Design of a 50 kWe Bio-oil Fueled

Rankine Cycle Cogeneration

Power Plant
Angela Hsu

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

BACHELOR OF APPLIED SCIENCE

Supervisor: J. S. Wallace

Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering

University of Toronto
March 2007

ABSTRACT
The objectives of this thesis are to design a 50 kWe bio-oil fueled Rankine cycle cogeneration
power plant and to determine the feasibility of constructing and operating such a plant. A
simulation model was constructed to incorporate the properties and characteristics of each
component and the operational limits of the entire system. The results of the simulation
indicate a maximum electrical efficiency of 3.45 percent and a maximum cogeneration
efficiency of 85 percent, both occurring at 100 percent process load demand. An economic
analysis was conducted to compare the cost of generating heat and electricity using the
system to the current cost of purchasing energy from a utility supplier. The total annual cost
of the system is approximately US$313,000. The total annual cost of purchasing the
equivalent amount of energy generated by the system is US$484,600 at 100 percent process
load demand and US$435,600 at 89 percent process load. The results from the technical and
economical analyses indicate the system is only economically feasible if cogeneration is
implemented. The system does not generate enough electricity to be economical without
implementing cogeneration.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Professor James S. Wallace for his guidance
and support throughout the project. His first-hand experience and knowledge of the energy
generation sector provided clear and insightful direction for the project. I would like to thank
my parents for their love and support throughout my life. Last but not least, I would like to
thank my fiance for supporting me through this entire project.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................................... IV
LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. VI
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................. VII
LIST OF EQUATIONS.....................................................................................................VIII
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION......................................................................................... 1
1.1
1.2

THESIS OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................... 1

OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................... 1

CHAPTER 2: BACKGROUND AND THEORY ............................................................... 3

2.1
2.2
2.3

BIO-OIL ...................................................................................................................... 3
THE RANKINE CYCLE................................................................................................. 6
COGENERATION OR COMBINED HEAT AND POWER (CHP)....................................... 11

CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW........................................................................... 12

3.1
3.2
3.3

BIO-MATTER FOR ENERGY PRODUCTION ................................................................. 12

BIO-POWERED SYSTEMS .......................................................................................... 13
A NON-BIO-POWERED RANKINE ENGINE ................................................................ 17

CHAPTER 4: SYSTEM AND PARTS REQUIREMENTS ............................................ 19

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8

OVERALL SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS.......................................................................... 19

STEAM TURBINES AND ELECTRIC GENERATORS ...................................................... 20
BOILER SPECIFICATIONS .......................................................................................... 24
PUMPS ...................................................................................................................... 26
CONDENSATE TRAPS ................................................................................................ 29
PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE................................................................................... 30
HEAT EXCHANGER ................................................................................................... 31
STEAM SEPARATOR AND WATER STORAGE TANKS ................................................. 32

CHAPTER 5: TECHNICAL ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 34

5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5

THERMODYNAMIC LIMITATION................................................................................ 34
MODEL ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................. 35
SYSTEM SET-UP ....................................................................................................... 35
SIMULATION ............................................................................................................ 36
SIMULATION RESULTS ............................................................................................. 40

CHAPTER 6: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS........................................................................... 43

6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5

COST SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 43

ELECTRICITY COST PER KILOWATT-HOUR............................................................... 44
HEATING COST PER KILOWATT-HOUR ..................................................................... 45
COST FOR BOTH ELECTRICITY AND HEAT ................................................................ 46
ECONOMIC SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 46

iv

CHAPTER 7: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS......................................... 49

7.1
7.2

DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................. 49
RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................ 51

CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION............................................................................................ 52
REFERENCES...................................................................................................................... 53
APPENDIX A: FULL SCHEMATIC OF A 50 KWE BIO-OIL FUELED POWER
PLANT ................................................................................................................................... 56
APPENDIX B: TURBINE EFFICIENCY CALCULATION.......................................... 57
APPENDIX C: SIMULINK MODEL AND FORMULAE.............................................. 58
APPENDIX D: SIMULATION RESULTS ....................................................................... 64
APPENDIX E: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS SUPPLEMENTAL DATA........................... 67
APPENDIX F: EQUIPMENT COST SOURCES............................................................. 71

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Simple Rankine Cycle .............................................................................................. 6
Figure 2: Pre-heating of Feedwater Steam (Heat Exchanger) ................................................. 8
Figure 3: Regeneration Direct Heat Transfer from Turbine ................................................. 9
Figure 4: Regeneration Open Feedwater Heater................................................................. 10
Figure 5: Steam Reheat.......................................................................................................... 10
Figure 6: Bio-oil Fueled Cogeneration Power Plant Schematic (Simple) ............................. 19
Figure 7: Turbosteam BP50 Turbine Genset [16].................................................................. 23
Figure 8: Clayton E-154 Steam Generator [18]..................................................................... 25
Figure 9: Clayton Feedwater Pump [18]................................................................................ 28
Figure 10: Federal Pump Type VRC Condensate Return Unit [21]...................................... 28
Figure 11: Spirax Sarco FT14 Ball Float Steam Trap [22].................................................... 29
Figure 12: How a Spirax Sarco Ball Float Steam Trap Works [22] ...................................... 30
Figure 13: Spirax Sarco Pilot Operated Self-Actuated Pressure Reducing Valve [24]......... 31
Figure 14: Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger ........................................................................... 31
Figure 15: Armstrong Heat Exchanger [25] .......................................................................... 32
Figure 16: Steam Separator.................................................................................................... 33
Figure 17: Feedwater Tank Inlet Enthalpy Results................................................................ 41
Figure 18: Electrical Efficiency Results ................................................................................ 41
Figure 19: Cogeneration Efficiency Results .......................................................................... 42
Figure 20: Pump 1 Inlet Enthalpy.......................................................................................... 50
Figure A-1: Full Schematic of a 50 kWe Bio-oil Fueled Power Plant................................... 56
Figure C-1: Simulink Model Part 1 ....................................................................................... 58
Figure C-2: Simulink Model Part 2 ....................................................................................... 59
Figure D-1: Electrical Efficiency Results, All Process Load Demand Levels ...................... 64
Figure D-2: Cogeneration Efficiency Results, All Process Load Demand Levels ................ 64
Figure D-3: Pump 1 Inlet Enthalpy Results, All Process Load Demand Levels ................... 65
Figure D-4: Feedwater Tank Inlet Enthalpy Results, All Process Load Demand Levels...... 65
Figure D-5: Fuel Rate Results, All Process Load Demand Levels........................................ 66
Figure D-6: Additional Mass Flow Rate Results, All Process Load Demand Levels ........... 66

vi

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Comparison between Induction and Synchronous Generators [14] ........................ 22
Table 2: Turbosteam BP-50 Turbine Specifications [16] ...................................................... 23
Table 3: Clayton E-154 Steam Generator Specifications [19]............................................... 26
Table 4: Comparison between Positive Displacement and Roto-dynamic Pumps [20] ........ 27
Table 5: System Component Efficiencies.............................................................................. 34
Table 6: Mathematical Approximations of Thermodynamic Values .................................... 37
Table 7: Simulation Input Parameters.................................................................................... 38
Table 8: Simulation Output Parameters................................................................................. 39
Table 9: Electricity Cost per Kilowatt-hour at Various Bio-oil Costs................................... 47
Table 10: Annual Equivalent System Cost at Various Interest Rates.................................... 48
Table B-1: State Values to Calculate Turbine Efficiency...................................................... 57
Table E-1: Equipment, Operation and Maintenance Costs.................................................... 67
Table E-2: System Energy Output Values ............................................................................. 67
Table E-3: Electrical Cost per Kilowatt-hour ........................................................................ 68
Table E-4: Household Energy Consumption [32] ................................................................. 68
Table E-5: Cost of Purchasing Electricity from Utility Supplier [33] ................................... 69
Table E-6: Household Annual Heating [32] .......................................................................... 69
Table E-7: Residential Gas-fired Water Heater Information [35] ......................................... 69
Table E-8: Cost of Purchasing Natural Gas for Heating from Utility Supplier [36] ............. 70

vii

LIST OF EQUATIONS
Equation 1: Rankine Cycle Efficiency..................................................................................... 8
Equation 2: Cogeneration Power Plant System Efficiency.................................................... 11
Equation 3: Turbine Efficiency.............................................................................................. 23
Equation 4: Carnot Efficiency ............................................................................................... 34
Equation 5: Cost per Kilowatt-hour Formula ........................................................................ 44
Equation 6: Annualized Equivalent Cost Formula [31]......................................................... 45
Equation B-1: Turbine Exhaust Steam Quality (Isentropic).................................................. 57
Equation B-2: Turbine Exhaust Steam Enthalpy (Isentropic) ............................................... 57
Equation B-3: Turbine Efficiency.......................................................................................... 57
Equation C-1: Turbine Outlet Formulae ................................................................................ 60
Equation C-2: Steam Separator Formulae ............................................................................. 60
Equation C-3: Mass Flow Rate Formulae.............................................................................. 60
Equation C-4: Condensate Tank Formulae............................................................................ 61
Equation C-5: Pump 1 Formulae ........................................................................................... 61
Equation C-6: Feedwater Heater Formulae ........................................................................... 61
Equation C-7: Feedwater Tank Heat Loss Formulae............................................................. 62
Equation C-8: Feedwater Tank Formulae.............................................................................. 62
Equation C-9: Pump 2 Formulae ........................................................................................... 62
Equation C-10: Power Formulae ........................................................................................... 63
Equation C-11: Heat Formulae .............................................................................................. 63
Equation C-12: Efficiency Formulae ..................................................................................... 63

viii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1

Thesis Overview

This thesis aims to analyze the efficiency and economics of a bio-oil fueled Rankine cycle
cogeneration power plant with a gross power output of 50 kWe. The service area of the
power plant is located within the northern regions of the province of Ontario.

The power plant utilizes water as the working fluid. Water is readily available and relatively
inexpensive to acquire. The system components required are those found in standard steam
cycle-based power plants. These include a steam turbine and generator set, a steam generator
and pumps. This thesis outlines the criteria used in the component selection process to
achieve the desired design.

Cost is almost always the primary consideration for any design project. As part of this thesis,
an economic analysis is performed to determine the feasibility of developing the small-scale
cogeneration power plant in Northern Ontario.

Steam turbines with power outputs less than several hundred kilowatts have relatively low
efficiencies compared to the several hundred megawatt output units used in traditional power
generation. However, the combination of a growing need for alternative energy sources, the
relatively small environmental impact of small-scale cogeneration systems and the growing
interest in distributed power generation systems requires that studies, such as the one
presented in this thesis, be conducted.

1.2

Objectives

The thesis consists of two main objectives: design a cogeneration power plant to meet the
design objectives and conduct a technical and economic analysis of the power plant to
determine the feasibility of constructing and operating the power plant.

The design objectives include the following. The power plant must generate 50 kWe, utilize
water/steam as the working fluid, the chosen components must be commercially available
and non-customized, and the steam generator must be capable of burning bio-oil.

As part of the technical analysis Simulink, a sub-program of Matlab, is used to simulate the
plant performance. Current energy rates are used for the economic analysis.

CHAPTER 2: BACKGROUND AND THEORY

This chapter provides theory and background information regarding bio-oil, the Rankine
cycle, and cogeneration.

2.1

Bio-oil

Bio-matter Sources
Bio-oil is derived from bio-matter.

The two main sources of bio-matter used in the

production of bio-oil are energy crops and wastes [1]. Energy crops are plants that are
specifically grown for fuel production, and wastes include plant, animal, and human activity
wastes, such as landfill garbage [1]. This project will utilize bio-oil generated from plant and
animal waste.

Energy Crops
According to Boyle [1], the growing interest in energy crops is due to several reasons:
1. The need for alternatives to fossil fuels to reduce net CO2 emissions
2. The search for indigenous alternatives to imported oil
3. The problem of surplus agricultural land
Depending on the location and the availability of land, different energy crops can be grown
to satisfy local energy needs [1].

Boyle [1] discusses two categories of energy crops: woody plants and others. Woody plants
are grown using the short rotation forestry (SRF) method, also known as the short rotation
coppice (SRC) method [1]. The SRF/SRC method is as follows [1]. Fast-growing trees are
planted 10,000 to 15,000 per hectare and are cut down close to the ground after a year of
growth. The trees re-grow and continue to grow for 2 to 4 years before they are cut again.
This cycle can be repeated for up to 30 years.

Agricultural crops such as sugar cane, maize and miscanthus (a grassy plant) are widely
grown for use as bio-fuel [1]. The advantages of agricultural crops include high yields, the

use of conventional farming techniques, and flexible land use as a result of the annual cycle
of the crop [1].

The specific types of energy crops grown vary widely and are dependent on the availability
of land, sunlight exposure, climate, and soil conditions.

Wastes
Boyle [1] lists four categories of waste suitable for use as bio-fuel.
1. Wood residues
2. Temperate crop wastes
3. Tropical crop wastes
4. Animal wastes
The background information presented in the sections below was extracted from Boyle [1].

