View
0
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Dr. Eric BibeauDr. Eric BibeauMechanical & Industrial Engineering DeptMechanical & Industrial Engineering Dept
Manitoba Hydro/NSERC Chair in Alternative EnergyManitoba Hydro/NSERC Chair in Alternative Energy
IEEE Power Engineering SocietyHoliday Inn South, Winnipeg, Manitoba
October 17, 2006
Integrating Distributed Integrating Distributed Technologies in the Technologies in the Electricity SectorElectricity Sector
OutlineOutlineWhy distributed generation (DG)R&D activities at UofM in distributed generation
BHCERCAnaerobic digestersKinetic turbines
PHEVCan it help make DG cost competitive
Alternative Energy ChairAlternative Energy Chair
Why a Manitoba Hydro/NSERC chair– Pursuing cost-effective
alternative energy is one of the 10 important corporate goals for Manitoba Hydro
– Manitoba Hydro encourages development and demonstration of cost-effective alternative energy applications collaboration with the University of Manitoba
Average Marginal Newfoundland/Lab 0.02 0.00Prince Edward Island 0.50 0.81Nova Scotia 0.74 0.54New Brunswick 0.50 0.81Québec 0.01 0.00Ontario 0.24 0.54Manitoba 0.03 0.00Saskatchewan 0.83 0.54Alberta 0.91 0.54British-Columbia 0.03 0.00Territories 0.36 0.91Total Canada 0.22 0.43
Canadian Power Emission Factor (tonnes/MWhr)
Distributed GenerationCost effective
Alternative Energy Low energy densities
Distributed Generation (DG) Distributed Generation (DG) using alternative energyusing alternative energy
Many Canadians live in northern communities– diesel generation
Non-centralized grid – new grid installation to rural areas have
significant costs2.0 Billion without power– Local employment– Education– Poverty alleviation– Better health – DG makes rural electrification possible
Node
Primary
Energy
Node
Needs
Energy Node Manitoba
Heat
TransportationElectricity
Fossil
Re-Electricity
Re-Fuels
Can Manitoba be fossil fuel free?
Energy DriversEnergy DriversSustainabilityClean airGlobal warmingPeak oil
Addressed by DG
Global Warming (GHG)Global Warming (GHG)Natural processes generating 770 BMT/yr – What is effect of human activity of 30 BMT/yr?
Earth “dynamic” system
CO2 levels in atmosphere – 1850: 250 ppm Now: 350-400 ppm
Add new ball every 2 years Time
World Peak Oil (World Peak Oil (HubbertHubbert) )
Hits – new wells– peak 1964
Discoveries – yearly production +
known reserves– peak 1987
Production– peak 2005
Hits
Discoveries
Production
Ann
ual Y
ield
100 billion barrels to find
Total production2.0 trillion
barrels
Our ability to catch fish depend on how much is left in the lake
PeakProduction
Saudi’s no longer have
excess capacity
We have some We have some problems to solveproblems to solve
153 new coal plants licenses presently under review in the US
Alternative/Renewable Alternative/Renewable Energy SourcesEnergy Sources
Electricity (highest form)
Heat (lowest form)
Gas & Liquid Fuels
WindOcean δT
BiomassSteam
PVCollectorsHydro
GeothermalFission
Processing
Sola
r
Mech/Turbo Generator
Nuc
lear
My ObservationMy ObservationSustainabilityClean airGlobal warmingPeak oil
Increase RE Ratio
Not a policy in Canada
Distributed generation
At what point are environmental concerns with RE small compared to fossil fuels?
A generation away
Renewable EnergyRenewable EnergyLarge Hydro: land use, geology, marine life, sediments, GHGSmall Hydro: cost, distributed, fishKinetic turbines: remote, fish, water accessWave/Tidal: marine ecology, costsWind: variable, land use, noise, nimby, varsBioEnergy: distributed, land use, emissionsWaste Heat: low industrial power ratesSolar thermal: daylight only, land useSolar PV: daylight, land use, disposal, costsGeothermal: remote, limited reservoirs
R&D in Distributed PowerR&D in Distributed PowerDistributed bioenergy technologies– generating heat and power from biomass
Kinetic Turbines distributed power– potentially affordable distributed
hydroelectric technology for Manitoba
PHEV– potential new demand for renewable energy
Manitoba
Heat
Fossil fuels
Re-Electricity
Re-Fuels
Transport Electricity
- 118 PJ/yearWhy biomass energy in Manitoba?
