Princeton University Facilities Engineering

Transcription

1 Princeton University Facilities Engineering Environmental & Energy Study Institute International District Energy Association District Energy & Combined Heat & Power at Princeton University Rayburn House Office Building Tuesday, April 21, 2009 Ted Borer, PE, CEM, LEED AP Overview Campus Energy Demands Energy Plant & District i t Energy Systems Combined Heat and Power Production Plant Economic Dispatch Historic & Projected Emissions Opportunities 1

2 Energy Demands at Princeton > 150 Buildings Academic Research Administrative Residential Athletic Energy Equipment & Peak Demands Electricity Rating Peak Demand (1) Gas Turbine Generator 15 MW 27 MW Steam Generation (1) Heat Recovery Boiler 180,000 #/hr (2) Auxiliary Boilers 300,000 #/hr 240,000 #/hr Chilled Water Production (3) Steam-Driven Chillers 10, Tons (5) Electric Chillers 10,700 Tons 13,800 Tons (1) Thermal Storage Tank *peak discharge 40,000 Ton-hours 10,000 tons (peak) 2

3 Plant Energy Balance PSEG Electricity Natural Gas Gas Turbine & HRSG Backpressure Turbines Electricity #2 Diesel Fuel Oil Biodiesel Fuel Oil Duct Burner & HRSG Auxiliary Boilers Chilled Water & Thermal Storage Systems Steam Chilled Water Campus Energy Users Campus District Steam System 3

4 Combined Cycle Cogeneration Air Fuel & Water Gas Turbine Power Turbine Gearbox Electric Generator AC Electricity Hot exhaust Gas CO Catalyst Feed Water Heat Recovery Boiler Exhaust Gas Steam Princeton Power Demand With Cogen Dispatch To Minimize Cost Generation Campus Demand Power Purchase Megawatts Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul 05 4

5 Princeton Economic Dispatch System PJM Electric Price Generate/Buy/Mix NYMEX Fuel Price Current Campus Loads Weather Prediction Production Equipment Efficiency & Availability Business Rules ICETEC Operating Display & Historical Trends Preferred Chiller & Boiler Selections Preferred Fuel Selections ICAP & Transmission Warnings Live feedback to Icetec Operator Action TES Economic Dispatch Screen 5

6 THIS Is The Smart Grid 2005 Peak Grid Demand Hour: 2006 Peak Grid Demand Hour: 27MW 2MW This frees 25 MW of system capacity for use elsewhere by the local grid and saves $$$! HOW?... CHP Power Generation Steam-Driven Cooling Thermal Storage Demand-Side Management Climate Change Legislation 220% 200% 180% 160% 140% 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Legislative source data estmated from World Resources Institute Comparison of Legislative Climate Change Targets in the 110th Congress Princeton Historic % of 1990 CO2. Business as Usual Bingaman-Specter w/ price Cap Bingaman-Specter, conditional target Lieberman-McCain and Oliver Gilchrest Lieberman-Warner draft outline Bingaman-Specter no price cap Kerry-Snowe Sanders-Boxer, Waxman Kyoto Protocol NJ Executive Order 54 (linear change) ,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 - Million metric Tons CO 2 e US Emissions 6

7 Reduced Chilled Water Use Millions Princeton University Chilled Water Load Growth Millions Chilled Water Use (Ton-Hours) Annual C ampus Floor Area (Sq.Ft.) Ca 5 Chilled Water Bldg Sq.Ft FY 88 FY 89 FY 90 FY 91 FY 92 FY 93 FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 Fy 02 Fy 03 Fy 04 Fy 05 Fy 06 Fy 07 Fy 08 Year Reduced Annual Steam Energy Princeton University Annual Steam Use Millions M 1, Millions Annual Steam Use (lbs) A ampus Floor Area (sq.ft.) Ca Steam Use Floor Area FY 88 FY 89 FY 90 FY 91 FY 92 FY 93 FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 Fy 02 Fy 03 Fy 04 Fy 05 Fy 06 Fy 07 Fy 08 Fiscal Year 7

