Alban CAT CHP SEMINAR · power (CHP), EPA’s Combined Heat and Power Partnership and the U.S. Department of State’s Asia Pacific Partnership. Mr. Sweetser is a Senior Advisor to

Alban CAT CHP SEMINAR

Richard Sweetser Richard Sweetser has spent 43-years commercializing advanced energy, power, refrigeration and HVAC technology. Mr. Sweetser founded EXERGY Partners Corporation in January 1998 as a consulting firm designed to capitalize on opportunities arising out of utility restructuring and global climate change in the energy and construction industry. EXERGY Partners has developed an extensive commercial, institutional and industrial network focusing on the integration of onsite power generation, energy recovery and thermal energy management. EXERGY Partners has provided strategic support for the Federal initiative on combined heat and power (CHP), EPA’s Combined Heat and Power Partnership and the U.S. Department of State’s Asia Pacific Partnership. Mr. Sweetser is a Senior Advisor to US DOE’s Mid-Atlantic CHP Technology Assistance Partnership. Mr. Sweetser has published numerous technical, and policy articles, technical manuals, a book titled, THE FUNDAMENTALS OF GAS COOLING and is the lead author on ASHRAE’s new CHP Design Guide.

FEDERAL INTEREST IN CHP JUNE 18, 2015

Richard Sweetser, Sr. Advisor DOE’s Mid-Atlantic CHP TAP

[email protected] 703.707.0293

Alban CAT Power Systems CHP Seminar

CHP Technical Assistance Partnerships

Key Activities

Market Opportunity Analysis. Supporting analyses of CHP market opportunities in diverse markets including industrial, federal, institutional, and commercial sectors

Education and Outreach. Providing information on the energy and non-energy benefits and applications of CHP to state and local policy makers, regulators, end users, trade associations, and others.

Technical Assistance. Providing technical assistance to end-users and stakeholders to help them consider CHP, waste heat to power, and/or district energy with CHP in their facility and to help them through the development process from initial CHP screening to installation.

6/18/2015 Slide 6

Agenda Review of CHP and its benefits

Critical Issues for Successful CHP Application

The potential for natural gas CHP

Resilience and CHP

Federal Technical Assistance – CHP TAPS

6/18/2015 Slide 7

150 units Total Fuel

Fuel

Fuel

94 units

56 units

30 units

Power Plant 32% efficiency

Boiler/Furnace 80% efficiency

45 units

Electricity

Heat

Combined Efficiency ~ 50%

CHP Captures the Heat Normally Lost in Power Generation, Increasing Overall

Efficiency …….

6/18/2015 Slide 8

Fuel

Fuel

Fuel 100

units

94 units

56 units

30 units



CHP 75% efficiency

45 units

Electricity

Heat



CHP Captures the Heat Normally Lost in Power Generation, Increasing Overall

Efficiency …….

6/18/2015 Slide 9

Fuel

Fuel

Fuel 100

units

94 units

56 units

30 units



CHP 75% efficiency

45 units

Electricity

Heat



30 to 55% less greenhouse gas emissions

…. and Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions

6/18/2015 Slide 10

Important

Concern about energy costs

Concern about power reliability

Concern about sustainability and environmental impacts

Long hours of operation

Concurrent thermal loads

Central heating and/or cooling distribution system

Favorable Characteristics for CHP Applications

Helpful

Future central plant replacement and/or upgrades

Future facility expansion or new construction projects

EE measures already implemented

Access to nearby renewable fuels

Facility energy champion

1/21/15 Slide 11

Vital

CHP is Already an Important Energy Resource

82.7 GW of installed CHP at over 4,400 industrial and commercial facilities

8% of U.S. Electric Generating Capacity; 14% of Manufacturing

Avoids more than 1.8 quadrillion Btus of fuel consumption annually

Avoids 241 million metric tons of CO2 compared to separate production

1/21/15 Slide 12

Chemicals 28%

Refining 19%

Paper 14%

Food 8%

Metals 5%

Other Manufacturing

6%

Other Industrial 6%

Commercial/ Institutional

14%

Existing CHP Capacity (MW)

Sources: DOE/ICF CHP Installation Database (U.S. installations as of December 31, 2014); “US Manufacturing Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis, November 2012”, EIA http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=8250 Energetics,

Natural Gas is the Preferred Fuel for Existing CHP (Based on Capacity)

Estimated Natural Gas Load of 4.2 Tcf

6/18/2015 Slide 13

Biomass, 2,705 MW

Coal, 12,307 MW

Natural Gas, 57,365 MW

Oil, 1,152 MW

Waste*, 7,366 MW

Wood, 1,375 MW

Other*, 459 MW

* Waste includes MSW, black liquor, industrial off gasses, and waste heat ** Other includes hydrogen, purchased steam, and unknown fuel types

