenfield project. Even with high investment,
the savings in energy and water are significant and generate fast profit
most laundries combine steam machinery with natural gas equipment.
Also, flue gas distribution is not as demanding as high-pressure steam. (see Fig. 12). In the case of the retrofit of scenarios with GMT, the DPB is
up to 5.8 years because of the higher investment cost of the GMT itself,
Due to this, a switch from the steam-operated laundry to the flue gas-
operated laundry is simpler than vice versa. The thermal oil-based sce­ dismantling of the steam generator and replacement of the steam
laundry machinery by the natural gas machinery. The steam and ther­
narios OIL + GMT and OIL also benefit from the less demanding flue gas
and thermal oil distribution. However, the laundry equipment operated mal oil management are maintenance demanding; therefore, scenarios
GMT and OIL + GMT have the lowest OPEX compared to optimised
on the thermal oil is entirely different, and the intervention to the
technology is significant. Moreover, there is the need for thermal oil steam laundry and scenario OIL. To demonstrate the significant role of
the process integration of the laundry, we can compare the OPEX of the
pumps and oil storage, which demands more space. In addition, there is
the possibility of an oil leak that can permanently damage the processed presented scenarios with the conventional unoptimised steam-operated
laundry without any waste heat utilisation. OPEX of such laundry is 23%
linen. It can be said that, in terms of technical complexity, flue gases
higher than the optimised laundry and for GMT scenarios even up to
seem to be the best solution in comparison with steam and thermal oil.
37%. The difference is slightly lower but still apparent for the scenario
For the economic evaluation, Table 3 and Table 4 were created to
OIL, about 20%, corresponding with the literature review.
evaluate the case of the greenfield project and retrofit, respectively. The
main parameters of the economic evaluation are stated in the Appendix. The optimised laundry has an extremely low PES percentage – 1.10%
caused by the lack of electrical power production. By utilising the nat­
The default optimised steam-operated laundry was also evaluated with
ural gas for heat and electricity production by the GMT, the scenarios
with GMT achieve 25.93% of PES. With such PES, it is possible to reach
Table 3 for subsidies for CHP generation.
Economic evaluation of greenfield project for scenarios. For the retrofit thermal oil heater scenario OIL, DPB is elevated to
more than 8.7 years which is again caused by the lack of electrical power
GREENFIELD PROJECT
generation. Due to this, the OIL scenario also gives the lowest PES per­
CAPEX OPEX PES DPB centage (10.40%). Given that the project lifetime is set to 20 years, this
[$1000] [$1000] [%] [y] scenario generates profit after almost half of the period; therefore, it is
scenario GMT 2036 121.1 25.93 2.8 not beneficial for the investor. In addition, the required volume flow of
scenario OIL þ GMT 2051 124.2 25.93 3.2 the thermal oil for heating the laundry machinery is 9,9 t/h. A sufficient
scenario OIL 1905 158.8 10.40 2.9 amount of the oil must be stored in the laundry, which lays a need for a

11
E. Konečná et al.
Fig. 12. Discounted cash flow for each scenario and variation of realization.
large space and following the special regulations for storing the thermal
oil.
The GMT scenario still achieves great results; for the greenfield
project, the DPB is longer, only by 1.5 years to the optimised steam-
operated laundry, but shorter than oil-based scenarios. For the retrofit
project, it is evident that the higher costs of GMT extend the DPB, but
still, the GMT scenario provides the best outcome of the non-steam
scenarios.
It is also important that the scenarios with integrated GMT give
significant environmental benefits – by eliminating the steam from the
laundry, the water consumption decreases and the highest primary en­
ergy savings are achieved. Thermal oil is also a possible way to achieve
the non-steam operation of laundry; however, it is more demanding in
terms of its technical realization.
GMT is a stable source of thermal and electrical energy; therefore,
12
Energy 267 (2023) 126630
the laundry covers most of the self-energy consumption. This approach
is revolutionary for the laundry industry by maximising the fuel uti­
lisation in CHP production, which has a great economic and environ­
mental impact. Also, GMT can be operated as a “green” energy source.
Moreover, there are subsidies to support the CHPenergy sources.
The presented approach is an outcome of long-term research, data
collection, cooperation with several local laundries and laundry engi­
neering companies, using advanced methods and software which are not
accessible for laundry owners or operators. To further support the shift
of the approach to practice (including the concept of direct linen dry­
ing), it is necessary to present the results and methodology of GMT
integration to the laundry engineering companies that can employ this
approach and offer it to the laundry owners seeking for savings and
improvement.
A highly discussed topic is water utilisation in the laundry, as
E. Konečná et al. Energy 267 (2023) 126630