Energy node Needs
BioPower ExampleBioPower ExampleRemote CommunitiesRemote Communities
Power 1 MWeHeat 4 MWth
Need ComponentsPower Wind turbine 3.3 MWeHeat Oil furnace 4.7 MWth
Power Water turbine 1.3 MWeHeat Oil furnace 4.7 MWthPower 1.0 MWeHeat 0.0 MWth
Kinetic turbine
Biomass
System Size
Biomass CHP
Community Requirements
System
Wind with storage
Forest Inventory Forest Inventory in Manitobain Manitoba
Total forest area– 65,000,000 ha
TPF area (Timber productive forest)
– 15,300,000 ha
TPF Volume– 938,000,000 m3 (national 26,159,000,000 m3)
Forest residue– Available: 20,000 BDT/a – Potential: 140,000 BDT/a
Straw in ManitobaStraw in ManitobaEnergy use –NRCan
available 3.5 M BDT/yrpotential 6.5 M BDT/yr
–Agriculture Canada
Wheat Oats Barley Flax Total Cattle use
Alberta 3.06 1 2.82 0.006 6.89 5.41Saskatchewan 4.8 1.07 1.97 0.15 7.99 2.12Manitoba 3.09 0.78 1.07 0.15 5.1 1.34Total 10.95 2.85 5.86 0.306 19.98 8.87Lawrence Townley-Smith, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2004
Annual straw production: 1/3 conservation tillage and 2/3 conventional tillage
Mega BDT/yr
Source: L. TownleySource: L. Townley--Smith, Agriculture and AgriSmith, Agriculture and Agri--Food CanadaFood Canada
Energy Crops in ManitobaEnergy Crops in ManitobaGrow crops for energy– Switchgrass, hemp and sugar beet
Based on land availability and yieldLarge variation 4 to 35 ODT/ha/yrResource– land 1,702,000 ha– assume 33% use
available 5.0 M BDT/apotential 15.3 M BDT/a
Livestock Wastes in Manitoba Livestock Wastes in Manitoba Manures– application causes problems– phosphor legislation– use for energy
anaerobic digestioncombustion/gasification
AnimalsAverage
Mass Manure Daily Yearly
number kg/animal kg/animal TonnesMega
Tonnes %Mega
Tonnes/yr
Diary 95,400 636 52 4,961 1.8 75% 1.4Beef 1,300,000 568 34 44,200 16.1 25% 4.0Poultry 7,085,385 1 0.06 425 0.2 85% 0.1Swine 7,300,000 90 5 36,500 13.3 85% 11.3
Recoverable manure from Livestock in Manitoba
Recoverable
Dairy
Energy Energy CostsCosts
NYMEX Crude PricingContract 1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1/2/
97
1/2/
98
1/2/
99
1/2/
00
1/2/
01
1/2/
02
1/2/
03
1/2/
04
1/2/
05
1997 - 2005
US$
/ ba
rrel
CHP and CHPCCHP and CHPC
Biomass AdvantageBiomass Advantage
Highest energy density of renewables
Can be harvested, stored, transported and used on demand
Biomass residues are a major potential source of renewable energy
Utilization success has been limited to specific large-scale applications
Utilization OpportunitiesUtilization Opportunities
Expanded use of biomass favors distributed approach– biomass resource is distributed– CHP applicable to smaller scale– transportation costs eliminated– minimizes power grid upgrades
Biomass is fundamentally a distributed resource
Better technology is needed for a distributed CHP biopower
Bioenergy Thermal ConversionBioenergy Thermal Conversionin Manitobain Manitoba
Why DG CHP Systems Using Why DG CHP Systems Using Biomass are UncommonBiomass are Uncommon
Low Cost: the primary need
Independence: must not affect process
Simplicity: reduce operator qualifications
Ruggedness: allow remote locations
Maintenance Free: reducing cost