Wood Residues
Currently, the majority of wood residues from tree-trimming and plantation thinning are
usually left at the site to ensure nutrients are returned to the soil. Due to the large amounts of
space required to transport the residues it was traditionally more economical to leave the
residues at the site. With the development of new harvesting techniques, a fraction of the
residues can be transported to power plants as fuel for heat and/or power generation.

It is recognized that the removal of these residues from the site will decrease the amount of
nutrients returning to the soil. However, the long term affects of residue removal on soil
nutrient levels have not been determined and are beyond the scope of this thesis.

Temperate Crop Wastes

Each year more than one billion tons of wheat and corn residues are generated. In the past,
the excess crops were burned in the field. This practice was later banned due to high levels
of pollution. Now the residues are used to generate bio-gas for the local area.

Straw is another plentiful crop waste. However, straw is considered a relatively expensive
fuel due to its low mass density. Transportation and storage is expensive since a lot of space
is required. A solution to this problem is the production of high-density (1 ton per cubic
meter) pelletted straw. The pelletted straw requires less space to transport and store.

Tropical Crop Wastes

The residues from sugar and rice, the two main tropical crops, are already being used as fuels
around the world. The fibrous residue of sugar cane, bagasse, is used in sugar factories to
generate steam and electricity. Even though transportation of bagasse is costly, the sale of
the generated electricity often produces enough profit to cover the costs. The bagasse could
also be used to produce ethanol, which further increases its appeal as a fuel source.

Animal Wastes
Animal manure accounts for 10 percent of the methane emissions in the United States. This
methane can be harnessed for use as bio-gas through anaerobic digestion.

Anaerobic

digestion utilizes bacteria to break down the organic material to produce bio-gas. The
remaining residue from the process can be used as fertilizer.

Poultry litter, and other wastes similar in water content, can be used in combination with
wood shavings and straw in direct combustion power generation. This is suitable in rural
areas where farming is prevalent.

To summarize, the type of organic waste used to produce bio-oil will differ depending on
what is available. In temperate climates, wood residues and temperate crop wastes are
plentiful. Animal waste may also be available if the climate is suitable for animal farms. In
tropical climates, all four types of wastes may be plentiful.

Pyrolysis: The Production of Bio-oil

Bio-oil is produced through the process of pyrolysis. As explained by Boyle [1], pyrolysis is
a process where the volatile compounds of bio-matter are collected and condensed to produce
bio-oil. This is achieved by heating bio-matter with low levels of oxygen. A variation on the
5

above mentioned process is fast pyrolysis. Fast pyrolysis, as described by Blackaby [2],
exposes the bio-matter to temperatures as high as 500C with almost no oxygen to produce
bio-oil. The resulting bio-oil is typically acidic [1] and very viscous [2]. This makes bio-oil
a difficult fuel to work with. However, the energy content of bio-oil is approximately half
that of crude oil [1]. Taking into consideration the availability and energy content, bio-oil is
an attractive fuel source.

Bio-oil Summary
Bio-oil is produced using one or more types of organic waste through the process of
pyrolysis. The location of the power plant will determine which category of organic waste is
used to produce bio-oil. The cogeneration power plant for this thesis is intended for Northern
Ontario and other similar locations. This eliminates tropical crop wastes since such crops
cannot be grown in such northerly climates.

2.2

The Rankine Cycle

Steam power plants utilize the Rankine cycle. A simple Rankine cycle consists of four main
stages: work input, heat input, work output, and heat output.

Figure 1: Simple Rankine Cycle

6

Work Input
Work input into the system is accomplished using one or several water pumps. Water
returning from the process heater is usually at a saturated liquid state at a low pressure
(atmospheric or sub-atmospheric). The water entering the boiler is required to be at a much
higher pressure, thus one or several pumps are required to increase the pressure of the
saturated liquid water.

Heat Input
A boiler (or steam generator) introduces heat into the system. The boiler heats the liquid
water converting it into steam. The steam is usually heated until it reaches the superheated
steam region to maximize the efficiency of the system. If the steam does not reach the
superheated region, at the very least, it must be at the saturated vapour state. This ensures
high quality steam passes through the steam turbine. A high quality steam consists largely of
steam and a small fraction of condensate (as suspended water droplets). Steam containing a
large fraction of water droplets can damage a turbine as the mixture passes through.

Work Output
To harness the energy contained within the steam, a steam turbine is used to convert the
thermal energy into mechanical energy. Steam passing through the turbine blades expands
and rotates the turbine shaft. The turbine shaft is connected to an electrical generator which
harnesses the mechanical energy and converts it into useable electrical energy.

Heat Output
The steam exiting the turbine is a low pressure, high quality two-phase mixture. Water
pumps cannot handle high-quality two-phase mixtures, thus the steam must be condensed
back into a liquid state. This is accomplished through a process heater. The process heater
extracts the latent heat contained within the mixture, condensing the mixture to the saturated
liquid state.

Efficiency
The cycle efficiency is conventionally calculated as the net work over the net heat input.
7

Wnet Wout Win Wturbine W pumps

=
=
Qin
Qin
Qboiler

Equation 1: Rankine Cycle Efficiency

Cycle Efficiency Improvements
There are several variations of the Rankine cycle in which the overall efficiency of the
system can be increased. These variations include pre-heating the feedwater, regeneration,
superheating, and re-heating.

Pre-heating
Pre-heating the feedwater increases the temperature of the water entering the boiler. This
reduces the amount of heat input from the boiler and increases the cycle efficiency. This can
be accomplished through regeneration or the use of a heat exchanger.

Figure 2: Pre-heating of Feedwater Steam (Heat Exchanger)

Regeneration
There are two methods of regeneration. Both methods utilize the high temperature, high
quality steam passing through the turbine. The first method involves passing the saturated
liquid from the condenser through the turbine for pre-heating. This is similar to what occurs
within a heat exchanger. The heat in the steam passing through the turbine is transferred to
8

the condensate which causes the steam to condense inside the turbine. However, this method
has two major problems. The heat transfer area in the turbine is minimal, and the turbine exit
steam is of very high moisture content. Exit steam with high moisture content indicates a
large region within the turbine where a two-phase mixture existed. As stated above, this is
undesirable.

Figure 3: Regeneration Direct Heat Transfer from Turbine

The second method involves the extraction of high temperature and high quality steam. This
extracted steam is used in either an open or closed feedwater heater to increase the
temperature of the feedwater. An open feedwater heater allows direct mixing of the high and
low temperature fluids. A closed feedwater heater is essentially a shell and tube heat
exchanger. The high temperature and high quality steam can be extracted either from the
turbine or the boiler. Extracting the steam from the turbine does not reduce the quality of the
steam at the turbine exit. This method is advantageous since the heat transfer rate between
the two streams of hot and cold fluid is much higher than in the previous method, and the
turbine exhaust steam is unaffected.

Figure 4: Regeneration Open Feedwater Heater

Superheating
As stated earlier, superheating the steam involves heating the steam until it reaches the
superheated region. Superheating increases the cycle efficiency by increasing the work
output.

Re-heating
Re-heating takes the exhaust steam from a high pressure turbine and re-heating the steam
prior to passing the steam through a low pressure turbine. This increases the amount of work
extracted, increasing the cycle efficiency.

Figure 5: Steam Reheat

10

2.3

Cogeneration or Combined Heat and Power (CHP)

Traditional power generation only utilizes the electrical energy produced by the turbinegenerator set. The turbine exhaust steam usually contains insufficient energy for further
electrical energy generation. The heat in the exhaust steam is typically rejected to large
bodies of water or the atmosphere as waste heat [3].

In a cogeneration power plant, the thermal energy removed at the condenser is used either to
pre-heat the working fluid within the system [3] or used as process heat to satisfy other
heating loads, such as space or water heating [4].

The cogeneration system efficiency is calculated as the sum of the net work and the useable
heat retrieved over the heat input.

cogeneration =

Wnet + Qout (Wturb W pumps ) (Qretrieved )

=
Qin
Qboiler

Equation 2: Cogeneration Power Plant System Efficiency

The increase in system efficiency is realized by reducing or eliminating the need to generate
the equivalent amount and quantity of steam using a separate boiler.

11

CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews and summarizes research relevant to bio-powered systems.

The

systems discussed include bio-mass gasifier gas turbines and bio-oil turbines. A solarpowered/fuel-assisted Rankine engine is also presented as a point of comparison for this
project.

3.1

Bio-matter for Energy Production

Fossil fuels became the primary energy source when higher temperatures were required by
industrial processes. These higher temperatures could not be achieved by burning bio-matter.
Despite that, bio-matter still plays a significant role in energy production. According to Bain
and Overend [5], bio-power is the single largest source of non-hydro renewable energy in the
United States. The average size of existing bio-power plants is 20 MW with an average biomass-to-electricity efficiency of 20 percent [5]. A power plant as small as 20 MW has
several disadvantages. The small size leads to higher capital costs per kilowatt-hour of
power produced [5]. Low efficiency ratings result in increased sensitivity to fluctuations in
the price of fuel [5]. The result is an increase in the cost of electricity to 8 to 12 cents per
kilowatt-hour [5]. In Ontario, the average cost of electricity is 6 Canadian cents per kilowatthour [6], not including other charges. Bio-power is currently too expensive to compete with
traditional power generation in densely populated areas. However, in rural areas where the
cost of electricity is higher than in cities, bio-power may be more economical.

Bain and Overend [5] suggest three methods to lower the cost of utilizing bio-matter. These
methods are applicable both in rural and suburban areas.
1. Co-firing
2. Gasification
3. Direct-fired combustion

12

Co-firing
The first cost reduction method suggested by Bain and Overend [5] is to co-fire bio-mass
with coal in existing systems.

The authors state this would lower the capital investment

since only slight modifications to existing systems are required.

Gasification
Gasification is the process in which the volatile compounds in the bio-matter are extracted in
either air or steam to produce a medium to low energy bio-gas [5].

Bio-gas is used as fuel

in a gasification combined cycle (GCC) which consists of a gas turbine topping cycle and a
steam turbine bottoming cycle [5].

According to the authors, the first generation of bio-

matter GCC systems could have efficiencies double that of current coal-based GCC systems.
In CHP applications, bio-matter GCC systems have the potential to achieve 80 percent
efficiency [5].

Higher cycle efficiency results in a lower cost per kilowatt-hour.

Direct-fired combustion
Direct-fired combustion involves burning bio-matter to produce heat.

The resulting

combustion gases are used to produce steam in a Rankine cycle [5]. The efficiency of the
steam system can be increased by 10 percent by incorporating re-heat, regeneration and other
efficiency boosting methods [5].

The three cost reduction methods described above lower the costs of utilizing bio-energy
either through raising the efficiency of the system or by reducing the investment costs
required. The implementation of these solutions leads to promising future prospects for bioenergy as a source of power.

3.2

Bio-powered Systems

Bio-mass Gasifier Gas Turbine Power Generation

Bio-mass gasifier gas turbine technology combines advanced Brayton cycle power
generation with bio-mass gasifiers [7]. Larson and Williams [7] states the unit capital costs
of gas-turbine systems are relatively low and insensitive to size. Larson and Williams [7]

13

also believe the advantage of gas turbines lies in the ability to achieve higher peak cycle
temperatures than steam turbines, thus achieving higher cycle efficiencies.

Although

commercial bio-matter gas turbines are currently unavailable, Larson and Williams [7] have
listed three cycles that could potentially be converted into biomass-integrated gasifier/gas
turbine (BIG/GT) systems.
1. Steam-injected gas turbine
2. Intercooled steam-injected gas turbine
3. Combined cycle

According to Larson and Williams [7], both BIG/GT and double-extraction/condensing

steam turbine (CEST) cogeneration systems convert 60 percent of the energy in bio-mass
fuel into steam and electricity. However, BIG/GT systems produce three or more times the
amount of electricity of CEST systems, making them a prime candidate for power
generation. Larson and Williams [7] discuss several BIG/GT projects that were underway
during the time the article was written. Two of these projects will be briefly discussed below
according to the information extracted from Larson and Williams [7].

Combined cycle district-heating cogeneration in Varnamo, Sweden

This was the first BIG/GT Combined Cycle plant. The plant has a nominal electrical output
of 6 MW and a nominal thermal output of 9 MW. To generate the stated outputs, 20 MW of
bio-mass input is required. The plant was modeled around a modified European Gas Turbine
Typhoon gas turbine and became fully operation in October 1995.

IVOSDIG cycle in Finland

The IVOSDIG cycle utilizes wet feedstocks. The wet fuel is dried in a pressurized dryer to
produce high pressure steam. This high pressure steam is recovered and injected into the gas
turbine. The system has a nominal output of 92 MW and an efficiency of 35 percent when
utilizing 70 percent moisture content peat.

