Click here to load reader
Upload
haydar
View
213
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Thermodynamic and Cost Analyses of a Residential HybridPV–Fuel Cell–Battery System for a Canadian House 16Mehdi Hosseini, Ibrahim Dincer, and Marc A. Rosen
Abstract
A residential photovoltaic (PV)-based hydrogen fuel cell system is analyzed using energy and exergy methods, and its
monthly performance is investigated. The PV system is accompanied by a water electrolyser for hydrogen production, a
lead acid battery pack, and a solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) for reconverting the hydrogen produced to electricity during
periods of solar unavailability. The solar irradiance is based on a monthly average in Toronto in 2011. The energy and
exergy analysis results reported include the PV power output and the shares attributable to the battery and the SOFC in
meeting the electrical demand. The exergy destructions of the main components and the overall efficiencies are presented.
A cost analysis is performed to determine the electricity unit cost over the system lifetime.
Keywords
Photovoltaic � Hydrogen � Fuel cell � Energy � Exergy
Introduction
Solar photovoltaic (PV) systems are capable of converting 10–20 % of solar energy into electricity with zero greenhouse gas
emissions during their operation. These systems can be implemented in residential applications for electricity generation.
However, solar radiation is intermittent, and supplying the electricity of a house requires the use of some energy storage
options. While the PV system supplies the electricity demand of the house, the surplus electricity generated can be used in a
water electrolyser for hydrogen production. Hydrogen is stored in compressed hydrogen tanks, to be fed to a fuel cell later in
the night or during periods of solar unavailability. With this hybrid system, not only the power demand is supplied, but a
certain amount of the thermal demand is also met.
This type of hybrid PV–fuel cell–battery system is the focus of several studies [1–4]. The use of solar energy in a
renewable electricity generation system for a residential area in Italy is studied by Santarelli et al. [5], with solar energy
being one of three main renewable energy resources considered. The result revealed that wind energy is not capable of
meeting the demand, for that specific area. Since solar availability is more constant rather than micro-hydro energy
throughout the year, smaller hydrogen storage capacity is required. Uzunoglu et al. [6] investigate a renewable energy
power generation system which utilizes hydrogen and ultra-capacitors as energy storage options. The power generation
system provides the electricity demand of a house based on the solar irradiance data in Turkey. The main contribution is the
modeling and analysis of a renewable-based energy resource in a residential fuel cell hybrid system with short- and
long-term storage options. The parametric design and dynamic behavior of the hybrid system are examined.
M. Hosseini (*) � I. Dincer � M.A. Rosen
Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Ontario Institute of Technology,
2000 Simcoe St North, Oshawa, ON, Canada L1H 7K4
e-mail: [email protected]
I. Dincer et al. (eds.), Progress in Exergy, Energy, and the Environment,DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-04681-5_16, # Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014
181
The components of the PV–fuel cell–battery system have been modeled separately by researchers. Sukamongkol et al.
[7] study the performance of a PV system with simulation. Chenni et al. [8] and Nordin and Omar [9] validate the results of
detailed mathematical models with I–V characteristic and maximum power point of real PV modules. A direct coupling
of photovoltaic systems to water electrolysers for hydrogen production is the main focus of the study by Clarke et al. [10],
who found that the system cost and therefore hydrogen production cost decrease with their proposed configuration. This is
achieved while retaining minimum energy loss and maximum safety for the system. Solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC) are
increasingly being applied in stationary power generation, especially in combined heat and power (CHP) systems and in
remote areas. These systems have been studied comprehensively, in terms of experimentation, modeling, thermodynamic
analysis, and implementation [11–14].
The performance of the PV–fuel cell system depends on weather conditions; here, the system is analyzed for a Canadian
house with relevant solar data. The investigation of the hybrid PV–fuel cell system based on energy and exergy (quality of
energy) determines the rates of energy and exergy flows in each component. The results of the analyses are used for
calculating system outputs, efficiencies, and exergy destruction rates. The main contribution of the present research is the
analysis of the hybrid PV–fuel cell system on a monthly basis. The daily average solar irradiance during each month of
operation is taken as the input to the PV modules. The total daily average outputs of the system components are reported,
along with system efficiencies. The annual total exergy destructions of the system’s main components are presented, and the
electricity unit cost is calculated for the system lifetime.
