Combined cycle/TES plant can save $1,244,474 per year. Proposed cogen system for a 1,100,000-ft{sup 2} medical complex has a payback period of 2.6 years

M. Meckler
{"title":"Combined cycle/TES plant can save $1,244,474 per year. Proposed cogen system for a 1,100,000-ft{sup 2} medical complex has a payback period of 2.6 years","authors":"M. Meckler","doi":"10.1080/10668683.1997.10530256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article presents a comparative analysis between an innovative proposed, combined heating/cooling cogeneration power plant and a base plant for an approximately 1.1 million ft{sup 2} hospital/office complex to be located in Toledo, Ohio. The complex consists of three buildings: a six-story hospital and two identical 12-story office towers. The comparative analysis between the two plants has shown substantial cost savings for the proposed plant because of reduction in utility and maintenance costs and, therefore, the total annual operating costs of the overall plant. This reduction in operating costs is mainly due to the fact that approximately 95% of the total required annual electrical power is produced on-site by cogeneration, and therefore only 5% of its annual estimated power needs are needed to be purchased from a utility. Reduction in the number of plant operators for the proposed plant has also made sizable contribution to the annual operating cost savings. Although the installed first cost of the proposed plant was higher in comparison, the total operating cost savings of $1,244,474 per year has resulted in a cost-effective simple payback period of 2.6 years for the proposed plant. Additionally, the design of the proposed plant has resulted in a substantially compactmore » central plant (an approximately 29% decrease in physical size) in comparison to the base plant having three separate central plants. The fully dedicated proposed plant contributes to reduced demand charges associated with the time-of-use electrical rates, better operation and maintenance, efficient energy management, higher overall system efficiency, and reduced levels of emissions and noise. With the anticipated nationwide deregulation of the electric utility industry (already underway in 40 states), the proposed plant can offer viable solutions to electric, steam, heating and cooling generation needs for large multi-building complexes.« less","PeriodicalId":374324,"journal":{"name":"Cogeneration and Competitive Power Journal","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cogeneration and Competitive Power Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10668683.1997.10530256","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article presents a comparative analysis between an innovative proposed, combined heating/cooling cogeneration power plant and a base plant for an approximately 1.1 million ft{sup 2} hospital/office complex to be located in Toledo, Ohio. The complex consists of three buildings: a six-story hospital and two identical 12-story office towers. The comparative analysis between the two plants has shown substantial cost savings for the proposed plant because of reduction in utility and maintenance costs and, therefore, the total annual operating costs of the overall plant. This reduction in operating costs is mainly due to the fact that approximately 95% of the total required annual electrical power is produced on-site by cogeneration, and therefore only 5% of its annual estimated power needs are needed to be purchased from a utility. Reduction in the number of plant operators for the proposed plant has also made sizable contribution to the annual operating cost savings. Although the installed first cost of the proposed plant was higher in comparison, the total operating cost savings of $1,244,474 per year has resulted in a cost-effective simple payback period of 2.6 years for the proposed plant. Additionally, the design of the proposed plant has resulted in a substantially compactmore » central plant (an approximately 29% decrease in physical size) in comparison to the base plant having three separate central plants. The fully dedicated proposed plant contributes to reduced demand charges associated with the time-of-use electrical rates, better operation and maintenance, efficient energy management, higher overall system efficiency, and reduced levels of emissions and noise. With the anticipated nationwide deregulation of the electric utility industry (already underway in 40 states), the proposed plant can offer viable solutions to electric, steam, heating and cooling generation needs for large multi-building complexes.« less
联合循环/TES装置每年可节省1,244,474美元。拟议的110万英尺{sup 2}医疗综合设施的cogen系统的投资回收期为2.6年
本文提出了一项比较分析,将在俄亥俄州托莱多市为一个大约110万英尺的医院/办公综合设施建设一个创新的联合供热/制冷热电联产电厂和一个基础电厂进行比较分析。该综合体由三座建筑组成:一座六层的医院和两座相同的12层办公楼。两个工厂之间的比较分析表明,由于减少了公用事业和维护成本,因此,整个工厂的年度总运营成本,拟议的工厂节省了大量成本。运营成本的降低主要是由于每年所需总电力的约95%是由现场热电联产产生的,因此每年估计电力需求的5%只需要从公用事业公司购买。减少拟建工厂的操作人员数量也对每年节省的运营成本作出了相当大的贡献。虽然拟议工厂的首次安装成本相比之下更高,但每年节省的总运营成本为1,244,474美元,这使得拟议工厂的投资回收期为2.6年,具有成本效益。此外,与拥有三个独立中心工厂的基础工厂相比,拟议工厂的设计导致了一个实质上更紧凑的中心工厂(物理尺寸减少了约29%)。完全专用的拟议工厂有助于降低与使用时间电费相关的需求费用,更好的操作和维护,高效的能源管理,更高的整体系统效率,并降低排放和噪音水平。随着预计全国范围内对电力公用事业的放松管制(已经在40个州实施),拟议中的电厂可以为大型多建筑综合体的电力、蒸汽、加热和冷却发电需求提供可行的解决方案。«少
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信