mentioned in the introduction to this paper. Vondra et al. (2019) [31]
presented the concept of a vacuum evaporation unit to treat digestate
from biogas plants. It is expected that the evaporation unit could be used
for laundry wastewater treatment as well. In addition, the vacuum
evaporation unit utilises waste heat commonly available in the laundry
process (40–90 ◦ C), which can be used for wastewater treatment and
return the water to the process.
A selection of the laundry energy source is a complex task and must
be carried out individually for each laundry and its specific conditions. It
could seem that the laundries are similar, only their capacity differs.
However, it is important to consider all the factors that influence energy
demands and proposed savings solutions – a type of processed linen,
peak loads, change of customer requirements, electricity and natural gas
costs etc. Also, scenarios reflecting the energy price changes should be
studied further to demonstrate the influence on economic evaluation.
a higher payback period and an overall efficiency of 75%. In addition,
the use of thermal oil is more demanding in terms of its technical
complexity.
With the GMT as a main energy source, laundry produces heat and
electrical power for its own consumption and can eliminate steam
management completely. Also, the GMT is an environmentally benefi­
cial solution because of water savings and improved utilisation of pri­
mary fuel. These results of GMT suitability for laundries can be
generalised for processes with high heat demand that can utilise the flue
gases directly, then the high overall efficiency is achieved. This is also
one of the topics of future research work – identifying other processes
that will benefit from GMT integration and developing a software tool
for GMT selection and its effective integration into the industrial pro­
cesses. It is an essential step in the accessibility of the above-described
analysis, which is now very time consuming and, therefore, expensive.

4. Conclusion Credit author statement

The laundry plant is a highly energy-demanding process where
selecting convenient energy sources is crucial to achieving a satisfactory
overall efficiency. The conventional laundry is steam-operated; how­
ever, the steam management demands high maintenance leading to the
efforts to eliminate the steam as much as possible. The CHP generation is
the evident solution because of the high heat and electrical consumption
of the laundry. The GMT was selected as a promising energy source due
to clean flue gases of high temperature that can be utilised as a drying
and heating medium. In our experiment, direct drying of linen using the
flue gases and water heating was proposed; for the very first time. The
GMT flue gases were successfully used for combined drying and heating.
The process integration of the laundry was carried out to optimise
the heat consumption, which was decreased by 670 kWt, showing that
process integration is a crucial point of the operation improvements. The
OPEX of conventional laundry is 23% higher than the optimised
laundry. A descriptive model was created to evaluate the GMT laundry
(scenario GMT) and the thermal oil-operated laundry (scenarios OIL),
and a thorough technical and economic analysis was also provided.
Our results show that the GMT is a feasible CHP source for laundry
operation with an overall efficiency of up to 80% and a payback period
of 2.8 years for greenfield projects and 5.8 years for retrofit. Also, the
GMT-operated laundry achieves the lowest OPEX of all the options and
primary energy savings of 25.9%. Likewise, the GMT and OIL scenarios
save almost 290 m3 of water per year by eliminating steam management.
The thermal oil was found not to be a beneficial option for laundry with
Konečná Eva: Writing - Original draft preparation, Writing-
Reviewing and Editing, Visualization: Máša Vítězslav: Conceptualiza­
tion, Writing - Original draft preparation, Supervision, Funding acqui­
sition: Miklas Václav: Software: Slovák Rostislav: Investigation,
Methodology: Jördening Alexandra: Writing- Reviewing and Editing:
Blaha Vladimír: Validation.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare the following financial interests/personal re­
lationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:
Vitezslav Masa reports financial support was provided by Ministry of
Education Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge financial support from the
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic under OP
RDE [grant number CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_026/0008413] “Strategic
Partnership for Environmental Technologies and Energy Production”.