Automated: simple to operate
DG CHP with Steam not ViableDG CHP with Steam not ViableBoilers require qualified operatorsLarge equipmentCooling towersMaintenancePoor efficiencyLow grade heat rejection– need CHP economics
High capital and operating cost
UofM Bioenergy ProjectsUofM Bioenergy Projects
Distributed CHP biopower– Brayton Hybrid Cycle (BHC)
Canadian Foundation for Innovation
– Entropic Rankin Cycle (ERC)Entropic Energy, TEAM and NRCAN
– Anaerobic Digestion ModellingNSERC/Manitoba Hydro ChairFuture experimental digester
Brayton Hybrid Cycle (BHC)Brayton Hybrid Cycle (BHC)indirect heat24% possible overall efficiency simple to operateapp. 60 PSI air pressurelow temperature turbine and heater– no ceramic or expensive materials
two fluids: water and aircombine Brayton and Rankin cycle advantages$2,500/kW targetsome CHP potential
Patent Pending
ColdWaterInput
Vcold
AirInletLab
ColdAirInletOutside
mPTcom_in
Trec_in
Trec_out
HotWaterInput
Vhot
PTcom_out
PTtur_in
Theat_in
Vout/Iout
From Capstone
mPTtur_outTbp_out
Tcomb_out
Tflu
Chimney
mPTw2
3/4 or 1/2"
Fw
Tee
ChVw TeeR
MVw1
MVw2
1/2"
Fa
Window
Window
MC
MC
MC
MC
MC
MC
VariableLoad bank
Va_in
PIheat_in
Vcomb
Vng
U
U
U
Pu
Va_out
PIcomb_out
Vpump
PIheat_in
mPTng
PIflu
mPTw1
May achieve same efficiency as direct fired microturbine
Laboratory system
Direct Fired
Indirect FiredBHC
Microturbine
Entropic Rankine CycleEntropic Rankine Cycle (ERC)(ERC)simple technologytwice the power compared to a steam based systemproduces hot glycol 90ºC-115ºC for cogenerationsmall components no certified operators
Patent Pending
Entropic Cycle CHP SystemEntropic Cycle CHP System
No boiler required: uses vapour heater
Small equipment: compact system
High temp. heat: 90°C district heat
Dry air heat rejection: 60°C return
Good Power efficiency: 17%-22% cycle eff.
High CHP efficiency: 50%-85% flue heat
Affordable capital cost: $2,500/kW target
Heater
Recuperator
Cooler
Power Unit
Flue Gas
Coolant
90°C
60°CPM Alternator- High efficiency generation
- high speed operation
- combustor flue gas - process exhaust
Heat Source
Hot Water Out- 100% useable heat
- no cooling tower
Single Stage Turbine
-simplified, inexpensive -high speed operation
Simple & Direct Recuperation of Heat- Keeps energy in the cycle
- increases efficiency
CPE, Compact Heat Exchangers
- All welded construction - small footprint
No Vacuum Operation
- reduced volume flow - small equipment
Entropic Cycle CHP SystemEntropic Cycle CHP System
4 BioPower Systems4 BioPower Systems
Superheater
Economizer
Boiler
Feed Pump
Deaerator
Attemporator
Turbine
2% blowdown
Condensate return and makeup
10
9
6
4
3
18
7
Co-generation process
5
Thermal Oil Heat Transfer
TURBODEN srl
synthetic oil ORC
Conversion
1000°C 310°C
250°C 300°C
60°C
80°C Liquid Coolant
Air heat dump
17%
Input Heater 59.9% recovery
Entropic Fluid Heat
Transfer
ENTROPICpower cycleConversion
1000°C 215°C
170°C400°C
60°C
90°C Liquid Coolant
Air heat dump
17.6%
Input Heater 68.2% recovery
650°C 315°C
367 kPa258 °C
111 kPa315 °C 336 kPa
483 °C
377 kPa127 °C
13.1% cycle eff. 58.3%
cycle energy
108 kPa185 °C
101 kPa15.6 °C
Air Heater
7.4% overall eff.