Source: DOE/ICF CHP Installation Database (U.S. installations as of December 31, 2014)

Market Drivers for CHP • Benefits of CHP recognized by Federal and

State policymakers

• Game changing outlook for natural gas in North America

• Opportunities created by environmental drivers

• CHP enhances resiliency in the face of man-made and natural disasters

Source: DOE/ICF CHP Installation Database (U.S. installations as of December 31, 2014)

Forecasted Additions

6/18/2015 Slide 14

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Cap

acit

y (M

W)

Annual Capacity Additions (MW)

CHP Saves Energy and Reduces Emissions Category 10 MW CHP 10 MW PV 10 MW Wind 10 MW

NGCC Annual Capacity Factor 85% 22% 34% 70%

Annual Electricity 74,446 MWh 19,272 MWh 29,784 MWh 61,320 MWh

Annual Useful Heat Provided 114,544 MWht None None None

Footprint Required 6,000 sq ft 1,740,000 sq ft 76,000 sq ft N/A

Capital Cost $19.8 million $35.6 million $22.1 million $9.2 million

Annual Energy Savings, MMBtu 318,221 196,462 303,623 154,649

Annual CO2 Savings, Tons 43,343 17,887 27,644 28,172

Annual NOx Savings 61.9 16.1 24.9 46.2

Original Source: Combined Heat and Power A Clean Energy Solution: August 2012: DOE and EPA • 10 MW Gas Turbine CHP - 27% electric efficiency, 69% total CHP efficiency, 15 ppm NOx, $1,976/kW Capital Cost – Source: DOE/EPA Catalog of CHP Technologies, March 2015 • Capacity factors and capital costs for PV, Wind and Natural Gas Combined Cycle system based on utility systems in DOE’s Advanced Energy Outlook 2015 – Source: Electricity Market Module Assumptions, 2014 • Efficiency (7,050 Btu/kWh) for Natural Gas Combined Cycle system based on Advanced Energy Outlook 2015 (620 MW system proportioned to 10 MW of output) – Source: Electricity Market Module Assumptions, 2014; 2.5 PPM NOx emissions assumed for NGCC • CHP, PV, Wind and NGCC electricity displaces National All Fossil Average Generation resources: Based on eGRID 2012 – (2009 data ) - 9,572 Btu/kWh, 1,743 lbs CO2/MWh, 1.5708 lbs NOx/MWh, 7% T&D losses; • CHP thermal output displaces 80% efficient on-site natural gas boiler with NOx emissions of 0.1 lb/MMBtu

6/18/2015 Slide 15

Source: Combined Heat and Power A Clean Energy Solution: August 2012: DOE and EPA

CHP Is a Cost-Effective Resource

Source: Bloomberg Sustainable Energy Factbook 2015

Levelize cost of electricity 2014 ($/MWh)

6/18/2015 Slide 16

The Remaining Potential for CHP Is Large

• Technical Potential of 120+ GW (Industrial 60 GW; Commercial/Institutional 63 GW). (ICF estimates)

• 40+ GW with payback less than 10 years. (AGA)

• 111(d) could support 20 GW of new CHP nationwide. (ACEEE)

Source: ICF Internal Estimates

6/18/2015 Slide 17

CHP can help States meet 111(d) The Electric Generating Unit (EGU ) emission reduction impacts of CHP are

similar to the emission reduction impacts of other end-use energy efficiency measures Deployment of CHP reduces demand, and overall emissions, from affected

EGUs CHP provides long-term, persistent savings and is: Measurable Enforceable Quantifiable Verifiable

Best practices exist in terms of crediting emissions savings from CHP, state programs to promote CHP markets, and in EM&V

18

CPP, 111d and Electric Power

1/21/15 Slide 19

CHP can help States meet 111(d)

1/21/15 Slide 20

Source: Center for Clean Air Policy

CHP Capacity by Region, Base and Policy Cases, 2030

The CHP Market Is Evolving

6/18/2015 Slide 21

Source: ICF Internal Estimates

Resilience Resilience | The capacity of people,

organizations and systems to prepare for, respond, recover from and thrive in the face of hazards, and to adjust to continual change. Resilient systems share certain qualities such as redundancy, flexibility and responsiveness.

Hazard | A sudden event or gradual change, which can lead to impacts on a place or people.

Exposure | People and things located in a place that could be affected by a hazard.

Vulnerability | The propensity for a hazard to affect the wellbeing of a person, community or organization.

Risk | The impact that occurs, whose severity depends on how the above factors interact.

