for Hospitals Abington Memorial Hospital

Transcription

1 Combined Heat & Power for Hospitals Abington Memorial Hospital November 17, 2011

2 Mid Atlantic Clean Energy Application Center Department of Energy Program directed by Penn State AE Department Jim Freihaut established at The Navy Yard in Philadelphia four year program coordinate activities with other regional CEACs

3

4

5

6 Larry Burton Pennsylvania and West Virginia PENN STATE UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY PARK, PA TEL: E MAIL: lcb2@psu.edu Gearoid Foley New Jersey 50 WASHINGTON ROAD PRINCETON JUNCTION, NJ TEL: E MAIL: guf@ uf@psu.edu James Freihaut, Director Mid Atlantic Clean Energy Application Center 104 ENGINEERING UNIT A UNIVERSITY PARK, PA Richard ih Sweetser TEL: Bill Vl Valentine Virginia, DC and Maryland E MAIL: jdf11@psu.edu Pennsylvania and Delaware MEADOWVILLE COURT THE PHILADELPHIA NAVY YARD HERNDON, VIRGINIA SOUTH BROAD STREET TEL: PHILADELPHIA, PA E MAIL: rss27@.psu.edu TEL: maceac.psu.edu edu E MAIL: wjv3@psu.edu

7 Margaret McGoldrick Chief Operating Officer

8 Introduction Who s Abington Health 700 bed community teaching health care system 2 hospitals 3 ambulatory campuses 200 employed physicians / 50 offices 150 graduate medical residents in training 6500 employees 1 million people service area 50% market share in primary service area

9 Introduction Who s Abington Health Trauma Center Level 3 NICU AHA Quest for Quality Award 2003 John M. Eisenberg Award 2003 Magnet Accreditation 2003, 2008 Magnet Prize 2008, 2011 KAPE Baldrige Award 2010 Everything is a Journey

10 What are the Steps to Success 1. Senior leadership commitment to environmental stewardship as an institutional imperative 2. Ability to create internal / grass roots energy for environmentally sustainable practices 3. Passion for Green living at all levels of the organization 4. Collaboration with regional and national experts and partners 5. Assign resources 6. Persistence / Perseverance / Journey

11

12 What is CHP Definition & Economics Workshop on CHP for Hospitals Abington, PA November 17, 2011 Gearoid Foley Senior Technical Advisor DOE s Mid Atlantic Clean Energy Application Center

13 What is CHP? Combined Heat & Power or Cogeneration ASHRAE Handbook: Combined heat and power (CHP) is the simultaneous production of electrical or mechanical energy and useful thermal energy from a single energy stream. Conventional grid based generators are located remote fromthermal applications while CHP plants are located close to thermal applications

14 What is CHP? CHP uses 40% less primary energy versus grid power and fossil fueled boilers. CHP is not a single technology but a suite of technologies that can use a variety of fuels to generate electricity or power at the point of use. CHP technologycan can be deployed quickly, cost effectively, and with few geographic limitations.

15 CHP System Components Prime Mover Heat Recovery Thermal Technology Accessory Devices Switchgear Cooling Towers Thermally Activated Chillers Fuel Supply Condenser Controls/M&V Dump Condenser Chilled Water Supply/Return Inlet Air Cooling Steam Heat Supply/Return Combustion Turbine Generator Steam Supply Bypass Stack Condensate Return Heat Recovery Steam Generator Duct Burner Fuel Supply Main Stack Combustion Turbine/Steam Turbine CHP System

16 Prime Movers Gas Combustion Turbines > 1 MW Microturbines 35 kw 250 kw IC Engines 30 kw 6 MW Fuel Cells 250 kw 75% 60% HEAT 25% 40% Electricity

17 Thermally Activated Technologies Technologies: Technologies: Applications: Hot Water HEX Boilers/Steam Generators Organic Rankin Cycle Backpressure Turbines Absorbers Steam Turbines Desiccants Adsorbers Process Heat Space Heat Domestic Hot Water Cooling Freezing Dehumidification Power Generation

18 CHP Benefits Cost Savings Offset Utility/3rd Party kwh s + Therms Reduce Utility Demand Charges Demand Response Offset Capital Costs Require Redundancy Improved Power Reliability/Quality Emissions Reductions In the same way that it saves fuel cost, CHP reduces pollution by using the fuel s energy twice, yielding half to a third of the emissions from separate fossil fuelled grid power and boilers. Supported by US DOE & US EPA