Compressor Turbine / Expander
Recuperator
combustion air
56.7% recovery
Steam Brayton
EntropicORC
Biomass Feed20% moisture Harvesting
Fuel Preparation(hogging)
6.0% Power Production
Steam CHPPlant
Transport to CHP plant
1.8% energy input (fossil fuel)
0.4% energy input(fossil fuel)
34.6% energy
loss
0.4% energy
loss59% Steam Heat
Production
315°CFlue Gas
Biomass Feed20% moisture Harvesting
Fuel Preparation(hogging)
11.1% Power Production
ORC CHPPlant
Transport to CHP plant
1.8% energy input (fossil fuel)
0.4% energy input(fossil fuel)
32.5% energy
loss
0.4% energy
loss56% Hot WaterHeat Production
310°CFlue Gas
Steam
Brayton
Entropic
ORC
Biomass Feed20% moisture Harvesting
Fuel Preparation(hogging)
13.1% Power Production
EntropicCHP Plant
Transport to CHP plant
1.8% energy input (fossil fuel)
0.4% energy input(fossil fuel)
23.3% energy
loss
0.4% energy
loss63% Hot WaterHeat Production
215°CFlue Gas
Biomass Feed20% moisture Harvesting
Fuel Preparation(hogging)
8.4% Power Production
Air TurbineCHP Plant
Transport to CHP plant
1.8% energy input (fossil fuel)
0.4% energy input(fossil fuel)
50.2% energy
loss
0.4% energy
loss41% Hot Air
Heat Production
315°CFlue Gas
Values for bugwood
Ene
rgy
Dia
gram
DG
scal
e
Biopower DG ScaleBiopower DG Scale
Organic Rankine Cycle
Small-scale Steam
Entropic Cycle
Air Turbine
CONVERSION EFFICIENCY
HEA T
10%
EL
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
HEA TELEC
HEA TELEC T
HEA TEL
Organic Rankine Cycle
Small-scale Steam
Entropic Cycle
Air TurbineCost Range ($/kWe)
Size Range (kWe) 100 500 1,000 5,000 10,000SIZ E
50
C OST
C OSTSIZ E
SIZ EC OST
SIZ E
$ 1,000 $ 3,000 $ 5,000 $ 7,000 $ 9,000
COST
1
Distributed BioPowerDistributed BioPowerCHP Conversion ChartCHP Conversion Chart(20% MC)(20% MC)
Switchgrass at 20% MCSmallSteam
AirBrayton
OrganicRankine Entropic
Large Steam
Power delivered 6.0% 8.4% 11.1% 13.1% 28.0%Heat delivered 59.0% 41.0% 56.0% 63.0% -Overall CHP delivered 65.0% 49.4% 67.1% 76.1% 28.0%Electricity (kWhr/BDT) 333 467 617 728 1,556Heat (kWhr/BDT) 3,278 2,278 3,111 3,500 -Electricity (GJ/BDT) 1.2 1.7 2.2 2.6 5.6Heat (GJ/BDT) 11.8 8.2 11.2 12.6 -Electricity (gallon oil/BDT) 7.6 10.6 14.0 16.6 35.4Heat (gallon oil/BDT) 74.7 51.9 70.9 79.7 -
1
Distributed BioPowerDistributed BioPowerCHP Revenue CHP Revenue Chart (Manitoba)Chart (Manitoba)20% MC20% MC (Cattails)(Cattails)
$0.06 per kWhr$11.65 per GJ
Power (90% use) Heat (60% use) TotalSmall Steam $18 $82 $100Air Brayton $25 $57 $83ORC $33 $78 $112Entropic $39 $88 $127Large Steam $84 $0 $84
Electical Power (Cnd)Natural Gas (Cnd)
Revenue (per BDTon)
1
Distributed BioPowerDistributed BioPowerCHP Revenue Chart CHP Revenue Chart (Ontario: Higher Power Costs)(Ontario: Higher Power Costs)
$0.10 per kWhr$11.65 per GJ
Power (90% use) Heat (60% use) TotalSmall Steam $30 $82 $112Air Brayton $42 $57 $99ORC $56 $78 $134Entropic $66 $88 $154Large Steam $140 $0 $140
Electical Power (Cnd)Natural Gas (Cnd)
Revenue (per BDTon)
BioEnergy in a BioEnergy in a Northern CommunityNorthern Community
2 MWe Community Subsidized Power System BioPower SystemPower (2 MWe) tonne CO2 0 tonne CO2
Heat (10 MWth) tonne CO2 0 tonne CO2
Total tonne CO2 0 tonne CO2
115532305534,608
Power: Diesel Fuel Turbion™ CHPNorthern Com munity
Heat: Oil Biomass (local or pellets)2 BD tonne/MWe-hr
Power
Heat
~233 liters/ MWe-hr~2.83 Kg CO2/ liter
~93 liters/ MWth-hr~2.83 Kg CO2/ liter
~1 MWe-hr~No GHG
~5 MWth-hr~No GHG
BioPower SystemSubsidized Power System
(Biomass district heat already installed)
CHOICES?
