Page 113 - Sustainable On-Site CHP Systems Design, Construction, and Operations
P. 113

Packaged CHP Systems      91


                     80                                Traditional  CHP
                     70
                    Efficiency for year (%)  50
                     60


                     40
                     30
                     20
                     10
                      0
                              Continuous Sys 1: E+H       Continuous Sys 2: E+C

             FIGURE 5-1  Continuously operated CHP systems outperform traditional energy systems.


                Second, consider the three packaged CHP systems when operated at customers
             with seasonal thermal energy demands. These demands were assigned as indicted in
             Table 5-2. Five-month seasonal periods were assigned to either heating or cooling, with
             continuous demand for electricity. The table also indicates the periods of energy delivery
             from the power grid, boiler, and electric chiller so that the total energy delivered by the
             CHP and traditional approaches were equal. It was recognized that if an electric power–
             only period was eliminated for a CHP system, the energy delivery efficiency would
             improve. However, the corresponding utilization of the system (i.e., hours per year)
             would reduce, adversely affecting the economic metric of number of “years for pay-
             back.” This effect would be great for Systems 1 and 2 but less significant for System 3.
                Figure 5-2 compares the yearly efficiency of delivering the electrical and thermal
             energies for the three packaged CHP systems with traditional methods for the above
             assumed use profiles. These results indicate that CHP systems with a single thermal
             output may have only a slight performance advantage over traditional methods if not
             all of the thermal output can be beneficially used by the facility; System 2: E + C appears
             to have no advantage. Again, note that other factors such as “economic benefits” may
             justify the selection of a single thermal output CHP system for a seasonal demand.
             However, only System 3 distinguished itself as significantly outperforming traditional



                        CHP Packaged System           1: E + H  2: E + C  3: E + H + C
               CHP operation       Months with E + H   5         0        5
                                   Months with E + C   0         5        5
                                   Months with E only  7         7        2
               Traditional operation  Months of grid  12        12       12
                                   Months of boiler    5         0        5
                                   Months of chiller   0         5        5
             TABLE 5-2  Operating Periods for Seasonal Demand
   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118