19 CHP Benefits Reliability Provides local grid support and improves power quality Can often be configured to provide emergency power back up Natural Gas grid can be more reliable for long term outages National Security Reduced fossil fuel usage extends US resources and reduces dependence on foreign energy imports Multiple points of power generation are less subject to catastrophic failure or attack

20 CHP & Public Energy Policy Increasing energy costs favor Energy Efficiency. CHP is Supply Side Energy Efficiency The Federal Government and many States have developed policy in support of developing a robust CHP industry to help meet societal goals of reducing energy cost and emissions, while increasing grid reliability and energy security CHP has a high private to public investment ratio and provides a very cost effect means of reducing carbon emissions sso s Marcellus Shale gas fired CHP enhances the job creation and economic benefits offered by CHP in Pennsylvania

21 Energy Cost Policy The government and oversight bodies are required to provide reliable power at a reasonable cost. CHP is lowest cost option after Energy Efficiency Thermal Credit Source: ICF for DOE

22 Emissions Policy CHP provides highly efficient use of clean fossil or renewable fuel. CHP reduces carbon emissions by over 50% versus PA grid power and natural gas boilers. Source: EPA s Handbook of CHP Technologies

23 Emissions Policy Based on: 1 MW Recip Engine CHP 34 % electric efficiency 68 % total efficiency U.S. average fossil generation

24 Job Creation Policy Large Industrial lu User, PA 53 MW Combustion Turbine CHP Systems installed in 1985 Work underway on installation of second unit Total CHP plant will provide most of the plant s electric and thermal energy needs. Marcellus shale gas will become a competitive advantage for our site and I believe will help existing or new industries develop that are energy intensive in PA The manufacturer saidthatthey are now the lowest The manufacturer said that they are now the lowest cost plant from an energy per unit production basis based on the CHP system they are using. Onsite Shale Gas Development

25 PA Commercial Technical Potential (MW) no Export (3,623 MW)

26 Cost to Generate Power At a natural gas cost of $7/MMBH, on site generators will produce power at between 8½ and 11½ cents/kwh* Natural Gas ($ per MMBH) $14.00 $12.00 $10.00 $8.00 $6.00 With high thermal load $4.00 factor, CHP produces power $2.00 at an effective 6 to 9 $ cents/kwh* * Includes maintenance Source: ICHPS Delivered Gas v's Grid Electric Cost NOT VIABLE 38% 31% 27% VIABLE Electricity (cents per kwh)

27 CHP System Output Energy Values Of the various energy streams produced by a CHP plant, the highest value output is electric power, next in value is heating and cooling is lowest value output based on typical utility costs and generator, boiler and chiller efficiencies. Input Values Offset Values Natural Gas $0.70 /Therm Electricity $29.29 /MMBH Grid Electricity $0.10 /kwh Heating $8.75 /MMBH Boiler Efficiency 80 % Cooling $5.00 /MMBH Chiller Efficiency 0.60 kw/ton CHP Costs Generator Efficiency 35 % Fuel $0.075 /kwh Maintenance $0.025 /kwh

28 Cost to Generate Power with Heat Use Large IC Engine CHP: Displacing Nat Gas Heating reduces cost to generate by 1/3. Displacing Oil or Electric Heating reduces cost to generate by 1/2. Cost to Generate Power including Thermal Offset CHP Costs Natural Gas Cost $0.60 $0.70 $0.80 $/Therm Maintenance Cost $ $ $ $kwh Engine Electric Efficiency (LHV) 38.0% 38.0% 38.0% Electric Efficiency (HHV) 34.5% 34.5% 34.5% Thermal Efficiency (HHV) 35.5% 35.5% 35.5% Cost to Generate Power Only Fuel Input (HHV) per kwh 9,883 9,883 9,883 Btu Fuel Cost per kwh $0.059 $ ,000 Btu/CF Maintenance per kwh $ $ $ Excl HR Equipment Total Cost per kwh $0.077 $0.087 $0.097 Gas 100% Thermal Load Factor Boiler Efficiency 80% 80% 80% Nat Gas Offset per kwh 4,380 4,380 4,380 Btu Offset Value per kwh $0.026 $ ,000 Btu/CF Net Cost per kwh $0.053 $0.059 $0.064 Incl HR Equipment

