07.04.2013 Views

part 1: overview of cogeneration and its status in asia - Fire

part 1: overview of cogeneration and its status in asia - Fire

part 1: overview of cogeneration and its status in asia - Fire

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Examples <strong>of</strong> <strong>cogeneration</strong> projects implemented <strong>in</strong> Asia 71<br />

The total electricity dem<strong>and</strong> <strong>of</strong> the factory was 59,000 MWh/year, with an average dem<strong>and</strong> <strong>of</strong><br />

around 6.7 MW. The actual dem<strong>and</strong> varied between a m<strong>in</strong>imum <strong>of</strong> 5.9 MW <strong>and</strong> a maximum <strong>of</strong><br />

8.9 MW. About 1 MW <strong>of</strong> electricity represent<strong>in</strong>g 15 per cent <strong>of</strong> the total dem<strong>and</strong> was selfgenerated,<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g more than 20 years old diesel generators.<br />

Four alternatives were considered dur<strong>in</strong>g the feasibility study <strong>and</strong> compared with the exist<strong>in</strong>g<br />

situation: (1) Back pressure steam turb<strong>in</strong>e, (2) Gas turb<strong>in</strong>e, (3) Comb<strong>in</strong>ed cycle, (4) Diesel<br />

eng<strong>in</strong>e. In all cases, the criteria set was to meet the peak steam dem<strong>and</strong> <strong>of</strong> the factory, i.e.,<br />

17 tons/hour.<br />

2.3.2 Option 1: back pressure steam turb<strong>in</strong>e<br />

The proposed option is schematically shown <strong>in</strong> Figure 2.2. This option was found to be not<br />

attractive due to the need for extract<strong>in</strong>g steam at two different pressures. The vary<strong>in</strong>g dem<strong>and</strong><br />

<strong>of</strong> steam at these pressures will lead to quite unfavourable steam turb<strong>in</strong>e operation. In steam<br />

match<strong>in</strong>g option, the net output would be only 0.8 MW, which is less than the current st<strong>and</strong>by<br />

needs.<br />

Moreover, the unavailability <strong>of</strong> a suitable st<strong>and</strong>ard turb<strong>in</strong>e will lead to high <strong>in</strong>stallation cost <strong>and</strong><br />

will be more difficult to operate <strong>in</strong> practice. Consider<strong>in</strong>g 40 per cent <strong>of</strong> custom duty <strong>and</strong> tax,<br />

the <strong>in</strong>vestment was calculated as US$ 7,500/kW. The annual ma<strong>in</strong>tenance cost was<br />

estimated as 3 per cent <strong>of</strong> the <strong>in</strong>vestment, i.e., US$ 180,000/year.<br />

130 c C, 12.73 t/h, (1.93 MW)<br />

Fuel<br />

10.6 MW<br />

Water: 70 o C<br />

11.5 t/h,<br />

(0.94 MW)<br />

Boiler<br />

η= 90%<br />

Figure 2.2 Steam turb<strong>in</strong>e <strong>cogeneration</strong> option for the textile mill<br />

2.3.3 Option 2: gas turb<strong>in</strong>e<br />

Steam: 100 bar/450 o C<br />

12.73 t/h (11.47 MW)<br />

Steam: 12 bar/237 o C<br />

1.23 t/h (0.99 MW)<br />

Electricity<br />

800 kW<br />

Steam to Process<br />

12 bar/237 o C<br />

6 t/h (4.84 MW)<br />

56 bar/380 o C<br />

5.5 t/h (4.79 MW)<br />

The schematic diagram <strong>of</strong> this option is shown <strong>in</strong> Figure 2.3. The system <strong>in</strong>cluded a diesel<br />

fired gas turb<strong>in</strong>e with heat recovery steam boiler <strong>and</strong> an option for auxiliary fir<strong>in</strong>g to meet the<br />

vary<strong>in</strong>g steam dem<strong>and</strong>s. A boiler bypass would allow the gas turb<strong>in</strong>e to run at full load, <strong>and</strong><br />

the auxiliary fir<strong>in</strong>g option with heavy fuel oil will let the boiler run at full load even when the gas<br />

turb<strong>in</strong>e is shut down. The net output <strong>of</strong> the alternator would be 4.7 MW, <strong>and</strong> assum<strong>in</strong>g a 90<br />

per cent availability factor, the <strong>cogeneration</strong> plant was capable <strong>of</strong> provid<strong>in</strong>g 58 per cent <strong>of</strong> the<br />

power needs <strong>of</strong> the factory, the rest be<strong>in</strong>g purchased from the utility grid.<br />

ST<br />

G

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!