System Description
The configuration of the hybrid PV–fuel cell–battery system, shown in Fig. 16.1, is selected to meet the electricity
requirement of a Canadian house. Solar energy is converted to electricity by the PV modules. The electricity generated is
directed to a load controller, which makes the decision of energy distribution within the system components and the house.
The load controller directs a part of the electricity generated to meet the power demand. The electrolyser converts the surplus
electricity to hydrogen, which is stored in a pressurized hydrogen tank. During periods of solar unavailability, the fuel cell
and battery cover the load. The operation of the battery is limited to the conditions where the electric load exceeds the solid
oxide fuel cell (SOFC) nominal power.
The SOFC is fed with the hydrogen (the fuel, which is stored in the storage tank) and ambient air as the oxidant. Hydrogen
is preheated via heat transfer from an external source, while air preheating is performed utilizing the heat from the SOFC
Electrolyzer
HydrogenTank
H2
SOFC
HRSG
Steam
Cooling Air
Load C
ontroller
DC Current
DC Current
DC Current
DC/ACConverter
AC Current
AbsorptionChiller
Stack Gas
Water
Water
Air
Power Load
ThermalLoad
Battery Pack
Heat
Fig. 16.1 Schematic of the
residential PV–hydrogen–fuel
cell CHP system
182 M. Hosseini et al.
stack gases, which have adequate energy for recovery for heating or hot water production. This is accomplished using a heat
recovery steam generator (HRSG), which generates low pressure saturated steam. As shown in Fig. 16.1, the steam
generated in the HRSG can be used in an absorption chiller for cooling purposes, or it can be used for hot water production.
The operational algorithm is simplified and illustrated in Fig. 16.2. Once the PV output power and the load demand are
calculated, the control system decides on the operation of the system components. A lower demand than the PV output
results in the operation of the electrolyser or the charging of the battery pack. If the demand is higher than the electric power
of the photovoltaic system, the fuel cell and the battery will be in operation.
Energy and Exergy Analyses
The modeling and energy and exergy analyses of the hybrid PV–fuel cell–battery system are briefly presented in this section.
Photovoltaic System
A previous paper [4] reported energy and exergy analyses of a residential PV–fuel cell–battery for a Canadian detached
house. That analysis is used in this work. The current–voltage characteristics are calculated as a function of light current and
reverse saturation current. The cell temperature and series resistance affect the I–V characteristics, as well. The general
equation to obtain the I–V characteristics of the PV modules can be expressed as [8]
I ¼ G
Gref
� �IL, ref þ kt Tcell � Trefð Þð Þ � I0 exp
q V þ IRsð ÞγkTcell
� �� 1
� �ð16:1Þ
where G is solar insolation W/m2, Gref is the solar insolation at the design condition, IL,ref is calculated based on the
manufacturer data for short circuit and maximum point currents, and kt is the manufacturer supplied temperature coefficient
of short-circuit current (A/�C). The maximum power output of the PV modules is at a point where voltage and current have
their maximum values. The control system for the PV system is designed so that the system operates at the maximum power
point. The energy and exergy efficiencies of the PV cell at maximum power point are given by
ηPV,mp ¼Pmp
_Ensolar¼ Imp � Vmp
G� Acell
ð16:2Þ
ψPv,mp ¼Pmp
_Exsolar¼ Imp � Vmp
G� Acell � 1� 43
T0
Tsunþ 1
3T0
Tsun
� �4� � ð16:3Þ
Solar Irradiance
Calculate PV Electric PowerOutput
PPV
Electricity DemandPdemand
ΔP=PPV - Pdemand
Pelectrolyser = PVpower – Pcharge, Battery
ΔP ≥ 0
Yes
No
|ΔP| ≤ FCnominal
PSOFC = FCnominal
Pbattery = |ΔP|- PSOFC
No
PSOFC = FCnominal
Yes
Fig. 16.2 Solving algorithm for providing the detached house with electricity
16 Thermodynamic and Cost Analyses of a Residential Hybrid PV–Fuel Cell–Battery System for a Canadian House 183
Water Electrolyser
For surplus electricity from the PV system, Pin,el, the energy efficiency relation of the electrolyser is used to calculate the
produced hydrogen flow rate:
ηel ¼_mH2
LHVH2
Pin, elð16:4Þ
Solid Oxide Fuel Cell
The Butler–Volmer equation is used to relate the current and voltage output of the solid oxide fuel cell. Relevant voltage drops
due to ohmic, activation, and concentration losses are considered in the calculation of SOFC electric power output according
to Colpan et al. [12] and Motahar and Alemrajabi [13]. The energy and exergy efficiencies for the fuel cell system are
ηSOFC ¼_W net�SOFC
_mH2,SOFC LHVH2þ _QH2�preheat
ð16:5Þ
ψSOFC ¼_Wnet�SOFC
_mH2,SOFC exH2þ _ExH2�preheat
ð16:6Þ
The purpose of the hybrid system is to provide a detached house with zero-emission electricity. The system also provides
a part of the heating/cooling demand. This is performed through heat recovery from the fuel cell stack gases.
