1. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 Combined Heat and Power Solutions Beka Kosanovic, PhD. Northeast CHP Application Center University of Massachusetts, Amherst Distributed Energy Conference Stratton, VT May 15, 2008

2. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 Regional Application Centers Mid Atlantic www.chpcenterma.org Midwest www.chpcentermw.org Pacific www.chpcenterpr.org Northwest Region www.chpcenternw.org Northeast www.northeastchp.org Intermountain www.IntermountainCHP.org The regional application centers promote combined heating and power (CHP) technology and practices, serve as a central repository and clearinghouse of CHP information, and identify and help implement regional CHP projects. Gulf Coast www.GulfCoastCHP.org Southeastern www.chpcenterse.org

3. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 Typical CHP System Fuel “in” at one place Multiple benefits “out”

4. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 Efficiency Advantages of CHP Source: Bruce Hedman, ICF Consulting - May 2007

5. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 Environmental Benefits of CHP- CO 2

6. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 Energy and Emissions Impact of 5 MW Natural Gas CHP 5 MW natural gas system –Net electric efficiency = 28%; 8200 hours/year National Average Fossil Central Station Generation – eGrid (2000) –Heat rate = 10,462 Btu/kWh; 1,950 lbs CO 2 /MWh –7% T&D losses

7. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 Important Design Considerations Cost of Buying Electric Power from the Grid Relative to the Cost of Natural Gas a.k.a “Spark Spread” Coincident Needs for Power & Thermal Energy Installed Cost Differential Between a Conventional and a CHP System

8. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 FEASIBILITY STUDY RESULTS

9. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 Sample BIOMASS CHP Analysis #1 Resulting Economics –Fuel consumption on MMBtu basis increases due to steam turbine isentropic efficiency. –Average electric generation: 200 kW –Estimated Savings: Electric Energy & Demand: $240,000 Boiler Fuel: $1,200,000 (savings due to cost differential between #6 fuel oil and wood) –Estimated Costs: Annual Operation & Maintenance: $185,000 Capital: $3,500,000 Incentives (State of Connecticut): $160,000 –Simple Payback Period: 2.7 years

10. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 Proposed System Schematic System Schematic & Steam Turbine figures courtesy of TurboSteam Boiler figure courtesy of Hurst

11. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 BIOMASS CHP Analysis #2 Dairy Farm in Massachusetts –Facility spends over $60,000 on electricity (480,000 kWh) and $6,000 on #2 fuel oil (3000 gal) annually. –650 production dairy cows are housed in barns and milked daily and additional 750 on site –the total manure and water volume is 156,130 lb/day, or roughly 18,830 gallons/day –125 kW engine could generate 937,000 kWh annually –Payback period 11.5 years without and 6.7 year with MTC rebate

12. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 Reliability with DG units Baseline System Reliability is 99.97% 99.972% 1.135% Improvement 99.977% 21.86% Improvement 89% Improvement in customer reliability 1.135% Improvement in system reliability

13. Copyright, CEERE, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 2008 Northeast Application Center Contacts Beka Kosanovic NAC Co-Director for Technical Assistance (413) 545-0684 (voice) kosanovi@ecs.umass.edu Tom Bourgeois NAC Co-Director for Education and Outreach (914) 422-4013 (voice) tbourgeois@law.pace.edu http://www.northeastchp.org/nac/index.htm