With relatively low capital costs, insensitivities to sizing, and reasonably high cycle
efficiency, BIG/GT systems are a very promising technology as illustrated by the two
14

projects discussed above. However, BIG/GT systems may be unsuitable for rural areas.
Transporting the bio-matter from rural areas to gasification plants to produce bio-gas may be
more costly than locally preparing the bio-matter for direct firing. This is due to the lower
population density of rural areas. Lower population density means less power demand. This
results in a higher cost of power on a per kilowatt basis. This is also a reason why smallscale power generation is more cost-effective than traditional centralized power generation.
Centralized power generation requires expensive power lines to be installed to transport
power. Small distributed power plants, such as the one developed for this thesis, will
eliminate the need for expensive electrical towers.

Bio-oil Gas Turbine

Blackaby [2] discusses modifications made to a GT2500 gas turbine which will be
summarized in the following paragraphs. A Canadian-based company, Orenda Aerospace
Corporation, in collaboration with a Ukrainian manufacturer, Zorya-Mashproekt, modified
the GT2500 system at a DynaMotive power plant to utilize bio-oil. Due to the viscous nature
of bio-oil, the oil is pre-heated prior to entering the high pressure pumps.

The West Lorne bio-oil plant located 50 kilometers southwest of London, Ontario produces
70 tons of bio-oil per day. The oil is used to power the GT2500 gas turbine, which produces
2.5 MW of electricity. This is enough electricity to meet the demands of the Erie Flooring
plant. The remaining electricity is exported to the local grid. The surplus heat generated by
the turbine is used to generate 12,000 pounds of steam per hour for the Erie Floorings
industrial operation. The plant has entered into a 3 year contract with a third party for the
sale of excess bio-oil.

Blackaby [2] also mentions a new project between DynaMotive and an Ojibway community
in Northwestern Ontario. Alex Peters, President of the Whitefeather Forest Management
Corporation, is quoted by Blackaby [2] as saying: Our community runs on fuel oil
generators, so we have to fly in fuel, which is very expensive. But we have all these trees we
can get the bio oil out of.

15

Many rural communities are surrounded by an abundance of bio-matter that could be

converted into bio-oil for energy production. Utilizing bio-oil CHP systems, bio-oil may be
the most cost-effective energy production method.

Other Bio-powered Systems

BIG/GT systems are not the only bio-powered systems currently under development. Bain
and Overend [5] provides four examples of other bio-powered technology. The examples
discussed below were extracted from Bain and Overend [5].

Gasifier spark ignition engine in Littleton, Colorado

The CPC project consists of a fixed-bed downdraft gasifier. The gasifier feeds gas to a spark
ignition engine which is coupled to a generator. The system capacity ranges from 12 kW to
25 kW.

Two units have been installed: one in the Philippines and the other in California

(both in 2001).

Stirling engine in Indianapolis, Indiana

The heat used to drive the Stirling engine comes from the combustion gases of a modified
pellet stove (burner). A large portion of the heat from the exhaust gases of the engine is
recovered and transferred to the incoming combustion gases, thus improving the overall
efficiency. The system is designed for 3 kW to 18 kW and is being targeted at residential
and small industrial markets.

Microturbine in Mission Viejo, California

Flex Energies has designed and fabricated a 30 kW proof of concept Flex-MicroturbineTM.
The unit is designed to utilize very low heating value gases (3.7 MJ/Nm3) with very low
emission levels. Once the proof of concept design is successfully tested, three additional
prototypes will be designed. The prototypes will be tested using landfill gas, anaerobic
digester gas, and gasification producer gas.

16

Fluid Bed Gasifier CHP plant in Orinda, California

The Carbona Corporation plans to design, fabricate and prototype a CHP system that will
utilize a fluid bed gasifier to fuel internal combustion engines. The 5 MW electric and 9 MW
hot water system will be located in Denmark for residential heating. Wood chips will be the
fuel source.

As the above projects illustrate, there are many technologies that can utilize bio-matter for
power generation. Further research and development into each technology will reveal which
is most suitable for each application (industrial, residential, etc.).

3.3

A Non-Bio-Powered Rankine Engine

As a point of comparison for the work developed in this thesis, the work conducted by Gari,
Khalifa and Radhwan [8] regarding a solar-powered/fuel-assisted Rankine engine for power
generation in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia will be discussed briefly.

The solar-powered Rankine engine steadily generates 36 kW of electrical power using steam
at 230C. The steam is produced using a boiler which is connected to a heated oil loop. The
oil loops are heated using 400m2 of single-axis tracking concentrating parabolic-trough
collectors and an auxiliary gas-fired heater.

With a two-stage turbine, the systems

theoretical efficiency is 23.2 percent.

Gari, Khalifa and Radhwan [8] discuss another study where solar energy was used to
generate steam at 100C. This steam was then superheated to 600C, doubling the system
efficiency as compared to Organic Rankine cycles operating at similar solar collector
temperatures. The same study showed a seasonal thermal efficiency of 14.6 percent can be
achieved in Phoenix, Arizona utilizing a 200m2 evacuated-tube collector, a 10-stage turbine
and an air-cooled condenser.

The two examples illustrate why alternative fuel power generation is only beginning to be
considered. The efficiencies achieved are quite low and are not acceptable for centralized
17

power generation stations. However, these efficiencies may be acceptable in rural areas
where the cost of electricity is much higher than in cities.

18

CHAPTER 4: SYSTEM AND PARTS REQUIREMENTS

This chapter presents the overall system requirements for this project. The requirements for
the individual components of the system are also discussed.

4.1

Overall System Requirements

The power plant for this project is a cogeneration power plant with a gross output of 50 kWe.
The system utilizes a Rankine cycle with the inclusion of a pre-heat stage. Water is the
working fluid chosen for the system. The steam is heated using the combustion gases from a
bio-oil fired steam generator. The thermal energy from the turbine exhaust steam is used by
a heating process, such as building radiators or hot water heaters, instead of being passed
through a condenser.

To achieve the desired outputs, several key pieces of equipment are required. A steam
turbine coupled with an electric generator, an oil-fired steam generator, pumps, condensate
traps, pressure reducing valves, a heat exchanger, a steam separator and water storage tanks.

A detailed schematic of the power plant is available in Appendix A.

Figure 6: Bio-oil Fueled Cogeneration Power Plant Schematic (Simple)

19

4.2

Steam Turbines and Electric Generators

Steam Turbines
The most important component of the system is the steam turbine. The turbine converts the
thermal energy in the steam into mechanical energy. As high pressure steam passes through
the turbine, the steam expands and hits the turbine blades, causing the turbine shaft to rotate.
This rotation generates mechanical energy that can be harnessed and converted into
electricity.

Steam turbines typically have power outputs in the megawatt or gigawatt range. This ensures
high efficiency and high power output required by large power generation facilities. A
kilowatt sized steam turbine is rare since the system efficiency would be comparatively low
and the amount of power produced would not satisfy the needs required by large cities. In
distributed power generation systems, multiple kilowatt sized steam turbine would provide
the power necessary for the surrounding area.

There are several types of steam turbines commonly used in power generation. These
include condensing, extraction, re-heat, and non-condensing turbines. Each turbine type will
be briefly discussed below.

Condensing Turbines
In a condensing turbine, the steam is expanded well below atmospheric pressure to extract
the maximum amount of energy from the steam [10]. The sub-atmospheric exhaust steam
does not contain enough energy for use in any other application. This type of turbine is
suitable for use in centralized power generation facilities, where maximum energy extraction
from the steam is a priority.

Extraction Turbines
Extraction turbines allow high pressure and high temperature steam to be extracted from an
intermediate area of the turbine [11]. The extracted steam can be used in a re-heat process or
used in a regeneration process to pre-heat the boiler feedwater [11] as stated in section 2.2.
20

Re-heat Turbines
Re-heat turbines are similar to extraction turbines, however the steam extracted from an
intermediate section of the turbine is re-heated close to its original temperature, and reintroduced back into the turbine [12]. As stated in section 2.2, this re-heat process greatly
improves the efficiency.

Non-Condensing Turbines
In a non-condensing turbine, the steam exits the turbine at a pressure above atmospheric [10].
The turbine exhaust steam still contains enough energy to be used in other processes, such as
heating [10].

A backpressure turbine is a type of non-condensing turbine. The steam exits the turbine at a
specific pressure, the system back pressure. Back pressure is the pressure applied at the
exhaust region of the turbine [13].

Electric Generators
Almost as important as the steam turbine is the electric generator. An electric generator
converts the mechanical energy provided by the steam turbine into useable electrical energy.

There are two types of electric generators: induction and synchronous. A brief overview of
each generator type is presented below.

Induction Generator
An induction generator is an electric generator that receives its excitation from the utility
[14].

This means the generator cannot produce any voltage on its own, and that the

frequency and voltage of the power produced is governed by the frequency and voltage of the
power from the incoming utility line [14]. An induction generator runs at a speed that is
determined by the utility and is slightly higher than its synchronous speed [14], the speed at
which the magnetic field in the motor is rotating [15].

21

Synchronous Generator
A synchronous generator is able to produce its own power and regulate its own voltage
without being connected to the utility [14]. This means a synchronous generator can operate
in parallel with the utility or operate independently (stand alone) [14]. Synchronous
generators require a speed reduction gear [14]. When a synchronous generator is used, the
turbine is designed to spin at whatever speed provides the maximum efficiency. Thus, a
speed reduction gear is required to reduce the turbine rotation speed to a speed suitable for
the generator [14]. Table 1 provides a comparison of the characteristics of the two types of
generators.

Table 1: Comparison between Induction and Synchronous Generators [14]

Parallel or stand-alone?

Typical price
comparison*
Power factor issues

Complexity

Induction generators
Can only run in parallel with
the utility.
Cannot provide back-up power
during utility outage.
Under 700 kW, less expensive.

Synchronous generators
Can run in parallel or standalone.
Can provide back-up power.

Over 700 kW, less

expensive.
Can be used to improve
Should not be used for more
power factor.
than about 1/3 of total plant
Can provide up to 100% of
electrical load.
plant load or more.
The common perception is that synchronous generators are
complex and difficult to operate. With modern electronics, this
is no longer an issue.

* Prices compared include turbine, generator, and complete switchgear, including circuit breaker, utility grade
electrical protection, synchronizing equipment as required, and turbine controls

Turbosteam BP-50 Turbine Generator Set

The turbine for this project must produce a gross electrical output of 50 kW.

The

Turbosteam BP-50 Turbine Genset meets the required electrical output. The Turbosteam
BP-50 Turbine is a backpressure steam turbine that can be coupled with either a synchronous
electric generator or an induction generator. A synchronous generator is chosen to allow for
power generation independent from the provinces electrical grid.
important when provincial power lines are damaged.

22

This is particularly

Figure 7: Turbosteam BP50 Turbine Genset [16]

The turbine and generator set includes a turbine, generator, pressure transmitter, generator
control panel and turbine control panel [9]. The pressure transmitter monitors the pressure at
the turbine exit and sends a signal to the pressure controller [9]. The generator controller
then opens or closes the turbine throttle to maintain the low pressure set-point [9].

The turbine efficiency is calculated using a simple relation shown in Equation 3 and the
information in Table 2. The turbine efficiency is calculated to be 32 percent. Detailed
calculations are available in Appendix B.

Table 2: Turbosteam BP-50 Turbine Specifications [16]

160 psig (174.696 psia)
Saturated (371F)
12 psig (26.696 psia)
3880 lbs/hr
50 kW
95%

Inlet Pressure
Inlet Temperature
Exhaust Pressure
Mass Flow Rate
Electrical Power Output
Generator Efficiency [9]

turbine =

Wactual
Wisentropic

Equation 3: Turbine Efficiency

23

4.3

Boiler Specifications

Another crucial component is the steam generator, also known as the boiler. The basic
function of a boiler is to transform the working fluid from the liquid phase to the gaseous
phase.

To accomplish this, fuel is burned in a combustion chamber to produce high

temperature combustion gases. The heat is transferred from the combustion gases to the
working fluid as the working fluid passes through the boiler in metal tubes.

The types of combustion fuel commonly used in power generation include natural gas, lightoils, diesel, and coal. The type of combustion fuel used dictates the specifications of the
boiler. In addition to being able to utilize the selected fuel, the boiler must also be able to
provide enough steam at the correct conditions to satisfy the various system components,
such as the turbine.

Clayton E-154 Steam Generator

The 50 kWe power plant for this project utilizes bio-oil as a fuel source. The selected boiler
must therefore be highly resilient due to the corrosive and viscous nature of bio-oil. The
Clayton E-154 Steam Generator is chosen for this project as it is able to burn number 6 oil.
Number 6 oil is similarly viscous but less corrosive than bio-oil. Therefore, if the Clayton E154 Steam Generator can burn number 6 oil, it should be capable of burning bio-oil, although
corrosion may be an issue in the long term.

The Clayton Steam Generator system includes a steam generator skid, a water treatment skid
and a feedwater receiver skid [17]. The steam generator skid includes the mounting, piping
and wiring for the steam generator and all the components for the water treatment skid [17].
The water treatment skid includes all the mounting, piping and wiring found on the feedwater
receiver skid, water softeners, a chemical feed system, blowdown equipment and booster
pumps, if necessary [17]. The feedwater skid includes the mounting, piping and wiring
necessary for the feedwater receiver [17].

