Process development and struggle

One of the hazards of having a degree in chemistry is the appealing idea that you can explain everything and predict everything on the basis of textbook notions on solubility, electronegativity, pKa’s, or molecular orbitals. These are important things to be sure. But in the field, the recall of knowledge isn’t always enough. More often than not you have to collect data and generate new knowledge.

Rationale of a result on the basis of hand waving and a few reference points can seem compelling in a meeting or brainstorming with a colleague to understand a problem. But in the end, nothing can top having solid data from well conceived experiments.

My chemical “intuition” have proven wrong enough times now that I am deeply skeptical of it. After prolonged periods of absence from the lab I find myself resorting to a few cherished rules of thumb in trying to predict the outcome or explain the off-normal result of a process.

In chemical process development there is no substitute for running experiments under well controlled conditions and capturing solid results from trustworthy analytical methods. It is hard work. You may have to prepare calibration standards for chromatographic methods rather than the preferred single-transient nmr spectrum  in deuterochloroform.

We’re all tempted to do the convincing quick and dirty single experiment to finesse the endpoint. Certainly time constraints in the manufacturing environnment produce an inexorable tilt towards shortcuts. But in the end, depth of knowledge is only had by hard work and lots of struggle in the lab. The most important part of science seems to be to frame the most insightful questions.The best questions lead to the best experimental results.

An involuntary grunting reflex

Make magazine is one of my very favorite publications. It’s made for hillbilly engineers and aspirants like myself.  Their Maker Shed Store offers kits as well as plans for making all sorts of cool gadgets. Check out this Berliner Gramophone kit and this vacuum tube radio kit.  

Kit building and garage engineering are important activites for aspiring young scientists. We senior scientist types should be on the ready to mentor local high school students in their bid to learn about technology from the ground upwards.

Electronic experience is invaluable to all experimentalists- physicists, chemists, geologists, biologists, etc- and is a subject of lifelong utility. Many students do not have peer groups or family members who can help them get into this subject.

As a junior high school kid, I worked on TV sets (tube electronics) and acquired some electrical and mechanical ability in doing so. I actually fixed a few problems, surprisingly. A family friend had a TV repair shop (remember those?) and as a result I had a steady supply of TV chassis to take apart for my collection of parts like potentiometers and variable capacitors.

Like most kids rippin’ stuff apart and eyeing the construction methods I gained valuable electrical insights and personal experience with electrical current.  Like the time I discharged a picture tube through my hand while trying to remove a flyback transformer from my grandparents color TV. It was great lesson in capacitance and isolated static charge. As my grandparents sat on the Davenport and watched, they heard a sudden and involuntary grunting noise burst from my mouth as I hurled myself from a squatting position by the opened console TV set and backwards across the room. I probably absorbed more joules of energy from landing on my backside than the joules absorbed by my hand. Luckily I was not burned. The next day I learned how to properly discharge the aquadag in the picture tube.

It is nothing at all like tangling with an vicious animal who might stand there after the altercation spent and panting, wondering in its little badger brain how to tear an even bigger chunk out of your leg. A discharged electrical appliance bears the same silent affect before as afterwards. It’s wicked electrons are inanimate and unparticular in their singular drive to find ground. An unexpected jolt from a device is much like a magical experience. It comes from nowhere and everywhere and is over in the blink of an eye. Afterwards you stand there in shock and awe of the effect of even modest amounts of energy.

The impulse to do science is also the impulse to find boundary conditions of phenomena. Where are the edges? How does it switch on or off? You have to be willing to leave some skin in the game to find out about things.

Obstreperous Theocracy

So it appears that the US is quietly building up military forces within striking distance of Iran. The island of Diego Garcia (UK) has served as a staging area for standoff weapons. The military-political establishment has been busy with threat analysis and is evidently staging forces to some extent based on their conclusions and evolving policy.

I think there are many credible arguments that rightly assert that Iran is an active threat to what passes for stability in that region. Or at least at the first-order level of political analysis. Iran is plainly an obstreperous theocracy with a particular zeal for the export of its orthodoxy.