Heat Recovery Steam Generator
The HRSG is treated as a heat exchanger. Subcooled water enters the economizer section and receives heat from the gases
leaving the HRSG. After it heats up to the saturation temperature at the boiler pressure, water vapor is formed inside the
pipes. The saturated steam generated in the HRSG leaves the unit for hot water production or cooling purposes.
Hybrid PV–Fuel Cell–Battery System
The overall efficiencies of the hybrid system consider all the useful outputs and the inputs to the system. The electric power
demand of the house and the heat recovered from the fuel cell exhaust gases are considered as outputs. The inlets to the
overall hybrid PV–Fuel Cell–Battery system are solar irradiance and the heat required to preheat the fuel feed to the SOFC.
Both enenrgy and exergy efficiencies of the overall system are then defined as follows:
ηtotal ¼Pdemand þ _mH2
LHVþ _Qs,HRSG
_Ensolar þ _QH2�preheat
ð16:7Þ
ψtotal ¼Pdemand þ _mH2
exH2þ _Exs,HRSG
_Exsolar þ _ExH2�preheat
ð16:8Þ
Assumption and Data
The thermodynamic and cost analyses are based on the following assumptions and data:
• The average daily demand is used of a 140 m2 detached house (22.2 kWh/day).
• The solar irradiance is based on a monthly average in Toronto in 2011. The calculations are for each month, separately.
• The Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) electrolyser is selected to operate at 30 bar and 65 % efficiency.
• The hydrogen generated by the electrolyser process is stored at 25 bar on a seasonal storage basis. The size of the storage
tank is determined based on the seasonal need for hydrogen.
184 M. Hosseini et al.
• The fuel cell is an atmospheric SOFC.
• The fuel cell nominal power is 1 kW (after accounting for 4 % internal consumption). The size of the fuel cell determines
the size of the PV array, the hydrogen storage tank, and the battery.
• The annual amount of the stored hydrogen must be positive; therefore, a PV panel with 86 modules is selected.
The nominal power output of each module is 210 W [at standard test conditions (STC)].
Figure 16.3 shows the daily electricity demand of the house. These sets of data are used in the previous work of the
authors [4] for comparison of the performance of the system in summer and winter of 2011. Here, the data, which are
adopted from the study for International Energy Agency [14], are used to perform the thermodynamic analysis and cost
evaluation of the system for each month of operation.
The University of Toronto publishes solar irradiance data in Toronto over the past 6 years. Here, the 2011 solar irradiance
presented in Fig. 16.4 is used [15]. Although the average monthly solar radiation on 24 h basis is used in the analyses,
Fig. 16.3 Hourly electric power
demand of the detached house
broken down by hour of the
day [14]
Fig. 16.4 Average daily solar
irradiance over each month
of 2011 (adapted from [15])
16 Thermodynamic and Cost Analyses of a Residential Hybrid PV–Fuel Cell–Battery System for a Canadian House 185
Fig. 16.5 is presented to illustrate the significant difference between the summer and winter solar availability.
The performance of the PV modules, and as a result the hybrid system components, are strongly dependent on the solar
irradiance, as discussed further in section “Results and Discussion”. The cost model considers only the purchase, installation
labor, and operation and maintenance of the system components. The details are provided in Table 16.1.