Appendix. 7
Appendix A
The list of cold and hot streams of the laundry

Stream initial temperature final temperature mass flow

[◦ C] [◦ C] [kg/h]

C1 washing water for washer extractors 10 70 576

H1 waste water from washer extractors 70 20 536
C2-1 rinsing water for tunnel washer 10 45 4342
C2-2 washing water for tunnel washer 45 70 4316
H2 waste water from tunnel washer 70 20 4017
C3 tumble dryer air 20 75 8654
H3 wet air tumble dryer 50 20 8737
C4 hand ironing 15 80 1013
H4
C5-1 ironer inlet air 20 120 7104
C5-2a heated water of laundry in the ironer 30 100 331
C5-2b evaporated water from laundry in ironer 100 105 331
C5-2c overheated water of laundry inthe ironer 105 120 331
H5 ironer output air 120 20 7435
C6 tunnel finisher inlet air 20 130 8566
H6 tunnel finisher output air 85 20 8730

13
E. Konečná et al. Energy 267 (2023) 126630

Appendix B
The main parameters for technical and economic analysis

Water $/m3 3.9

natural gas $/MWh 31.2

electricity $/MWh 49.6
thermal-oil $/gal 62.9
gas microturbine $/kW 851.3
thermal oil heater $/kW 276.1

heat exchangers $1000 56.1

steam laundry equipment $1000 1385
gas laundry equipment $1000 1452
thermal-oil laundry equipment $1000 1452

interest rate % 2.50

discount factor – 0.98
project lifetime y 20
laundry capacity tDL/shift 10
shift length h 8
annual operational hours h/y 1840