As always, the drums begin to beat for war and the business of manufacturing public consent begins in earnest. I’ll go out on a limb and make a gross generalization. All human populations seem to have a fraction, say 1/4 , who are particularly fearful by nature. These are the folks who susbscribe to concrete notions of nationalism, righteousness, and the associated keenness for adherence to orthodox doctrine. These were key proclivities of the US/Soviet cold war era. It is part of a collective consciousness that is especially adept at finding patterns that validate its fundamental fear.

It would seem that we may be in yet another run up to the projection of force on the far side of the world. A good question would be this: Are we addressing the fundamental cause of World-vs-Iran conflict? At minimum we trying to shore up the result of a century of bad western foreign policy.  This region is at the overlap of profound social forces associated with abrupt infusions of petrodollars, reflexive militarism, ethnic antipathy, and religious orthodoxy.

I think that Chomsky has some valid points about the origin of these conflicts. Iran and other groups have used the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a bully pulpit for their own regional ambitions. Obviously there is sincere religious and ethnic outrage over the the Palestinian issue. But a state like Iran is sure to use this conflict to their own political advantage to exercise the projection of power.

The US and other western states have chronically miscalculated the magnitude and direction of regional conflicts.  For instance, would a military strike against Iran be viewed as just an attack on the government of Iran, or as an attack by infidels on Shi ‘ism? Are we prepared for what would follow? I think I can guess the answer.

Trombone Shorty

I have a guitar and sometimes I pick at the strings before I retire for the evening. Regrettably, I can’t produce much that is recognizable. It’s just an elementary condition related to a lifelong neglect of this kind of activity. My brain plasticity has produced a tough layer of rythmic dissonance between my grey hair and grey matter like a skin of old playdough or expired custard.  

What I have come to understand is this- guitar players whom I have taken for granted as providers of background music were in fact some extremely clever fellows.

In trying to convert the sheet music of a few players into sound, I have come face to face with the truth of their talent. And I am humbled. Most people learn this well before their fifties. But not me. My insights are hard won and accumulate when most of the other runners have already passed the finish line.

I was just surfing Youtube for guitar players like Chet Atkins, Leo Kottke, Eric Clapton, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Jeff Beck,  and a few others.  Another way of looking at the spectacle of their art is this:  Behold what neurons are capable of!! The player’s central nervous system seeks maximum satisfaction in the refinement of the exercise of producing sounds from an external object. It is a feedback loop that explores for a target state and, through brain plasticity via evolving neuron interconnectivity, refines its own capacity to produce a desired effect.  What an amazing universe it is that can produce such things.

And what an amazing demonstration of the marvel of brain biology. Even if they find the Higgs boson next week, we’re still a long way from a fundamental mechanistic understanding of how someone learns to excel at Spanish guitar.

Lately I’ve been listening to Trombone Shorty. He has brought new life to that venerable background instrument, the trombone. This is from his album Backatown.

I’ll be blunt. It’s all about putting butts in seats.

Ok. So I’m one of the founders of a theatre group more or less based in my home town.  Truthfully, I’m the least experienced of this group.  We’re a bunch of community theatre enthusiasts who have decided to start our own theatre group. Together we’ve had a few critical successes, but we wanted some autonomy.  Most of our shows ended up with a modest surplus of cash with only one production that was well executed but poorly attended. The next show is largely funded by the receipts of the previous show.

Together or in groups we’ve done Proof, Brighton Beach Memoirs, Murder Room, Beets, and Love letters. Last fall I was in Room Service. We’re starting to accumulate a bit of experience. Luckily there have been no disasters.

What does it really mean to be a board member of a theatre group? It means that you are a producer. It means that your main purpose is to find and allocate resources so that others- sniff, sniff– can perform. As a board member you find out what it really means to be a producer of a show. It’s a lot of work.

