Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
GENerators for Small Electrical and
Thermal Systems (GENSETS)
J.C. Zhao
December 14, 2016
What We Learned After Year-1 of GENSETS
Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy
Outline
Reminder of the original GENSETS Vision
Select GENSETS technical highlights
Open questions and goals of this meeting
US residential sector annual energy use
Overall efficiency: 50% Overall efficiency: 83%
e-
5 Quads
Heat loss9.7 Quads
4.7 Quads
“19.4 Quads”
Centralized Electricity Generation
2
e-
Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
e-
40% electrical efficiency
11.7 Quads
11.7 Quads
4.7 Quads
5 Quads
CHP
2 Quads excess heat
• 5 quads of energy savings potential (residential + commercial)
• 200 millions tons of CO2 reduction (4% US total ≈ 40 M cars)
• 8% reduction of US fresh water withdrawal
Why haven’t you bought a generator for your home?
3
<1,000 of 110,000,000 US homes have CHP systems
• Low fuel to electricity efficiency (<26%)
• High cost for long durability ones (>$6,000)
• Low lifetime for low-cost generators (<1 yr)
• Large kW size than optimal
~ 500,000 US homes have backup generators
70 million US homes have
piped-in natural gas already
GENSETS: GENerators for Small Electrical and Thermal Systems
4Improve Efficiency Reduce Emissions Reduce Imports
> +25% – 200 million tons
• 1 kW electricity system
• 40% electrical efficiency
• 10 year durability/life
• $ 3,000 system cost
Technologies to enable
widespread deployment of
CHP systems for residential
& commercial sectors
• Save energy (~ 5 quads)
• Save $ (~ 4-5 year payback)
• Reduce CO2 by 200 million tons
• Reduce fresh H2O withdrawal
(~8% of US total)
• Increase power reliability
• $240 billion business opportunity
Long-Term Objectives and Metrics (Primary)
5
Number Property Primary Target
1.1 Electrical power generation capacity 1 kWe
1.2 Fuel to electricity conversion efficiency (LHV) ≥40%
1.3 Useful heat energy output (>80°C) >1kW/kWe
1.4 Capacity factor ≥99.9 %
1.5 Complete system cost excluding
installation/balance of plant costs
≤$3,000
1.6 System lifetime ≥10 years
1.7 Total system-out NOx ≤0.07 lb/MWh
1.8 Total system-out CO ≤0.10 lb/MWh
1.9 Total system-out VOC ≤0.02 lb/MWh
1.10 Total system-out PM ≤0.40 g/kWh
1.11 Total system-out CO2 equivalent (CO2 & CH4) ≤1100 lb/MWh
1.12 System noise ≤55 db(A) 3 ft. away
Long-Term Objectives and Metrics (Secondary)
6
Number Property Secondary Target
1.13 Methane number for operation ≥70
1.14 Number of regular maintenance services ≤1/year
1.15 Operation and maintenance cost ≤$ 0.005/kWh
1.16 Time for regular maintenance ≤60 minutes/service
1.17 System mass ≤150 Kg
GENSETS Program Awards
7
$32 million total for 12 teams
• 6 ICE teams
• 4 Stirling engine teams
• 2 Microturbine teams
9 small businesses, 2 universities, 1 large business
GENSETS Timeline and Critical Milestones
8
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Year-1 Year-2 Year-3
NOTE: This is a notional figure and timeline for each individual award may vary
Critical Milestone in Year-2
Outline
Reminder of the original GENSETS Vision
Select GENSETS technical highlights
Open questions and goals of this meeting
GENSETS Portfolio Summary: 3 technology areas
10
Single-Cylinder Two-Stroke
Free-Piston Internal Combustion
Generator
Spark-Assisted HCCI Residential
Generator
Oscillating Linear Engine and
Alternator Advanced Lean Burn Micro-CHP
Genset
High Efficiency Split-Cycle Engine
for Residential Generators
A High Efficiency SACI 1 kW
Generator System with Integrated
Waste Energy Recovery
1kW Recuperated Brayton-Cycle
Engine Using Positive-Displacement
ComponentsAdvanced Microturbine Engine
for Residential CHP
Sustainable Economic mCHP
Stirling (SEmS) Generator
Free Piston Stirling Engine Based
1kW Generator
Kinematic Flexure-Based Stirling-
Brayton Hybrid Engine Generator for
Residential CHPAdvanced Stirling Power
Generation System for Combined
Heat and Power
Stirling engines
ICE
Microturbines
GENSETS Portfolio Technologies (Page 1 of 2)
Project Technology
type
Key Technologies
West Virginia University
(WVU)
ICE Free piston, spark-ignited stoichiometric ICE
Aerodyne Research Inc. ICE Free piston, homogeneous charge compression
ignition ICE
Wisconsin Engine Research
Consultants, LLC (WERC)
ICE Spark Assisted Compression Ignition (SACI)
ICE
Mahle Powertrain ICE Turbulent Jet Ignition (TJI) ICE
Tour Engine Inc. ICE Novel split cycle ICE with a shuttle valve for
transferring working fluid
Air Squared Inc. ICE Scroll expander based waste heat recovery for
SACI ICE
Brayton Energy Microturbine Sub-atmospheric microturbine employing screw
compressor and expander
Metis Design Corporation
(MDC)
Microturbine Microturbine with rotating vaneless diffuser
(RVD) and low swirl burner
11
GENSETS Portfolio Technologies (Page 2 of 2)
Project Technology
type
Key Technologies
Temple University Stirling engine Free Piston Stirling Engine (FPSE) manufactured
using additive manufacturing with a high temperature
heater head
Sunpower, Inc. Stirling engine FPSE based on their 80 W Advanced Stirling
Converter for space applications with gas bearings
Infinia Technology
Corporation (ITC)
Stirling engine FPSE with a high temperature heater head and
flexure bearings
Sencera Energy Stirling engine Kinematic Stirling engine employing flexures instead
of pistons
12
Microturbine: Brayton Energy
13
System Schematic of the microturbine CHP system
Microturbine: Brayton Energy
14
Ceramic main and gate rotors
(Screw Expander)
Thermal imaging of combustion-heated test article
FEA model predictions
Stirling Engine: Sunpower
15
ICE: Mahle Powertrain Combustion System
– Developed 1D/3D efficiency model with empirical data input from multiple sources
– Model indicates target indicated thermal efficiency of 45% is achievable
– Developed MJI pre-chamber geometry variants
– Identified target FMEP
Engine Design
– Completed prototype single-cylinder design
Design centered around Jet Ignition combustion system
– Targeted subsystems for low friction and long life
Incorporated numerous MAHLE low friction engine components and best practices
ICE: Mahle Powertrain Aftertreatment
– Established anticipated emissions scenarios
– Identified aftertreatment strategies
– Performed bench-scale testing to evaluate strategies
– Best performance: MOC + LNT
Tailpipe NOx, VOC should be below program targets
CO should meet targets
Significant challenge remains for meeting GHG target
– Developed controls parameters for regen cycles
Outline
Reminder of the original GENSETS Vision
Select GENSETS technical highlights
Open questions and goals of this meeting
Open Questions: Internal Combustion Engines
‣ What is the optimum combustion strategy for high efficiency at this
scale?
