How much can we save using a continuous sterilizer (Case Study – 1)

While pursuing higher product quality, manufacturers in the food and pharmaceutical industries are constantly looking for ways to reduce energy and water consumption and unit production costs.

ABRS (Automatic Batch Retort System) has won the favor of many users worldwide because of its high degree of automation, large output, and lower investment costs. As a more advanced and highly integrated sterilization system, the continuous retort can minimize unit production costs due to its unique design.

There is no denying that the initial investment of a continuous retort sterilizer is higher than that of an ABRS. However, food manufacturers must also consider the subsequent production costs before making investment decisions.

This article will share a practical case to help you understand the economics of a continuous retort sterilizer in actual production.

Table of contents:

1. Brief introduction
2. Comparison of water, electricity, and steam consumption
3. Comparison of the number of operators
4. Comparison of floor space
5. Annual actual total cost savings
6. Conclusion

1. Brief introduction of this case

In this case, all data come from actual production and are provided by a well-known beverage manufacturer in China. This customer previously used automatic batch sterilization systems. When launching a new production line in 2016, they went for continuous sterilizer provided by OUSI.

• The product is sweet milk (450ml), and the packaging containers are HDPE bottles.
• Daily production is 20 hours, and production capacity is 7.5 tons/hour, 150 tons/day. There are 330 days of production per year, and the annual production capacity is 49,500 tons.
• To ensure 20-hour production per day, there are 3 daily shifts of operators.

2. Comparison of water, electricity, and steam consumption

Comparison of consumption (per ton of sweet milk produced)

Based on an annual sweet milk production capacity of 49,500 tons, the continuous retort sterilizer can save a total of:

Electricity: 125,235 KW (2.53 * 49,500 = 125,235)

Steam: 4,950 tons (0.1 * 49,500 = 4,950)

Water: Because the client did not provide water consumption data for the original ABRS, the comparison is omitted.

3. Comparison of the number of operators

Comparison of the number of operators

There are 3 daily shifts of operators to ensure 20 hours of production per day. The total number of people saved by the continuous sterilizer is 9 people (3 people/shift * 3 shifts).

4. Comparison of floor space

Comparison of floor space

5. Anual cost savings

Anual cost savings

*Remark:

• Electricity, and steam are calculated according to local charging standards.
• Operators’ costs include salary, insurance, working meals, etc.
• The cost of floor space is calculated based on the average price of renting in the local area.
• Water: Because the client did not provide water consumption data for the original ABRS, the comparison is omitted.

6. Conclusion

In this case, we can see that compared with ABRS, every year, the continuous retort sterilizer saves approximately CNY 2.5 million in water, electricity, steam, operators, and floor space. Considering that it’s designed to be used for 20 years (if used properly and maintained regularly, it can be used for a longer time), the total cost savings of the continuous sterilizer are huge.

Although the initial investment of ABRS is lower, in the long term, a continuous sterilizer is a better choice economically.

(In different countries and cities, the unit prices of the above comparison items may vary greatly. You can convert them to the actual prices in your local area to obtain a more intuitive comparison result.)