So here is the deal. We have two productions scheduled, one at a very nice municipal theatre next January.  The question before us is this- how do you marshall resources and staff willing to work for free to put on a good show? Yes, we have 6 board members who are also actors, writers, and directors. But we can’t do everything. We need people for props, costumes, sets, and makeup. We also need someone to do lighting and sound. Possibly two or three of us may be in the show with bit parts.

In show business, there are several criteria for success. Obviously there is critical success. Everyone wants to be part of a great show.  We’re obligated to provide a nights entertainment in exchange for tickets. So, we need to snag some good actors and a director up to the task of directing upcoming Neil Simon production. Fortunately, we have an experienced director who has contacts in the local network of actors. So,  with some luck the audition will be well attended with prospective actors.

But beyond all of the handwringing about production value, what matters most to the producers is that we put butts in seats. We could put on the best performance in history, but without an audience, it’s all a silly exercise.

The question arises, then, as to how does one get the message out? We recently learned the expensive lesson that newspaper advertising is highly unreliable. A good writeup in the local entertainment insert can be very helpful, though. But the staff writers have to see a compelling newspaper story in order to do a good writeup. So, if you’re doing a Neil Simon play, one that has been done many, many times, how do you stir up the excitement?

Well, you have understand who your audience is and what they respond to. Who attends plays, anyway? In the case of community theatre, there is a substantial reservoir of blue hairs and the Q-tips who love to see a show. You know, retired people. So then, how do we get the message out to the retired folks? This is the nut we have to crack in the dog days of summer. Who is willing to go out on a January night to see a show?

Andy Grove on Scaleup

Andrew Grove is the former CEO of Intel who was responsible for its transition from memory chip producer to microprocessor producer. According to Wikipedia, Grove is responsible for an increase of 4500 % in Intel’s market capitalization. In his youth he and his family escaped from Budapest, Hungary during the Soviet invasion of 1956. Groves holds a PhD in chemical engineering from UC Berkeley. Grove is now retired and is a senior advisor to Intel.

Grove recently wrote an article for Bloomberg that is quite insightful in its analysis of certain aspects of American corporate culture. In particular, Grove notes the disconnect between US technology startups and the subsequent expansion of business activity leading to job growth. He also notes that startups are failing to scaleup their business activity in the USA. The Silicon Valley job creation machine is powering down.

Grove makes an interesting point here,

A new industry needs an effective ecosystem in which technology knowhow accumulates, experience builds on experience, and close relationships develop between supplier and customer. The U.S. lost its lead in batteries 30 years ago when it stopped making consumer-electronics devices. Whoever made batteries then gained the exposure and relationships needed to learn to supply batteries for the more demanding laptop PC market, and after that, for the even more demanding automobile market. U.S. companies didn’t participate in the first phase and consequently weren’t in the running for all that followed. I doubt they will ever catch up.  Andrew Groves, 2010, Bloomberg.

To build on what Grove is saying, I’ll embellish a bit and add that an industry is actually a network of manufacturers, suppliers, job shops, labor pools, insurers, bankers, and distributors. When deindustrialization occurs, the network of resources collapses. The middle class takes a big hit when a commodity network moves offshore. In the end, the intended market for commodity goods and services- ie., the middle class- is weakened by the very move that was supposed to keep prices down and profits up.

Grove is most concerned with the matter of scaleup. This is the business growth phase that occurs after the entrepreneurship proves its worth in the marketplace. Investors pour money ino large scale operations and staff to get product onto the market. Grove suggests that investment in domestic startups who do not follow on with domestic scaleup are not participating in keeping the magic alive.

Offshore scaleup negatively counteracts the benefit of domestic innovation. In a sense, it is an abdication of the trust given to the entrepreneurs by the citizens who provided the infrastructure to make the innovation possible.

Grove makes a good point in his editorial and I think that the rest of us need to take an active stance to question the facile analysis so often uttered by business leaders when it comes to relocation of business units offshore.  Citizens paid for the infrastructure and a large part of the education that makes our innovative technology possible. There needs to be more public pushback on business leaders and government officials about this topic.

