Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
11/8/2013
1
1
Biomass Feedstock, Pelleting, and CHP Opportunities
Erickson Alumni Center
West Virginia University
June 25th, 2013
Jim Freihaut, Ph.D.
Professor, Architectural Engineering
Director, DOE Mid Atlantic Clean Energy Applications Center
Chief Scientist, DOE Energy Efficient Buildings Hub
104 Engineering Unit A
Department of Architectural Engineering
Pennsylvania State University
Tel: 814-863-0083
Fax: 814-863-4789
2
DOE CLEAN Energy Application Centers
John Cuttica
Midwest, Intermountain,
Northwest, and Pacific Regions
312-996-4382
Jim Freihaut
Mid-Atlantic Region
814-863-0083
Beka Kosanovic
Northeast Region
413-545-0684
Isaac Panzarella
Southeast and Gulf Coast [email protected]
919-515-035
For More Information on DOE Boiler MACT Technical Assistance
Katrina Pielli
202-287-5850
DOE Boiler MACT Technical
Assistance:
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/m
anufacturing/distributedenergy/
boilermact.html
DOE Boiler MACT Technical
Assistance Fact Sheet:
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/m
anufacturing/distributedenergy/
pdfs/boilermact_tech_asst_facts
heet.pdf
3
Commercial Building Energy Use and Emissions
C1Hx
Coal , C1H0.85
Oil, C1H2
Natural Gas, C1H4
Site ~e -
On Site Use of Fossil Fuels
Imported Electric Power from Generating Sites
District Heating Hot water from district plant
m H2O Cp ΔT
Oil (2.7%)Primary
Energy
Forms
11/8/2013
2
The Beginning
Thomas Edison’s first
power station – the 1882
Pearl Street Station – the
world’s first commercial
power plant – was a CHP
power plant with a 50%
efficiency rate.
11/8/201
3Slide 5
Separate Heat & Power vs Combined Heat & Power
11/8/2013 6
SHP CHP
λU = Heat = 1.5
Power
~ 70% Recovered
& Used
~ 30% Efficiency
Lower emissions
Higher reliability
Lower Life Cycle costs?
CHP Value Proposition
Category 10 MW CHP 10 MW PV 10 MW Wind
Combined
Cycle (10 MW Portion)
Annual Capacity Factor 85% 25% 34% 87%
Annual Electricity 74,446 MWh 21,900 MWh 29,784 MWh 76,212 MWh
Annual Useful Heat 103,417 MWht None None None
Footprint Required 6,000 sq ft 1,740,000 sq ft 76,000 sq ft N/A
Capital Cost $20 million $60.5 million $24.4 million $10 million
Cost of Power 7.6 ¢/kWh 23.5 ¢/kWh 7.5 ¢/kWh 5.8 ¢/kWh
Annual Energy Savings 316,218 MMBtu 225,640 MMBtu 306,871 MMBtu 203,486 MMBtu
Annual CO2 Savings 42,506 Tons 20,254 Tons 27,546 Tons 35,090 Tons
Annual NOx Savings 87.8 Tons 26.8 Tons 36.4 Tons 76.9 Tons
Based on: 10 MW Gas Turbine CHP - 28% electric efficiency, 68% total efficiency, 15 PPM NOx
Electricity displaces National All Fossil Average Generation (eGRID 2010 ) -
9,720 Btu/kWh, 1,745 lbs CO2/MWh, 2.3078 lbs NOx/MWH, 6% T&D losses
Thermal displaces 80% efficient on-site natural gas boiler with 0.1 lb/MMBtu NOx emissions
11/8/2013 8
Principal Building
Activity kBTU/ft2-yr
Education 79.3
Food Sales 213.5
Food Service 245.5
Health Care 240.4
Lodging 127.3
Mercantile and Service 76.4
Office 97.2
Public Assembly 113.7
Public Order and Safety 97.2
Religious Worship 37.4
Warehouse and Storage 38.3
Electricty
EUI Fossil EUI Norm EEUI
Norm
FFEUI λ λ λ λ u
24.7 54.6 0.650 1.040 2.211
163.9 49.6 4.313 0.945 0.303
96 149.5 2.526 2.848 1.557
76.6 163.8 2.016 3.120 2.138
39.1 88.2 1.029 1.680 2.256
35.5 40.9 0.934 0.779 1.152
57.9 39.3 1.524 0.749 0.679
35.9 77.8 0.945 1.482 2.167
30.8 66.4 0.811 1.265 2.156
8.8 28.6 0.232 0.545 3.250
17.1 21.2 0.450 0.404 1.240
Average Heat/Power Ratios , λ λ λ λ uVarying Commercial Building Types
Server Farms, Data Centers, Casinos,
Industries Based on Thermal Processing, Refineries, Campuses
District Systems, Refineries, Pharmaceuticals
11/8/2013
3
U.S. Energy Environmental Systems R&D Issues
PG&E Commercial Load Profiles
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 20 40 60
Half Hour Interevals
Load
Series1
Series2
Series3
Series4
Series5
Series6
Series7
PG&E Large Commercial Load Profiles
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0 20 40 60
Half Hour Intervals
Load
Series1
Series2
Series3
Series4
Series5
Series6
Series7
Electric Load Profiles from a Public Utility CompanyU.S. Energy Environmental Systems R&D Issues
PG&E Residential Load Profiles
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 20 40 60
Half hour interval number
Load
Series1
Series2
Series3
Series4
Series5
Series6
Series7
PG&E Small Commercial Load Profiles
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 20 40 60
Half Hour Intervals
Load
Series1
Series2
Series3
Series4
Series5
Series6
Series7
11
CHP Design Goals
• Integrate natural gas engine, electric generator, heat
recovery equipment and thermally driven HVAC
equipment with the building systems
• Maximize economic advantage
• Minimize project cost
12
CHP System Design• Maximize Economic Advantage
• Match the CHP system Thermal/Electric Ratio with the facility requirements and Baseload the CHP system electric and thermal output
• Minimize Project Cost
• Understand the electric, heating and cooling loads and select equipment for maximum load factor – Not necessarily maximum efficiency.