29 Basic Economics At power costs of CHP E i 8 /kwh and 70 /Therm, CHP 2009 Average Rate 0.08 /kwh simple payback without CHP Costs incentives is 11.2 years versus grid power and CHP Economics v's Gas Heating natural gas fired heat CHP Economics Electric Power Rate Increase 0% Over 2009 Rates Future Power Cost $ $ $ /kwh Natural Gas Cost $0.60 $0.70 $0.80 $/Therm Maintenance Cost $0.020 $0.020 $0.020 $kwh Savings per MW $224,553 $178,758 $132,964 CapX per MW $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 Simple Payback Years

30 Basic Economics At 10 /kwh and CHP E i 60 /Therm, CHP simple payback 2009 Average Rate 0.08 /kwh without incentives is 5.8 CHP Costs years versus grid power and natural gas fired CHP Economics v's Gas Heating heat CHP Economics Electric Power Rate Increase 25% Over 2009 Rates Future Power Cost $0.100 $0.100 $0.100 /kwh Natural Gas Cost $0.60 $0.70 $0.80 $/Therm Maintenance Cost $0.020 $0.020 $0.020 $kwh Savings per MW $390,993 $345,198 $299,404 heat CapX per MW $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 Simple Payback Years

31 2 MW ICE, 95% Electric LF, 100% Thermal LF 2MWICE w/steam &Hot twater Engine Selection: ICE Nat Gas Offset $502,583 Net Power Output: 1,960 kw Electric Offset $1,625,044 $2,127,627 Net Steam Output: 3,284 Lbs/hr Maintenance $406,261 Net HW Output: 3,356 MBH Gas Input $1,147,122 $1,553,383 Electric Load Factor: 95% Addnl Labor $0 Thermal Load Factor: 100% Net Savings: $574,244 Economic Analysis Input Variable Power Rate Base Case Net Capital 1 $ $3,453,975 $3,453,975 Grid Power $/kwh $0.100 $0.100 Boiler Gas $/Dtherm $7.00 $7.00 Annual Costs $/yr $1,553,383 $1,553,383 Annual Savings $/yr $2,127,627 $2,127,627 Net Savings $/yr $574,244 $574,244 Simple Payback Years Year Net 2 $ $3,129,085 $3,129,085 Variable Gas Rate Notes: 1 Capital cost includes Federal 10% ITC 2 Includes 3% cost escalation per year for all utilities and engine maintenance 90% simple ROI over 10 years

32 2 MW w/ Steam & Chilled Water 2MWICE w/steam &Cooling Engine Selection: ICE Nat Gas Offset $242,544 Net Power Output: 1,960 kw Electric Offset $1,722,127 $1,964,671 Steam Output: 3,284 Lbs/hr Maintenance $406,261 Cooling Output: 206 Tons/hr Gas Input $1,147,122 $1,553,383 Electric Load Factor: 95% Addnl Labor $0 Thermal Load Factor: 96% Net Savings: $411,288 Economic Analysis Input Variable Power Rate Base Case Variable Gas Rate Net Capital $ $3,784,725 $3,784,725 $3,784,725 $3,784,725 $3,784,725 $3,784,725 Grid Power $/kwh $0.100 $0.075 $0.110 $0.100 $0.100 $0.100 Boiler Gas $/Dtherm $7.00 $7.00 $7.00 $7.00 $0.00 $0.00 Annual Costs $/yr $1,553,383 $1,553,383 $1,553,383 $1,553,383 $1,389,508 $1,717,258 Annual Savings $/yr $1,964,671 $1,534,139 $2,136,884 $1,964,671 $1,930,022 $1,999,320 Net Savings $/yr $411,288 ($19,244) $583,501 $411,288 $540,514 $282,063 Simple Payback Years 9.2 N/A Year Net 1 $ $930,233 ($4,005,331) $2,904, $930,233 $2,411,658 ($551,192) 192) Notes: 1 Includes 3% cost escalation per year for all utilities and engine maintenance 2 Includes 3% cost escalation per year for all utilities and engine maintenance

33 2 MW ICE, 95% Electric LF, 100% Thermal LF 2MWICE w/steam &Hot twater Engine Selection: ICE Nat Gas Offset $502,583 Net Power Output: 1,960 kw Electric Offset $1,625,044 $2,127,627 Net Steam Output: 3,284 Lbs/hr Maintenance $406,261 Net HW Output: 3,356 MBH Gas Input $1,147,122 $1,553,383 Electric Load Factor: 95% Addnl Labor $0 Thermal Load Factor: 100% Net Savings: $574,244 Economic Analysis Input Variable Power Rate Base Case Net Capital 1 $ $3,453,975 $3,453,975 Grid Power $/kwh $0.100 $0.100 Boiler Gas $/Dtherm $7.00 $7.00 Annual Costs $/yr $1,553,383 $1,553,383 Annual Savings $/yr $2,127,627 $2,127,627 Net Savings $/yr $574,244 $574,244 Simple Payback Years Year Net 2 $ $3,129,085 $3,129,085 Variable Gas Rate Notes: 1 Capital cost includes Federal 10% ITC 2 Includes 3% cost escalation per year for all utilities and engine maintenance

