integration of solid oxide fuel cells and ... - Ea Energianalyse

2.4. Distributed Generation (DG)
air conditioner will give a total saving of around 1,5 mil. DKK 14 . So the
investment seems to be quite profitable.
Normal Climate
For this climate the numbers are a little closer:
Case A: 26mil. DKK (-SOFC, -Absorption unit)
Case B: 16mil. DKK (+SOFC, -Absorption unit)
Case C: 16mil. DKK (+SOFC, +Absorption unit)
For this climate the savings of using an SOFC is slightly decreased from
12 to 10mil. DKK. But the gain of using the ABS unit is significantly
reduced from around 1,5mil. DKK to 0,4mil. DKK. So it still looks
profitable although not as good as for the hot climate.
Pay Back Time for the entire system (case A vs case C)
Figure 2.5 shows how long time it takes before case C becomes cheaper
than case A when running a hotel i.e. how long does the entire
SOFC+ABS system has to live in order to be cheaper than just purchasing
the electricity from the electrical grid and use an electrical air conditioner
for cooling. It is seen that if the purchase price of the SOFC is around
the expected 2500DKK/kW, the pay back time for the entire system will
be around 1 year for both climate cases. And even if the SOFC price
is as high as 10.000DKK/kW the payback time is less than 3 years, but
at this price it is seen that the SOFC+ABS investment is slightly more
advantageous for the hot climate.
So if the SOFC price can just be lowered to around 10.000DKK/kW it
could become profitable for at hotel to purchase the SOFC + ABS system.
But the comparison of case A and C says nothing about whether it is
the addition of the absorption chiller or the SOFC in itself which makes
the investment profitable. Hence in the following case B and C will be
compared to see what effect the addition of the absorption chiller has on
the economics (assuming that the SOFC is used either way).
14 The NPV values of case B and C for the hot climate stated above have been rounded
off from 15,27mil. DKK and 13,78mil. DKK respectively
33