24

The specifications for the Clayton E-154 Steam Generator are shown in Table 3. The E-154
model is capable of providing steam at a mass flow rate of 5175 pounds per hour. The
turbine only requires 3880 pounds of steam per hour, thus the steam generator will be
running at 75 percent of its design capacity.

A feature of the Clayton E-154 is its counter-flow design. The feedwater is pumped up to the
top of the boiler unit and travels down the boiler in a helical path [18]. This maximizes the
heat transfer between the combustion gases and the fluid.

Included in the package is a mechanical separator. The mechanical separator ensures the
steam leaving the boiler has a quality of 99.5 percent (or higher) [18]. Any moisture that is
separated out is returned to the steam generator via a steam trap and a feedwater tank [18].

Figure 8: Clayton E-154 Steam Generator [18]

25

Table 3: Clayton E-154 Steam Generator Specifications [19]

Boiler Horsepower
Heat Input
Heat Output
Oil Consumption at Max. Steam Output (No. 2 oil)
Oil-Fired Efficiency (at 75% firing rate)
Electric Motor: Pump (65-300 psi)
Dimensions (Length x Width x Height)
4.4

150 BHP
5,907,353 Btu/hr
5,175 lbs/hr
42.0 gal/hr
85%
5 HP
144 in x 88 in x 102 in

Pumps

The purpose of a pump is to add energy to a fluid. There are two classes of pumps: positive
displacement pumps and roto-dynamic pumps.

A brief description of each pump type is

presented below.

Positive Displacement Pumps

A positive displacement pump utilizes volume change to move fluid. A pump cavity opens
and the fluid enters the pump [20]. The pump cavity closes and the fluid is forced out
through the pump with the aid of a piston, diaphragm, or rotor [20]. There are two main
classifications of positive displacement pumps: reciprocating and rotary. Reciprocating
pumps utilize a piston or diaphragm moving in a back and forth motion to move the fluid. A
human heart is an example of a reciprocating pump [20]. Rotary pumps utilize one or more
rotating rotors to move the fluid. A screw pump is an example of a rotary pump [20].

Roto-dynamic Pumps
A roto-dynamic pump does not utilize a change in volume to move the fluid. The pump adds
momentum to the fluid via fast-moving blades or vanes [20]. The fluid increases momentum
as it moves through the open passages inside the pump [20]. The high velocity of the fluid is
converted to a pressure increase when the fluid exits into a diffuser section of the pump [20].
Roto-dynamic pumps can be classified into three categories depending on the direction the
fluid takes when exiting the pump. The three categories of pumps are: centrifugal (or radial),
axial, and mixed (between radial and axial) [20].

26

Table 4 compares the characteristics of the two types of pumps.

Table 4: Comparison between Positive Displacement and Roto-dynamic Pumps [20]

Flow Rate
Fluid
Viscosity
Pressure

Positive Displacement
Up to 100 gal/min.
Can handle high-viscosity fluids.

Roto-dynamic
Up to 300,000 gal/min.
Can handle low-viscosity fluids.

Very high pressure rise (300 atm).

Moderate pressure rise (a few

atm).
Requires priming.
Continuous constant-speed
variation of performance.
At zero flow, maximum pressure
rise. At maximum flow rate, zero
pressure rise.
Increasing viscosity sharply
degrades pump performance.

Priming
Performance

Mostly self-primng.
At constant shaft rotation speed,
produces nearly constant flow rate
and virtually unlimited pressure
rise.

Effects of
Viscosity on
Performance

Little effect on performance.

Two pumps are required for this project: a feedwater pump and a condensate pump. Both
pumps must be capable of delivering a mass flow rate of 3880 pounds per hour to ensure
continuous re-circulation of the working fluid.

Feedwater Pump
The feedwater pump delivers water from the feedwater tank to the boiler. As stated in
section 4.3, the feedwater pump is included in the Clayton E-154 Steam Generator system.
The Clayton feedwater pump is a positive displacement diaphragm pump that is driven by an
electrical motor. The pump uses a flexible multi-layer rubber membrane and hydraulic oil to
move the working fluid. The reciprocating drive pistons do not come into contact with the
working fluid. Instead, the pistons displace the hydraulic oil which displaces the membrane.
The Clayton pump has a maximum capacity of 5175 pounds per hour.

The system

requirement for the pump is a capacity of 3880 pounds per hour, thus the Clayton pump
satisfies the design requirement.

27

Figure 9: Clayton Feedwater Pump [18]

Condensate Pump
The condensate pump delivers water from the condensate tank, which holds the condensate
from the process load and various steam traps, to the feedwater tank and feedwater heater.
The condensate pump chosen for the project is the Type VRC condensate pump from Federal
Pump Corp. The unit includes a condensate receiver, a pump, and a float switch [21]. The
receiver is made of cast iron and is designed to vent to the atmosphere [21]. The condensate
pump itself is a bronze-fitted centrifugal pump [21]. The float switch is mounted and wired
on the condensate return unit and allows automatic operation of the pump [21].

The VRC-

620-2 condensate pump will have a discharge pressure of 20 psi above the inlet pressure and
a pump capacity of 9 GPM (equivalent of 4497 pounds per hour) [21].

Figure 10: Federal Pump Type VRC Condensate Return Unit [21]
28

4.5

Condensate Traps

The primary function of a condensate trap (or steam trap) is to separate and collect the
moisture present in the steam. Condensate traps are particularly important during system
start-up. During the start-up phase the piping throughout the system is cold. When the hot
steam encounters the cold pipes, the steam condenses. If the condensate is not separated out,
there is an increased potential for corrosion and damage throughout the system, particularly
at the turbine. Condensate traps also separate air and other impurities from the steam.
Condensate collected by the traps is re-directed back to the condensate tank.

Figure 11: Spirax Sarco FT14 Ball Float Steam Trap [22]

Once the system reaches steady state, the pipes are warm and the amount of condensate
throughout the system greatly reduces. Only a few of the traps are utilized during steady
state operation. The Spirax Sarco FT14 Ball Float Steam Trap was chosen for its durability.
The steam trap works by allowing air to by-pass the main valve through a thermostatic air
vent during start-up [22] (Figure 12-1). As condensate is collected the ball float is raised and
the lever mechanism opens the main valve [22] (Figure 12-2). Hot condensate flows through
the main valve, but closes the air vent [22]. When steam enters the trap, the ball float drops
and closes off the main valve, this prevents live steam from passing through [22].

29

Figure 12: How a Spirax Sarco Ball Float Steam Trap Works [22]

4.6

Pressure Reducing Valve

A pressure reducing valve (PRV) is used to reduce the pressure of a working fluid. Pressure
reducing valves are often used in steam plants to reduce the high pressure steam generated by
the boiler or from turbine exhaust to a lower pressure to be used in another application.

There are two main types of PRVs: self-acting and pneumatic control [23]. Self-acting
valves can operate without external power while pneumatic control valves require a
pneumatic signal and actuator to operate [23].

The system utilizes two PRVs. One is used to relieve the pressure in the system when the
process load is operating at less than 100 percent load. The other is used to extract steam
from the boiler into the feedwater tank to maintain the condensate within the tank at a certain
temperature.

The Spirax Sarco Pilot Operated Self-Actuated PRV was chosen for this

project. The pilot operated PRV is extremely accurate, easy to adjust, and has the capability
to be turned on and off [23].

30

Figure 13: Spirax Sarco Pilot Operated Self-Actuated Pressure Reducing Valve [24]

4.7

Heat Exchanger

The function of a heat exchanger is to transfer energy in the form of heat from a high
temperature fluid stream to low temperature fluid. The heat transfer occurs mainly through
convection. A common heat exchanger type is the shell and tube heat exchanger. The low
temperature fluid enters from one end of the exchanger via tubes. The high temperature fluid
enters from the other end of the exchanger in a cavity around the tubes. Typically the two
fluids flow in opposite directions, towards then away from each other, and around baffles to
increase heat transfer. Baffles are dividers positioned perpendicular to the length of the tubes
which are used to direct the flow of the high pressure fluid.

Figure 14: Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger

Fluid temperature plays an important role in heat exchanger performance since heat transfer
is dependent on the temperature difference between the two fluids. It is often desired to have
a large temperature difference between the two fluids.
31

In addition to a large temperature difference, the available surface area also plays an
important role. In a typical shell and tube heat exchanger the low temperature fluid travels
through many small diameter tubes. This drastically increases the surface area available for
heat transfer.

The heat exchanger is used to pre-heat the boiler feedwater using steam that is not required
by the process load. The Armstrong WS Heat Exchanger was chosen for this project. The
Armstrong Heat Exchanger features a removable tube bundle as a standard feature [25]. A
removable tube bundle allows for easier maintenance operations. The chosen unit is a 4-pass
model comprised of copper tubes, carbon steel baffles, and cast iron head [25].

Figure 15: Armstrong Heat Exchanger [25]

4.8

Steam Separator and Water Storage Tanks

Steam Separator
A steam separator separates the steam and condensate in a two-phase mixture. This is used
when very high quality steam is required for an application. A steam separator can be easily
constructed using a T-configuration from piping joints, as shown in Figure 16. The twophase steam mixture enters the T-joint and hits the back of the joint. The steam, of lower
density, flows upward to the next part of the process and the condensate, of higher density,
flows downwards to a condensate trap.

The steam separator will be located downstream of the turbine exhaust. The separated steam
will proceed to the process load and the condensate will be directed to the condensate tank.
32

Figure 16: Steam Separator

Water storage tanks

Water storage tanks are used to equalize the temperature of the condensate from various
points throughout the system. The tanks are also used to hold a small amount of condensate
to ensure the system operates uninterrupted during times of brief system disruption. The
tanks are also used to help system start-up by supplying condensate to the pumps and boiler.

The system contains two water storage tanks: a feedwater tank and a condensate tank. The
feedwater tank pre-heats the boiler feedwater using steam from the boiler. The condensate
tank collects condensate from the process load and the steam traps throughout the system.

33

CHAPTER 5: TECHNICAL ANALYSIS

This chapter presents the thermodynamic limitation of the designed system, the assumptions
used in the construction of the simulation model, the input and output parameters relevant to
the simulation model, and an explanation of the system set-up.

5.1

Thermodynamic Limitation

A Rankine cycle is usually designed to maximize the temperature difference between the
highest pressure state and the lowest pressure state to maximize the system efficiency. The
maximum temperature for this system is constrained by the steam turbine to 371F. The
turbine exhaust steam is passed through heating loads, such as a radiator, thus the minimum
temperature for this system is the saturation temperature at atmospheric pressure, 212F. The
Carnot efficiency (maximum theoretical efficiency) for this system is calculated to be 19.13
percent.

carnot = 1

TL
(212 + 460) = 1 672 = 0.1913
= 1
(371 + 460)
831
TH

Equation 4: Carnot Efficiency

The actual system efficiency will be much lower than the Carnot efficiency. The Carnot
efficiency assumes the components within the system are ideal with 100 percent efficiency.
In reality, this is not the case. Most of the components utilized in the system have less than
100 percent efficiency, as listed in Table 5.

Table 5: System Component Efficiencies

System Component
Turbine
Generator [9]
Boiler Firing Rate
Condensate Pump
Feedwater Pump
Process Load

Efficiency [%]
32
95
85-87*
65**
65**
100***

*Boiler efficiency higher at partial load and lower at higher load

**Typical pump efficiency for optimal performance
*** Assumed efficiency; all of steam is condensed in heating load

34

5.2

Model Assumptions

Prior to the construction of the simulation model, some assumptions regarding the operation
of the system are made in order to allow for a simpler model. Refer to Figure 6 or Appendix
A for the system schematic.
-

The steam leaving the boiler is at the saturated vapour state.

The piping between the system components is assumed to be perfectly insulated, with the
exception of the process load.

The steam passing through the process load is assumed to be fully condensed to a
saturated liquid at atmospheric pressure.

Pump 1 will compensate for the pressure loss caused by the fluid traveling from the
process load to the boiler.

The pressure drop across all other piping is considered to be negligible as the components
are assumed to be located close to each other.

The feedwater heater (heat exchanger) is assumed to be perfectly insulated.

The steam (shell side) in the feedwater heater is assumed to be fully condensed at the
shell side outlet.

The inlet water to pump 2 is assumed to be a saturated liquid at 26.7 psia.

The pressure and temperature inside the feedwater tank is assumed to remain constant at
26.7 psia and 244F.

Heat loss occurs at the feedwater tank due to conduction and convection. The heat loss
remains constant.

The condensate from the process load is assumed to enter the condensate tank at 122F
and atmospheric pressure due to heat and pressure loss through the return piping.

5.3

System Set-up

The system presented in Figure 6 or Appendix A, is designed to provide the maximum

electrical output at any process load demand level. To achieve maximum electrical output,
there must always be the maximum amount of steam passing through the turbine. When the
process load is below 100 percent, the excess steam not utilized by the process load must be
35

diverted elsewhere. The excess steam is diverted through a piping section parallel to the
process load. The steam in this section passes through a pressure reduction valve (PRV).
The PRV allows the turbine to operate at the design condition by maintaining the turbine
exhaust pressure at 26.7 psia. Without the PRV the pressure at the turbine exhaust would
increase and reduce the operating efficiency of the turbine.