34 2 MW ICE, 95% Electric LF, 50% Thermal LF 2MWICE w/steam &Hot twater Engine Selection: ICE Nat Gas Offset $162,082 Net Power Output: 1,960 kw Electric Offset $1,625,044 $1,787,126 Net Steam Output: 3,284 Lbs/hr Maintenance $406,261 Net HW Output: 3,356 MBH Gas Input $1,147,122 $1,553,383 Electric Load Factor: 95% Addnl Labor $0 Thermal Load Factor: 50% Net Savings: $233,743 Economic Analysis Input Variable Power Rate Base Case Net Capital 1 $ $3,453,975 $3,453,975 Grid Power $/kwh $0.100 $0.100 Boiler Gas $/Dtherm $7.00 $7.00 Annual Costs $/yr $1,553,383 $1,553,383 Annual Savings $/yr $1,787,126 $2,127,627 Net Savings $/yr $233,743 $574,244 Simple Payback Years Year Net 2 $ ($774,376) $3,129,085 Variable Gas Rate Notes: 1 Capital cost includes Federal 10% ITC 2 Includes 3% cost escalation per year for all utilities and engine maintenance

35 2 MW ICE, 95% Electric LF, 0% Thermal LF 2MWICE w/steam &Hot twater Engine Selection: ICE Nat Gas Offset $0 Net Power Output: 1,960 kw Electric Offset $1,625,044 $1,625,044 Net Steam Output: 3,284 Lbs/hr Maintenance $406,261 Net HW Output: #DIV/0! MBH Gas Input $1,147,122 $1,553,383 Electric Load Factor: 95% Addnl Labor $0 Thermal Load Factor: 0% Net Savings: $71,661 Economic Analysis Input Variable Power Rate Base Case Net Capital 1 $ $3,453,975 $3,453,975 Grid Power $/kwh $0.100 $0.100 Boiler Gas $/Dtherm $7.00 $7.00 Annual Costs $/yr $1,553,383 $1,553,383 Annual Savings $/yr $1,625,044 $2,127,627 Net Savings $/yr $71,661 $574,244 Simple Payback Years Year Net 2 $ ($2,632,465) $3,129,085 Variable Gas Rate Notes: 1 Capital cost includes Federal 10% ITC 2 Includes 3% cost escalation per year for all utilities and engine maintenance

36 Load Factor vs Efficiency No matter which h basis is used to choose the prime mover, the degree of use of the available heat determines the overall system efficiency; this is the critical factor in economic feasibility. Therefore, the thermal/electric ratio of the prime mover and load must be analyzed as a first step towards making the best choice. Maximizing efficiency is generally not as important as thermal and electric utilization.. ASHRAE Design Guide, Chapter 7 CHP Systems

37 Federal Energy Policy Business Energy Investment Tax Credit (ITC) Incentive Type: Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies: Applicable Sectors: Amount: Maximum Incentive: Eligible System Size: Corporate Tax Credit Solar Water Heat, Solar Space Heat, Solar Thermal Electric, Solar Thermal Process Heat, Photovoltaics, Wind, Biomass, Geothermal Electric, Fuel Cells, Geothermal Heat Pumps, CHP/Cogeneration, Solar Hybrid Lighting, Microturbines, Geothermal Direct Use Commercial, Industrial, Utility, Agricultural 30% for solar, fuel cells and small wind;* 10% for geothermal, microturbines and CHP* Fuel cells: $1,500 per 0.5 kw Microturbines: $200 per kw Small wind turbines placed in service 10/4/08 12/31/08: $4,000 Small wind turbines placed in service after 12/31/08: no limit All other eligible technologies: no limit Small wind turbines: 100 kw or less* Fuel cells: 0.5 kw or greater Microturbines: 2 MW or less CHP: 50 MW or less* Equipment Requirements: Fuel cells, microturbines and CHP systems must meet specific energy efficiency criteria Authority 1: 26 USC 48 Authority 2: Instructions for IRS Form 3468 Authority 3: IRS Form 3468

