Upload
sissy
View
35
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Low Carbon Technologies for Greenhouse Horticulture What are the options for Growers in the UK?. Chris Plackett FEC Services Ltd. Topics. Results from two recent HDC projects PC256 A review of closed greenhouse technology PC265 Biomass heating systems. Closed Greenhouse Technologies. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Low Carbon Technologies for Greenhouse Horticulture
What are the options for Growers in the UK?
Chris Plackett FEC Services Ltd
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Topics• Results from two
recent HDC projects
• PC256– A review of closed
greenhouse technology
• PC265– Biomass heating
systems
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Closed Greenhouse Technologies• Interesting concepts
• Complex engineering solutions• Impressive headlines
• Commercially, where are they now?– Do they offer
anything to growers in the UK?
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Where is the technology now?
• Themato project has been a flagship– Successfully grown tomatoes
– Moved to other crops - strawberry• Commercial focus now on ‘semi-closed’
greenhouses– Similar advantages
– Reduced investment– Lower risk?
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
What about the UK?
• Aquifer thermal energy storage is not viable
• No other commercially attractive energy storage options currently exist
• But!– Air handling / heating technology has good
potential
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
How Does ‘Semi Closed’ Work?
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Air Movement Technology• The Benefits
– Uniform greenhouse conditions
» temperature, humidity & CO2
– More efficient heating?» Better response» Use low grade heat» Increased opportunities to
use alternative heat supplies
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Fan & Duct Systems
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
New HDC Project – PC278• Adapting the Dutch approach ……
– And doing it better!– Meeting the needs of the UK grower
• R&D with a commercial installation– 1Ha Tomato Nursery
– Side by side comparison with conventional system
• Partnership between– HDC
– Mill Nursery Ltd– Industry suppliers
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Project Objectives
• Reduce energy use & cost • Reduce CO2 emissions
• Expand the opportunities to use alternative heat sources
• Improve yield & quality• Reduce disease incidence & the
use of crop protection chemicals
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Project Status
• Installation complete• Work ongoing
– 4 year project• Look out for results
– All of the normal HDC communications routes
– Website for HDC members
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Summary – Sealed Greenhouses
• Not likely to be economic in the UK– Aquifer thermal storage not widely available– Long paybacks
• ‘Semi-sealed’ offers better opportunities– Air movement technology– Opportunities for ‘low grade’ heat
• A new HDC Project is investigating the potential– PC 278
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
What about biomass heating?• Options?
– Wood pellets– Miscanthus– Wood chip– Straw
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
One Potential Problem
• CO2 enrichment – not currently commercially
available• What impact does this
have on boiler utilisation?
• What are the alternatives?
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Options for CO2 enrichment
• Pure CO2
– Not currently economic
• Biomass for winter heating only?
– Heat with biomass when CO2 demand is low
– Use mains gas to produce CO2 in summer
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
What size boiler?
• Choose the biggest possible?– Satisfy peak winter heat
demand– Low output most of the year
• Smaller boiler?– Won’t meet all of the heat
demand but…– Lower capital cost– Higher utilisation
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Heat Storage
• Helps to maximise boiler use• Connect as ‘open buffer’
• What size?
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Finding the answers
• Data from commercial nurseries– CO2 demand – 5 minute data– complete cropping season
• Scenarios– Low CO2 demand, moderate heat use– High CO2 demand, high heat use
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Scenario 1
• 1 Hectare• Energy
efficient– Thermal
screen etc.• Low CO2 user
• Ignoring the need for CO2
Boiler size (kW) Buffer size (m3)
Heat from biomass %
1,420 0 100
800 150 99.2
800 200 99.4
800 250 99.6
600 200 90.9
500 200 83.9
400 200 73.4
200 200 40.5
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Scenario 1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 2 4
Week
Wee
kly
kWh
/ m2
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
kWh
/ m2
Biomass Heat Extra Heat Total Biomass Heat Total extra Heat
• No CO2 demand
• 500kW, 200m3 – 84% biomass
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Nursery 1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
6 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 38 42 46 50 2Week
tonn
es/H
a/w
eek
• CO2 demand – 423 tonnes/Ha p.a.
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Scenario 1• CO2 demand satisfied by mains gas
• 500kW, 200m3 – 42% biomass
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
6 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 38 42 46 50 2Week
Wee
kly
kWh
/ m2
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
kWh
/ m2
Biomass Heat Extra heat Heat for CO2 Total biomass Heat Total extra Heat
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Scenario 2
• Higher energy & CO2 user• 697 tonnes CO2 /Ha p.a.• Biomass heat = 31%
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 46 50Week
t/Ha/
wee
k
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Some simple economics• Assumptions
– 600kWh/m2/year heat use– ‘Low’ CO2 demand
– 42% heat provided by biomass• Comparative fuel costs
– Mains gas 2p/kWh (60p/therm)– Wood chip 0.7p/kWh (£25/t)
• Fuel cost saving = £32,760/Ha/year.
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Simple economics• 3Ha nursery
– Total fuel cost saving = £98,280/year.• Cost of 1.5MW boiler & infrastructure
– £200k - £300k– 2 - 3 year pay back, ignoring O&M costs
• Economies of scale & fuel cost sensitivity are high– Gas price 1.5p/kWh, payback up to 6 yrs– Lower capital cost /MW for bigger boiler
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Also consider• Boiler selection
– Fuel flexibility– Ease of use
• Fuel– Cost now & in the future– Reliability of supply– Ease of storage & handling
• Operation & maintenance– Labour
• Rules & regulations
©FEC Services Ltd 2007
Summary - Biomass
• Lack of CO2 enrichment is a barrier to uptake– But not a complete ‘lock out’
• The technology is not fit & forget• There are opportunities
– Do your homework– The economics are very site specific