The diverted steam still contains useable energy. Rather than waste the energy in the steam,
the steam is used to pre-heat the feedwater. This is accomplished by using a heat exchanger
(feedwater heater). The diverted steam occupies the shell side of the heat exchanger while
the feedwater occupies the tube side. The steam is assumed to be fully condensed at the shell
side outlet. This condensate then travels through a steam trap (ST6) to reduce the pressure to
atmospheric where the condensate combines with condensate returning from the process load
and the steam separator.

As stated in section 5.2, the pressure and temperature inside the feedwater tank is assumed to
remain constant at 26.7 psia and 244F. However, when the process load demand is high, the
feedwater entering the tank will be at a lower temperature and pressure. To mitigate this,
steam from the boiler outlet will be diverted to the feedwater tank. A pressure reduction
valve (PRV2) will be necessary to ensure the pressure at the boiler exhaust is at design
conditions.

5.4

Simulation

Simulink is used to simulate the system performance. Various input and output parameters
are necessary to perform the analysis. The parameters are either a result of equipment
constraints or are chosen to facilitate system operations.
To allow for flexibility in parameter adjustments, such as pressure, saturated steam properties
were plotted in Microsoft Excel and a trendline was used to approximate the relationships
between various properties. The approximations are displayed in Table 6.

36

Table 6: Mathematical Approximations of Thermodynamic Values

Saturated
Liquid
State, P in
psia [3]

h f = 81.619 P 0.2808 [ Btu / lbm ]

s f = 0.0839 ln P + 0.0952 [ Btu / lbm R]
v f = 3 10 14 P 6 + 1 10 11 P 5 1 10 9 P 4 + 9 10 8 P 3 3 10 6 P 2
+ 7 10 5 P + 0.0161 [ ft 3 / lbm ]

Saturated
Vapour
State, P in
psia [3]
Compressed
Region, h in
Btu/lbm and
T in F [25]

hg = 1105.5 P 0.0152 [ Btu / lbm ]

s g = 0.0815 ln P + 1.9769 [ Btu / lbm R ]
vcompressed = 2 10 8 h 2 + 8 10 7 h + 0.016 [ ft 3 / lbm ]
hcompressed = 0.9886T 30 .533 [ Btu / lbm ]

Tables 7 and 8 present the parameters used in the Simulink model. Appendix C contains the
complete Simulink model as well as the formulae used within the model.

37

Table 7: Simulation Input Parameters

Input Parameters
Variable Name
Category
in Simulink
Model

Description

Value
(Imperial
Units)

p_turb_in

Turbine inlet pressure

174.7 [psia]

p_turb_out
eta_turb

p_pump1_in
p_pump1_out
eta_pump1
p_pump2_in

Turbine outlet pressure

Turbine efficiency
Steam flow rate to
turbine
Pump 1 inlet pressure
Pump 1 outlet pressure
Pump1 efficiency
Pump 2 inlet pressure

26.7 [psia]
0.3191
3880
[lbm/hr]
14.7 [psia]
34.7 [psia]
0.65
26.7 [psia]

p_pump2_out

Pump 2 outlet pressure

174.7 [psia]

eta_pump2

0.65

eta_boil

Pump2 efficiency
Surface area of
feedwater tank
Feedwater tank
convective heat transfer
coefficient
Feedwater tank thermal
conductivity (with
fibreglass insulation)
Feedwater tank internal
temperature
Ambient temperature
(tank external surface
temperature)
Feedwater tank wall
thickness (with
insulation)
Environment
temperature
Boiler efficiency

q_fuel [27]

Heating value of bio-oil

Net Power

eta_gen

PRV

p_prvout

Process
Load

h_Lout

Generator efficiency
Pressure reducing valve
#1 outlet pressure
Enthalpy of process load
return condensate

Turbine

m_steam
Pump 1

Pump 2

Atank
h

k
Feedwater
Tank

Tt
Tamb

tin
Tinf
Boiler

38

40.10 [ft3]

Value (SI
Units)

1204.5
[kPa]
184.1 [kPa]
0.3191
1760 [kg/hr]
101.3 [kPa]
239.2 [kPa]
0.65
184.1 [kPa]
1204.5
[kPa]
0.65
1.13548
[m3]

1.76
10
[Btu/hft2F]
[W/m2K]
0.023
[Btu/hftF]

0.04
[W/mK]

243.55 [F]

117.53 [C]

43.4 [F]

23.0 [C]

1.97 [in]

0.05 [m]

68 [F]

20 [C]

0.85
82520
[Btu/gal]
0.95

0.85
23 [MJ/L]

20 [psia]

137.9 [kPa]

90.08
[Btu/lbm]

209.53
[kJ/kg]

0.95

Table 8: Simulation Output Parameters

Output Parameters
Variable Name in Description
Simulink Model
h_Tin
Turbine inlet enthalpy [Btu/lbm]
s_Tin
Turbine inlet entropy [Btu/lbmR]
h_Tout_act
Turbine outlet actual enthalpy [Btu/lbm]
qual_Tout_act
Turbine outlet actual quality
w_turb
Turbine work output [Btu/lbm]
h_SSout
Enthalpy of steam branch of steam separator
[Btu/lbm]
h_ST5
Enthalpy of condensate branch of steam separator
[Btu/lbm]
h_FWHout
Feedwater heater shell side outlet enthalpy
[Btu/lbm]
Internal Output
h_pump1_in
Pump 1 inlet enthalpy [Btu/lbm]
Variables
v_pump1_in
Pump 1 inlet specific volume [ft3/lbm]
w_pump1_in
Pump 1 work input [Btu/lbm]
h_pump1_out_act
Pump 1 outlet actual enthalpy [Btu/lbm]
h_FWT_in
Feedwater tank inlet enthalpy [Btu/lbm]
h_pump2_out_act
Pump 2 outlet actual enthalpy [Btu/lbm]
h_pump2_in
Pump 2 inlet enthalpy [Btu/lbm]
w_pump2
Pump 2 work input [Btu/lbm]
v_pump2_in
Pump 2 inlet specific volume [ft3/lbm]
q_boil
Boiler heat input [Btu/lbm]
q_Load
Load heat output [Btu/lbm]
m_SSout
Mass flow rate through steam branch of steam
separator [lbm/hr]
m_ST5
Mass flow rate through condensate branch of
steam separator [lbm/hr]
Mass Flow
m_Load
Mass flow rate through process load [lbm/hr]
Rates
m_PRV
Mass flow rate through pressure reduction valve
[lbm/hr]
m_add
Additional mass flow rate into feedwater tank
[lbm/hr]
Heat
QFWT
Feedwater tank heat out [kW]
Input/Output
Q_boil
Boiler input power [kW]
Ppump1
Pump 1 power [kW]
Power
Ppump1
Pump 2 power [kW]
Input/Output
Pgen
Net power output [kW]
Pturb
Turbine power output [kW]
Fuel Rate
Fuel_dot
Fuel input rate [kW]
eta_cogen
Cogeneration efficiency [%]
Efficiencies
eta_elec
Electrical efficiency [%]
Category

39

5.5

Simulation Results

The results from the simulation indicate a maximum electrical efficiency of 3.45 percent and
a maximum cogeneration efficiency of 85 percent, both occurring at 100 percent process load
demand.

As the process load demand varies, so do several characteristics of the system.

The

feedwater tank inlet enthalpy is of particular interest. As the process load demand decreases
below 89 percent the feedwater tank inlet enthalpy becomes negative. This violates the laws
of thermodynamics, thus the minimum process load demand for this is 89 percent. This
limitation essentially disregards all data for the system below a process load demand level of
89 percent.

The following figures illustrate the change in the feedwater inlet enthalpy, electrical
efficiency and cogeneration efficiency between 80 percent and 100 percent process load
demand. Figure 19 also illustrates the cogeneration efficiency if additional steam was not
diverted from the boiler to feedwater tank. This efficiency is higher since the amount of heat
input at the boiler would be lower.

Appendix D presents additional figures with the entire process load demand range.

40

Feedwater Tank Inlet Enthalpy at Different Process

Load Demands

Feedwater Tank Enthalpy

[Btu/lbm]

100
75
50
25

FWT Inlet Enthalpy

0
80

85

90

95

FWT Inlet Enthalpy,

h_FWT>=0

100

-25
-50
-75
-100

Process Load Demand [%]

Figure 17: Feedwater Tank Inlet Enthalpy Results

Electrical Efficiency at Different Process Load Demand

Levels
3.5

Electrical Efficiency [%]

3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1

Electrical Efficiency

Electrical Efficiency with

Negative h_FWT

2.9
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.5
80

85

90

95

100

Process Load Demand [%]

Figure 18: Electrical Efficiency Results

41

Cogeneration Efficiency at Different Process Load

Demand Levels

Cogeneration Efficiency [%]

95

Cogeneration
Efficiency

90
85
80

Cogeneration
Efficiency, No
Additional Heat
at Feedwater
Tank

75
70
65

Cogeneration
Efficiency with
Negative
h_FWT

60
55
50
80

85

90

95

100

Process Load Demand [%]

Figure 19: Cogeneration Efficiency Results

42

CHAPTER 6: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

This chapter presents an economic analysis of the designed 50 kWe power plant. In addition
to capital costs, annual operation and maintenance costs will also be considered. To provide
a thorough analysis of the economic nature of this project, a comparison with current energy
rates will be conducted. Haliburton, Ontario is chosen as the location for comparison.
Haliburton is 3 hours northeast of Toronto. The cost at which bio-oil becomes viable will
also be analyzed.

6.1

Cost Summary

The capital cost of equipment and the annual costs of operation and maintenance are
considered for this project. The system is relatively small compared to centralized power
generation stations, thus it is assumed that the entire system will be able to fit into an existing
facility. This eliminates the costs associated with constructing a new housing facility, such
as land, construction, piping, and wiring costs.

As stated in section 5.2, the major components of the system are assumed to be located
relatively close to each other. Therefore, the cost of piping required between the components
is considered to be negligible when compared to the cost of the major components (i.e.
turbine and boiler) and are excluded from the analysis.

The installation cost for a piece of equipment can vary greatly depending on the size of the
installation and the level of expertise required. For this project, the steam generator and the
turbine are the two components that require installation expertise provided by the supplier.
The other components are comparatively simpler and cost significantly less to install.
Therefore, an installation cost of 50 percent of the total purchase price of the equipment is
estimated to be sufficient.

The cost of bio-oil is estimated to be approximately double the cost of number 2 heating oil
since bio-oil is not as widely used. The current cost of number 2 heating oil in the United
43

States is approximately 245 US cents per gallon (65 US cents per litre) [28]. Thus, the cost
of bio-oil is 490 US cents per gallon (130 US cents per litre).

To ensure the plant is operating at optimal performance, the major components must be
maintained. Annual maintenance costs for all the equipment are estimated to be 3 percent of
the total capital cost (US$5700 per year). This is based on the annual maintenance cost of
the University of Toronto Mississauga Campus microturbine system, which is roughly 3.5
percent of the capital cost.

The system is assumed to require minimal operation supervision. The majority of the
operational cost is due to the need to supply the steam generator with bio-oil. This can be
accomplished at a relatively low cost either by utilizing a very large holding tank for the fuel
which would require infrequent re-filling (i.e. every other day), or by having an existing
operator re-fill a moderately sized fuel holding tank once or twice a day. Either option
results in a relatively low labour cost estimated to be US$15000.

The lifetime of the system is estimated to be 20 years. At the end of 20 years, it is assumed
that none of the components are salvageable.

A complete listing of the relevant costs is located in Appendix E.

6.2

Electricity Cost per Kilowatt-Hour

One of the main objectives of this thesis is to determine the financial feasibility of
constructing and operating the system. To achieve this objective, the cost per kilowatt-hour
of energy must be determined. The cost per kilowatt-hour can be calculated using Equation
5.

$ / kWh =

Annual Equivalent Cost [$]

Annual Power Generation [kWh]

Equation 5: Cost per Kilowatt-hour Formula

44

The annual equivalent cost includes the annualized equivalent cost of the initial capital cost.
Assuming an inflation rate of 2.1 percent [29] and a mortgage rate of 6.35 percent [30], based
on historical data, an initial interest rate of 10 percent is selected. Based on a lifetime of 20
years, the annualized equivalent of the initial capital cost is calculated to be US$22,904.86
using Equation 6, which converts a present cost into an equivalent annual cost over a certain
time period. The total annual equivalent cost of the system is US$313,014.94.

i
N
AE = P(1 + i )

N
(1 + i ) 1
where
P = present cost
N = time period
i = interest rate
Equation 6: Annualized Equivalent Cost Formula [31]

From the simulation, the system provides a net power output of 49.3521 kW. Assuming the
system operates 24 hours a day, for 360 days a year (5 days for equipment maintenance) the
plant produces 426,402 kilowatt-hours each year. Substituting these values into Equation 5,
the resulting cost is US$0.7341 per kilowatt-hour. This is over 8 times the cost of purchasing
electricity from the electrical grid (US$0.0912 per kilowatt-hour; calculations in Appendix
E).

