cogeneration facility overview. history joshua walker gore (1852-1908) and gore building at...
TRANSCRIPT
Cogeneration FacilityOverview
History
Joshua Walker Gore (1852-1908) and Gore Building at Cogeneration Facility
• Came to Chapel Hill in 1882, taught philosophy, physics and engineering• Designed 1st campus steam plant in 1895
•Located near old Venable Hall•Burned coal and wood•Started cogeneration using a small steam turbine in 1901
•New plant built on same site around 1920
Original Cameron Avenue plant• Constructed in 1941• Commitment to coal, 2 pulverized coal boilers
1978
Cameron Avenue Plant in 1974• Open coal pile• Bag houses to address stack emissions
Cameron Avenue Plant in 2005
District Energy System
1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 1997 2008
U.S. Average Generating Efficiencies
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
UNC Cogen •
• Traditional thermal electric plant• 65% of energy goes to a cooling tower, lake, etc.
Steam Distribution System
Plant Operation
Plant Operation• Built to utility standards, complete redundancy
throughout• 2 circulating fluidized bed boilers, 250,000
lbs/hour– Only boilers capable of operating the turbine
generator– Lower temperature than pulverized coal or gas,
inhibits NOx– Limestone injection limits SO2 but creates CO2
– 40 minutes before pressure incident if tripped• 1 natural gas/oil boiler, 250,000 lbs/hour
– Fuel and boiler diversity to increase reliability– 10 minutes before pressure incident if tripped
Circulating Fluidized Bed System
NSPS 40CFR60, Subpart DbConstituent Permit Limit Typical
Operation
Sulfur Dioxide
90% reduction1.2 lbs/MMBtu
92% reduction0.2 lbs/MMBtu
Nitrogen Oxide
0.6 lbs/MMBtu 0.4 lbs/MMBtu
Mercury 0.000003 lbs/ MMBtu
0.00000075 lbs/MMBtu
Hydrogen Chloride
435 lbs/hour 4.4 lbs/hour
Particulate 0.5 lbs/MMBtu 0.01 lbs/MMBtu
Opacity 20% 3%
Finances
How Expenses Are Paid
Type of Cost Carolina Other Schools
Capital Projects Debt retired by utility revenues*
State appropriated capital project
Renewal and Replacement
Debt retired by utility revenues
State appropriated R&R allocation
Operations and Maintenance
Utility revenues State appropriated building operating reserve
Fuel costs or direct purchases of power
Utility revenues State utility operating budget
Revenue Sources
Major Rate Components
• Debt Principal and Interest– 34% of total budget– $94 million remaining on debt to construct plant, paid
in 2022• Fixed Costs
– Do not vary with amount of steam produced– Examples: labor, maintenance
• Variable Costs– Fuel is 30% of total budget – Natural gas is purchased at the interruptible rate
State of NC Requires Lowest Cost Operation
All-in cost includes limestone and ash disposal, and adjusted for lower efficiency of natural gas
State Recaptures Any Savings
• Office of State Budget and Management– Determines increase factor– Adds to prior year’s actual expenditures
• Example– Assume state appropriated utility budget is $100
million– Assume actual expenditures are $95 million– Assume OSBM increase factor is 10%– Increase = $9.5 million (calculated on $95 million)– $95 million + $9.5 million = $104.5 million new budget– Appropriated utility budget increased by $4.5 million
State Inadvertently Recaptures Energy Budgets for New Buildings
• When a new building comes on line mid-year– Partial year’s funding received for the 1st year– Funding for remainder of full year ‘s cost provided
in 2nd year• If the first year’s partial funding is not spent, then it is
recaptured in the increase procedure and permanently lost
• Partial year funds normally are not spent because– Utility costs are transferred from the contractor
when the building is accepted and move-in occurs later so usage is low
– Consumption is not uniform, may miss a summer or winter peak
– No debt service or fixed cost components in the utility rates in the first year of a building’s operation
Alternative Energy
Climate Action Plan
• UNC was an early adopter of the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment
• Pledged climate neutrality by 2050• Climate Action Plan adopted by
University in September 2009• Alternative Energy Study, looked at
alternatives to coal, began 2 years before Climate Action Plan issued
Transportation
Conservation
Energy
Green Building
BehaviorSupply
Chain
Offsets
LevelizedCost(Savings)perMTCDE
Near-TermPortfolioA B C
DF G
H I JK
L
MNOP
E
$0
$100
>$150
$50
($50)
($100)
($150)
<($200)
Scale
100,000MTCDEA. Biomass Gasification at Carolina North (CN)
B. 100% Coal SubstituteC. 50% Coal SubstituteD. Plasma Gasification of MSW - SyngasE. Shops and Informal Contract RecyclingF. 50% Natural Gas, 50% Coal SubstituteG. Plasma Gasification of MSW: Syngas + Natural GasH. 50% Natural Gas
I. Biomass Gasification w/ Biochar Production (CN)J.Energy Conservation (Mid-High Investment)K. Large Scale BiomassL. Biomass Gasification at CN (Phase II)M.Solar Thermal (CN)N. Solar Thermal to Electricity (Troughs) (CN)O. Solar Thermal to Electricity (Dish Sterling) (CN)P. Demo Scale Concentrating Solar PV (CN)
LevelizedCost(Savings)perMTCDE
Near-TermPortfolioA B C
DF G
H I JK
L
MNOP
E
$0
$100
>$150
$50
($50)
($100)
($150)
<($200)
LevelizedCostUnder CarbonCapandTrade
Scale
100,000MTCDEA. Biomass Gasification at Carolina North (CN)
B. 100% Coal SubstituteC. 50% Coal SubstituteD. Plasma Gasification of MSW - SyngasE. Shops and Informal Contract RecyclingF. 50% Natural Gas, 50% Coal SubstituteG. Plasma Gasification of MSW: Syngas + Natural GasH. 50% Natural Gas
I. Biomass Gasification w/ Biochar Production (CN)J.Energy Conservation (Mid-High Investment)K. Large Scale BiomassL. Biomass Gasification at CN (Phase II)M.Solar Thermal (CN)N. Solar Thermal to Electricity (Troughs) (CN)O. Solar Thermal to Electricity (Dish Sterling) (CN)P. Demo Scale Concentrating Solar PV (CN)
50% Natural Gas50% Coal Substitute
100% Coal Substitute
Large Scale BiomassPlasma Gasification
Near-Term Portfolio Long-Term Common
Long-Term Alternative
LFG Banked Offsets
Additional Projects
Biomass Issues• Fuel supply chain and cost• Front end fuel handling
– Storage– Feed systems
• Impact on combustion and heat transfer surface
• Baghouse impacts• Ash disposal impacts
Biomass Plan• Test protocols – February 2010• Dried wood pellets tests – Spring
2010• Torrified wood tests – Fall to Winter
2010/2011• Evaluation and implementation plan
development – 2010/2011• Burn 2012 – Dependent upon fuel
supply reliability and extent of required modifications
Questions