Power: Diesel Fuel Turbion™ CHPNorthern Com munity
Heat: Oil Biomass (local or pellets)2 BD tonne/MWe-hr
Power
Heat
~233 liters/ MWe-hr~2.83 Kg CO2/ liter
~93 liters/ MWth-hr~2.83 Kg CO2/ liter
~1 MWe-hr~No GHG
~5 MWth-hr~No GHG
BioPower SystemSubsidized Power System
(Biomass district heat already installed)
CHOICES?
Integrated Sawmill ConceptIntegrated Sawmill Concept
Anaerobic DigestersAnaerobic DigestersBiological degradation– Mesophilic bacteria (25oC-38oC)
Bio-Gas CH4 & CO2
Heat and powerReduction in – CH4 from manure & heating– N20 from manure & heating– CO2 from displaced electricity and heating– Water usage– Odour from barn, lagoons & land
Can address phosphates soil build-upOrganic fertilizer
Slurry In
Heat In
Heat InHeat In
Slurry In
Slurry In
Slurry In
Covered Lagoon
TPAD
Plug Flow
Complete Mix
Effluent Out Effluent Out
Effluent Out
Effluent Out
Anaerobic Digester ModelAnaerobic Digester ModelDevelop numerical model for swine anaerobic digester– heat transfer (Phase 1)– anaerobic digestion coupled to flow (Phase 2)– two-phase, liquid and mechanical mixing (Phase 3)
Demonstrate numerically simple AD systems can operate economically in cold climatesDesign and optimize cost-effective anaerobic lagoon-type swine digester for cold climates– low solids
Develop tool Design system
Low Cost Lagoon DesignLow Cost Lagoon Design
Power
Gas
Digester Gas
Recycled Plastic Linked Boxes
Tsolid = 35 Co
Recirc Compressor
Flexible Membrane
Hay
Distributer Pipe2 Clay Layers
Flax Straw
Recirc GasMixing+Heating
Liquid/Solid Manure
Warm Recirc Gas
Wind Compressor
BurnerGlycol Loop
Hot Glycol
Glycol Return Recirc Heat Exchanger
IC Engine
Digester ModelDigester ModelBiogas
Unfrozen Soil
Cover
Frozen Soil
Manure
Straw
Waterproof Membranes
Ambient AirSolar Radiance
Qcover
Qwall
Qfloor
Qsolar
Qin
Qout
Qheating
Tfrozen
Tunfrozen
Tambient
Phase 1– heat transfer
1-D model3-D CFD model
0
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
04/08
/2004
04/09
/2004
04/10
/2004
04/11
/2004
04/20
/0404
/21/04
04/22
/0404
/24/04
04/26
/0404
/27/04
04/28
/04
Hea
t Flu
x (K
J)
Measured (kJ)1-D Predicted (kJ)3-D Predicted (kJ)
Digester ModelDigester Model
Digester ModelDigester ModelGeometry effect– Cover, walls, floor– % HHV of Biogas (HLB)
Phase II– 3-D Anaerobic
Digestion numerical model
– CH4 production
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Depth (m)
Hea
t los
ses
(kW
)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Radius (m)
HLB
(hea
t los
s to
bio
gass
hea
t rat
io)
CoverFloorWallTotal Q% HLB
Depth
Radius
Kinetic TurbinesKinetic Turbines
What are Kinetic What are Kinetic Turbines?Turbines?