6.3

Heating Cost per Kilowatt-Hour

In addition to producing electricity, the system also produces heat that can be used for water
or space heating. The cost per kilowatt-hour of producing this heat is also calculated using
Equation 5. However, the amount of power generated (as heat transferred) varies depending
on the process load demand. Thus the cost per kilowatt-hour of producing this heat also
varies. For all levels of demand, the cost of producing the heat is less than the cost of
purchasing heat from a conventional supplier. The cost of purchasing from a supplier
includes the cost of purchasing natural gas as well as the cost of purchasing two gas-fired hot
45

water heaters (each assumed to have a life of 10 years). At maximum process load demand it
costs US$0.0301 per kilowatt-hour to produce the heat whereas it costs US$0.0429 per
kilowatt-hour to purchase it.

6.4

Cost for both Electricity and Heat

On a per kilowatt basis, it is more cost effective to purchase electricity from a utility service
than to produce electricity. However, it is more cost effective to produce heat through the
system than to purchase the heat from a utility service. Thus, the results of the preliminary
economic analysis seem to be contradictory. This is explained by the way the above analysis
was conducted.

The system is a cogeneration system, thus producing both heat and

electricity. However, a consumer purchases heat and electricity separately and at different
rates. Thus, an analysis that separates the heat and electricity generated by the system does
not fully encompass the systems true economic nature.

To sufficiently determine the economic nature of the bio-oil fueled system, the annual cost of
operating the system is compared to the annual cost of purchasing an equivalent amount of
heat and electricity from a utility service.

The annual equivalent cost of the system is

US$313,014.94, as stated in section 6.1. The annual equivalent cost of purchasing both
electricity and heat from a utility service is US$484,572.53 at 100 percent process load
demand.

At 89 percent process load demand (minimum operating point), the annual

equivalent cost of purchasing energy is US$435,546.93. These numbers indicate the system
becomes much more economical when cogeneration is implemented.

6.5

Economic Sensitivity Analysis

The following analysis attempts to determine the economic sensitivity of the system to the
price of bio-oil and the assumed interest rate. Cogeneration will not be taken into account in
the bio-oil cost analysis, but will be included in the interest rate analysis.

46

Sensitivity to the Price of Bio-oil

Electricity is currently sold at 9.12 US cents per kilowatt-hour. This price includes all the
extraneous costs included on an electricity bill (i.e. customer charge, delivery charge, etc.).
Table 9 shows the cost per kilowatt-hour of utilizing only the electricity generated at various
bio-oil costs. The analysis indicates that even if the bio-oil was free, the cost of utilizing
only electricity using this system will still be greater than purchasing electricity from the
electrical grid. The system does not produce enough electrical power to match the prices of
the large centralized power generation stations.

Table 9: Electricity Cost per Kilowatt-hour at Various Bio-oil Costs

Bio-oil
Cost
Bio-oil
Cost
[US$/L] [US/kWh]
[US$/L] [US/kWh]
1.30
73.41
0.60
39.39
1.20
68.55
0.50
34.53
1.10
63.69
0.40
29.67
1.00
58.83
0.30
24.81
0.90
53.97
0.25
22.38
0.80
49.11
0.20
19.95
0.70
44.25
0.15
17.52
*Current rate of 9.12 cents US per kilowatt-hour

Bio-oil
Cost
[US$/L] [US/kWh]
0.10
15.09
0.05
12.66
0.04
12.17
0.03
11.68
0.02
11.20
0.01
10.71
0.00
10.23

Sensitivity to the Interest Rate

The analysis in section 6.4 utilizes a 10 percent interest rate. The purpose of this sensitivity
analysis is to determine whether the cogeneration system would remain the more economical
choice if inflation and/or mortgage rates increased above their historical levels. A cost of
US$1.30 per litre is used in the sensitivity analysis.

Recall the annual cost of purchasing energy from a utility service at 100 percent process load
is US$484,572.53. At 89 percent process load demand the annual cost is US$435,546.93.
Table 10 presents the annual cost of the bio-oil fueled system. Even at an interest rate of 100
percent, the cost to generate energy (at 100 percent process load) using this cogeneration
system is comparable to purchasing energy from a utility supplier.

At an interest rate of approximately 75 percent, the annual cost of the bio-oil fueled system,
operating at 89 percent process load demand, will equal that of purchasing energy from a
47

utility supplier.

An interest rate of 75 percent is highly unlikely, if not impossible.

Therefore, it is reasonable to state that this system is economically feasible when

cogeneration is implemented.

Table 10: Annual Equivalent System Cost at Various Interest Rates

Interest
Rate
[%]
15
20
25
30
35
40

Annual Cost
[US$]
$321,260.24
$330,149.28
$339,408.69
$348,902.02
$358,512.32
$368,181.10

Interest
Rate
[%]
45
50
55
60
65
70

Annual Cost
[US$]
$377,888.86
$387,577.13
$397,343.37
$407,070.63
$416,817.38
$426,564.13

48

Interest
Rate
[%]
75
80
85
90
95
100

Annual Cost
[US$]
$436,310.88
$446,057.63
$455,804.38
$465,551.13
$465,551.13
$485,044.63

CHAPTER 7: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The results from the simulation and economic analysis are discussed in this chapter.
Recommendations for performance and economic improvement are also presented in this
chapter.

7.1

Discussion

In section 3.3, the performance of two non-bio-powered Rankine engines was presented. A
36 kWe steam cycle utilizing solar energy and a two-stage steam turbine had a theoretical
efficiency of 23.2 percent. Another solar-powered system utilizing a ten-stage steam turbine
and air-cooled condenser had a seasonal thermal efficiency of 14.6 percent. The system
analyzed in this thesis has an efficiency of 3.45 percent. Both solar-powered cycles utilized
steam at a higher temperature than this bio-oil powered system (446F and 1112F versus
371F). This illustrates the importance of superheating the turbine inlet steam to achieve
higher system efficiency. However, the steam turbine chosen for this system is not capable
of utilizing superheated steam, hence the low efficiency.

Section 5.5 briefly stated the simulation results. The feedwater tank inlet enthalpy (refer to
Figure 16) decreases steadily at a rate of 8.6 Btu per pound mass per 1 percent decreases in
the process load demand. This results in a very limited operation window for the system.
The system can only function between 89 percent and 100 percent process load demand. The
root cause of this operational limit is at the feedwater heater. At lower process load demand
levels, the amount of available condensate is incapable of absorbing the thermal energy from
the steam. In reality, only a fraction of the steam is condensed and passed through the steam
trap (ST6 in Figure 6). The remaining steam is trapped behind the steam trap. This results in
a pressure build-up throughout the system all the way back to the turbine exhaust. An
increase in the turbine exhaust pressure decreases the turbine performance and reduces the
system performance.

49

The electrical efficiency of the system changes proportionally with the process load demand.
Figure D-1 (in Appendix D) illustrates three distinct changes in the electrical efficiency with
respect to the process load demand. The decrease in efficiency between 89 percent and 100
percent process load demand is attributed to the additional steam that is added at the
feedwater tank to maintain the internal tank conditions. The constant efficiency rating
between 18 percent and 89 percent process load demand is a result of limiting the feedwater
tank inlet enthalpy to be above zero. A second decrease in electrical efficiency between 0
percent and 18 percent process load demand is attributed to the increase in the pump 1 inlet
enthalpy into the two-phase saturated mixture region. Essentially, the data below 89 percent
process load demand is void since it corresponds to a thermodynamically impossible state. If
this was not the case, the limiting operational point would be at 18 percent process load
demand where the maximum enthalpy for the inlet at pump 1 is achieved (Figure 20).

Pump 1 Inlet Enthalpy at Different Process Load

Demands

h_pump1_in [Btu/lbm]

200

175

150
h_pump1_in
Upper Limit for h_pump1_in
125

100

75
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90 100

Process Load Demand [%]

Figure 20: Pump 1 Inlet Enthalpy

The maximum cogeneration efficiency of the system is 25 times greater than the maximum
electrical efficiency (85 percent versus 3.45 percent, respectively). This again illustrates the
importance of utilizing all the energy generated by the system.
50

The results from the economic analysis support this conclusion. The cost of only utilizing
the electricity produced by the system simply cannot compete with the current prices of
electricity.

As illustrated in section 6.5, the cost of bio-oil would have to decrease

significantly to make this system economical if only the electricity was utilized.

When cogeneration is implemented, however, the system becomes much more economical
than purchasing the energy from a utility service. Even at the systems lower operational
limit, the system remains more economical than a utility service.

7.2

Recommendations

Much of this system was limited by the availability of certain components. This affected the
economic nature of the system.

Recommendations to further increase the economic

feasibility of this system are presented below.

An increase in the systems electrical efficiency would reduce the cost of electricity
generation. This can be achieved by utilizing a higher efficiency turbine. Unfortunately,
steam turbines in the 50 kW range are difficult to find. Therefore, a slightly larger turbine
with a higher efficiency is recommended. A turbine in the range of 100 kW, which is still
considered to be quite small, may produce enough electricity to offset the high cost of biooil.

Increasing the temperature of the turbine inlet steam by superheating would improve the
system efficiency. The Clayton E-154 is capable of generating superheated steam. However,
the steam turbine would need to be replaced. The Turbosteam backpressure turbine only
operates with steam at the saturated vapour state. Regeneration or re-heating could be
implemented to further increase the system efficiency.

An analysis would need to be

conducted to determine whether the increased efficiency offsets the increased use of bio-oil.

51

CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION
This project consists of two main objectives. The first is to design a 50 kWe cogeneration
power plant that utilizes bio-oil and the second is to determine the feasibility of developing
the power plant. Both objectives have been successfully achieved.

The system utilizes commercially available components that generate approximately 50 kW

of electrical power. The system is designed to maintain the maximum electrical output while
allowing for a variation in the process load demand.

The technical analysis revealed the importance of utilizing both the electrical and thermal
energy generated by the system. The maximum electrical efficiency of the system is 3.45
percent, whereas the cogeneration efficiency of the system is 85 percent. The analysis also
revealed the limitations of the system. Due to the operating conditions within the system, the
minimum process load demand rate at which the system is still functional is 89 percent. Any
process load demand level below 89 percent results in the reduced performance of the
system.

The economic analysis supports the findings from the technical analysis. Utilizing only the
electrical energy from the plant is far from cost-effective at the current price of bio-oil.
When cogeneration is implemented the cost decreases and the overall system becomes more
cost effective than purchasing the equivalent amount of energy from a utility service.

The findings from this thesis indicate it is economically feasible to generate a relatively small
amount of power using bio-oil. Rural communities that have an abundant source of bio-mass
that can be transformed into bio-oil should consider a system such as the one proposed in this
project as an alternative to purchasing energy from a utility supplier. In addition to reducing
the impact on the surrounding and global environment, rural communities can also lessen
their dependence on the provincial power grid.

52

REFERENCES
[1]

G. Boyle, Eds., Renewable Energy: Power for a Sustainable Future, 2nd ed., Oxford:
Oxford University Press in association with The Open University, 2004.

[2]

N. Blackaby, Burning Desire for Power, PEI Power Engineering International, vol.
13, no. 2, pp. 27-29.

[3]

M. Boles and Y. engel, Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach, 4th ed., New

York: McGraw-Hill, 2002.

[4]

J. Brodrick, K. Roth and R. Zogg, Combined Heat and Power for Residences,
ASHRAE Journal, vol. 47, no. 7, pp. 142-143, 2005.

[5]

R. Bain and R. Overend, Biomass for Heat and Power, Forest Products Journal, vol.
52, no. 2, pp. 12-17, 2002.

[6]

Ontario Energy Board, Electricity Prices in Ontario, [Online document], 2006 Oct
11, [cited 2006 Nov 20], Available HTTP:
http://www.oeb.gov.on.ca/html/en/consumerinformation/2005elecrates.htm

[7]

E. Larson and R. Williams, Biomass Gasifier Gas Turbine Power Generating

Technology, Biomass and Bioenergy, vol. 10, no. 2-3, pp. 149-166, 1996.

[8]

H. Gari, A. Khalifa and A. Radhwan, Design and simulation of a solarpowered/fuel-assisted Rankine engine for power generation, Applied Energy, vol.
30, no. 4, pp. 245-260, 1988.

[9]

P. Beaty and J. Phillips, Steam Pressure Reduction Using a Turbine Driven

induction Generator, Proceedings of the 1990 Industrial Power Conference, vol. 9,
pp. 85-90, 1990.

