Transcript Becoming DEEP Green with Just One Project: Cogen

Becoming DEEP Green with
Just One Project: Cogen

Tom Davies –
Director Design & Construction, Amherst College

Todd Holland –
Energy Manager, Amherst, Mount Holyoke &
Smith Colleges
The Bottom Line(s)
Reasonable pay-back
 Huge CO2 reduction
 Fuel flexibility and standby power
 But . . .

. . . Large first cost
Why Go Green?
Many flavors of climate commitment:
 Kyoto Protocol
 Clean Air/Cool Planet
a.k.a. The New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers’ Climate Change Action Plan
Step It Up
 Presidents Climate Commitment

a.k.a. American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment
Greenhouse gas audit
Amherst Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trend
(linear regression)
40,000
35,000
25,000
slope = 343 tons per year (1.2% growth)
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
0
1990
eCO2 (tons)
30,000
2050
2048
2046
2044
2042
2040
2038
2036
2034
2032
2030
2028
2026
2024
2022
2020
2018
2016
2014
2012
2010
2008
2006
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
eCO2 tons per year
Greenhouse gas model
Greenhouse Gas Emissions History: 1.2% Growth
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
growth
baseline
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
2016
2016
2018
2018
2018
2020
2020
2020
2022
2022
2022
2024
2024
2024
2026
2026
2026
2028
2028
2028
2030
2030
2030
2032
2032
2032
2034
2034
2034
2036
2036
2036
2038
2038
2038
2040
2040
2040
2042
2042
2042
2044
2044
2044
2046
2046
2046
2048
2048
2048
2050
2050
2050
2014
2014
2012
2012
2012
2010
2010
2008
2008
2006
2006
2004
2004
2002
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
eCO2 tons per year
Flavors of climate
commitment
Climate Change Commitments
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
President's
Step It Up
Step
Kyoto
It Up
Kyoto
CA/CP
Kyoto
growth
CA/CP
CA/CP
growth
CA/CP
baseline
growth
growth
baseline
growth
baseline
baseline
baseline
10,000
5,000
0
Many ways to go green –
How do they compare?
Purchasing REC’s
 Building improvements
 Operational changes
 Behavioral changes
 Cogeneration

Offsets, Programs, and Projects
GHG Reduction Strategies
40,000
35,000
Offsets
Offsets
Projects
Offsets
Programs
Projects
Programs
Projects
growth
growth
Programs
growth
Programs
baseline
baseline
growth
baseline
growth
baseline
baseline
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
2036
2036
2038
2038
2040
2040
2042
2042
2044
2044
2046
2046
2048
2048
2050
2050
2034
2034
2032
2032
2030
2030
2028
2028
2026
2026
2024
2024
2022
2022
2020
2020
2018
2018
2016
2016
2014
2014
2012
2012
2010
2010
2008
2008
2006
2006
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
0
1990
eCO2 tons per year
30,000
2050
2050
2048
2048
2046
2046
2044
2044
2042
2042
2040
2040
2038
2038
2036
2036
2034
2034
2032
2032
2030
2030
2028
2028
2026
2026
2024
2024
2022
2022
2020
2020
2018
2018
2016
2016
2014
2014
2012
2012
2010
2010
2008
2008
2006
2006
2004
2004
2002
2002
2000
2000
1998
1998
1996
1996
1994
1994
1992
1992
1990
1990
eCO2
year
eCO2 tons
tons per year
Offsets, vs. Projects and Cogen
GHG Reduction Strategies
GHG
Strategies
40,000
35,000
35,000
30,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
20,000
Offsets
Offsets
Offsets
Offsets
Cogen
Offsets
Projects
Projects
Programs
Programs
growth
growth
15,000
baseline
baseline
10,000
5,000
0
Offsets, vs. Projects and Cogen
GHG Reduction Strategies
40,000
35,000
Offsets
Offsets
Cogen
Projects
Cogen
Projects
Programs
Projects
Programs
growth
Programs
growth
baseline
growth
baseline
baseline
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
0
1990
eCO2 tons per year
30,000
Cogen by the numbers
of GHG emissions
from fuel for heat
and purchased
electricity
Cogen by the numbers
of the energy we
buy is electricity
of our GHG
emissions are
from electricity
Where does electricity come from?
Electrical Energy Generation by Source
US Total
6%
2%
3%
19%
51%
19%
Coal
Nuclear
Natural Gas
Petroleum
Hydro
Renewables
Cogen by the numbers
of the energy used
to generate
electricity is
wasted as heat
Cogen by the numbers
efficiency of the
nation’s electric
grid
overall efficiency of
a small cogen
system
Comparison of conventional
systems vs. Cogen

CO2 reduction 7000 tons, 23%

NOx (smog) reduction 27 tons, 60%

SOx (acid rain) reduction 93 tons, 62%
OK, you convinced me.
So what is this Cogen?
Gas turbine, recip engine, steam turbine
 Types of plants where this it works
 What’s new: available to smaller campuses