Convert flow kinetic energy into powerLow environmental impact – does not require head, dam, or impoundment– minimizes fish impact: screens; air; slow RPM
Limited data – long term deployment; cold weather impact– cost information; not commercially demonstrated
Modular Rapid DeploymentModular Rapid Deployment
Water Air
150 m3.0 m
Power increases by: Velocity3 Density Area
Station
River
Bridge
FlowSpillway
Kinetic Turbine Demo ProjectKinetic Turbine Demo Project
Define Commercialization Define Commercialization and R&D Project Objectivesand R&D Project Objectives
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.1 2.3 2.6 3.1 4.1 5.1 6.2 7.2
Flow velocity (m/s)
Pow
er (k
W)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0
Thou
sand
s
Flow velocity (Knots)
Forc
es (l
bf)
Power (kW)
Drag (lbf)
Torque (lbf)
Ocean/Demos
60 kW DemoProject
UofM R&D/targets
What do we need to achieveWhat do we need to achieveTest for the first time a kinetic turbine for commercialization – 1 year period; cold climate; higher power density– river application; grid connected
Develop on river Safety ProceduresAddress the limited data issue – long term deployment; cold weather impact– cost information; not commercially available– provide quality data
What are the possible outcomesWhat are the possible outcomes
May prove new viable emerging-hydro application for remote communitiesAllow to tap into a new hydro-based renewable energy resourceCrucial step towards the commercialization of this technology– required step for future commercial and large
scale projects river and cold weather applications
Remote ApplicationsRemote ApplicationsAny success besides diesel generation?Kinetic turbine proposed– Operate at 2.5 m/s
Target less than $3,000 installed cost– Capital
$1, 500 /kW
– Power control, grid connection, installation $1,500 /kW
– Equivalent twin revenues: 120 kWe per unit40 c/kW = 0.42 Million/yr of renewable power10 c/kW = 0.11 Million/yr of renewable power
25% of water drains through Manitoba25% of water drains through ManitobaManitoba – Good location in
North America for kinetic turbines river applications
– Flat landscape– Granite
Less erosionNarrow passages
Remote ApplicationsRemote Applications
Opens Northern Communities for development on a sustainable basisEnvironmentally sound technologyReduces transport of diesel/oil northwardApplications– remote communities, logging camps, mines,
fishing lodges, locations with limited grid capacity, Native communities, diesel generation displacement
Commercial Testing Commercial Testing of Kinetic Turbines of Kinetic Turbines
Positive step towards SustainabilityEnvironmental breakthrough for remote communitiesNew source of renewable energy Support distributed generation industry Show DG can workConnect alternative power to grid
Commercialization ObjectivesCommercialization Objectives
Prove first year-long operationEvaluate the applicability of kinetic turbines in Canadian riversEstablish operation and cost-effectiveness in all seasonsProve kinetic turbines can– achieve high CF/high availability – deliver base load power
Commercialization ObjectivesCommercialization Objectives
Deployment and operating costs Develop required experience – Anchoring, deploying/retrieving– Safety and deployment protocols
Make project data available for IPP’sDG technology for commercialization
Whitemud cut
Seven Sisters
Point du Bois
Site SelectionSite Selection
Measure Flow Measure Flow Velocity downstream walkway Pointe du Bois June 13, 2005
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5Depth (m)
Vel
ocity
(m/s
)
5.0 m8.0 m10.8 m13 m16 m
ADCP Flow Measurements
Turbine Flow Meter