[10]

Encyclopdia Britannica, turbine: Condensing and noncondensing turbines,

[Online document], 2007, [cited 2007 Feb 23], Available HTTP:
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-45679/turbine

[11]

Encyclopdia Britannica, turbine: Steam extraction, [Online document], 2007,

[cited 2007 Feb 23], Available HTTP: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article45680/turbine

[12]

Encyclopdia Britannica, turbine: Reheat and nonreheat turbines, [Online

document], 2007, [cited 2007 Feb 23], Available HTTP:
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-45681/turbine

53

[13]

McGraw Hill Online Learning Centre, Thermodynamics of High-Speed Gas Flow,

[Online document], 2002, [cited 2007 Feb 23], Available HTTP:
http://highered.mcgrawhill.com/sites/0072383321/student_view0/chapter16/chapter_glossary.html

[14]

Turbosteam, Steam Turbine Cogeneration Systems: Synchronous vs. Induction,

[Online document], 2002, [cited 2007 Feb 23], Available HTTP:
http://www.turbosteam.com

[15]

The Cowern Papers, Glossary of Frequently Occurring Motor Terms, [Online

document], 2007, [cited 2007 Feb 23], Available HTTP:
http://www.motorsanddrives.com/cowern/motorterms.html

[16]

Turbosteam, Standard Products: The BP50 Series, [Online document], 2002, [cited
2007 Feb 23], Available HTTP: http://www.turbosteam.com

[17]

Clayton Industries, Packaged Units, [Online document], [cited 2007 Feb 23],
Available HTTP: http://www.claytonindustries.com/1.4.4.4.jsp

[18]

Clayton Industries, How We Make Steam, [Online document], [cited 2007 Feb 23],
Available HTTP: http://www.claytonindustries.com/1.4.4.1.jsp

[19]

Clayton Industries, Specifications, [Online document], [cited 2007 Feb 23],

Available HTTP: http://www.claytonindustries.com/1.4.4.3.jsp

[20]

F. White, Fluid Mechanics, 5th ed., New York: McGraw Hill, 2003.

[21]

ABC Electric Corp., Type VRC Condensation Return Units, [Online document],
[cited 2007 Feb 24], Available HTTP:
http://www.abcelectriccorp.com/Federalpump/CondRetUnits/vrc.htm

[22]

Spirax Sarco, ball float steam traps for pressure up to 32 bar, [Online document],
2001, [cited 2007 Feb 24], Available HTTP:
http://www.spiraxsarco.com/assets/uploads/PDFs/SB/S02_01.PDF

[23]

Spirax Sarco, Pressure reducing valves for steam: An overview, [Online

document], 2001, [cited 2007 Feb 24], Available HTTP:
http://www.spiraxsarco.com/pdfs/SB/gch_29.pdf

[24]

Spirax Sarco, product overview for steam and other industrial fluids [Online
document], 2004, [cited 2007 Feb 24], Available HTTP:
http://www.spiraxsarco.com/pdfs/SB/gcm_09.pdf

[25]

Armstrong, Shell and Tube, [Online document], 2007, [cited 2007 Feb 28],
Available HTTP:
http://www.armstrongpumps.com/Data/pdfbrochures/Links/01_04_003/112.09_Heat_
Exchangers_brochure.pdf

54

[26]

J.H. Keenan and F.G. Keyes, Thermodynamic Properties of Steam Including Data for
the Liquid and Solid Phases, 1st ed., New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1964.

[27]

T. Koljonen, N. Nylund, A. Oasmaa, Y. Solantausta and M. Westerholm. Woodpyrolysis Oil as Fuel in a Diesel-power Plant, Bioresource Technology, vol. 46, pp.
177-188, 1993.

[28]

Energy Information Administration, U.S. No. 2 Heating Oil Residential Price (Cents
per Gallon Excluding Taxes), [Online document], 2007 Feb 28, [cited 2007 Mar 5],
Available HTTP: http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/mhoreus4m.htm

[29]

Bank of Canada, Consumer Price Index: 1995 to Present, [Online document], 2007
Feb, [cited 2007 Mar 10], Available HTTP: http://www.bank-banquecanada.ca/en/cpi.html

[30]

Bank of Canada, Average Residential Mortgage Lending Rate 5 year, [Online

document], 2006, [cited 2007 Mar 10], Available HTTP: http://www.bank-banquecanada.ca/pdf/annual_page52_page53.pdf

[31]

I. Bernhardt, N.M. Fraser, E.M. Jewkes and M. Tajima, Engineering Economics in

Canada, 3rd ed., Toronto: Pearson Prentice Hill, 2006.

[32]

Natural Resources Canada, Improving Energy Performance in Canada Report to

Parliament Under the Energy Efficiency Act For the Fiscal Year 2004-2005, [Online
document], 2006 Apr 10, [cited 2007 Mar 9], Available HTTP:
http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/Publications/statistics/parliament04-05/chapter3.cfm?attr=0

[33]

Toronto Hydro Electric System, Residential Bill Comparison, [Online document],

2006 Oct 23, [cited 2007 Mar 10], Available HTTP:
http://www.torontohydro.com/electricsystem/understanding_your_bill/bill_compariso
n/index.cfm

[34]

Bank of Canada, Rates and Statistics, [Online document], 2007 Mar 9, [cited 2007
Mar 9], Available HTTP: http://www.bankofcanada.ca/en/rates/exchange-look.html

[35]

Sears.ca, Kenmore Power MiserTM 9 Gas Water Heater, [Online document], 2007,
[cited 2007 Mar 5], Available HTTP: http://www.sears.ca

[36]

Enbridge, Residential Customers Rate 1, [Online document], 2007, [cited 2007

Mar 5], Available HTTP: https://portalplumprod.cgc.enbridge.com/portal/server.pt?space=Opener&control=OpenObject&ca
ched=true&parentname=CommunityPage&parentid=0&in_hi_ClassID=512&in_hi_u
serid=2&in_hi_ObjectID=248&in_hi_OpenerMode=2&

55

Appendix A: Full Schematic of a 50 kWe Bio-oil Fueled Power Plant

Figure A-1: Full Schematic of a 50 kWe Bio-oil Fueled Power Plant

56

Appendix B: Turbine Efficiency Calculation

Table B-1: State Values to Calculate Turbine Efficiency

1197.32 Btu/lbm
1.7044 Btu/lbmR
215.49 Btu/lbm
947.69 Btu/lbm
0.36333 Btu/lbmR
1.34107 Btu/lbmR

hg at 174.696 psia
sg at 174.696 psia
hf at 26.696 psia
hfg at 26.696 psia
sf at 26.696 psia
sfg at 26.696 psia

xturbine ,out =
xturbine ,out =

sturbine out s f @ Pt ,out

s fg @ Pt ,out

s g @ 174.696 psia s f @ 26.696 psia

s fg @ 26.696 psia

1.7044 Btu / lbm 0.36333 Btu / lbm

1.34107 Btu / lbm

xturbine ,out = 0.8907

Equation B-1: Turbine Exhaust Steam Quality (Isentropic)

hturbine, out = h f @ 26.696 psia + xturbine,out h fg @ 26.696 psia

hturbine ,out = 215.49 Btu / lbm + 0.8907 947.69 Btu / lbm
hturbine ,out = 1059.54 Btu / lbm
Equation B-2: Turbine Exhaust Steam Enthalpy (Isentropic)

W turbine = 50kW

3412.14 Btu / hr
= 170607 Btu / hr
kW

W isentropic = m turbine (hg @ Pt ,in hturibine,out )

Btu
Btu
1197.32

1059.54
lbm
lbm

Btu
W isentropic = 534586.4
hr
170607
turbine =
100% = 31.91%
534586.4

W isentropic = 3880

lbm
hr

Equation B-3: Turbine Efficiency

57

Appendix C: Simulink Model and Formulae

Figure C-1: Simulink Model Part 1

58

Figure C-2: Simulink Model Part 2

59

Formulae used in Simulink Model

ht ,in = hg @ Pt ,in [ Btu / lbm ]

st ,in = s g @ Pt ,in = st ,out ,isen [ Btu / lbm R ]
st ,out ,isen st ,in

xisentropic =

s fg @ Pt ,out

ht ,out ,isen = ht ,in + xisentropic hgf @ Pt ,out [ Btu / lbm ]

ht ,out ,actual = ht ,in t ,in (ht ,in ht ,out ,isen ) [ Btu / lbm ]
x actual =

ht ,out ,actual h f @ Pt ,out

h fg @ Pt ,out

Equation C-1: Turbine Outlet Formulae

hSSout = hg @ Pt ,out [ Btu / lbm ]

hST 5in = h f @ Pt ,out [ Btu / lbm ]

m SSout = x actual m t

m ST 5 = (1 x actual ) m t
Equation C-2: Steam Separator Formulae

m load = m SSout process load demand %

m PRV = m SSout m load [ pph]

m ST 6 = m PRV [ pph]

m pump1 = m ST 5 + m load + m ST 6 [ pph]

m pump 2 = m pump1 + m PRV 2 [ pph]

m boiler = m pump 2 [ pph]

m fuel

qboiler
=

m add + m turbine
1
264.17 gal

3.7854 L / gal [ L / hr ]
3
78.035lbm / ft
q fuel boiler
35.315 ft 3

Equation C-3: Mass Flow Rate Formulae

60

Q net = 0

Qin = Q out

m ST 5 hST 5 + m ST 6 hST 6 + m load hload = m pump1 h pump1,in

h pump1,in =

m ST 5 hST 5 + m ST 6 hST 6 + m load hload

[ Btu / lbm ]

m pump1
where
hload = hcompressed @ Tload & Pload ,out [ Btu / lbm ]
hST 6 = hFWHout = h f @ PPRVout [ Btu / lbm ]
Equation C-4: Condensate Tank Formulae

w pump1,isen = v pump1,in (Ppump1,out Ppump1,in )

w pump1 =

w pump1,isen

pump1

144
[ Btu / lbm ]
778

[ Btu / lbm ]

h pump1,out ,actual = w pump1 + h pump1,in [ Btu / lbm ]

where
v pump1,in = v f @ Ppump1,in [ ft 3 / lbm ] for h pump1,in = h f @ Ppump1,in
v pump1,in = 2 10 8 h 2 + 8 10 7 h + 0.016 [ ft 3 / lbm ] for h pump1,in < h f @ Ppump1,in
Equation C-5: Pump 1 Formulae

Q net = 0

Qin = Q out

m pump1 h pump1,out + m PRV hPRV = m pump1 hFWTin + m PRV hFWHout

hFWTin = h pump1,out m PRV

hPRV hFWHout

[ Btu / lbm ]

m pump1
where
hPRV = hSSout [ Btu / lbm ]
hFWHout = h f @ PPRVout [ Btu / lbm ]
Equation C-6: Feedwater Heater Formulae

61

Q FWT = Q conduction + Q convection [kW ]

Q conduction = k A

(T Tambient )
t

[kW ]

Q convection = h A (Tambient T ) [kW ]

Equation C-7: Feedwater Tank Heat Loss Formulae

Q net = 0

Qin = Q out

m pump1 hFWTin + m PRV 2 hPRV 2 = m pump 2 h pump 2,in + Q heat loss 3412.14

m pump 2 = m pump1 + m PRV 2 [ pph]

m pump1 hFWTin + m PRV 2 hPRV 2 = m pump1 + m PRV 2 h pump 2,in + Q heat loss 3412.14

m pump1 (h pump 2,in hFWTin ) + Q heat loss 3412.14

m add = m PRV 2 =

hPRV 2 h pump 2,in

[ pph]

where
h pump 2,in = h f @ Ppump 2,in [ Btu / lbm ]
hPRV 2 = hg @ Pt ,in [ Btu / lbm ]
Equation C-8: Feedwater Tank Formulae

w pump 2,isen = v pump 2,in (Ppump 2,out Ppump 2,in )

w pump 2 =

w pump 2,isen

pump 2

144
[ Btu / lbm ]
778

[ Btu / lbm ]

h pump 2,out ,actual = w pump 2 + h pump 2,in [ Btu / lbm ]

where
v pump 2,in = v f @ Ppump 2,in [ ft 3 / lbm ]
Equation C-9: Pump 2 Formulae

62

Ppump1 =

m pump1 w pump1,actual

Ppump 2 =

m pump 2 w pump 2,actual

[kW ]

3412.14

3412.14

[kW ]

m turbine (ht ,out ,actual ht ,in )

Pturbine = m turbine wturbine =

3412.14

[kW ]

Pgenerator = generator Pturbine [kW ]

Equation C-10: Power Formulae

Q boiler =

m boiler qboiler

boiler

boiler 3412.14

[kW ]

m load (hSSout hload )

=
[kW ]
3412.14

Q load = m load qload

m boiler (ht ,in h pump 2,out )

Q heat loss = Q conduction + Q convection [kW ]

Equation C-11: Heat Formulae

electrical =

Pturbine Ppump1 Ppump 2

100% [%]

Q boiler

cogeneration =

Pturbine Ppump1 Ppump 2 + Q load

100% [%]

Q boiler

Equation C-12: Efficiency Formulae

63

Appendix D: Simulation Results

Electrical Efficiency at Different Process Load Demand
Levels
3.5

Electrical Efficiency [%]

3.3
3.1
2.9
2.7

Electrical Efficiency

2.5

Electrical Efficiency with

Negative h_FWT

2.3
2.1
1.9
1.7
1.5
0

20

40

60

80

100

Process Load Demand [%]