Russia being Russia

It was reported that the Russian Parliament has approved a draft of a law to increase the powers of its FSB, or the remnant of its Soviet era KGB.

The final version is somewhat weakened from its earlier form, which prescribed punishment for individuals who ignored such warnings from the F.S.B. In remarks posted on his party’s Web site this week, Vladimir Vasiliyev, the chairman of the State Duma’s Committee on Security, described the new power as “a preventive conversation” with “someone who is beginning to move toward committing a crime.” (New York Times, July 16, 2010)

Imagine that. A Future Crimes Division.

When asked about the bill by a German reporter during a meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Thursday, President Dmitri A. Medvedev said, “what is going on now is the result of my direct instructions,” and that foreign commentators should not concern themselves with it. (New York Times, July 16, 2010)

The police state is back. The Russian gov’t is moving (back) towards policing perceived intent. What a sad day for Russian civilization and the world.  Queen to E5, check.

Viewpoints on American Business

Over at the Robert Reich blog there is a recent commentary on Chinese currency policy. Reich makes some interesting comments on the Chinese approach to industrialization.

But most fundamentally, China is oriented to production, not consumption. It wants to become the world’s preeminent producer nation. While keeping the yuan artificially low is costly to China — it pushes up the prices of everything China imports — China is willing to bear these costs because its currency policy is really an industrial policy.

We think the basic purpose of an economy is to consume, not to produce. So we only grudgingly support industrial policy. We think of government efforts to rebuild our infrastructure as a “stimulus.” We approve of government investments in basic research and development mainly to make America more secure through advanced military technologies. And we give American companies tax credits for R&D wherever they do it around the world.

Don’t be fooled into thinking that US companies will continue to make big profits from sales in China. China allows big U.S. and foreign companies to sell in China on condition that production takes place in China – often in joint ventures with Chinese companies. It wasn’t American know-how, so it can eventually replace the US firms with China firms.  [Italics by Gaussling]

It seems to me that American policy leaders have no clue whatsoever on how to coexist or compete with China economically. Because of the authoritarianism in contemoporary Chinese culture, they are able to focus their resources on long term goals while we in the USA rely on a kind of economic Darwinism. It seems that we are waiting for the rational forces of the marketplace to take us forward in the economic struggle with China.  In reality, American businesses have no nationality. Their obligation is only to achieve maximum shareholder value, irrespective of parochial concepts of national interest.

Americans like to put on a show of maintaining an orthodox capitalistic stance against a nation state like China. One with a centrally controlled economy.  Unfair currency policy is a foreign policy that China is using to leverage the flow of export dollars their way.  Somehow we are content to play cards with an opponent who has stacked the deck.

It is worth remembering that much of the technology that economically emergent states use to energize their manfacuring sectors was paid for by US citizens over the last 100 years. Electronics , metallurgy, chemistry, aerospace, transportation, automation. The US has made substantial contributions to technologies that are now ubiquitous.

These emergent states have not funded generations of successive invention and improvement to achieve their semiconductor FAB or petrochemical complex. Corporate investors dropped it out of the sky.  This technology that we have been busy exporting has been dearly paid for by generations of hard working citizens here. Yet, through the exercise of advanced business philosophies, this magic of ours has been transplanted off shore to the benefit of a few.

I think there is an assumption that our American democracy is somehow a uniquely robust form of democracy. It is hard to make that argument anymore. A culture that equates money with speech and validates it in the Supreme Court is a culture that accepts the notion that the congress is part of the marketplace of goods and services.

In the face of a shift in the global economic center of gravity, Americans are busy in an orgy of fratricidal disassembly of its institutions. Journalism and independent media come to mind.  The former watchdogs of democracy are now quasi-analytical entertainment divisions of a few major comglomerates.

The market is like a stomach. It has no brain. It only knows that it wants more. I think nations like China know this about us and take full advantage of the fact that we like to wear the badge of orthodox capitalist on our sleeves. In a way we are just country bumpkins who have never traveled out of the county. We’ll be true to our doctrine as we run aground.