PartnersPartnersManitoba Hydro– Emerging Technologies Group
UEK– Underwater Electric Kite Corporation
University of Manitoba– NSERC/Manitoba Hydro Chair in Alternative
Energy– NSERC/Manitoba Hydro Chair in Power
System SimulationsHVDC
Funding PartnersFunding Partners
Manitoba Hydro– Summer 2005
Western Economic Diversification – Winter 2006
CEATI– Fall 2006
Collaborative Research Grant– Fall 2006 (pending)
UEK Turbine/Platform UEK Turbine/Platform
PermitsPermitsManitoba ParksManitoba Water Resource BranchFisheries & Oceans CanadaManitoba Conservation Environmental Navigable Waters ProtectionTransport CanadaManitoba Power Act
9.1
m
8.1
m
2 m
Boom
BoomCable
Boom Support
Low Water Level
High Water Level
WalkwayBridge
ResearchVessel
Portage Sign
Danger Sign
AnchoringAnchoring
CommunicationCommunication
25ft 25ft25ft 25ft
(+)
Sheath
(-)
(+) Input(-) Input
50ft
Boom
TaltTboat Tw ater Tgbox
25ft 25ft 25ft 25ft
Lcell
25ft
Mflow
25ft
Wireless
25ft
Pulse signal
Atco Trailer
Wireless
600V3 phase60 Hz
Isolation Transformer To (220V, 30Amps)From Bridge (600V3-phase)
Wireless Receiver
USB (6ft)
ATCO Heater and lights
25ft
9-pin port
K Thermocouple AWG: 20
Pressure Sensor AWG: 18Load cell
AWG: 18
Load cellAWG: 25
Wireless current transmitter0-20mA
P-Card
Router (Pwireless5.5 GHz300ft Range)
Bridge
Car Battery12 V
Lcellboom
Alternator
Shaft Power
Gearbox
SignalAtco Computer
380 V3 phase100 Amps0 - 400 Hz
Boat
Boat camera(Infared
Red)
Underwater camera &
sound(Infared Red)
DAS Battery
Boat Battery
Zodiac Battery
Grid 2,400V60 Hz
Ground Pole
RadioTower
Hill
Color and types of components:
Sensor Devices
Related to Battery
Heat DissipationDevices
Other devices
Related to Computer devices
Amplified
P1 P2 P3 P4
Data TrackerPressure Sensors: In:10-28Vdc Out:0-20mA
Thermocouple: Out:0-mV
Load Cell:In: 10Vdc Out:0-10mV
Accelerometer:In:10-30Vdc Out:8-12Vdc
DT800 forSensor excitation:0-20V0-20mA0-200mW
Load Cell:In:9-32VdcOut:4-20mA
Flow Probe:Out: 0-60Hz
Wireless500ftHardware Supplied by Manitoba Hydro (T1 line)
Aturbin
Spool(Flexible Cable
length)
3 CT Current Transformer
House
ZincPlug
Circuit Breaker
Circuit Breaker
Transformer
60 KW Load Bank
9-pin portCom1
Video/sound card
Router/ t
MicrowaveT1 line
Signal
Alarms
Jboat
Jturbine
Oil Heater 3KW
120V AC
Spool(Flexible Cable
length)
Circuit Breaker Boat Computer
Battery Charger(Trickle Charge)
UPS/SurgeProtection
Infrared underwater Light
Boat light
Bus bar
12V DC
Nexus 1250
Valt
Ialt
Falt
Ealt
60 KWPower Controller
Vgrid Egrid
UPS/SurgeProtection
240V AC
120V AC
120V AC
120V AC
120V AC
120V AC
240V AC
120V AC
120V AC
120V AC
120V AC
Aturbin
InstrumentationInstrumentationMonitorPerformance dataR&D
InstrumentationInstrumentationData Logger (DT800)4 Pressure sensors6 ThermocouplesWater flow meter
InstrumentationInstrumentation2 boat cameras1 underwater cameraHydrophoneInfrared lights3 phase power quality meter2 ADV probes
InstrumentationInstrumentation2 Velocity meters– Collect the velocity data
to determine the vibration of the turbine
– vertical/axial directions2 Load cells– Boat and boom
(wireless)
Power ElectronicsPower Electronics
Power electronics simulations– MH/NSERC Chair in Power Simulations– PSCAD
Power Converter
Safety ProtocolsSafety Protocols
Anchor deploymentInstallation of TurbineTesting phaseMaintenance
OthersOthersInsuranceR&D– Turbulence measurements– CFD Modeling
Grid connectionElectrical safetyCommercialization– IPP or remote site
Resource estimate – Winter satellites images
PHEVPHEV
In 2005, there were 19.0 million vehicles of all types in Canada
They drove 154.9 billion passenger-km that year
Source: Canadian Vehicle Survey (2005), Stats Canada
1000 times!
32 times!