– HCCI, SACI, Stoichiometric combustion or Lean combustion?
We have different teams approaching the problem differently
‣ Can ICE achieve CARB emissions limits?
– Can methane emissions be reduced using Methane oxidation
catalyst (MOC)?
– How much will be the cost penalty of After-Treatment system?
‣ How much impact will thermal barrier coatings have?
– Are they durable?
– What is the ideal thickness and will it only lead to higher
exhaust energy?
‣ Can the oil change intervals be reduced (low O&M cost)?
19
Open Questions: Stirling Engines
‣ Can the combustor be effectively integrated with the Stirling
engine?
– If so, is a combustor efficiency north of 85% feasible while
being cost effective at such a scale?
‣ What should be the ideal recuperator cost-to-effectiveness
tradeoff?
‣ Is an engine efficiency (heat to mechanical work) north of 45%
feasible at 1 kW scale?
– What is the not-to-exceed heater head temperature for 10 year
life?
‣ Can the combined alternator and power electronics efficiency for
FPSEs be north of 90% while being cost-effective
20
Open Questions: Microturbines
‣ What should be the ideal recuperator cost-to-effectiveness
tradeoff?
‣ Are compressor and expander efficiencies north of 75% feasible
at such a scale?
‣ Can the compressor and expander be cost-effectively
manufactured at the required tolerances?
‣ Will the turbomachinery components survive for 10 years?
‣ Can the combined alternator and power electronics efficiency be
north of 90% while being cost-effective
21
Open Question: T2M
Who will be the Market Makers for µ-CHP?
‣ HVAC
– Traditional HVAC companies are highly competent in and familiar with HVAC technology, customer, supply chain, etc.
• Existing sales & service infrastructure ideal for market entry
– How will they consider the risk of behind the meter (BtM), electrical generation that requires a relationship with the Utility?
• Will conservative HVAC companies look to take any technology risk?
‣ DER Electrical
– New entrants in BtM (Solar City) for the Residential/Commercial market may be better suited to consider µ-CHP as part of a suite of products
– More innovative on financing options
-> As CHP systems get larger and address front-of-the-meter opportunities, this differentiation becomes more important
22
High- Level Lessons from GENSETS after Year 1
23
‣ Design and analysis of several teams show potential to achieve
35-40% fuel-to-electricity conversion efficiency.
– Predictions yet to be vetted by testing. Year-2 technical effort
should focus on prototype development and demonstration for
independent testing
‣ Several teams may need a high efficiency and cheap compressor
for natural gas compression for boosting engine efficiency →
Parasitic loss and cost penalty
‣ Several teams show initial cost estimates exceeding $3,000/kWe
– Year-2 effort should focus on device-level techno-economic
analysis
Meeting Agenda
24
Core Technology
•Combustor Designs for Small-Scale CHP (Peter Therkelsen, LBNL)
•Aisin 1.5kW Internal Combustion Engine CHP (Yoshi Sekihisa, Aisin)
Testing and Certification
•UL 2200, Utility Interactive Engine Generator System Assemblies (George Langton, UL)
•NREL Energy Systems Integration Facility (ESIF) (Ben Kroposki, NREL)
HVAC Integration
•HVAC Integration for Residential and Light Commercial Applications (Richard Lord, UTC CCS)
•Thermally Activated Technologies (Craig Walker, UTRC)
•Building Technologies Office – Perspectives on µ-CHP (Antonio Bouza, DOE-BTO)
General T2M
•DER Technology to Market / Device-level TEA (John Tuttle, ARPA-E)
•Utility Perspective on DERs (Noah Meeks, Southern Company)
•Additional Revenue Potential for Behind the Meter DG (Richard Fioravanti, Exponent)
• Insights on the Global Micro-CHP Market (Steven Ashurst, Delta-EE)
Early Markets
•E2S2 Needs for Small Generators (Chris Bolton, Army E2S2)
•ONR needs for Small Generators (Billy Short, ONR)
•Stranded Natural Gas for Distributed Power Generation (Ben Azar, Blackbird O&G)
• Team presentations and poster session - Day-1
• Panel to discuss market makers for µ-CHP - Day-2
• NREL ESIF tour - Day-2