Cogen explained:
Conventional Power Plant:
High Pressure Steam
60 Units
72
Units
BOILER
(Efficiency = 83%)
STEAM
TURBINE
25
GENERATOR
23
(Eff. = 42%)
Units
(Eff. = 92%)
Units
DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM
(Eff. = 95%)
22
Units
35 Units
72
CONDENSER
Fuel Source units yields:
 22 Units of Electricity
Electric Efficiency: 30%
Conventional Heating Plant:
Heat to Campus
58 Units
73
Fuel Source units yields:
 58 Units of Thermal Energy
73
Units
BOILER
(Efficiency = 80%)
Thermal Efficiency: 80%
Conventional Heat & Power:
High Pressure Steam
60 Units
72
Units
BOILER
(Efficiency = 83%)
STEAM
TURBINE
25
GENERATOR
23
(Eff. = 42%)
Units
(Eff. = 92%)
Units
DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM
(Eff. = 95%)
22
Units
CONDENSER
145
Heat to Campus
58 Units
Fuel Source units yields:
 22 Units of Electricity
 58 Units of Thermal Energy
73
Units
BOILER
(Efficiency = 80%)
Overall Efficiency: 55%
Cogen = Combined Heat & Power:
100
Units
GAS TURBINE
24
GENERATOR
(Efficiency = 24%)
Units
(Eff. = 92%)
76
22
Units
Units
100 Fuel Source units yields:
HEAT RECOVERY
STEAM GENERATOR
 22 units electricity
 58 units thermal energy
Steam to Campus 58 Units
Overall Efficiency: 80%
Cogen explained:
Cogen configuration
Fuel cost and availability:
natural gas, diesel, or both
 Year-round or seasonal operation
 Are you thermally or electrically rich?
 Steam and/or hot water for heat
 Summertime heat load
 Rate structure

The Cogen Solution at Amherst

Solar Saturn dual-fuel gas turbine and
HRSG with duct burner

Back-pressure steam turbine

Total capacity 1250 and 500 kW
Cogen by numbers:
Payback and other cost factors
Initial cost
 Operational savings
 Simple payback estimates
 Volatility in energy costs and what that
means for payback
 Rising energy prices = good news!

Amherst Cogen First Costs
Construction
 Equipment
 Soft Costs
 Total Cost

5,200,000
3,500,000
600,000
9,300,000
Payback Calculations

This will be done live off a spreadsheet
based on current gas, oil and electricity
costs, and the audiences predictions of
future gas, oil and electricity costs.
Fuel
NG
#2
#6
$/mcf
gal
gal
kWh
Annual
Svgs
1
$8.10
$3.29
$3.50
$0.14
$912,941
2
$8.00
$3.50
$3.50
$0.15
$936,592
3
$9.00
$3.50
$3.50
$0.15
$901,706
4
$10.00
$3.50
$3.50
$0.15
$866,821
5
$8.00
$3.50
$3.50
$0.16
$1,058,543
6
$9.00
$3.50
$3.50
$0.16
$1,023,657
7
$10.00
$3.50
$3.50
$0.16
$988,772
8
$8.00
$3.50
$3.50
$0.17
$1,180,494
9
$9.00
$3.50
$3.50
$0.17
$1,145,609
10
$10.00
$3.50
$3.50
$0.17
$1,110,723
11
$11.00
$3.50
$3.50
$0.17
$1,075,837
Other benefits:

Stand-by power capabilities

Island mode operation

Demand reduction = payments from utility

Diversification of boiler equipment

Reduced reliance on #6 fuel oil
Too good to be true?

Equipment availability

The reality of a seller’s market

Schedule volatility

Pricing volatility and change orders

It’s complex, so build a great team
Evolution of costs & savings
Project Cost
Utility Costs:
Electricity
Natural Gas
#2 Fuel Oil
#6 Fuel Oil
Annual Savings
Simple Payback
Est. ROI
Feasibility
$5,100,000
$
$
$
$
41.03
10.10
9.66
8.00
$809,000
6.3
16%
Project
$9,300,000
$
$
$
$
46.89
13.00
25.36
16.00
$1,018,000
9.1
11%
Increase
82%
14%
29%
163%
100%
26%
Grid Operator Alphabet Soup

ISO

RMR

FCM1

FCM2

ODR

Translation = $67,000 a year
Cogen Team

In-house: D&C, Engineering, Ops,
Energy, Administration, Trustees

Consultants: Engineers, Commissioning
Agent, Testing, Permitting, Procurement

Vendor: Prime Mover(s) & Subs

Contractor: Builders, Commissioners
Become DEEP Green with Just One Project: Cogen
The Bottom Line(s)

Reasonable pay-back

Fuel flexibility and standby power

Huge CO2 reduction
Resources
CHP Application Centers
 www.northeastchp.org
 www.chpcenterma.org
 www.chpcenterse.org
 www.gulfcoastchp.org
 www.chpcentermw.org
 www.intermountainchp.org
 www.chpcenternw.org
 www.chpcenterpr.org
Discussion
Contact info:
Tom – [email protected]
 Todd – [email protected]
