Appendices - GSA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table A-18: City Cost Adjustments for Composite Project Cost – Materials and Labor LPOE Site Name Nearest City for Which Cost Adjustment Factor is Published RS Means & Co. City Cost Adjustme nt Factor Beecher Falls, VT Burlington VT 0.861 Canaan, VT Burlington VT 0.861 East Richford, VT Burlington VT 0.861 Richford, VT Burlington VT 0.861 Alburg, VT (Joint ownership) Burlington VT 0.861 Highgate Springs 1, VT Burlington VT 0.861 Highgate Springs 2, VT Burlington VT 0.861 Highgate Springs 3, VT Burlington VT 0.861 Blaine, WA Everett WA 1.011 Danville, WA Everett WA 1.011 Laurier, WA Everett WA 1.011 Mataline Falls. WA Everett WA 1.011 Oroville, WA Everett WA 1.011 Point Robert, WA Everett WA 1.011 Sumas, WA Everett WA 1.011 Blaine, WA Everett WA 1.011 Blaine, WA Everett WA 1.011 A.4 Optimization Technique The objective of the optimization problem is to minimize life-cycle cost. An excel spreadsheet was prepared to estimate the cost and savings associated with each renewable energy measure and the life-cycle cost for energy use at each LPOE. A computer program named “Premium Solver” from Frontline Systems was then used to adjust each of the following variables to minimize life-cycle cost: • kW of PV • kW of wind power • Square feet of Solar ventilation air preheating • Square feet of solar water heating • Square feet of solar thermal (parabolic troughs) and kW of solar thermal electric • BTU/hour of biomass boiler capacity and kW of biomass electric using: - Combustion 100
- Gasification - Anaerobic Digestion • Percentage of office, packaging and warehouse roofs to be occupied by daylighting skylights. Life-cycle cost was calculated for the RE Solutions Case and for the Base Case by adding initial cost to any annual costs inflated over time and discounted to their present value. Initial cost used for the Base Case was zero. Initial costs for the RE Solutions Case were taken from NREL assessments and data of each RE industry. Annual costs for both the RE Solutions Case and the Base Case include maintenance, fuel, standby charges from the utility, payments to the utility associated with the difference between retail and delivered power, any production incentives, or other cash flows. The discount rate (4.6 percent) and energy cost escalation rates were used according to regulation 10CFR436. [2] The regulation specifies a maximum analysis period of 25 years for mechanical and electrical equipment, and the renewable energy measures considered here may be expected to last that long. In order to model costs which are not constant from year to year, such as accelerated depreciation, a 25-year cash flow analysis was prepared. The life-cycle cost analysis discounted all costs over a 25-year analysis period to their present worth. RE projects with life-cycle costs lower than the Base Case are good options. Life-cycle cost results were used to calculate return on investment. Cost-effective RE projects have rates of return higher than the discount rate used in the life-cycle analysis (4.6 percent). The solver routine calculates the change in life-cycle cost associated with a change in the size of each of the renewable energy technologies and then moves in the direction of LCC by an amount determined by a quadratic approximation (Figure A-20). The solver routine finds the minimum life-cycle cost in 13 variables, but only two variables can be illustrated in this two-dimensional figure. An increase and decrease in the size of each RE component is used to indicate direction of reducing life-cycle cost. The solver routine involved the following parameters— precision: value of energy use 0.0 +/- 0.0001; convergence: change in life-cycle cost less than $0.0001 for five iterations; quadratic extrapolation to obtain initial estimates of the variables in one-dimensional search; central derivatives used to estimate partial derivatives of the objective and constraint functions; and Newtonian Search Algorithm used at each iteration to determine the direction to search. 101
Page 1 and 2:
Appendix A. Detailed Methodology A.