1/21/15 Slide 22

RISK

RESILIENCE

HAZARD, EXPOSURE,

VULNERABILITY

Source: Toolkit for Resilient Cities

Global Natural Disasters

1/21/15 Slide 23

Source: Emergency Events Database EM-DAT

2012 Major Climate Disasters

Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

1/21/15 Slide 24

DOE Report on CHP in Critical Infrastructure

Provides context for CHP in critical infrastructure applications.

Contains 14 case studies of CHP operating through grid outages.

Policies promoting CHP in critical infrastructure.

Recommendations on how to design CHP for reliability

1/21/15 Slide 25

http://www.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/distributedenergy/pdfs/chp_critical_facilities.pdf

Resilient CHP versus Traditional CHP

CHP is typically designed for the thermal load and may require additional DG to meet CI load requirements

Block loading capabilities of gas engines may require additional switchgear – can be significant

Gas engines cannot meet “emergency” power restoration requirements so may require diesel engines to comply

Energy cost offsets do not increase with complexity or cost of resiliency without “loss of load” remuneration

1/21/15 Slide 26

One Economic View of Resilient CHP CHP System Components

Standard CHP (no off-grid reliability benefit)

CHP With Backup Capabilities

Generator Capacity (kW) 1,500 1,500 CHP System Total Installed Cost ($/kW) $1,800 $1,800 Added Controls and Switchgear ($/kW) N/A $175 Typical Backup Diesel Generator, Controls, and Switchgear ($/kW) N/A ($550) Incremental Capital ($/kW) $1,800 $1,425 Total Incremental Capital Cost ($) $2,700,000 $2,137,500 Net Annual Energy Savings ($) $400,000 $400,000 Payback 6.8 years 5.3 years Internal Rate of Return 12.20% 16.90% Net Present Value (at 10% discount) $311,302 $822,665

1/21/15 Slide 27

Need to Assess the Economic Impact of Loss of Power

Source: http://www.epa.gov/chp/basic/reliability.html

What type of Technical Assistance is available through the U.S. DOE CHP TAPs?

Uses available site information. Estimate: savings, Installation costs, simple paybacks, equipment sizing and type.

Quick screening questions with spreadsheet payback calculator.

3rd Party review of Engineering Analysis. Review equipment sizing and choices.

Review specifications and bids, Limited operational analysis

US DOE CHP TAP Services:

Screening and Preliminary

Analysis

Feasibility Analysis

Investment Grade Analysis

Procurement, Operations & Maintenance,

Commissioning

5/29/2015 Slide 28

For More Information

1/21/15 Slide 29

Richard Sweetser, Sr. Advisor

DOE’s Mid-Atlantic CHP TAP

[email protected]

703.707.0293

http://www.energy.gov/eere/amo/chp-deployment

http://www.midatlanticchptap.org/

Tina Reed Tina Read serves as the Manager of Industrial and Commercial Markets at the Energy Solutions Center, a non-profit member organization of Natural Gas Utilities. She oversees the Multifamily consortium and the Industrial consortium and manages the Natural Gas Vehicle Workgroup, Agricultural Applications Workgroup and the Renewable Energy Workgroup. She oversees the production of ESC’s Gas Technology magazine and Energy Solutions for Commercial Buildings magazine. Prior to ESC, Tina spent 10 years at Alban where she progressed from project manager to engineering consultant and departed as a sales executive. She is a Certified Energy Manager (CEM). She holds a BS in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Maryland, College Park and a MA in Teaching.

© 2015 Energy Solutions Center Inc. – All Rights Reserved

Natural Gas Perspectives on CHP June 2015

Tina Read, Energy Solutions Center

32 © Energy Solutions Center Inc. – All Rights Reserved

Natural Gas Supply Gas storage and delivery Market information Natural gas advantages

Presentation Outline


North American Shale Gas Deposits

Source: http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=20852


Pump Fluid into the well at high pressure Pressure creates

Fractures in the shale Filler material mixed with

fluid keeps fractures open Natural Gas then able to

move to the well

Basics of Fracking

Source: National Energy Board - Canada A Primer for Understanding Canadian Shale Gas - Energy Briefing Note ISSN 1917-506X


Horizontal Drilling for Shale Gas Operators have strong economic incentives to ensure that fractures do not propagate beyond the shale

Waste of materials, time, and money

Potential loss of the well and the associated gas

Lead to excess water production from adjacent strata – increasing production costs

Source: www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil-gas/publications/EPreports/Shale_Gas_Primer_2009.pdf


Gas can be stored in huge storage tanks in liquefied form (LNG) or in underground wells

How Gas is Stored and Delivered

37 © Energy Solutions Center Inc. – All Rights Reserved 37 © Energy Solutions Center Inc. – All Rights Reserved

Underground Gas Storage

http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ngqs/images/storage_2013.png


