Combined heat & power
Can less really be more? Single vs multi CHP
Alex Parkinson of Bosch Commerial Heating evaluates the pros and cons of multiple module CHP systems vs single module arrangements
still generally viewed as something of an emerging tech- nology, discussions around the best design practices are still ongoing. As with any appliance within the heating and hot water industry, there is no ‘one solution fits all’ approach, which means consultants and contractors always need to make a multitude of per- formance-related considerations. As far as this is concerned, there appears to be differences of opin- ion across the industry with regard to when cascades of multiple CHP modules, and single module sys- tems should be used. Generally speaking, the conclusions lie in the assessment of four key areas.
Installation cost
When it comes to the time and cost involved in the installation of a CHP system, a suitably-sized single module inevitably boasts the fewest complications and subsequently, the most cost-effec- tive installation. The delivery and installation of one module means that only one set of gas, electrical, BMS, and flow/return connections needs to be made, and only one meter required. As a result, the installation and commissioning procedure ought to be relatively straightforward.
By contrast, multiple units require an increased number of ancillaries. A system comprising three CHP modules for example, would require three of each connection to be made, three meters to be fitted, and three commissioning procedures to take place. This extended list of requirements results in longer installation time, and added labour costs.
Opinions differ in when cascades of CHP modules and single modules should be used
20 | July 2014 | HVR
Alex Parkinson is Bosch Commercial Heating’s commercial sales manager for CHP
Plant space
As with any commercial or industrial heating and hot water technology, an investment in CHP will have spatial implications and as a result, careful planning of the plant room layout will be required. Naturally, one of the major drawbacks of a system comprising of multiple CHP modules is that more plant space is generally required. The physical dimensions of each CHP module isn’t the only logistical considera- tion to be made here either, as each module will generally require a connecting buffer vessel and a certain amount of clearance to be able to operate to its design potential.
Load mapping The most effective way to design a CHP system is to align the electri- cal output as closely as possible with the load of the application. Whilst the advantage of a CHP cascade is the ability to track elec- trical load to a lower output in the event of a reduction in demand, this can also prove to jeopardise efficiency levels. Ultimately, the full benefit is only realised when
the number of hours that the sys- tem runs at full load is maximised, so having modules within a cas- cade tracking electrical load to lower outputs shouldn’t necessari- ly be seen as a desirable option. Furthermore, instances in which a load as little as 10kWe is required tend to be few and far between. In the event there is no demand for heat and therefore very little financial saving poten- tial, the maintenance costs of a multi-module cascade would make it not economic to operate. As an alternative, a single mod- ule system can, if the manufactur- er’s product specification allows, modulate both electrically and thermally to 50 per cent of the load. While this level may not be as large a reduction as with a three module cascade for example, hav- ing a system designed to modulate for long periods is not a strong design scenario as the cost gener- ally far outweighs the benefit.
Standby
For investors, one of the biggest attractions of a system comprising multiple modules is that should one unit fail, the facility in ques-
tion will still be able to rely on the remaining units to deliver a supply of heat and power. That said, the reduced collective output of a sys- tem where one module is down limits the financial gain of the sys- tem, as the capital cost of two or more units plus two or more maintenance contracts would result in a significantly reduced payback.
When it comes to the effective observation and maintenance of a CHP system, manufacturers such as Bosch offer a remote CHP monitoring system to respond immediately if a faulty connection occurs. With CHP downtime having the potential to damage financial and carbon savings, remote monitoring can reduce this risk, as well as offering stakehold- ers the peace of mind that can prove so important when it comes to large scale investment. Although it is usually possible to meet the requirements of an end-user with the design and installation of a single or multiple CHP system, it is important to con- sider the advantages and limita- tions of each approach before- hand. Recent industry trends sug
Daily news update at
www.heatingandventilating.net
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40