References [14] Cotton L, Hayward AS, Lant NJ, Blackburn RS. Improved garment longevity and
reduced microfibre release are important sustainability benefits of laundering in
colder and quicker washing machine cycles. Dyes Pigments 2020:177. https://doi.
[1] DIRECTIVE (EU) 2018/844 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE
org/10.1016/j.dyepig.2019.108120. 108120.
COUNCIL of 30 May. amending Directive 2010/31/EU on the energy performance
[15] Ho KC, Teow YH, Sum JY, Ng ZJ, Mohammad AW. Water pathways through the
of buildings and Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency (Text with EEA
ages: integrated laundry wastewater treatment for pollution prevention. Sci Total
relevance) n.d. 2018.
Environ 2021;760:143966. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2020.143966.
[2] Malinauskaite J, Jouhara H, Ahmad L, Milani M, Montorsi L, Venturelli M. Energy
[16] Ledger L. JENSEN. CleanTech-for the future | laundry ledger 2020. https://laun
efficiency in industry: EU and national policies in Italy and the UK. Energy 2019;
dryledger.com/jensen-cleantech-for-the-future/. [Accessed 2 January 2022].
172:255–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENERGY.2019.01.130.
[17] Dutra JC, Gonzalez-Carmona MA, Lazaro-Alvarado AF, Coronas A. Modeling of a
[3] Nelson J, Johnson NG, Doron P, Stechel EB. Thermodynamic modeling of solarized
cogeneration system with a micro gas turbine operating at partial load conditions.
microturbine for combined heat and power applications. Appl Energy 2018;212:
J Sustain Dev Energy. Water Environ Syst 2017;5:139–50. https://doi.org/
592–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.12.015.
10.13044/J.SDEWES.D5.0138.
[4] Máša V, Bobák P, Kuba P, Stehlík P. Analysis of energy efficient and
[18] Máša V, Bobák P, Vondra M. Potential of gas microturbines for integration in
environmentally friendly technologies in professional laundry service. Clean
commercial laundries. Oper Res 2017;17:849–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/
Technol Environ Policy 2013;15:445–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10098-013-
s12351-016-0263-8.
0618-2/FIGURES/9.
[19] Kolanowski BF. Guide to microturbines. first ed. New York: Fairmont Press; 2004.
[5] Wood L. Global Dry-Cleaning, Services Laundry. Market report 2019-2022-top
https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003168546.
opportunities in on-demand services, sustainable laundry practices, tier 1 & tier 2
[20] Noe J, McKeirnan Jr R. Gas Turbine Generator Set 1996;5:497–615.
cities, and millennials - ResearchAndMarkets.com. Bus wire 2019. https://www.
[21] Kanbur BB, Liming X, Dubey S, Hoong CF, Duan F. Impact of the relative humidity
businesswire.com/news/home/20191120005826/en/Global-Dry-Cleaning-Laundr
on the LNG cold energy based inlet air cooled microturbine systems. Proc. 2017 Int.
y-Services-Market-Report-2019-2022. [Accessed 2 January 2022]. –. -Top-Opport
Conf. Green Energy Appl. ICGEA 2017. Institute of Electrical and Electronics
unities-in-On-Demand-Services-Sustainable-Laundry-Practices-Tier-1-Tier-2-Cities-
Engineers Inc. 2017:143–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICGEA.2017.7925472.
and-Millennials. –. -ResearchAndMarkets.com.
[22] Dx55-Primus Laundry n.d. https://primuslaundry.com/cs/prumyslove-susice/dx-r
[6] Newswire Globe. The global market for Commercial Laundry Machinery is 2020.
ada-radialne-axialni-proudeni-vzduchuxq-control/dx55-prumyslovy-axialni-pr
https://www.globenewswire.com/fr/news-release/2020/11/04/2119926/0/
oudeni-vzduchu/. [Accessed 1 January 2022].
en/The-global-market-for-Commercial-Laundry-Machinery-is-projected-to-reach-
[23] ProMax n. d. https://www.bre.com/ProMax-Main.aspx. [Accessed 2 January
US-5-7-billion-by-2025.html. [Accessed 2 January 2022].
2022].
[7] Moon D, Amasawa E, Hirao M. Consumer Motivation and Environmental Impact.
[24] CHEMCAD | Chemical Engineering Simulation Software by Chemstations n.d. htt
Of laundry machine-sharing: analysis of surveys in tokyo and bangkok. https://doi.
ps://www.chemstations.com/CHEMCAD/. [Accessed 2 January 2022].
org/10.3390/su12229756; 2020.
[25] Kunz O, Wagner W. The GERG-2008 wide-range equation of state for natural gases
[8] Wasserbaur R, Sakao T, Ljunggren Söderman M, Plepys A, Dalhammar C. What if
and other mixtures: an expansion of GERG-2004. J Chem Eng Data 2012;57:
everyone becomes a sharer? A quantification of the environmental impact of
3032–91. https://doi.org/10.1021/JE300655B.
access-based consumption for household laundry activities. Resour Conserv Recycl
[26] JENSEN-GROUP n.d. https://www.jensen-group.com/. [Accessed 2 January
2020:158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104780. 104780.
2022].
[9] Klint E. Peters ⋅ Gregory. Sharing is caring-the importance of capital goods when
[27] Global. Kannegiesser - global n.d. https://www.kannegiesser.com/global/en/inde
assessing environmental impacts from private and shared laundry systems in
x.html. [Accessed 2 January 2022].
Sweden. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2021;3:1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-
[28] Kemp IC. Pinch analysis and process integration : a user guide on process
01890-5.
integration for the efficient use of energy. Butterworth-Heinemann; 2007.
[10] Pakula C, Stamminger R. Energy and water savings potential in automatic laundry
[29] Paratherm. ParathermTM HE heat transfer fluid | paratherm 2021. https://www.pa
washing processes. Energy Effic 2015;8:205–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12053-
ratherm.com/heat-transfer-fluids/paratherm-he-heat-transfer-fluid/. [Accessed 2
014-9288-0.
January 2022].
[11] Sepúlveda FJ, Miranda MT, Montero I, Arranz JI, Lozano FJ, Matamoros M, et al.
[30] Eur-Lex -. 32012L0027-EN - EUR-Lex n.d. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conten
Analysis of potential use of linear fresnel collector for direct steam generation in
t/CS/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32012L0027. [Accessed 9 January 2022].
industries of the Southwest of Europe. Energies 2019;4049:12. https://doi.org/
[31] Vondra M, Touš M, Teng SY. Digestate evaporation treatment in biogas plants: a
10.3390/en12214049.
techno-economic assessment by Monte Carlo, neural networks and decision trees.
[12] Somdalen R, Köhler J. Theoretical investigation of a novel thermoelectric laundry
J Clean Prod 2019;238:117870. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
dryer concept. Mater Today Proc 2018;5:10323–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
JCLEPRO.2019.117870.
matpr.2017.12.280. Elsevier Ltd.
[13] Lopes CM, Scavarda AJ, Nunes M, De Carvalho M, Vaccaro G, Korzenowski AL.
Analysis of sustainability in hospital laundry: the social, environmental, and
economic (cost) risks. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources8010037; 2019.

14