2.4 million mile underground system 2.1 million LDC, 300,000 Transmission

Interstate Pipeline Network

Source: AGA


FERC or state approval Submit plans & economic studies Show need Environmental impact statement Obtain right-of-way Construction Trench & directional drill Install & connect protected pipe Backfill

Pipeline Construction


How Gas is Stored and Delivered

Natural Gas Delivery System

Transmission Underground

Storage City Gate

Processing Plant

1700 Electric Power Plants

Compressor Station

Regulator/ Meter

INTERSTATE TRANSMISSION

LINES

Gathering Lines

Producing Wells

Utility Underground

Storage

66 Million Households

5 Million Commercial Customers Offices, Hospitals, Hotels & Restaurants

Regulator Meter

Regulator Meter

Regulator Meter

Regulator Meter

LDC Regulator

Supplemental Fuels – LNG, LPG

Approx. 2.4 million

Miles in U.S.

Distribution and Service

Pipelines

189,000 Factories And Manufacturers


Natural Gas Market Info


Stable Pricing Predicted Into the Future

Source: Rethinking Natural Gas, A Future for Natural Gas in the U.S. Economy.


Natural Gas -Economical Energy

Oil Prices Increasing

North

American Gas Prices

Decreasing


Global Natural Gas Prices

Source: www.cga.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Chart-5 -Global-Natural-Gas-Prices8.pdf

European and Japanese Gas Prices Increasing

North American Gas Prices Dropping

Henry Hub Connects to four intrastate and

nine interstate pipelines Serves as the official delivery

location for futures contracts on the NYMEX

AECO-C Alberta spot gas trading price

at the AECO-C hub US

Fede

ral R

eser

ve, W

orld

Ban

k, C

GA


Advantages of Natural Gas


Why Combined Heat & Power? Help Stabilize the Grid Quality Power Economical Efficient Environmentally Sound

Conventional Power Generation vs. Combined Heat & Power


Source: IEEE Web Site http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/policy/us-electrical-grid-gets-less-reliable Illustration: Emily Cooper

Electric Grid Reliability Is DECLINING

IEEE Data Outages > 100 MW

Outages Affecting > 50,000 Customers

1991-1995 66 41

1996-2000 76 58

2000-2004 156 149

2005-2009 264 349


9,000 MW > 7,000 MW < 8,000 MW

Generation: (Growing)

Transmission & Distribution:

(?????)

Load: (Growing)

Why the Decline in Electric Grid Reliability?


Electricity:

Natural Gas:

Site vs. Source


Combined Heat & Power CHP Efficiency vs. Electric Power Plants

Source: www.aga.org/our-issues/playbook/Documents/AGA_Playbook2012_HI_RES.pdf


Natural Gas – The Clean Energy Emission Reduction with CHP

Source: http://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/files/Pub13655.pdf


CHP is good for business - Economical Improves overall energy efficiency and fuel

utilization - thereby lowering electric and overall energy costs Offers reliability during outages – less downtime Enhances power quality Equipment to meet virtually every need – size to fit

your need

Combined Heat & Power


Associations and Resources Numerous Trade Associations and web resources are available to assist and provide you additional market information and resources


ESC’s CHP Consortium www.UnderstandingCHP.com


Simple Payback Tool www.UnderstandingCHP.com



CHP Association www.chpassociation.org


EPA Web Site – CHP Information

http://www.epa.gov/chp/technologies.html

58 © Energy Solutions Center Inc. – All Rights Reserved 58 © Energy Solutions Center Inc. – All Rights Reserved

CHP Is Cleaner – EPA Emissions Calculator

Source: www.epa.gov/chp/basic/calculator.html


DOE – U.S. Department of Energy Located in Washington, DC Numerous resources available http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/distributed

energy

Associations & Resources

© Energy Solutions Center Inc. – All Rights Reserved

Thank you …

Michael Leslie Michael Leslie is the CHP and C&I Energy Efficiency Program Manager for the Maryland Energy Administration (MEA). After a successful career in the aerospace industry, where he served the power generation and electro-mechanical needs of aircraft operators throughout the world, Michael has spent the last seven years focused on

facility resiliency and sustainable energy initiatives for utilities and large-scale energy users.

COMBINED HEAT & POWER POLICIES AND PROGRAMS PRESENTATION

M I C H A E L L E S L I E, M S C, C L E A N E N E R G Y C H P A N D C & I P R O G R A M M A N AG E R

“Clean, Affordable and Reliable Energy for all Marylanders”

June 18, 2015

MEA Overview

The mission of the Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) is to promote affordable, reliable, clean energy. MEA’s programs and policies help lower energy bills, fuel the creation of jobs, drive economic development, and promoting energy independence.

