1 / 15

Efficient Power Generation

Efficient Power Generation. Dick Munson Recycled Energy Development Midwest Media Project 10 July 2007. Why Consider Alternatives?. Average plant built with 1950’s technology Only 33% efficiency; burn three units of fuel to obtain one unit of electricity. Pollution. 67% Total Waste.

kirk
Download Presentation

Efficient Power Generation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Efficient Power Generation Dick Munson Recycled Energy Development Midwest Media Project 10 July 2007

  2. Why Consider Alternatives? • Average plant built with 1950’s technology • Only 33% efficiency; burn three units of fuel to obtain one unit of electricity

  3. Pollution 67% Total Waste Line Losses 9-20% Fuel 100% Power Plant T&D and Transformers Conventional Central Generation 33% delivered electricity

  4. Why Consider Alternatives? • Average plant built with 1950’s technology • Only 33% efficiency; burn three “lumps” of fuel to obtain one “lump” of electricity • Electric generators are largest polluters • Unreliable supplies cost $150 billion/yr • U.S. consumer loses power 214 min/yr; 70 min/yr in UK; 6 min/yr in Japan

  5. Rising Prices Focus One’s Attention • Fuel costs are 3-5 times above 1990 levels, and long-term contracts now below the spot market. • Clean Air Interstate Regulations (CAIR) and Clean Air Mercury Regulations will add $550-850/kw for existing plants • New coal plant costs $2,500/kw, up from $800/kw in the late 1990s • Pending costs: transmission expansion, greenhouse-gas reductions (carbon credits of $20/ton would add 2 cents/kwh). • Midwest’s electricity prices could double in 5-10 years.

  6. U.S. Electric Industry Fuel-Conversion Efficiency

  7. Pollution 10% Waste Heat, no T&D loss Electricity Fuel 100% CHP Plants 90% Steam Chilled Water (At or near thermal users) Combined Heat and Power (CHP)

  8. Local Generation Plants we have built that recycle waste heat Denmark Electric Efficiency

  9. Feasible Target of 30% CHP in US U.S. is an International Laggard in Capturing Heat and Power

  10. Denmark Changed in Two Decades Source: Danish Energy Center

  11. Best New Generation: Recycle Industrial Energy • Wasted energy streams in nineteen industries could generate 19% of US electricity Recycled Energy in the US 9,900 MW Recycled Energy in Service 95,000 MW Identified Opportunities Source:USEPA 2004 Study

  12. 10% Waste Heat 25% Electricity Waste Energy 100% 65% Steam Steam Generator Back-pressure Turbine Generator Recycled Energy (At user sites) No Added Pollution

  13. Industrial Energy Recycling 90 MW Recycled from Coke Production

  14. Policy Options • Remove policy barriers – interconnection standards, backup power rates, private wires. • Recognize the value of Clean Distributed Generation’s Benefits – less T&D, reduced line losses, grid stability. Ontario Standard Offer, Subtitle E in House Energy bill. • Induce Efficient Biofuel Production

  15. Thank You Dick Munson Recycled Energy Development www.recycled-energy.com dmunson@recycled-energy.com

More Related