Sun
Source: Online databases, Office of Energy Efficiency, Natural Resources Canada http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/
Vehicle GHG Emissions in Canada
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Year
GH
G's
(Mt)
GasolineDieselTotal
50 times the weight of all Canadians
Conversion EfficiencyConversion EfficiencyWell-to-wheel efficiency
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
ICE:Gasoline
ICE: Diesel ICE: Naturalgas
ICE: eH2 FCV: H2 NG FCV: eH2 BEV PHEV (40%Gas)
ES
HT TR EE
Needs
Primary
FF RE RF
Manitoba
118 PJ
Saskatchewan Ontario
Minnesota
HT TR EE
HT TR EE
HT TR EE
HT TR EE
North Dakota
FF RE RF
FF RE RFRF
RE F
F
Power Export Assumed MH Current EmissionGHG Export Factor
Displacements Profile (%) (kg CO2/kWhr)North Dakota 10 1.02Minnesota 80 0.69Saskatchewan 5 0.83Ontario 5 0.24
0.71Total
RF RE F
F
Manitoba Energy Node
Node
Primary
Energy
Fossil Fuel
Renewable Electricity
Renewable Fuels
Heat
TransportationElectricity
Energy
Conversion
Station
Node Needs
PHEVPHEV
bioPHEV route
Well To Wheel
Well to Tank Tank to Wheel
Well To Primary Energy Primary Energy to Onboard Electricity Onboard Electricity to Wheel
Primary to Storable Energy Storable Energy to Wheel
Naturally and Commercially Constrained by Supply,
Sustainability and Energy Density
Politically Controlled Through Energy Policies
Consumer Driven, Technologically Restrained
Complete Energy Source to Work Path
Standard Analysis Method
Primary to Onboard
Electricity Method
Extraction & Processing
Delivery as Primary Energy
Conversion of EnergyTo a Storable Fuel
ConversionTo OnboardElectricity
Motion Created by the Onboard Electricity Form
Energy Loss Processes Storage
Area of largest concern
Controllable GHGS
Well To Primary Energy
Where can you influence changeWhere can you influence change
Importance of demonstrating Importance of demonstrating PHEVPHEV’’s as a base technologys as a base technology
Is PHEV technology practical?– battery issues– how much RE can be used to offset fossil fuels
Can Manitoba be energy self-sufficient in transportation?– Manitoba: 1.4 billion L gasoline per year
Does wasted renewable power result in GHG and air emission attribution?
How do you calculate emissions when new Marginal Power is all renewable?
MB Winter Load
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Day Hours
Load
(MW
)
WinterWinter + FCVWinter + BEVWinter + PHEV
Daytime Nightime
Manitoba Grid Infrastructure WinterManitoba Grid Infrastructure Winter
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Power FCX FCV
Power Rav4 EV
Power PHEV New MW power
Vehicles in Manitoba cars 662,200Driving mileage per day km/day 50
Generating Capacity GHG/Emissions?
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Gasoline (nobiofuels)
BEV PHEV (1/3gasoline)
PHEV (1/3 biofuel;1.65 FF ratio)
FCV (electrolysisH2)
GH
G (g
/km
)
Renewable H2
Renewable EnergyRenewable Energy
Gasoline
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Gasoline (nobiofuels)
BEV PHEV (1/3gasoline)
PHEV (1/3 biofuel;1.65 FF ratio)
FCV (electrolysisH2)
GH
G (g
/km
)
Renewable H2
Electrical Mix
Electrical Mix Electrical Mix
Gasoline
Average MarginalExcludes CH4 and N2O Includes CH4 and N2O
Newfoundland and Labrador 0.02 0.00Prince Edward Island 0.50 0.81Nova Scotia 0.74 0.54New Brunswick 0.50 0.81Québec 0.01 0.00Ontario 0.24 0.54Manitoba 0.03 0.00Saskatchewan 0.83 0.54Alberta 0.91 0.54British-Columbia 0.03 0.00Territories 0.36 0.91Total Canada 0.22 0.43
Average CO2North Dakota 1.02Minnesota 0.69Total US 0.61
Canadian Power Emission Factor (tonnes/MWhr)
United States Power Emission Factor (tonnes/MWhr)
Network MethodNetwork Method
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Gasoline (nobiofuels)
BEV PHEV (1/3gasoline)
PHEV (1/3 biofuel;1.65 FF ratio)
FCV (electrolysisH2)
GH
G (g
/km
)
Renewable H2Electrical MixNetwork (PHEV base case)
Gasoline
Why PlugWhy Plug--in Highway Programin Highway ProgramPossible 90% reduction in gasolineManitoba ideal location for BioPHEV’s Canada needs to demonstrate real solutions No infrastructure costsMake renewable transportation a realityHelp overcome inertia of automotive industryInformation for utilities to adjust power growth rates V2G
PlugPlug--in Highway in Manitobain Highway in ManitobaEvolution of transportation– efficient home refueling using renewable hydro
Investigate battery life, costs and cold weather issuesGovernment/private cost-shared programIntegrate distributed renewable energy generation with PHEV– wind, kinetic turbines, biomass
Energy savings– $1.00/l rising vs $0.30/l stable
NSERC/Manitoba Hydro Chair in Alternative Energy
AcknowledgementAcknowledgement
Presentations on alternative energyPresentations on alternative energyhttp://www.umanitoba.ca/engineering/mech_and_ind/prof/bibeau/
Recommended