Results and Discussion
The load profile depends on the instantaneous demand, which requires precise measurement of electricity consumption.
However, the thermodynamic analyses can be performed based on average values to determine the initial sizes of the system
components, the pattern of energy flow in the electricity generation system, and the sources of losses. The results can also
help developing a control strategy and dynamic model for further investigations.
Fig. 16.5 Electric power output
of the PV–fuel cell system
component on a daily basis
as a monthly average
Table 16.1 Equipment purchase and operation and maintenance costs
System and component Nominal size Unit cost Cost
PV system [16]PV system 18.06 kW 5,156 $/kW US$ 93,113.66O&M [17] 47 $/kW/year US$/year 848.82
Fuel cell system [18]SOFC, balance of plant (BOP) 1 kW 2,296.73 $/kW US$ 2,296.73O&M 5 % of purchase US$/year 114.84Stored hydrogen 117.29 kg (3,909.28 kWh)Hydrogen storage tank 58.12 m3 at 25 bar, 300 K 4 $/kWh US$ 15,636.73O&M 3 % of purchase US$/year 469.10
ElectrolyserPEM electrolyser, BOP, installation 14.45 kW 586.5 $/kW US$ 8,474.93O&M 5 % of purchase US$/year 423.75Battery, BOP, installation 5 kWh 185 $/kWh US$ 937.50O&M 3 % of purchase US$/year 28.12
Total hybrid system capital cost US$ 120,459.55
Operation and maintenance US$/year 1,888.63
Total O&M cost over the system lifetime (25 years) US$ 47,115.75
Total estimated system cost over 25 years US$ 167,575.30
186 M. Hosseini et al.
In this study, the hourly solar irradiance and load demand are considered in the analyses. The data for solar irradiance are
derived from the average values over each month of the year 2011. However, the presented results only show the total daily
generation/consumption of each system component. The system is considered to perform the same throughout the month.
The electric power supply by each component of the hybrid PV–fuel cell–battery system (in kWh per day) is presented in
Fig. 16.5. The results are reported for each month, considering average values of solar irradiance in each month. Figure 16.5
presents the daily share of power supply of the PV modules, fuel cell, and batteries in each month. With the increase in solar
irradiance in the summer months (Fig. 16.4), the PV electric power output increases significantly. Therefore, most of the
electricity demand is directly met by the PV output, and the fuel cell has its minimum share in supplying the demand.
To quantify this significant difference, the power penetrations of the PV system and the fuel cell–battery are shown in
Fig. 16.6. Due to less solar irradiance in Fall-Winter months, the fuel cell–battery penetration in demand is as high as 80 %
in January and December. The supply share of the fuel cell–battery of the demand decreases with the rise in solar availability
in summer months.
The surplus electricity generated by the PV modules is directed to the electrolyser. The daily hydrogen production rate is
shown in Fig. 16.7, with July having the maximum production rate as 2.33 kg/day. The fuel cell hydrogen consumption is
related to its power output rate; therefore, more hydrogen is consumed by the SOFC during winter days. The difference
between the electrolyser hydrogen production rate and the SOFC fuel consumption rate is taken as the amount of the
hydrogen which needs to be stored in or provided by the hydrogen storage tank. The positive values for hydrogen storage in
Fig. 16.5 illustrate more production than what is consumed by the fuel cell. The negative values mean that the electrolyser
is not capable of producing enough hydrogen for the SOFC, and hydrogen is supplied by the storage tank. The hydrogen
storage tank must be large enough to cover the total consumption during the months with more consumption than
production.
The annual exergy destructions in the hybrid PV–fuel cell–battery system are given in Table 16.2, which shows that the
PVmodules are the main source of exergy destruction in the system. Improving the efficiency of the PV cells leads to a lower
exergy destruction. Exergy destruction in the fuel cell is caused by several phenomena, e.g., electrochemical reactions and
high temperature preheating of the air and hydrogen flows.
The efficiencies of the system components change when their operating conditions deviate from the nominal conditions.