I think that, in the end, publically owned corporations will be the death of our economic vitality. Blind reverence for CEO’s who maneuver a dividend no matter what the economic climate force this species of organization to abdicate any sense of national affiliation. It’s been happening for many years. Legions of B-school students study the strategy of Jack Welch and similar ethically agnostic characters who serve the greater good of the corporation.

Instead, legions of B-school students should be trying to figure out how to sustain American manufacturing rather than how to outsource it. These people should not confuse M&A with progress. Making things and offering services that people want is how progress happens. If taxes are too high to sustain business within these borders, then an open effort to bring corporate taxes into line based on mathematically defensable arguments should be made. To work for progress is to be progressive. We need more progressive business people, not more financial wizards. The grownups of America need to step up.

Process Intensification and the Chemical Marketplace

Somewhere along the timeline of a given chemical plant process a manager will (or at least should) ask the question: “can we run this process in a more efficient and safer manner”?  Chemists and engineers may be set to work finding ways to extract more profit from a process.

There are numerous ways any given process may be improved. How that is done specifically depends on the process, obviously. But certain generalities can be made that serve as a guideline in thinking through the process.

In this essay I will limit my comments to batch or semi-batch processing and to specialty and fine chemicals. Continuous processes and commoditized products are out of the scope of this essay.

Batch and Semi-Batch

A batch process is one in which a vessel is charged with raw materials which are allowed to react to form a desired product. A semi-batch process is one in which raw materials are metered into the vessel over the course of the reaction. From a process safety perspective, the big difference between the two is that the batch reaction is the one with all of the reaction energy contained in the vessel from the start. A semi-batch process is one in which the energy is metered in based on the limitations of heat transfer capacity.

Commodity Chemicals

Some chemicals are commodity products and others are specialty or fine products. A commodity chemical is a product which is produced at a large (relative) scale, commonly in a continuous process, and is subject to price pressures generated by national or global scale competition. There are exceptions, naturally. Generic drugs or semiconductor chemicals may be commoditized but manufactured by relatively small scale batch processing though still subject to commodity market dynamics.

A commodity chemical product is one which has numerous producers offering similar specifications and varying mostly by price, often resulting in strong competition. As a result of the large scale and the great competition, commodity chemicals are often priced at low dollar-per-unit levels. Owing to the basic nature of commodity chemicals in manufacturing, it is not uncommon for commodity chemical sales volume to be an economic indicator.

Here is an important economic point in thinking about commodity vs non-commodity chemicals. Commodity chemicals typically have a cost structure featuring large raw material or energy costs. Commodity processing is all about the dilution of overhead into high volume. Commodity cost structures may be quite immobilized by fixed raw material and/or energy costs.

Commodity chemicals are commonly used for mass production of other goods. Examples of commodity chemicals include NaOH, soda ash, potash, sulfur, sulfuric acid, HCl, chlorine, BTX, ethylene, propylene, butanol, ethanol, methanol, naphtha, methane, hydrogen, ammonia, etc. These are materials bought and sold by the railcar and whose sales volumes indicate the health and vigor of entire nations. Other, lower volume, chemicals are commoditized as well. Additives and treatment chemicals for commodity consumer goods like pigments, solvents, plasticizers, dyes, food processing additives, lubricants, polymer additives, metal treatment chemicals, agrichemicals, etc. These goods are sold on the large scale for their performance modification or other properties.

Specialty and Fine Chemicals

Specialty and fine chemical products are commonly sold in lower volumes for a broad range of manufacturing and formulation activity. There is no sharp line of demarcation between commodity and high volume  fine chemicals. Commoditization is less a manufacturing phenomenon and more of a market phenomenon. The same is true for specialty and fine chemicals.

Specialty and fine chemicals are an important part of the total chemicals market sector. There are tens of thousands of chemical entities on the market. Most are deeply obscure, in demand only by a few researchers. A common growth strategy of  catalog companies is to increase the number of catalog offerings, thus snagging new customers by providing specialized precursors to those who do not want to make a science project out of starting materials. This business strategy has helped to grow the well known chemical catalogs to their immense size.