MEA Strategic Goals

The strategic goals of the Maryland Energy Administration are:

• Make the State of Maryland a leader in energy efficiency;

• Reduce energy costs for our citizens; • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from energy; • Increase the use of renewable energy; • Leverage public/private partnerships in order to

improve the competitive position of Maryland industry; and

• Lower the operating expenses of State and local governments while contributing to the improvement of air and water quality in Maryland.

CHP Benefits and Policy Attributes

Energy Efficiency • EmPOWER Maryland initiative, the State has a goal of reducing

energy consumption by 15 percent by 2015

Economic Development • The use of CHP systems creates LOCAL jobs in manufacturing,

engineering, installation, ongoing operation and maintenance, and many other areas.

Grid and Facility Resiliency • Complies with Executive Order demand to identify how to

improve the resiliency and reliability of the Maryland electric distribution system

Current CHP Policy Attributes (continued)

Greenhouse Gas Reduction • Supports the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (the Plan) that will

reduce greenhouse gases 25 percent by the year 2020.

Job Creation • Job Creation Tax Credit (JCTC) managed by the Maryland

Department of Business & Economic Development

Maryland Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard • Maryland legislature passed legislation (S.B. 690) expanding the

portfolio standard’s Tier I definition to include waste-to-energy systems.

Maryland’s Installed CHP Base

ICF International http://www.eea-inc.com/chpdata/States/MD.html

Prime Mover Sites Capacity (kW) Total 29 717,277 Boiler/Steam Turbine 8 585,200 Combined Cycle 2 25,500 Combustion Turbine 5 89,100 Fuel Cell 0 0 Microturbine 1 65 Other 0 0 Reciprocating Engine 8 15,060 Waste Heat to Power 1 902

Current Utility led CHP Program

Eligibility (BGE, PHI, and PE) • Minimum requirement of 65% efficiency (Higher Heating Value) • All qualifying systems must not export electricity to the grid • Projects must be pre-approved

Incentive (BGE, PHI, and PE) • $2.5 million per project incentive cap ($1.25m capacity and $1.25

production) • Capacity Incentive Payment: Design incentive ($75/kW): • Capacity Incentive Payment: Installation incentive ($275/kW) for

projects under 250 kW and ($175/kW) for projects greater than 250 kW • Production incentive: ($0.07/kWh for 18 months): Three payments

subsequent to review of metering data at the end of the 6th, 12th and 18th months

SMECO Currently, SMECO does not offer standalone CHP rebates and, instead, provide rebates under the Custom programs

How is the MEA positioned to help?

• Collaboration

• Lawton Loan Program

• Maryland Clean Energy Center (MCEC)

Financing Program

• MEA EmPowerMdCHP Program

Eligible Entities (Please see the MEA EmPowerMdCHP website for more details)

• Healthcare facilities (e.g. hospital, assisted living, nursing home, and surgical center)

• Publicly Owned Wastewater Treatment facilities

Minimum Project Requirements • Located in the State of Maryland • Ground breaking will take place and materials will be

onsite by January 1, 2016 • Operational no later than January 1, 2017 • Minimum system efficiency of 60% Higher Heating Value

FY15 MEA EmPOWER Maryland CHP Program

FY15 MEA EmPowerMdCHP Incentive

MEA EmPowerMdCHP Capacity Grant Incentive

System Size Capacity Payment per kW

Equal to or less than 75kW Up to $575 Between 76kW and 150kW Up to $550 Between 151kW and 300kW Up to $525 Between 301kW and 500kW Up to $500 Between 501kW and 750kW Up to $475 Between 751kW and 1MW Up to $450 1MW and greater Up to $425

Sample Incentive Calculations: A 75kW CHP system is eligible to receive up to a $43,125 grant award. 75kWx$575/kW=$43,125 A 1MW CHP system is eligible for up to a $450,000 award. 1MWx$450/kW=$450,000

FY15 MEA EmPowerMdCHP Results

Results • Received 1o applications within the grant deadline totaling over

13 MW of new CHP capacity

• Approved 7 applications to receive grant funds

• 6 out of 7 are healthcare facilities

• No biomass or biofuel projects had been submitted

• Projects range in size from 130 – 2,000 kW

• Grant recipients are eligible to receive between $71,500 - $464,700

• Assuming all eligible grantees comply with the grant conditions the 7 projects will provide over 9 MW of new CHP capacity

Eligible Entities (subject to change)

• Industrial facilities • Critical infrastructure facilities (including

hospitals, wastewater treatment facilities, and essential state and local government facilities)

• Private and public sector locations that leverage biogas/biomass

Incentive (Subject to change)

• Incentive to be structured like FY15

FY16 MEA EmPOWER Maryland CHP Program

FY16 MEA EmPowerMdCHP Program

First-come first-served basis (subject to change) • Application materials must be submitted by February 1,

2016. However, since the grant selection will be determined primarily on a first-come first-served basis, applicants are encouraged to submit a complete application as soon as possible.