The variations of the efficiencies of the PV and fuel cell systems are presented in Fig. 16.8. In summer days, the average
daily solar irradiance is closer to the standard test condition of the photovoltaic cells. However, the fuel cell appears to work
at its nominal power rate throughout the year. Higher values are obtained for exergy efficiency because solar exergy, the
input to the PV module, is less than solar energy. In the case of the fuel cell, the exergy of the required heat for hydrogen
preheating is less than its energy content, which results in higher efficiencies based on exergy rather than energy.
Fig. 16.6 PV and SOFC–battery
power penetration
16 Thermodynamic and Cost Analyses of a Residential Hybrid PV–Fuel Cell–Battery System for a Canadian House 187
Table 16.2 Total yearly exergy destruction in the major hybrid system components
Component PV Electrolyser SOFC HRSG
Exergy destruction, kWh/year 81,974.77 4,734.40 5,249.03 510.18
Fig. 16.8 Energy and exergy
efficiencies of the PV and SOFC
systems
Fig. 16.7 Monthly hydrogen
storage/consumption
188 M. Hosseini et al.
However, interesting results are obtained for the overall efficiencies of the hybrid PV–fuel cell–battery system.
According to Fig. 16.9, the efficiencies differ significantly with month. Higher values are reported for Fall-Winter months
in which the fuel cell–battery penetration is a maximum, and lower values are reported for Spring-Summer months in which
the PV modules provide a greater portion of the demand. The difference in the efficiencies of PV and fuel cell systems is the
cause of such results.
The unit cost of electricity is a function of the total estimated cost and the total electricity production over 25 years of
operation. The total annual electricity production is the sum of the daily production over 365 days of the year. Therefore, the
electricity unit cost (EUC) is 0.83 US$/kW. However, another analysis is made to estimate the cost of electricity in each year
of operation of the system. If the capital costs are assumed to be paid off in 10 years, considering the inflation rate (3 %), the
electricity unit cost will follow the trend shown in Fig. 16.10. A significant drop is observed for the 11th year of operation,
since the only costs of the system are associated with operation and maintenance costs.
Fig. 16.9 Energy and exergy
efficiencies of the hybrid PV–fuel
cell–battery system
Fig. 16.10 Annual electricity
unit cost during the hybrid system
lifetime
16 Thermodynamic and Cost Analyses of a Residential Hybrid PV–Fuel Cell–Battery System for a Canadian House 189
Conclusions
Several conclusions can be drawn from the thermodynamic and cost analyses reported here of a hybrid PV–fuel cell–battery
system as applied to a Canadian house. The nominal maximum power output of the PV modules is 18.06 kW, which is five
times higher than the demand maximum power. The photovoltaic system is sized to meet the demand either directly or
by storage of hydrogen generated in the electrolyser. Due to less solar irradiance in Fall-Winter months, the fuel cell–battery
penetration in supplying of the demand is as high as 80 % in January and December. The supply share of the fuel
cell–battery in meeting the demand decreases with the rise in solar availability in Summer months. The maximum H2
production rate is in July (2.3 kg/day), and the hydrogen consumption is maximum in January (0.99 kg/day).The efficiencies
differ significantly with the time of the year. Higher values are observed for fall-winter months in which the fuel cell–battery
penetration is a maximum, and lower values are observed for Spring-Summer months in which the PV module provides a
greater portion of the demand. The electricity unit cost is 0.83 $/kWh based on a 25-year economic evaluation period of the
hybrid PV–fuel cell–battery system.
Acknowledgment The authors acknowledge the support provided by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
Nomenclature
ex Specific exergy, kJ/kg
En:
Energy flow rate, kW
Ex:
Exergy flow rate, kW
G Solar irradiance, W/m2
IL PV light current, A
I0 Reverse saturation current, A
I PV electric current, A
k Boltzmann constant
kt Manufacturer supplied temperature
coefficient of short-circuit current, A/�C
LHV Lower heating value, kJ/kg
_m Mass flow rate, kg/s
P Power, kW_Q Heat transfer rate, kW
Rs Series resistance of the PV cells, Ohm
T Temperature, K
V Voltage, V_W Work rate, kW
Greek Letters
γ PV cell shape factor
η Energy efficiency, %
ψ Exergy efficiency, %
Subscripts
0 Ambient condition
cell PV cells
H2 Hydrogen
in, el Input to the electrolyser
mp Maximum power
SOFC Solid oxide fuel cell
Acronyms
CHP Combined heat and power
PV Photovoltaic
SOFC Solid oxide fuel cell
STC Standard test condition
References
1. Shabani B, Andrews J, Watkins S (2010) Energy and cost analysis of a solar-hydrogen combined heat and power system for remote power supply using a computer
simulation. Sol Energy 84:144–155
2. Lagorse J, Simoes MG, Miraoui A, Costerg P (2008) Energy cost analysis of a solar-hydrogen hybrid energy system for stand-alone applications. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 33:2871–2879