A specialty chemical is a material that feeds into a particular use, or is valuable or usable only to a particular end user. Commonly, a specialty chemical may be used for a single application by a single customer or a few narrow applications for a few customers. A specialty chemical is often part of an intellectual property package whose use and identity is highly controlled. The specialty chemical, like a fine chemical, may be covered under process patents that limit manufacturing practices.

A specialty chemical may be of technical grade (i.e., 60 to 95 % purity) or it may be highly purified. It might be of a complex composition and specifiable only under bulk properties like viscosity, flash point, or color. Or a specialty chemical might be highly purified and have sharply defined specs requiring spectroscopy, chromatography, XRD, % ee, or elemental analysis. A specialty chemical might also be a fine chemical in the sense that its composition is in the public domain, but its application is just obscure or covered by a patent.

Generally, a fine chemical is a substance whose composition is in the public domain and is refined to some commercially viable level. A fine chemical may be a reagent or a substrate and may be  used by anyone technically qualified to handle it. Very often, the composition of a fine chemical is understood to a high level. Fine chemicals may be starting materials for the manufacture of other substances, or may be used directly in an application where it remains chemically intact at the retail level.  An example would be an emulsion stabilizer or some polymer additive.

Specialty and fine chemicals are not mathematically distinct definitions. The differeces are based on market behavior and intellectual property. Examples exist which may find a home under both definitions. For the most part, a specialty chemicals manufacturer is a producer of customized materials with a limited base of potential customers.

The Prime Directive

Here is the central business imperative of any chemical plant- we want to run the reaction as fast as possible without taking undue risks. Labor costs and other overhead accumulate with process time, Δt. Any given batch fine or specialty plant has x gallons of capacity available for use 24 x 7 every year. The key to profitable operation is to get maximum product output per unit time. That means maximum space yield and/or maximum rate. Decreasing production time is equivalent to increasing plant capacity.

Production risk divides into two principal domains: 1) safety and 2) economic. While it is possible to have an economic risk without a significant safety risk, the practical fact is that all safety risks are also economic risks. So in the execution of a process improvement, very practical thinking has to guide the work.

Cost Drivers

Commoditized chemicals are often disproportionately raw material or energy cost intensive relative to specialty and fine chemicals. High volume, low margin products that have been in a competitive market a while have most likely been optimized such that the labor contribution to overhead has long been minimized. For a given plant, significant improvements to the cost structure may not be easily found in the labor column if the major costs are raw mats. Except as follows. Relocating a plant to a country with lower labor and/or tax costs. Commodity production follows the labor cost gradient from a high-cost labor pool to a lower-cost labor pool.

Process intensification on chemical products that have been commoditized for a long time is difficult. Besides relocation of the manufacturing site, a step change in processing technology may be needed to improve process economics. Fundamentally new chemistry (or catalyst!) or reactor type or in materials handling may be needed to justify a change.

Whereas commoditized chemical costs may be driven by raw material or energy costs, specialty and fine chemicals are most likely to have a cost structure driven by labor and overhead. A dominance by labor cost contribution will be especially true early in the life of the chemical product. The early developmental period in the market life of a fine or specialty product is the time when competition is likely to be minimal and price pressures lowest.

Early in the life of a fine or specialty chemical product is the time when the end user is struggling to understand the market picture. This is the commercial development period. While the end user (customer) is certainly trying to contain costs, low volume may cause the buyer to rely on a single supplier for a time. This gives the vendor a chance to log enough process iterations to bring the production costs more in line with expectations.

When pricing smaller volume products, every effort should be made to pad the costs in anticipation of process upsets and low yields. And for high margin. R&D and scaleup costs are typically highest early in the life of a product. Margins should be high enough early on so that the early production pays for the development. Customers will not be enthused about this. They’ll want you to “partner” with them and get some skin in the game early. Try to avoid this, politely.

