Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Electricity to Grid
Boiler
Heat to atmosphere
Boiler
Heat to load
Boiler Pump
Fuel
Boiler
Isolation Valve
Isolation Valve
Heat to load
Capital Savings: Since 75% of the power plant is already built, the effective (marginal) capital costs are quite low.
1,000 MW Rankine plant typical capital costs ~ $1 billion ($1,000/kW) 1 MW steam turbine generator integrated into existing facility typical installed capital costs ~ $500,000 ($500/kW) Turbosteam has done fully installed systems for as little as $300/kW
Similar logic applies to non-fuel operating costs, since most of Rankine cycle O&M are in the boiler and cooling tower. Turbine-generator O&M costs are negligible.
Long term Turbosteam service contract on 1 MW unit ~ 0.1 c/kWh
Key differences from other CHP technologies. Defined by how the downstream thermal energy is used, not by the technology itself
Backpresssure = use LP steam. Condensing = dump LP steam
T:E ratio usually >10 for BPTGs (compare to 2 5 for other prime movers).
BPTG target markets fundamentally different from engines, turbines, etc.
Operational and design considerations are backwards from power first CHP
Design for thermal load, take power as near-free byproduct
Power-first approaches design for power need, take heat as byproduct
Can design to 100% of thermal load, but rare to be able to design for 100% of electrical load.
Power-first can be sized to electric demand, only recover heat that can be locally used.
Power production can be base-loaded or thermal following depending on size relative to thermal load, but generally cannot follow electric load
Power-first is exactly inverted from this approach
BUT the two approaches can be synergistic. UMCP gas turbine + HRSG + backpressure steam turbine is a great example.
LP Steam to load
Thermal plants are usually suboptimally designed for CHP. BPTG design often includes increases in boiler pressure and/or reductions in distribution pressure to boost power output. At the (confusing) extreme, this can enable condensing turbines in backpressure operation. Like all CHP, STGs (both CX and BP) can be designed to provide ancillary benefits in addition to kWh savings (e.g., enhance reliability, power factor)
We have installed 111 systems in the U.S., and 178 worldwide since 1986.
NonNon-U.S.
>10,000 kW 5001 10000 kW 1001 5000 kW 501 1000 kW 1 500 kW
Chemical/Pharmaceuticals Food processing Lumber & Wood Products District Energy Petroleum/Gas Processing Colleges & Universities Pulp & Paper Commercial Buildings Hospitals Waste-to-Energy Military Bases Prisons Textiles Auto manufacturing
28 21 20 19 17 16 11 10 8 6 5 2 1 1
In institutional applications where energy costs, reliability and environmental impact are becoming more important drivers.
Universities Hospitals Prisons
In regions where there have been recent sudden increases either in energy costs or regulatory friendliness through barrier removal or incentive creation (ACEEE: volatility drives efficiency investments more than absolute energy cost)
Southeastern US recent electric rate spikes Ontario big new govt incentives VT, CT: states to watch
However, the design challenge posed by opportunities is different from that of power-first CHP.
In a power-first application, the power generation is a fairly standard device, but the heat recovery unit requires custom-engineering
Can pick a prime mover and power output fairly quickly, but then have an infinite number of ways to design the heat-recovery unit: there is no such thing as a standard, mass-produced heat recovery steam generator.
In a heat-first application, the steam boiler is a fairly standard device, but the power-recovery unit requires custom engineering
Boilers can be picked by frame size, but then have an infinite # of ways to design the steam turbine-generator, each with unique capital & operating cost characteristics: there is no such thing as a standard, massproduced steam turbine.
Design for Peak flow? 11.9 MW rated power 43.3 million kWh/yr $1.4 million annual savings 3 year simple payback
Design for baseload? 2.4 MW rated power 21.0 million kWh/yr $672 K annual savings 2.7 year simple payback
50% 45% 6.5 MW 40% $1.44 million/year savings 10 MW 35% $1.59 million/year savings 30% 25% 20% 15% Gross ROA 10% Marginal ROA 5% 0% 150 200 250 Design Steam Flow (mlbs/hr)
Optimal system is designed here to balance desires for rapid capital recovery, high annual cash generation AND effective use of free cash.
300
15-year ROA
Inlet Steam Pressure Pressure drop across turbine-generator Steam flow Annual steam load factor Local electricity rate