View
216
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
8/8/2019 Replacement of Ballast
1/9
Energy Conservation opportunity In Street Light System
Date :-December 27, 2010
8/8/2019 Replacement of Ballast
2/9
confidential2
Replac
ement ofc
onventional Ballast withEnergy Efficient Electronic Ballast
FlowofPresentation
Background
Objectives
Key Strategies
8/8/2019 Replacement of Ballast
3/9
confidential3
Highlight Of REL Street Light System
-Total Number of Street Lights = 88,045
- Type of Lamp Used = 70W HPSV
= 150W HPSV
= 250W HPSV
- Maximum Demand of Street Lighting = 14.11MW
- Loss of Power as watt loss = 1.87 MW
- Operating P.F (Averages) = < 0.82
8/8/2019 Replacement of Ballast
4/9
confidential4
Energy Conservation opportunity in Street light system
Objective
- To meet need of time
- Energy Conservation
- Reduction in O&M cost.
- Improve System Reliability
Opportunity available
- Reactive power Management
- Dimming of street light during late night
- Utilization of energy efficient equipment. (E.g. Lamps, Ballast )
8/8/2019 Replacement of Ballast
5/9
confidential5
Pilot Project Result Based on meter Reading
Replacement of existing 21 no of Magnetic Ballast with Electronic ballast
ParameterAverageKW
AverageKVA
AverageKWH
P.F.
AverageLux( BelowLamp)
% I THD %V THDAverageBurninghrs
WithOld Luminaries
Magnetic Ballast4.09 5.30 1253.50 0.77 40.00 30.63 0.73 327.32
With NewLuminaries MagneticBallast
3.88 4.80 1212.00 0.93 44.00 30.63 0.73 341.10
With New luminaries
With electronicBallast
3.60 3.60 1388.00 1.00 47.90 4.73 0.70 390.18
Step -1
PF Improve by 20.77 % from 0.77 to 0.93 , KW reduced by 5.13% ,KVA reduced by 9.43%
Step-2
PF Improve by 7.5 % from 0.93 to unity , KW reduced by 7.22% ,KVA reduced by 26.23%
8/8/2019 Replacement of Ballast
6/9
confidential6
Comparison of Kwh /hrs consumption based on meter reading---pilot project
Parameter Average KWHAverage
burning hrs
Average
KWH / Hrs
With Old Luminaries
Magnetic Ballast1253.50 327.32 3.8296
With New Luminaries
Magnetic Ballast1212.00 341.10 3.5532
With New Luminaries
Electronic Ballast1388.00 390.18 3.5573
KWH consumption / hrs reduced by 7.2 % when old luminaries are replaced with new luminaries
There is noc
hange inc
onsumption when new magnetic
ballast replac
ed with elec
tronic
ballast
If all old 150 W luminaries with magnetic ballast are replaced with electronic Ballast
- KWH/Hr will be reduced by 7.2 %
- KVA will be reduced by 32.1%
- KW Will be reduced by 11.98%
- PF will improve by 29.88%
8/8/2019 Replacement of Ballast
7/9
confidential7
WATT LOSS CALCULATION-BASED ON METER READING
A B C D E=B/C F=E-D
INSTALLED WRECORDED
W( Avg)
NUMBER
OF LAMP
WATT /
LAMP
WATT
CONSUMED
PER LAMP
WATT
LOSS/LAMP
WITH OLD 150W
LUMINARIES-MAGNETICBALLAST
3150.00 4009.00 21.00 150.00 190.90 40.90
WITH NEW 150W
LUMINARIES -MAGNETICBALLAST
3150.00 3860.00 21.00 150.00 183.81 33.81
WITH NEW 150W
LUMINARIES-ELECTRONICBALLAST
3150.00 3600.00 21.00 150.00 171.43 21.43
Watt loss consumed per unit decreased by 47.6 % from old magnetic ballast to electronic ballast.
Watt consumer per lamp decreased by 10.19 % from old magnetic ballast to new magnetic ballast
8/8/2019 Replacement of Ballast
8/9
confidential8
Cost benefit analysis Data as on 31/01/2010
NPV = -67.98 Million
Project is not finically viable
We should wait for technology development.
1st year 2nd year 3rd year 4th year 5th year
Initial Investment (Mu RS) - 130
Energy saved (MU) 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31
Cost of power perches (
Million Rs)
10.51 10.51 10.51 10.51 10.51
Cost material
( Million Rs)
2.24 2.24 2.24 2.24 2.24
Cost Labor & Transport
( Million Rs)
2.58 2.58 2.58 2.58 2.58
Selling cost of scrap
recovered (Million Rs)
1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total cost saved 17.04 15.34 15.34 15.34 15.34
8/8/2019 Replacement of Ballast
9/9
Thank you
27 December 2010
Recommended