Anticipated Minimum Project Requirements • Located in the State of Maryland • Ground breaking will take place and materials will be

onsite by January 1, 2017 • Operational no later than January 1, 2018 • Minimum system efficiency of 60% Higher Heating

Value

Helpful Links

• MEA EmPowerMdCHP Program (FY16 Not Posted/Released)

• Jane E. Lawton Conservation Loan Program (Managed by MEA)

• Maryland Clean Energy Center (MCEC) Financing Program

• BGE Smart Energy Savers Program® Combined Heat and Power (CHP)

• Pepco Combined Heat & Power (CHP) program

• Delmarva Power Combined Heat & Power (CHP) program

• Potomac Edison Combined Heat and Power Incentives Program

• Maryland utility territory map

http://energy.maryland.gov/Business/EmPowerMdCHP.html

http://energy.maryland.gov/Govt/janeelawton.html

http://mcap.webflow.com/

https://www.bgesmartenergy.com/chp

https://cienergyefficiency.pepco.com/combinedHeat.aspx

https://cienergyefficiency.delmarva.com/CombinedHeat.aspx

http://energysavemd-business.com/specialty-programs/combined-heat-and-power/

http://www.opc.state.md.us/opc/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=0KtP47geZJ8=&tabid=60

Questions?

MEA CHP Presentation

Contact Info:

MICHAEL LESLIE, MSC Clean Energy CHP and C&I Program Manager

o:(410) 260-7543 m:(443) 694-7475 [email protected]

Kathryn O'Rourke Katie O’Rourke is a Manager with ICF managing BGE’s Combined Heat and Power Program. Prior to joining ICF, Katie designed and managed energy efficiency programs in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and New York for National Grid and most recently held the position as Deputy Director of Energy Efficiency at the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources. Katie has her BS in Chemical Engineering along with her CEM and LEED AP, and enjoys waterskiing on the lakes of her native MN – but only in the summer.

79

UM Upper Chesapeake Medical Center

200-bed hospital and medical complex in Bel Air, MD CHP System: 2 MW with 350-ton absorption chiller BGE incentive: $1,747,500 Annual electric savings: 12,200 MWh

80

Harrah’s Horseshoe Casino

Casino with 122,000 ft2 gaming floor, 100 tables, 2,500 slot machines, and multiple restaurants in Baltimore, MD CHP System: 1.2 MW BGE incentive: $1,271,178 Annual electric savings: 9,200 MWh

Tim Witting Tim Witting of Lockheed Martin, a specialist in Combined Heat and Power, has been a business development representative for the Pepco & Delmarva Power Energy Savings Programs since 2012. With a background of 8 years in financial services and 6 years in energy efficiency, Mr. Witting consults with Maryland utility customers to advocate for the viable economic integration of CHP technology

Pepco and Delmarva Power

2015 – 2017 Combined Heat and Power Incentive Program

83

Combined Heat and Power in Maryland

More than 25 facilities Generating 722 MW of electricity Notable host facilities

• University of Maryland (2002) • National Archives (2011) • Food and Drug Administration (2004) • National Institutes of Health (2010)

Source: DOE.gov

84

EmPOWER Maryland CHP Incentives

Incentives up to $2.5 million per project Approximately 30-40% of total project cost Program available until 12/31/2017 Eligible facilities

• Commercial • Industrial • Governmental • Multifamily

85

Pepco & Delmarva Power Pipeline

• Project pipeline is diverse • 9 Pepco projects under contract for installation

• 20,218 MW

• 15 projects in active development • 32,468 MW

86

Questions and Discussion

For more information:

Pepco C&I Energy Savings Program www.pepco.com/business

(866) 353-5798 [email protected]

Delmarva Power C&I Energy Savings Program

www.delmarva.com/business (866) 353-5799

[email protected]

Gene Smar Program Manager


William R. Ellis Manager, Demand Side Management


Tim Witting Business Development


Bill Steigelmann Senior Engineering Consultant


http://www.pepco.com/business

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.delmarva.com/business





Patrick J. Barrett Patrick J. Barrett has over 30 plus years of experience in the electric power industry. He has been involved in

numerous aspects of the industry focusing mainly on on-site power solutions. Solutions including reciprocating engines, gas turbines, hydro electric, power boilers and steam turbine generators. He also has experience in

combined heat and power and renewable energy including landfill gas to energy projects. He began his career as a junior staff engineer and successfully earned positions of increasing responsibility through project

management and project development.