A small volume fine or specialty product should be heavy in labor costs. Over time, and as price pressure from customers mount, the vendor should be able to accept price concessions through improvements in labor contribution. This is wiggle room. A smart vendor will never price a new product too close to raw mat cost since the inevitable movement of price is downward.

Low volume specialty or fine chemicals are often not subject to the same sort of pricing dynamiocs as the commodity chemicals. This category of chemical manufacture is more obscure and the products may not be manufactured constantly or in large lots.

Importantly, lower volume fine and specialty chemicals are commonly purchased on a spot buy basis rather than a supply contract. Owing to the lack of long term certainty of cash flow, spot buy prices are always higher than contract prices.

Process Intensification. The benefits.

The business of making a reaction execute in a shorter time or in a higher batch space yield or batch chemical yield is called process intensification. The idea of intensification is to produce more product per unit batch volume of processing equipment and/or per unit batch time. Every chemical plant has a fixed number of operable reactor gallon hours per year.  Given that conventional chemical batch reactors are fixtures that are very expensive to modify or change out, it is desirable to focus effort on getting the maximum product out of those limited reactor gallon hours.

In a competitive market, one way to grow is to find advantageous economies of scale and pass some of that improvement along in the form of more attractive pricing.  The ability to maximize the throughput of product in fixed equipment is the ability to dilute overhead expenses into a greater number of kgs of product and direct more cash into the profit column.

Process intensification almost always involves doing something faster, hotter, at higher pressure, or in increased concentration. That is the intensification part. An exception might be an alternate process that affords a higher chemical or space yield, or faster rxn rate without undue risks.  One should always be on the lookout for these plums.

Process Intensification. The down side.

The attactive part of process intensification is quite plain. But there is a down side that may or may not be apparent in any given intensification project. It is a change that could bring plant operations closer to the release of hazardous energy.

The question that any process intensification project should squarely address is the matter of the accumulation of hazardous energy. This can be manifested in many ways.

For example, you increase the concentration of your reaction mixture in your process. This is a space yield intensifying improvement that has the benefit of advantageous bimolecular kinetics. You get more product per batch and you increase the reaction rate by increasing the reagent concentrations.  Reagent feed times are nominally increased, but probably not to a deleterious extent.

Naturally, there are consequences to consider. Is there an induction period to look out for? The thermal consequences of this may be magnified at higher space yields.

Does the intensified process produce excessive and unwanted side products?

Does the process generate a precipitate or increase the viscosity of the reaction mass? Increased viscosity has a deleterious effect on heat transfer and mixing efficiency. Slurry formation may be enhanced and consequently produce problems with discharge and pumping of the reactor contents. Filtration may be problematic as well.

Furthermore, as a result of reagent addition the reaction mixture may have a greater density that the initial solution in the vessel, diminishing power transfer efficiency in agitation. Effectively you may end up vortexing an inner band of reaction mass with poor flow along heat transfer surfaces.

Cavitation at the impeller tips may occur and attenuate the efficiency of heat transfer. Heating a viscous two phase reaction mass may lead to localized overheating along the reactor  jacket if it is rigged for heat. I have seen this lead to flash boiling of volatile solvents along the jacket surface with an increase in pot pressure.

Another form of process intensifiaction is through the application of higher reaction temperature and/or pressure. Increasing the reaction temperature could be as easy as using a higher boiling s0lvent. Or it could entail higher pressure as well. Whereas most operations can easily accommodate a higher boiling solvent, higher pressure will require specialized pressure vessels. These are less common, in fact, they are part of a manufacturing subspecialty in their own right.

To summarize, intensify a commodity chemical process is more likely to involve  addressing raw materials, energy inputs, and material handling.  Conversely, while specialty and fine chemical processing could benefit from the above areas of concern, unit labor cost is likely to be a target for process improvement. Labor cost is something that can be minimized most easily by process intensification and quite likely without fundamental equipment changes.

From time to time, all processes should be re-examined for efficiency and safety improvements. But the operator should expect consequences in any process change.