Maximizing load factor is the way to maximize profit.
11/8/2013
4
13
CHP System Design• Thermal Form Varies – Electric Form is Constant
• Conventional Wisdom:
• Select Generator on Electric Load Basis
• Select Thermal Technology on Generator Basis
• Fit Thermal Output to Building
• CHP Wisdom:
• Select Thermal Technology on Thermal Load Basis
• Select Generator on Thermal Basis
• Fit Electric Output to Building
‘Thermal First’ design is the way to maximize load factor.
14
CHP System Design
• The heating and cooling Thermal/Electric Ratiosare the key load characteristics required to ensure high CHP Load Factor.
• Heating T/E Ratio = Heating Load in MBH / Electric Load in kW
• Cooling T/E Ratio = Cooling Load in Tons / Electric Load in kW
• (The T/E Ratio is the inverse of the Power/Thermal Ratio)
• The Load T/E Ratios define the CHP Configuration
15
CHP System Design
• Economics
• Essentially the thermal revenue represents the annual cost savings.
• Without thermal revenue, the cost savings are significantly reduced and the payback is greatly increased.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Revenue
Profit
Revenue/Profit Share
Electric
Thermal
16
CHP System Design
• Know your Loads:
• Electric utilities usually provide 15 min interval data from which can be derived load duration curves.
• Thermal information should be measured and tabulated through summer, winter and shoulder season.
• Thermal characteristics (flow, pressure, temp) need to be identified.
Electric Load Factor, 2007 Jan - Apr
89%
97%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000
Power Demand (kW)
Tim
e a
bove P
ow
er
Dem
and v
alu
e
Average Mthly Steam Load Factor, 2003 - Apr 07
96%
90%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 20 22
Average Steam Demand in MMlbs/hr
Tim
e a
bo
veS
team
Dem
an
d v
alu
e
11/8/2013
5
Globalcon 2012 17
CHP System Design
• A 100 ton chiller has a 74% load factor while a 75 ton chiller has an 89% LF.
• The 100 ton unit has 33% more capacity (cost) but only produces 10% more output.
Typical data for illustrative purposes
Load Factor vs. Efficiency Load Factor
0
25
50
75
100
125
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23
Hour of Day
Re
frig
era
tio
n T
on
s
Building Load 100 Ton Output 75 Ton Output
18
DG/TAT Match
Thermally-Activated Cooling
Technologies
Distributed Generation
Technologies
I.C. Engine Jacket +
Exhaust
Double-Effect
Absorption
Chiller
Microturbine
Solid Oxide Fuel Cell
I.C. Engine Exhaust
Single-Effect
Absorption ChillerDesiccant Air
Conditioner
180ºF
360ºF
800ºF
600ºF
Steam Turbine
Centrifugal Chiller
Gas-turbine
GT
MT
IC
E
IC
E
S
T
2E
1E
E
F
F
I
C
I
E
N
C
Y
0.65 T/kW
0.60 T/kW
0.35 T/kW
0.30 T/kW
1.20 T/kW with Duct Burner
19
CHP System T/E Ratio• Typical T/E Ratios for various CHP configurations
Generator Range Cooling TATT/E Ratio (Ton/kW)
Gas Turbine > 1 MWSteam Turbine
2E Absorber0.6 - 0.7
Microturbine < .4 MW2E Absorber
Desiccant0.4 - 0.5
IC Engine .1 to 3 MW1E Absorber
2E Absorber0.2 - 0.4
Fuel Cell > .25 MW 2E Absorber 0.1 - 0.2
0.0000.1000.2000.3000.4000.5000.6000.7000.8000.9001.000
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00
λ λ λ λ D
EUF SHP
ηηηη B = 0.80ηηηη GTD = 0.32
ηηηη B = 0.92
ηηηη GTD = 0.55
(PEUF) SHP = (1 + λU) , where F SHP = 1/(ηGTD+λU/ηB )
F SHP
(PEUF) SHP = (1 + λU)ηGTDηB
ηB + ηGTDλU
SHP Primary Energy Utilization Index
Key parameter in
CHP design
PFFsite = Qu/ηηηηB
PFWesite =We
site /ηGTD
11/8/2013
6
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90