38 Pennsylvania Act 129 Pennsylvania Governor, Ed Rendell, signed House Bill 2200 into law as Act 129 in The Act requires utilities to develop cost effective plans to reduce electricity it consumption by 1 percent by 2011, and by 3 percent by Additionally, the Act requires a 4.5 percent reduction in peak demand by Failure to Deliver Plan EE Savings or DR will Result in Fines of up to $20 Million

39 Marcellus Shale Gas Shale gas really has been a revolution that s happened extremely rapidly, Yergin says. Up until 2008, it really wasn t recognized and then it just took off, and it s gone frombeingvirtually noneof of ournatural gas productionto to about 30 percent of our total natural gas production. Shale gas has created hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of jobs in the last five years in the United States. It s brought $1 billion of revenue into the state government of Pennsylvania, Yergin says. It does have a transformative impact. (NPR, 9/20/11). Daniel Yergen, author, commentator and energy guru

40 Marcellus Shale Formation The organic rich, gas producing layers of the Marcellus shale range from less than 5 feet thick to more than 250 feet thick. It covers 6 states and underlies nearly 75 percent of Pennsylvania.

41 Marcellus Shale Formation Found as deep as 9,000 feet below the ground surface in NE and central Pennsylvania It generally becomes shallower at depths of 2,000 feet toward NW Pennsylvania

42 Marcellus Shale Activity

43 Utica Shale Formation The thickness estimates include relatively organic carbon rich intervals above and below that are capable of generating hydrocarbons (gas, condensate and oil) with sufficient burial and heating.

44 Marcellus Shale Gas Estimated technically (not economically) recoverable reserves in the Marcellus play are between TCF.

45 CREEDA was formed to provide a voice for CHP users, potential users and industryparticipants in shaping the Commonwealth s energy future.

46 Questions

47 CHP Considerations for Hospitals Thomas A. Bathgate Chief Executive Officer

48 Automobile Energy Heat Rejected to Atmosphere Air Out (hot) Drive Shaft Cooled Water Air In (cold) Rear Wheel Hot Water Car Engine

49 Combined Heat and Power Building Power Lines Drive Shaft Cooled Water Electricity Generator Cogeneration Engine Steam Hot Water Building Heating Co-Generation Tri-Generation

50 Hospital Waste Heat Uses Building Heating (HVAC) Domestic Hot Water Heating Kitchen Cooking Heat De-Humidification Cycles Humidification Absorption Refrigeration Snow/Ice Removal Sterilization

51 Cogeneration Preferred Technologies Gas Reciprocating Engines 750 KW & Up Concept Generate electricity and recover waste heat for heating & cooling Heat is recovered from engine block & exhaust air Heat recovered from engine block generates 240 F hot water and is approximately 50% of the recovered heat Heat recovered from the exhaust can be either 240 F hot water or steam up to 125 PSI

52 Cogeneration Preferred Technologies Combustion Turbine Engines 1,200 KW & Up Concept Generate electricity and recover waste heat for heating & cooling Heat is recovered from exhaust air to generate steam as high as 350 PSI

53 Cogeneration Technologies Fuel Cells Concept Generate power, heat & water from electrochemical reaction between hydrogen, a platinum catalyst & oxygen Can use hydrogen as a direct Can use hydrogen as a direct fuel

54 Cogeneration Technologies Fuel Cells Applications Demonstration projects Not economically feasible at this time Transportation Bus Automobile Mining Trains Remote areas without power source Landfills Waste water treatment plants digester gas Portable power

55 Firm Base Loaded Program CO GENERATION `

56 Block and Index Program INDEX BLOCK

57 Base Loaded Program INDEX BLOCK CO GENERATION

58 Break Even Program INDEX/COGEN BLOCK

59 Spot Market Program INDEX/COGEN

60 Savings Target Co-generation: $500,000/mW-Year 2. Aggregation + Block and Index: 12% for major sites and 41% for small users 3. Future Spot Market: ADD 11% more for major sites and 11% more for small users 4. Total Savings Targets: $500,000/mW-Year Cash Flow + 23% savings for major sites + 52% savings for small users

61 Combined Heat & Power at Rick Szatkowski Director of Plant Operations

62 2008/9 Situation Completion of Strategic Energy Plan outlining defined future plans CHP screening study indicated feasibility De-regulation looming with possible 40+ % increase in electric costs Management supported energy plan