Page 3 and 4:
Initial cost, efficiency, and opera
Page 5 and 6:
Table A-1: Characteristics of Dayli
Page 7 and 8:
Table A-2: Illuminance Information
Page 9 and 10:
Table A-2: Illuminance Information
Page 12 and 13:
Table A-3: Characteristics of Wind
Page 14 and 15:
Table A-4: Land Required and Land A
Page 16 and 17:
Table A-4: Land Required and Land A
Page 18 and 19:
Biomass Energy Biomass energy is fu
Page 20 and 21:
Orchard and Grape (Dry Tonnes/Year)
Page 22 and 23: A.2.3.2 Technology Characteristics
Page 24 and 25: three systems and costs are, theref
Page 26 and 27: These systems offer lower electrica
Page 28 and 29: not accounted for in this analysis
Page 30 and 31: Table A-7: Additional Information f
Page 32 and 33: Table A-7: Additional Information f
Page 34 and 35: Solar Resources The solar resource
Page 36 and 37: of the wall admits fresh air withou
Page 38 and 39: The size of a solar ventilation air
Page 40 and 41: Figure A-13: Typical solar water he
Page 42 and 43: Suggested size for the solar water
Page 44 and 45: other with an embedded conductor wi
Page 46 and 47: System efficiency is taken to be 77
Page 48 and 49: Since the system has moving parts,
Page 50 and 51: Table A-13: Location and Size of th
Page 56 and 57: Table A-14: Base Case Electricity C
Page 58 and 59: Table A-14: Base Case Electricity C
Page 60 and 61: Table A-15: Base Case Oil Consumpti
Page 62 and 63: Table A-16: Base Case Natural Gas C
Page 64 and 65: Geographical Information System (GI
Page 66 and 67: Table A-17: RE Resource Information
Page 68 and 69: Table A-17: RE Resource Information
Page 70 and 71: Table A-18: City Cost Adjustments f
Page 74 and 75: Figure A-20: Illustration of the so
Page 76 and 77: Kenneth Ward, WA Blaine, WA Blaine,
Page 78 and 79: Table B-2: RE Use as Percentage of
Page 80 and 81: Table B-2: RE Use as Percentage of
Page 82 and 83: Table B-4: CO 2 Avoided with RE Sol
Page 84 and 85: Table B-4: CO 2 Avoided by Site (wi
Page 86 and 87: B.3 Initial Cost Initial cost of $0
Page 88 and 89: Table B-6: Initial Costs for RE Tec
Page 90 and 91: Table B-6: Initial Costs for RE Tec
Page 92 and 93: Table B-8: Fuel Escalation Rates Us
Page 94 and 95: Table B-10: Life-Cycle Costs for RE
Page 96 and 97: Table B-10: Life-Cycle Costs for RE
Page 98 and 99: Table B-11: RE Solutions that Minim
Page 100 and 101: Table B-11: RE Solutions that Minim
Page 102 and 103: Table B-12: Daylighting Calculation
Page 104 and 105: Table B-12: Daylighting Calculation
Page 106 and 107: Table B-13: Wind Energy Calculation
Page 108 and 109: Table B-13: Wind Energy Calculation
Page 110 and 111: Table B-14: Calculations for Biomas
Page 116 and 117: Table B-16: Details of Solar Ventil
Page 118 and 119: Table B-16: Details of Solar Ventil
Page 120 and 121: Table B-17: Details of Solar Water
Page 122 and 123:
Table B-17: Details of Solar Water
Page 124 and 125:
LPOE Site Name Table B-18: Return o
Page 126 and 127:
The following LPOE Sites did not ha
Page 128 and 129:
Appendix C. Results of Life-Cycle C
Page 130 and 131:
type of arrangement the customer pa
Page 132 and 133:
Table C-1: Initial Cost of RE Techn
Page 134 and 135:
Table C-1: Initial Cost of RE Techn
Page 136 and 137:
Table C-2: Size of RE Technology th
Page 138 and 139:
Table C-2: Size of RE Technology th
Page 140 and 141:
Table C-4: Return on Investment for
Page 142 and 143:
Table C-4: Return on Investment for
Page 144:
[13] Emissions from Integrated MSW
show all

Appendices - GSA

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?