Alban Cat Combined Heat and Power June 2015

Page 89

CATERPILLAR CONFIDENTIAL: YELLOW

Agenda • CHP Overview

• Turbines vs Reciprocating Engines

• Market Attributes

• High Level Go/No Considerations

• Other Key Considerations

Page 90


CHP Definition

Combined Heat and Power (CHP) also known as cogeneration, is broadly defined as…

“The simultaneous and sequential use of power and heat from the same fuel

source.”

Page 91


Combined Heat And Power (CHP) /Distributed Generation Basics

Page 92


• Heat Recovery Options

– steam-LP & HP • Typically from exhaust • Sometimes from IC JW-ebullient

– hot water • Typically from IC JW and CAC

– chilled water • Typically from steam or hot water fired absorption chillers • Sometimes steam turbine driven centrifugal chillers • Sometimes direct fired chillers


Page 93


Caterpillar Engine Generator Sets

•Cat Generator Sets - since 1939

•Built on successful platforms used in many applications

•Broadest kW range in the industry

•Wide variety of options, to complete integrated systems – enclosures, fuel tank bases, controls, etc.

•Local Cat dealer support

Diesel – from 8 kW to 16 MW

Gas – from 25 kW to 10 MW

Page 94


Solar Turbine Generator Sets

•Solar Turbines Founded - 1927

•Wholly-owned subsidiary of Caterpillar, Inc.

•~5,000 Employees world-wide

•World’s largest manufacturer of Combustion Turbines (1-15 MW)

•Experience –11,500 units to 90 countries

–1 billion + operating hours

•1.2 MW to 25 MW

•Applications 1-50 MW

–Combined Heat & Power

–Combined Cycle

–Peaking Solar Turbines

Company Headquarters

San Diego, California USA

Page 95


Fuel Cell Power from Caterpillar

•High electrical efficiency

• High value waste heat by-product for cogeneration

• Internally generated hydrogen from natural gas – operating at customer sites today

• 1 MW at King County Wastewater Treatment

DFC® 300 DFC® 1500 DFC® 3000

Multi-MW Grid Support

Page 96


Micro Turbines

Low NOx emissions – better than tough global standards

Built-in compressor means smaller footprint and easy installation •

One moving part: Minimal maintenance and downtime •

Patented air bearing: No lubricating oil or coolant •

Integrated utility synchronization and protection

Small, modular design allows for easy, low-cost installation •

Page 97



Exhaust Heat Recovery Steam Generator

•5 kW to 7 MW in a single unit •450F to 1,600F •Gas and Diesel Engines, Gas Turbines •Hot water and Steam

Manufacturers Cain Industries Vaporphase

Page 98



Single Effect: •Low Temperature Activation, 200 F •Low Cost •Simple system •Good Efficiency…

–0.7 COP

Double Effect: •High Temperature Activation, 350 F •Moderate Cost •More complex system •Higher Efficiency…

–1.2 COP

Wide range of models from <100 tons to >1,000 tons

Activated by Steam (15 psi - 125 psi), Hot Water or Exhaust

Page 99



6MW Electric Generation

Steam 10 million Btu/hr

Thermal fluids 11 million Btu/hr

145° F 6 Million Btu/hr

Engine Generator 1

Engine Generator 2

Exhaust Heat

Recovery Steam

Generator

Engine Auxiliary

Loop

Engine Jacket Loop

220° F 5 Million Btu/hr

Separate Jacket and Exhaust Heat Recovery

Low/High Pressure Steam

220 F Hot Water

1 + MW Engines

Page 100


Engine Low Temperature Circuit ( 32C to 54C )

Fuel

Exhaust Gas

Engine High Temp.

Circuit

CAT

Electric Power

Horizontal Radiators (Table Coolers)

Air 20 +35C

99C

85C

500C

Air 80 +90C - ideally 140.000m3/h

Air 20 +35C

Hot Air Generation: Tunnel Drying, Brick Manufacturing

Thermal Recovery Applications

Page 101



Fuel

Exhaust Gas

Engine High Temp.

Circuit

CAT

Electric Power

Table Radiators

90C

95C

85C

To Customer

500C

110C

100C

70C From Customer

Hot Water Generation: Industrial / Commercial


Page 102



Fuel

Exhaust Gas

Engine High Temp.

Circuit

CAT

Electric Power

Hot Water & Steam Heat Recovery: Industrial / Commercial

Radiators

70C

90C

95C

85C

From Customer

To Customer

500C

90C

95° C

Steam

Feeder tank

200C

Condensate

Saturated steam 8-15bars


Page 103


Which Prime mover fits best my application?

