Download - Poster presentation

www.postersession.com

Smart Grid Analysis of Centralized Cooling

for an Urban Community

Objectives

Introduction

Perform a techno-economic analysis of

a centralized cooling system for

an urban community of 10,000 people

in the context of day-ahead electricity prices.

Cooling Load

Figure 1 – Decentralized Cooling System.

Figure 2 – Centralized Cooling System.

The cooling load was obtained by adapting Cooling Load

Temperature Difference (CLTD) method proposed by the

ASHRAE to our case.

The electrical power due the cooling system:

Figure 3 – Cooling Load model

Figure 4 – Cooling load (𝑄𝐾𝐿 )

Then, the hourly cost and operational cost for case 1 are:

Figure 6 – Day ahead electricity price PJM (2012).

Figure 7 – Energy cost per hour.

Figure 5 – Electrical Chiller

𝐶𝑂𝑃𝐸𝐶 = 𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦

𝐼𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦

= 1.14 tons/kW

Net Present Value

Vieira, F.L; Henriques, J.M.M; Soares, L.S; Rezende, L.L; Martins, M.S; de Melo Neto, R; D. J.Chmielewski

Results for Case 1:

Initial Costs: $14 million

Operational Costs: $14 million

NPV: $28 million

𝑃𝑘𝐸𝐶 =

𝑄𝐾𝐿

𝐶𝑂𝑃𝐸𝐶

OC =

𝑘=0

𝑛

𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑃𝑘𝐸𝐶

Decentralized Chiller

Case 1

Planning period ( n = 20 years ), Interest rate ( i = 7% )

NPV = IC + PV PV = OC (1+𝑖)𝑛 −1

𝑖(1+𝑖)𝑛

http://www.megaprint.com/



for an Urban Community Vieira, F.L; Henriques, J.M.M; Soares, L.S; Rezende, L.L; Martins, M.S; de Melo Neto, R; D. J.Chmielewski

Figure 9 – Power Plant process load diagram.

Figure 10 – Case 2 diagram: Plant + Absorption Chiller + Electrical

Chiller

Centralized System – Background

Figure 8 – Electrical and Absorption Chiller diagrams.

Case 2

Figure 11 –Results of case 2..

𝑂𝐶 = min

𝑘=0

𝑛𝑐𝑘𝑒

𝐶𝑂𝑃𝐸𝐶𝑄𝑘𝐸𝐶 − 𝑐𝑘

𝑒𝑃𝑘𝐺 + 𝑐𝑘

𝑁𝐺𝜈𝑘𝑓

𝑄𝑘𝐸𝐶 + 𝑄𝑘

𝐴𝐶 = 𝑄𝑘𝐿

−𝑄𝑘𝐴𝐶 .𝜂𝑅𝐶𝑂𝑃𝐴𝐶

+ 𝜈𝑘𝑓. 𝜂𝑃 − 𝑃𝑘

𝐺 = 0

0 ≤ 𝑄𝑘𝐸𝐶 ≤ 𝑄𝑀𝐴𝑋

𝐸𝐶

0 ≤ 𝑄𝑘𝐴𝐶 ≤ 𝑄𝑀𝐴𝑋

𝐴𝐶

0 ≤ 𝜈𝑘𝑓≤ 𝜈𝑀𝐴𝑋𝑓

0 ≤ 𝑃𝑘𝐺 ≤ 𝑃𝑀𝐴𝑋

𝐺




for an Urban Community

Thermal Energy Storage Preliminary Results

Figure 13 – Case 3 diagram: Plant + Absorption Chiller + Electrical

Chiller + Thermal Energy Storage

Figure 14 – Results of case 3

Case 2:

Initial Cost: $ 299 million

o Absorption Chiller: $7.4 million

o Electric Chiller: $4.2 million

o Distribution Network: $80 million

o Power Plant: $207 million

Operational Cost: -$1.08 billion

o Profit of the Power Plant: $102 million/year

NPV: - $781 million

Case 3:

Initial Cost: $ 307 million

o Thermal Energy Storage: $ 8 million

Operational Cost: -$1.09 billion

o Profit of the Power Plant: $103 million/year

NPV: - $783 million

References1. American Society of Heating,Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, and

Knovel (Firm). 1997. 1997 ASHRAE handbook: Fundamentals. SI ed. Atlanta, GA:

American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers

2. Feng, J., Brown, A., O’Brien, D., & Chmielewski, D. J. (2015). Smart grid coordination of a

chemical processing plant. Chemical Engineering Science

3. Roth, K., Zogg, R., & Brodrick, J. (2006). Cool thermal energy storage. ASHRAE journal,

48(9), 94-96

4. Newnan, D. G., Lavelle, J. P., Eschenbach, T. G. (1991). Engineering Economic Analysis. 12th

edition

5. Black, J. Cost and performance baseline for fossil energy plants. US Department of Energy.

September, 2013

6. PJM Data Miner - Energy Pricing. (n.d.). Retrieved June , 2015, from

https://dataminer.pjm.com/dataminerui/pages/public/energypricing.jsf

7. NCDC: Quality Controlled Local Climatological Data - Chicago Illinois. (n.d.). Retrieved

June, 2015, from http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/qclcd/QCLCD?prior=N

8. Illinois Natural Gas Prices. (n.d.). Retrieved June, 2015, from

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_pri_sum_dcu_SIL_m.htm

Vieira, F.L; Henriques, J.M.M; Soares, L.S; Rezende, L.L; Martins, M.S; de Melo Neto, R; D. J.Chmielewski

Case 3

Figure 12 – Thermal Energy Storage


𝐴𝐶 = 𝑄𝑘𝐿


𝐴𝐶 - 𝐸𝑘 + 𝐸𝑘+1=𝑄𝑘𝐿

- 𝐸𝑀𝐴𝑋 ≤ 𝐸𝑘 ≤ 0

Acknowledgements