Figure D-1: Electrical Efficiency Results, All Process Load Demand Levels

Cogeneration Efficiency at Different Process Load

Demand Levels

Cogeneration Efficiency [%]

100

Cogeneration
Efficiency

90
80
70

Cogeneration
Efficiency, No
Additional Heat
at Feedwater
Tank

60
50
40
30

Cogeneration
Efficiency with
Negative
h_FWT

20
10
0
0

20

40

60

80

100

Process Load Demand [%]

Figure D-2: Cogeneration Efficiency Results, All Process Load Demand Levels

64

Pump 1 Inlet Enthalpy at Different Process Load

Demands

h_pump1_in [Btu/lbm]

200

175

150
h_pump1_in
Upper Limit for h_pump1_in
125

100

75
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90 100

Process Load Demand [%]

Figure D-3: Pump 1 Inlet Enthalpy Results, All Process Load Demand Levels

Feedwater Tank Inlet Enthalpy at Different Process

Load Demands
100

Feedwater Tank Enthalpy

[Btu/lbm]

0
-100

20

40

60

80

100

-200
FWT Inlet Enthalpy

-300

FWT Inlet Enthalpy,

h_FWT>=0

-400
-500
-600
-700
-800

Process Load Demand [%]

Figure D-4: Feedwater Tank Inlet Enthalpy Results, All Process Load Demand Levels

65

Fuel Rate at Different Process Load Demand Levels

40
38

Fuel Rate [L/hr]

36
34
32

Fuel Rate with Negative

h_FWT
Fuel Rate

30
28
26
24
22
20
0

20

40

60

80

100

Process Load Demand [%]

Figure D-5: Fuel Rate Results, All Process Load Demand Levels

Additional Mass Flow Rate into the Feedwater Tank at

Different Process Load Demand Levels

Additional Mass Flow Rate

[lbm/hr]

4500
4000
3500
3000
Additional Steam

2500

Additional Steam with

Negative h_FWT

2000
1500
1000
500
0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90 100

Process Load Demand [%]

Figure D-6: Additional Mass Flow Rate Results, All Process Load Demand Levels

66

Appendix E: Economic Analysis Supplemental Data

Table E-1: Equipment, Operation and Maintenance Costs
Initial Costs per Unit
Clayton Steam Generator (B)
Back Pressure Regulator (B)
Stack Damper Relay (B)
Universal Alarm Kit (B)
Feedwater Tank (B)
Chemical Pump (B)
Blow Down Tank (B)
Water Softeners (B)
50 kW Steam Turbine (T)
Electric Generator (T)
Steam Trap
Pressure Reducing Valve
Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger
Condensate Return Unit
Installation
Total Capital Cost
Operation and Maintenance
Bio-oil [/L/year]
Plant Maintenance [/year]**
Operation Labour [/year]***
Total O&M Cost [/year]

Cost [US$/each] Quantity

$62,000.00
1
$2,200.00
1
$430.00
1
$500.00
1
$4,600.00
1
$820.00
1
$3,300.00
1
$4,200.00
1
$37,835.00
1
$4,160.00
1
$1,050.00
2
$1,125.00
2
$2,000.00
1
$3,540.00
1
$60,000.00
1

$1.30
$5,700.00
$15,000.00

207238*
1
1

Extended Cost [US$]

$62,000.00
$2,200.00
$430.00
$500.00
$4,600.00
$820.00
$3,300.00
$4,200.00
$37,835.00
$4,160.00
$2,100.00
$2,250.00
$2,000.00
$3,540.00
$60,000.00
$189,935.00

$269,409.63
$5,700.00
$15,000.00
$290,109.63

Notes:
- equipment costs from various suppliers; supplier contact information in Appendix F
(B) part of boiler/steam generator set; (T) part of turbine-generator set
* based on maximum fuel rate (at 89% load) and 24 hour, 360 days operation per year
** estimated to be approximately 3% of capital cost
*** estimated based on minimal supervision
Table E-2: System Energy Output Values

Electrical Energy Generated

49.3521 [kW]
Electrical Energy Generation Each Year*
426402 [kWh]
Electrical Energy Generation Each Month
35533.5 [kWh]
Heat Output (at 100% load demand)
1203.6914 [kW]
Heat Output Each Year*
10399894 [kWh]
Heat Output Generation Each month
866657.8 [kWh]
*operational hours each year assumed to be 8640 hours (360 days)

67

Table E-3: Electrical Cost per Kilowatt-hour

Initial Costs per Unit
Clayton Steam Generator (B)
Back Pressure Regulator (B)
Stack Damper Relay (B)
Universal Alarm Kit (B)
Feedwater Tank (B)
Chemical Pump (B)
Blow Down Tank (B)
Water Softeners (B)
50 kW Steam Turbine (T)
Electric Generator (T)
Steam Trap
Pressure Reducing Valve
Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger
Condensate Return Unit
Installation
Total Capital Cost

Extended Cost [US$]

$62,000.00
$2,200.00
$430.00
$500.00
$4,600.00
$820.00
$3,300.00
$4,200.00
$37,835.00
$4,160.00
$2,100.00
$2,250.00
$2,000.00
$3,540.00
$65,000.00
$194,935.00

Operation and Maintenance

Bio-oil [/L/year]
Plant Maintenance [/year]
Operation Labour [/year]
Total O&M Cost [/year]

Capital Cost Annualized @ 10%

Annual Equivalent Cost
Cost/kWh [US/kWh]*
*based on 360 days, 24 hour operation

$269,409.63
$5,700.00
$15,000.00
$290,109.63
$22,904.86
$313,014.49
73.41

Table E-4: Household Energy Consumption [32]

Household
Average Monthly
Energy
[GJ/year]
[kWh/year]
Consumption
Consumption
[kWh/month]
Built 2001-2004
158
43888.89
3657.41
Built 1991-2000
169
46944.44
3912.04
Built 1981-1990
191
53055.56
4421.30
Built 1970-1980
201
55833.33
4652.78
Average
179.75
49930.56
4160.87963
Assuming the electricity produced by the bio-oil fueled system is distributed evenly to each

household, the system produces enough electricity to meet the needs of 8.5 houses each year.

68

Table E-5: Cost of Purchasing Electricity from Utility Supplier [33]

Price
Price
Regulated Electricity Prices (Haliburton, Ontario*) [$CDN/kWh]
[US$/kWh]**
First 1000 kWh [per kWh per month]
0.055
0.046915
Afterwards [per kWh per month]
0.064
0.054592
Debt Retirement Charge [per kWh]
0.007
0.005971
Distribution Charge [per kWh]
0.0186
0.015866
Transmission Charge [per kWh]
0.0102
0.008701
System Operation and Regulation Charge [per kWh]
0.0062
0.005289
Regulated Plan Admin Charge [per month]
0.25
0.21325
Customer Charge [per month]
12.43
10.60279
Total Cost per Month per House
444.73
379.3575
Total Cost per Month (8.5 houses)
3797.98
3239.676
Cost per year per 8.5 houses
45575.75
38876.11
Cost per kWh
0.1069
0.0912
*Haliburton County is located 3 hours northeast of the City of Toronto.
** Exchange Rate as of March 9, 2007 COB: 1 CDN = 0.8530 USD [34]
Table E-6: Household Annual Heating [32]
Average
Monthly
Household Annual Heating
[MJ]
Consumption
[MJ]
Existing 1970 House
216812
18067.67
Typical New House 2002
146274
12189.5
181543
15128.58
Average
Assuming the heat produced by the bio-oil fueled system

Average
Monthly
[kWh]
Consumption
[kWh]
60225.56
5018.80
40631.67
3385.97
50428.61
4202.38
is distributed evenly to each

household, the system produces enough heat to meet the needs of 206 houses each year.

Table E-7: Residential Gas-fired Water Heater Information [35]

Heater Cost
Natural Gas Energy Content [MJ/m3]
Average Energy Use per Month [MJ]
Amount of Gas per month per house [m3]
* assume heater has lifetime of 10 years
Annual Equivalent Cost of 2 boilers

69

[CDN$]
650
37
15128.58
408.8806306

[US$]
761.84
37
15128.58
408.8806306

152.75

179.03

Table E-8: Cost of Purchasing Natural Gas for Heating from Utility Supplier [36]
Regulated Natural Gas Prices (Haliburton,
[$CDN/m3]
[US$/m3]**
Ontario*)
System Sales per m3
0.314844
0.268561932
Customer Charge
11.25
9.59625
Delivery
First 30 m3
0.143051
0.122022503
Next 55 m3
0.136778
0.116671634
3
Next 85 m
0.131863
0.112479139
Afterwards
0.128203
0.1093828
Cost per month per house
193.6315018
165.173796
Annual Cost for 206 houses (including
510693.188
445687.3007
required number of boilers)
Energy [kWh/year]
10399894
10399894
Cost/kWh
0.0493
0.0429
* Haliburton County is located 3 hours northeast of the City of Toronto
** Exchange Rate as of March 9, 2007 COB: 1 CDN = 0.8530 USD [34]

70

Appendix F: Equipment Cost Sources

Steam Generator Unit Cost Quotation Summary

HIGH PRESSURE STEAM BOILER SYSTEM EG 154

Angela Hsu
STEAM GENERATOR
1

Steam generator type

EG-154-1

The generators heating surface consists of a single, continuous coil tube, designed in such a way as to cause the water
within it and the combustion gases around it to circulate at high velocity. Velocity of water and steam is controlled
through a progressive increase in the size of the coil tube. The high velocity, both on the gas and the steam/water side
combined with the counterlow principle, ensures the highest possible heat transfer.

The combustion chamber is water cooled to minimize radiation losses. This feature also provides for a safe and
comfortable working environment.

CLAYTON centrifugal steam/water 99.5% quality separator

PRICE 99.5% QUALITY SEPARATOR:

included

CLAYTON burner & blower

included

CLAYTON feed water pump

included

FOLLOWING AUTOMATIC FUNCTIONS ARE BUILT IN:

Modulation of the steam generator

included

Automatic flame detector and burner control

included

Automatic post-run

included

Automatic wet layup of the steam generator

included

PRICE Steam Generator:

$62,000.00 x 1 = $62,000.00

FOLLOWING OPTIONS CAN BE ADDED:

1

Back Pressure Regulator

$2,200.00

Stack Damper Relay

$432.00

Universal Alarm Kit

$502.00

71

FEEDWATER EQUIPMENT
1

Hotwell tank
Price for Hotwell Tank

$4,580.00

Chemical dosing
Price for Chemical Pump

$816.00

Blow down tank

Price for Blow Down Tank

$3,300.00

Softeners
Price for Softeners

$4,200.00

Blow down tank cooling

included

Contact:
Glenn Adgey
General Manager
13 Edvac Road, Unit 19
Brampton, Ontario
L6S 5W6
E-mail: glenn.adgey@claytoncanada.ca
Tel.: (905) 791-3322 Fax: (905) 790-0583
Steam Turbine and Electrical Generator Unit Cost Summary
Note: Cost of Turbosteam Backpressure Turbine and generator assumed to be of an
equivalent cost to costs cited below since both are sized for 50 kWe and both operate at
similar conditions

TURBOMACHINES CANADA
Elliott C1R4 Gear with Standard Lube System.............. $37,835.00 USD

Contact:
Tej Trevor Parekh
18 Place DeCary
Dorval, Quebec
H9S 3J8
E-mail: turbomachines@videotron.ca
Tel: 514-631-1234

72

U.S. ELECTRICAL MOTORS

DIVISION OF EMERSON ELECTRIC CANADA LTD
Generator:
QTY / QT

HP

RPM

VOLTSPH-HZ

NET
UNIT $

Extended
$

75.0

1800

575/3/60

4,162$

4,162$

Contact:
Martin Tougas
Technical Sales Support, Quotations
8515 Place Devonshire, Suite 203
Ville Mont-Royal, Quebec
H4P 2K1
Tel: 514-332-1880 Fax: 514-332-5912
Steam Traps and Pressure Reduction Valves

Spirax Sarco Canada Limited

2" FT14-14 Ball Float & Thermostatic Steam Trap NPT
$1,050.00
11/4" 25P Pilot Operated Self Actuated Pressure Reducing Valve NPT with
pressure pilot 3-30 psig (Yellow spring)
$1,124.00
Contact:
Charles Elliott
E-mail: CElliott@spirax.ca
Cell: 647-222-3446

73

Heat Exchanger

Delta T Heat Exchangers

Contact:
David LaDouceur
Delta T Heat Exchangers
206-1674 Hyde Park Road
London, Ontario
N6H 5L7
E-mail: dave@deltathx.com
Tel: (519) 471-2800 Cell: (519) 280-5316 Fax: (519) 471-8494

Armstrong
Armstrong WS Heat Exchanger

$2000

Contact:
Armstrong Heat Transfers Products Group Technical Support
E-mail: techsupport@armlink.com

Condensate Return Unit

ABC Electric Corp.

VRC-620-2 Condensate Return Unit

List Price: $3537

Tel: 1-800-562-1919
http://www.abcelectriccorp.com/Federalpump/CondRetUnits/vrcPrices.htm

74