63 Concept Developed Co-Generation Capacity: (1) 4.5 mw Combustion Turbine Steam heat recovered for all hospital heating needs Option for future Steam Turbine Chiller (not installed yet) Premium cost for facility to house CHP

64 Economics Utility Operating Cost Prior to Co-Generation: $7 million/yr Projected Net Annual Savings*: $ million/yr Investment Cost: Simple Payback: Financial Incentive $9.2 million 4.1 Years $3 million (PA Award) $3.16 million (Pending) *Includes Maintenance Cost

65 Benefits Reduced operating costs with more electric redundancy On site power generation increases to 95% backup power Carbon footprint reduction (see next slide) Initial economics via baseload operations 2011 Block and Index, exposed savings : $540,000/yr 000/yr additional 2012 Block and Index, using CHP to mitigate risk

66 Regional Emissions Saved Nox 69,343 lbs/year Sox 301,376 lbs/year HG 1,951 grams/year H million gal/year

67 Lessons Learned Allow for extensive pre-planning Combustion Turbine Engines usually require gas pressure boosters Focus on where to house CHP systems early Continue the search for incentive $ Include executive management in decisions (solicit support)

68 Combined Heat & Power at Charles A. Buboltz VP of Facilities Planning and Management

69 2005 Situation Doubling of electric demand with Big Expansion (in progress) Forced loss of dual-power 12.4KV Service New single 35 KV service De-regulation resulting in 40+ % increase in electric costs Focus on big picture Doing it right Re-visiting concept of Co-generation (CHP)

70 Concept Developed Co-Generation capacity: (2) 1.9 MW Units (storage), reheat and pre-heat throughout h t campus. 470 ton hot water fired absorption chiller to use waste heat in summer All located in new energy plant (consolidation generated through energy savings)

71 Economics Utility Operating Cost Prior to Co-Generation: $6.95 million/yr Projected Net Savings: $1.767 million /yr Investment Cost: Financial Incentive Simple Payback Prior to Incentive: $6.9 million $1 million (NJ) 3.9 Years

72 Benefits Reduced operating costs with improved electrical independence and redundancy. On-site power generation now provides 85% backup power. Initial economics via baseload operations (running the units save money) Reviewing Block and Index using CHP to mitigate spot market pricing Reviewing Block and Index, using CHP to mitigate spot market pricing (turning off the units to save more money).

73 Lessons Learned Allow for extensive commissioning (simulate events) Make sure of operating and maintenance staff s education/experiential background Do not allow single person knowledge expertise Expect some early failures or interruptions to service The more complex the system, the more the early failures Buy the best most experienced design consultants and contractors you can buy - Don t count on your equipment suppliers 2012 Block and Index, using CHP to mitigate spot market pricing 20% additional annual savings

74 Combined Heat & Power at

75 2008 Situation 50% growth in energy costs due to sizable expansion (still in progress) Dual service power, but with history of outages (same source) De-regulation in 2010 resulting in % increase in electric costs In the heart of Marcellus Shale gas development

76 Concept Development Co-Generation Capacity: (1) 1.9 MW Unit RICE, thermally optimized (approx. 50% of peak demand) Steam and hot water heat recovery serving domestic hot water (storage), reheat and pre-heat throughout campus. All located in new energy plant (consolidation generated through energy savings) Board approval qualified by significant grant funding

77 Economics Utility Operating Cost Prior to Co-Generation: $2,939,000/year Utility Operating Cost Post Co-Generation*: $2,405, /year Investment Cost: $2,600,000 Simple Payback: Financial Incentive: 4.9 Years $1 million (PA) *Includes Maintenance Cost

78 Benefits Reduced operating costs with more electric redundancy. On-site power generation increases to 100% backup power. Carbon footprint reduction. Initial economics via baseload operations 2012 Block and Index, using CHP to mitigate spot market pricing Future operations expected to save an additional 12-20% annually ($)

79 Regional Emissions Saved Nox 13,310 lbs/yr. Sox 119,130 lbs/yr. CO 2 7,575 lbs/yr. HG 21,850 lbs/yr H million gal/year

80 Lessons Learned Allow for extensive commissioning (simulate events) Consider outside maintenance initially, and let it grow inside Expect some early failures or interruptions to service at least 2-3 months May consider 100% capacity, rather than 50% in the future island

81 Combined Heat & Power for Hospitals Abington Memorial Hospital November 17, 2011