190 M. Hosseini et al.
3. Morrison IB, Mottillo M, Ferguson A, Ribberink H, Yang L, Haddad K (2006) The simulation of a renewable-energy-powered hydrogen-based residential
electricity system. Second national IBPSA-USA conference, Cambridge, MA, 2–4 August 2006
4. Hosseini M, Dincer I, Rosen MA (2013) Hybrid solar-fuel cell CHP Systems for residential applications: energy and exergy analyses. J Power Sources
221:372–380
5. Santarelli M, Cali M, Macagno S (2004) Design and analysis of stand-alone hydrogen energy systems with different renewable sources. Int J Hydrogen Energy
29:1571–1586
6. Uzunoglu M, Onar OC, Alam MS (2009) Modeling, control and simulation of a PV/FC/UC based hybrid power generation system for stand-alone applications.
Renew Energy 34:509–520
7. Sukamongkol Y, Chungpaibulpatana S, Ongsakul W (2002) A simulation model for predicting the performance of a solar photovoltaic system with alternating
current loads. Renew Energy 27:237–258
8. Chenni R, Makhlouf M, Kerbache T, Bouzid A (2007) A detailed modeling method for photovoltaic cells. Energy 32:1724–1730
9. Nordin A, Omar A (2011) Modeling and simulation of photovoltaic (PV) array and maximum power point tracker (MPPT) for grid-connected PV system. 3rd
international symposium and exhibition in sustainable energy and environment, Melaka, Malaysia, 1–3 June 2011
10. Clarke RE, Giddey S, Ciacchi FT, Badwal SPS, Paul B, Andrews J (2009) Direct coupling of an electrolyser to a solar PV system for generating hydrogen. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 34:2531–2542
11. La O’ GJ, In HJ, Crumlin E, Barbastathis G, Horn YSh (2007) Recent advances in microdevices for electrochemical energy conversion and storage. Int J Energy
Res 31:548–575
12. Colpan CO, Dincer I, Hamdullahpur F (2007) Thermodynamic modeling of direct internal reforming solid oxide fuel cells operating with syngas. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 32:787–795
13. Motahar S, Alemrajabi AA (2009) Exergy based performance analysis of a solid oxide fuel cell and steam injected gas turbine hybrid power system. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 34:2396–2407
14. Knight I, Kreutzer N, Manning M, Swinton M, Ribberink H (2007) European and Canadian non-HVAC electric demand and DHW load profiles for use in
simulating the performance of residential cogeneration systems. Annex 42, International Energy Agency, Energy Conversions in Buildings and Community
System Programme, May 2007
15. Weather Data, Department of Geography, University of Toronto Mississauga (2012) http://www.utm.utoronto.ca/geography/resources/meteorological-station/
weather-data. Accessed 26 June 2012
16. Sun Power Corporation (2012) Document #001-42023, 210 solar panel. http://www.prevailingwindpower.com/sunpower.pdf. Accessed 26 June 2012
17. Enbar N (2010) PV O&M best practices. Utility/lab workshop on PV technology and systems. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 8–9 November 2010
18. Braun RJ, Klein SA, Reindl DT (2011) Assessment of solid oxide fuel cells in building applications, phase 1: modeling and preliminary analyses. Prepared for
Energy Center of Wisconsin, Report 207-R, November 2011
19. Zhang X, Chan SH, Li G, Ho HK, Li J, Feng Z (2010) A review of integration strategies for solid oxide fuel cells. J Power Sources 195:685–702
16 Thermodynamic and Cost Analyses of a Residential Hybrid PV–Fuel Cell–Battery System for a Canadian House 191