Fraction Thermal Exhaust Not Used
Perfect Match λ U = λ CHP
Conventional
System
Crossover Region(PE
UF
) C
HP
Mic
oro
turb
ine
Required performance by many
incentive programs
(EUF) CHP Microturbine (ηηηη= 25%, λλλλD max= 3.0)
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90
(PEUF) CHP IC Engine (ηηηη= 40 %, λλλλDmax = 1.5)
(PE
UF
) C
HP
IC
En
gin
e
Fraction Thermal Exhaust Not Used
Perfect Match λ U = λ CHP
Conventional
System
Crossover Region
Required performance by many
incentive programs
-0.20
-0.10
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00
F S
HP
-F
CH
P
FS
HP
η η η η GTD = 0.33
ηηηη Boiler = 0.85
η η η η CHP Prime = 0.25
λ λ λ λ CHP = λ λ λ λ D
FESR = 1 – ηηηηGTD*ηηηηB
ηηηηCHP*(ηηηηB + λλλλu*ηηηηGTD)
FESR = 1 – ηηηηGTD/ηηηηCHP
(1(1(1(1 + λλλλu*ηηηηGTD/ηηηηB)
Fuel Energy Savings Ratio: Microturbine Prime Mover
11/8/2013 24
-0.80
-0.70
-0.60
-0.50
-0.40
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00
F S
HP
-F
CH
P
FS
HP
η η η η GTD = 0.55
ηηηη Boiler = 0.92
η η η η CHP Prime = 0.25
λ λ λ λ CHP = λ λ λ λ U
Primary Fuel Energy Savings Ratio: Microturbine Prime Mover
11/8/2013
7
0.000
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.400
0.500
0.600
0.700
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00
F S
HP
-F
CH
P
FS
HP
λλλλ CHP = λ λ λ λ D
η η η η GTD = 0.33
ηηηη Boiler = 0.85
η η η η CHP Prime = 0.40
Primary Fuel Energy Savings Ratio: IC Prime Mover
Why CHP: PA Economics
11/8/2013 Slide 26
11/8/2013 Slide: 27
Why CHP: NJ Economics
11/8/2013
8
Amount and location of shale gas reserves Amount and location of shale gas reserves
388.49
336.14(DOE EIA estimates 400+)
197.02
95.59
8.30
Undiscovered technically recoverable natural gas in the US
Units: [trillions of cubic feet]
Conventional gas
Shale gas
Tight gas
Coalbed methane
Oil-associated gas
Amount and location of shale gas reserves
Source: Total Oil and Gas Resources Data Table, National Assessment of Oil and Gas Project, US Geological Survey, 2011
U.S. Energy Environmental Systems R&D Issues
11/8/2013
9
U.S. Energy Environmental Systems R&D Issues
EIA Gas Production Projections by Source
11/8/2013 34
Recent Natural Gas Prices
~ constant
24 hr Day
Conventional
Load
Profiles
24 hr Day
Desired Load Profiles
for CHP & Dynamic Controls Optimization
Increase Building Thermal Capacitance
Controlled and Known Infiltration (Latent Load)
Integrated Daylight and Lighting Controls
Short Term Electric and Thermal Storage
Reliable, Cost Effective Dynamic Controls
Building Design
Paradigm
Shift
Thermal
Electric
Thermal
Load
Kw
Load
Thermal
Load
Kw
Load
Need Hybrid Automobile Version of Building Energy Delivery Systems
11/8/2013
10
24 hour cycle
Kw
Demand
Thermal
Demand
Prime Mover
Kw , Thermal
Steady State Output
Short Term
Electrical
StorageShort Term
Thermal
Storage
And all this for $X00/ft2
compared to $X,000/ft2 ……..automobiles
$X00,000/ft2 .......aircraft
with no significant rebuilds or breakdowns in 20 years!
It’s not rocket science, it’s a lot more difficult!
Need Hybrid Automobile Version of Building Energy Delivery Systems
District Systems – Heating and CHP
11/8/2013 38
Biomass fired district heating
power plant in Mödling, Austria
District heating accumulation tower
from Theiss near Krems an der Donau in
Lower Austria with a thermal capacity of
2 GWh
District heating pipe
in Tübingen, Germany
Masnedø CHP power station in Denmark. This station burns straw as
fuel. The adjacent greenhouses are heated by district heating from the
plant
39