8 FY 2008 Summary Goal: Return to 1990 CO2 emissions by Baseline: 105,000 short tons FY 2007: 145,000 short tons FY 2008: 128,000 short tons 12% improvement this year due to: Improved energy production and delivery Repairs & upgrades Economic dispatch PSEG accounting correction 2007 & 2008 Energy Delivered & CO2 Emissions Common Units 700,000 70, , , ,000 50, ,000 40, , , , , ,000 10,000 - Million Btu Million Btu Million Btu Short Tons CO2 Short Tons CO2 Short Tons CO2 0 Delivered Power Delivered Steam Delivered Chilled Water. Delivered Power Delivered Steam Delivered Chilled Water 8

9 2008 vs Changes We purchased less energy but delivered more of it to campus. Purchased power is ~1/3 of our CO2. PSEG changed CO2 accounting methodology to better reflect the mix of power delivered. That reduced our purchased power emission rate by 16%. Campus power consumption (outside the plant) was reduced by ~ 5%. There were 5% more heating & 2% more cooling degree-days 08 vs. 07 We burned half as much diesel fuel and a little less natural gas. We reduced thermal losses through repairs, insulation, trap & valve upgrades. We improved condensate recovery from 67% to 83%. We ran the cogeneration system at a higher average efficiency (fewer hours on-line at low efficiency). We used more free cooling and a lower-emission mix of chillers; (1% less steam and 14% more electric). We used economic dispatch more effectively. CO 2 Reduction Goals Low Flow Fixtures, 1% Lighting, 9% Unknown/Future Technology, 25% HVAC/GSHP, 17% Utility Grid Reductions, 9% Energy Conservation, 8% Biodiesel, 9% Plant Efficiency, 14% Thermal Distribution Improvements, 8% 9

10 Ongoing Opportunities Ground Source Heat Pumps Backpressure Steam Turbine-Generators Cogen Plant Efficiency Upgrades Real-time emissions calculation CHW-HTW Heat Pumps Biodiesel Energy Star & Smart Start Programs Thank you 10

11 CO 2 Emissions by Source sands Thous Campus CO2 Emissions rbon Dioxide Emissions Short Tons Ca Net electric purchase (PSEG data) Natural gas combustion #6 oil combustion #2 oil combustion Gasoline combustion Backpressure Turbine - Generators 11

12 Chilled Water Campus Loop Warm vapor Hot ~ 90 F Warm water from campus ~ 56 F Cooling Tower Cool ~ 70 F Chiller Cold water To Campus ~ 41 F Chilled Water Thermal Storage Warm vapor Warm water from HTX or tank ~ 56 F Warm water from Campus ~ 58 F Cooling Tower Cool Chiller Thermal Storage Tank Cold water To Campus ~ 34 F Hot Cold water To HTX or tank ~ 32 F Plate & Frame Heat Exchanger 12

13 TES Tank Stratification Reducing Cost and Emissions with TES Purchase daily power at least cost Reduce energy use High efficiency equipment selection Equipment operates at full load design point More efficient: lower night time wet-bulb temperature Reduced transmission losses Lower storage temp increased campus differential temperature lower pumping energy required Increase Reliability and Ease of Operation De-coupled production from demand Increase night-time load, reduced daytime load Easier daytime maintenance Reduced peak demand Excellent low-load performance 13

14 Growing Electrical Demand Princeton University Electrical Use Growth Millions l Electrical Usage (1000 Mwh) Annual ampus Floor Area (sq.ft.) Ca 20 Electric Floor Area FY 88 FY 89 FY 90 FY 91 FY 92 FY 93 FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 Fy 02 Fy 03 Fy 04 Fy 05 Fy 06 Fy 07 Fy 08 Fiscal Year Campus and CHW Power Use 160 Princeton University Electrical Usage 140 Electric cal Use (Million Kwh) Main Campus Electric Electric to CHW Campus Elec w/o ChW Plant Linear (Main Campus Electric) Load increase averages 2.8 M kwh per year as of fy FY 79 FY 80 FY 81 FY 82 FY 83 FY 84 FY 85 FY 86 FY 87 FY 88 FY 89 FY 90 FY 91 FY 92 FY 93 FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 Fy 02 Fy 03 Fy 04 Fy 05 Fy 06 Fy 07 Fy 08 Fiscal Year 14