• Gas Engines • Gas Turbines

Page 104


• Low emissions levels/ Beneficial use of natural gas

• High reliability

• High availability

• Excellent for continuous, high load applications

• Low life cycle costs

• Quick delivery and ‘on-line’ capabilities

• Proven technology in many applications

Gas Engine / Turbine Similarities

Page 105


Gas Engine Advantages • Higher fuel efficiency

• Lower Initial costs for small schemes (<10 MWe)

• Better suited for variable load applications

• More tolerant to high ambient conditions and high elevations (law of physics – all is linked to CR)

• Lower fuel pressure requirement

• Accept low BTU fuels

• On line in less than 30 sec

Page 106


• Well suited for CHP w/ large heat to ekW ratio • Higher exhaust temperature :480 C / 900 F • Low weight & minimal space requirement • Very simple design • Lower emissions capabilities • Less down time per machine

- Replacement at overhaul • Ideal for 24/7 operation.

- Turbines do not like starts & stops • Accept high BTU fuels

- No detonation – low sensibility to MN - Can burn low energy fuels as well

Gas Turbine Advantages

Page 107


Gas Engines vs. Turbines

Heat to Power Need Ratio Type of Heat Needed Load Electricity Cost Driver Heat / Cooling Cost Driver

Gas Engine 1:1 Hot Water, Some Steam More Variable

Turbines 2:1 Mostly Steam More Constant

Page 108


Page 109


WHO IS THE WINNER, Turbine or Gas Engine ?

• In fact in 95% of cases there’s no contest • If the NPV evaluation is made correctly the choice is evident

• Low temp, low pressure gas, high altitude will go engines • Large Heat / ekW ratio schemes, high pressure steam will go turbines • Hybrid systems with both gas turbines and gas engines are possible.

Page 110


• Geographically – High electric costs – Relatively low fuel costs – Adequate grant/funding levels – RPS-compliant & voluntary

• Site specific – High electric costs – Solid load factor – Coincident thermal and electric load profile – Available opportunity fuel, ADG, LFG etc – Site power quality, high reliability requirement

Target Market Attributes

Page 111


Source = US DOE Energy Information Administration

US Market Driver

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

1967

1969

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

2023

2025

2027

2029

Year

Avg. Commercial Natural Gas Price Avg. Commercial Retail Electricity Price

Forecast

Spark Spread = CHP Business Case

Forecast Spark Spread

Historical $/10

00ft3

C

ent k

W-h

Page 112


2011 Electric Prices- US Overview

Page 113


Financial Feasibility-First Pass •Most CHP plants are economically driven. •Economics are based on rate disparity between utility energy and CHP Energy costs. “Spark Spread”


Page 114


High Level First Look

Start with the obvious deal killers-Fatal Flaw Analysis – Air quality permitting – Waste water discharge permitting – Adequate space – Adequate facility utilities

• Electrical • Water • Fuel • Waste water

Page 115



Move to high level feasibility analysis – Identify and stack $/kW pricing components (running costs)

• Fuel -Typically biggest cost component

• Capital recovery • O & M • Thermal credit

Page 116



• Thermal Credit –Understand technology and model specific recoverable heat –Determine existing boiler efficiency –Calculate avoided boiler fuel cost –Convert to cents/kWh

Page 117



• Roll Up of Stacked Running Costs & Credits (cents/kWh) Plus Fuel Plus Capital Recovery Plus O & M Less Thermal Credits Total cents/kWh • If this beats present retail purchase price, all in, including demand charges, investigate further. • Potentially pull in engineer or developer. • Commission a Feasibility study

Page 118


Key Evaluation Points

Understand the details of the customers utility costs • Tariff • Demand Charge $/kW-Month Peak and off Peak

- Month To Month - Ratcheted

• Energy Charge cents/kWh Peak and Off Peak • Standby Charges & Non availability penalties • Customer Capacity Load Curves • Existing or Pending CHP Incentives

Page 119


Demand Charges

• Utility Charges Customer By Monthly Demand Put on Their System By Customer Facility

– Typically Highest 20 Minute Demand in kW During Utility Peak Period – Some Are Month By Month

– Others are Ratcheted – Pay peak demand for that month and then 80-90 % of that Cost For Following 11 Months. Unless Customer Establishes A new Peak Demand In The Out Months

Can Significantly Impact Plant Cost And Required Redundancy

Page 120


Utility Energy Charges*

• Utility Charges Customer By Monthly kWh Consumption – Typically Utility Peak Rate – And Associated Off Peak Rate

Standby Charges* • For CHP The Utility Will Charge Fee To Have Capacity “Standing By” If The Customer Plant Is Off Line. In An Amount Equal To The Customers Plant Capacity.

*In Some Areas These Charges Are Going Away

Page 121


Gas for DG and CHP is Emerging as the Preferred Fuel Choice

• Gas is more widely available today • Public Policy and the local ‘green market’ are causing industry to re-think gas DG/CHP applications • Spark spread improvements are causing users to rethink the value of DG/CHP with turbines and gas engines

•There is a strong opportunity for gas fired equipment

Questions?