European-wide field trials for residential fuel cell micro-CHP

European‐wide field trials for residential fuel cell micro‐CHP Ene.field ‐ "The findings of a recent regulations codes and standards report“
Massimo Santarelli, Politecnico di Torino (IT)
HANNOVER MESSE 2014
April 9th, 2014 – 3:00 3:30 pm
The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union´s 7th Framework Programme (FP7/2007‐2013) for the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking Technology Initiative under Grant Agreement Number 303462.
Agenda
1. Brief presentation of the project
2. Overview of FC m CHP technology and its benefits
3. Technology deployed under ene.field
4. Energy and economic benefits of the adoption of FC‐
based microCHP
5. Notes on RC&S situation in EU for FC‐based microCHP
installation
6. Notes on Energy Labeling
2
Introduction to ene.field
• ene.field is the largest European demonstration of the latest smart energy solution for private homes, fuel cell micro‐CHP.
• It will deploy up to 1,000 Fuel Cell heating systems in 12 key European member states.
v
• Project duration of 5 years. Systems will be demonstrated for 2 to 3 years.
• Outputs of the project include: Detailed performance data, lifecycle cost and environmental assessments, market analysis, commercialisation strategy.
Countries where units are currently expected to be installed
3
ene.field is a European platform for FC mCHP
The consortium brings together 26 partners including:
• the leading European FC micro‐CHP developers,
• leading European utilities,
• leading research institutes,
The Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH JU) is
committing c. €26 million to ene.field under the EU's 7th
Framework Programme for funding research and
development.
• partners in charge of dissemination and coordination of the project. 4
Fuel Cell micro Combined Heat and Power systems (FC mCHP) System description
•
Produce both heat and electricity for a building using a single fuel. Primarily produces electricity with heat being produced as a by‐
product.
•
v
Well suited to the retrofit market and compatible with new build properties.
•
Noise and vibration free source of power.
•
Low local emissions
When heat demand is too large for the system the
peak demand boiler will switch on and provide
heat. This peak demand boiler operates like a
conventional gas boiler.
Source: Fuel Cell Handbook (fifth edition), EG&G Services Parsons, Inc., 2000. and Fundamental
physics and chemistry of direct electrochemical oxidation in SOFC (see www.ene.field.eu)
5
A growing market and interest for FC mCHP
The last 5 years have seen a steep increase in sales worldwide as well as the v
implementation of numerous schemes to incentivise the uptake of mCHP.
Countries with incentives for mCHP
Type of support Country
Tax support
Belgium, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain, UK.
Feed‐in‐tariff
Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, UK.
Certificate scheme
Belgium.
Capital grant
Italy, Netherlands, UK.
Other
Belgium, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain.
FC mCHP sales worldwide
Source: Code project at http://www.code-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/231210-European-Summary-Report-on-CHPsupport-schemes.pdf (table) and data from Delta Energy & Environment at
http://www cogeneurope eu/medialibrary/2013/04/23/ccf35af0/John%20Murray%20-%20Delta%20EE pdf (Graph)
6
A growing interest at the European policy level
• Energy Efficiency Directive (2012/27/EU)
• Defines micro‐CHP as a cogeneration unit with a maximum capacity below 50 kWe.
• Member States shall conduct a comprehensive assessment of introducing high‐
efficiency CHP & DHC, which shall also consider the potential for micro‐CHP.
• Member States are encouraged to facilitate the grid connection to micro‐
cogeneration units.
• Simplified notification “install and inform” procedure for the installation of micro‐
CHP is recommended.
• Energy performance of Buildings Directive (2010/31/EU)
v
• Cogeneration, including micro‐CHP, is part of the toolbox of energy efficient
measures to improve the energy efficiency in buildings.
• European Parliament Microgeneration Resolution (adopted on 12th September 2013)
• Calls on the Commission to put more emphasis on realising the potential of small
scale technologies, including micro‐CHP.
• Micro‐CHP is mentioned as an important small scale technology to save energy in
buildings, contributing together with renewables to zero‐ or positive‐ energy
buildings.
7
Technical characteristics of systems in ene.field
The systems deployed in ene.field present a good coverage of various type of v
requirements thanks to a wide range of technology, size and fuels.
8
Examples of field trials Elcore 2400 system at family Aberl
installed by the company Schröter
Haustechnik
• Mr. Schröter, owner of Schröter
Haustechnik: “I want to support new technologies like the fuel cell that improves energy efficiency in homes, reduces CO2emissions and contributes to the success of the energy transition”.
v
• Mr. Aberl: “We wanted to get involved with this innovative fuel cell cogeneration system tailored for single family homes and achieve significant energy savings“.
Source: Elcore, Press release 06/09/13.
The house of family Aberl
(Munich region)
•
•
•
•
•
Single-family home
Mid-terrace house
120m² living space
300W electrical power
(base load energy
demand)
600W thermal output
(warm water / heating)
9
Energy and economic benefits of the adoption of FC‐based microCHP
FC-based microCHP: energy analysis in residential loads (ex. 1 kWe)
Electric
coverage
Ramp rate
3 s profile
1 min profile
0.1 W/s
0.87
0.87
3 W/s 0.92
0.92
100 W/s
0.92
0.92
10
Energy and economic benefits of the adoption of FC‐based microCHP
Single family, electric load following
Electricity import from the grid [kWhe/y]
Electricity export to the grid [kWhe/y]
Electricity produced with FC [kWhe/y]
Primary energy savings with FC respect to 'zero condition' [kWh/y]
8000
7000
6000
5000
[kWh/y]
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
‐1000
‐2000
NO battery
WITH battery
No modulation
NO battery
WITH battery
Load Following
11
Energy and economic benefits of the adoption of FC‐based microCHP
FC-based microCHP: energy analysis in residential loads
Optimization of thermal recovery (example with PEMFC, 1 kWe)
#
Flux
Φ [W]
1
PEMFC recovery
659.2
2
Burner exhausts
207.6 (172.9 recovered)
3
Cooling of Reformate
58.0
ENERGY CLASSIFICATION OF BUILDING
Normalized thermal load – φ [W/m2]
Fraction coverage of residential thermal load supplied by the PEMFC CHP PINCH ANALYSIS
E
C
A++
64.20
34.42
9.38
22.4% 39.7% 111.9%
12
Energy and economic benefits of the adoption of FC‐based microCHP
FC-based microCHP: economic analysis in residential loads (ex. 1 kWe)
Economic assumptions: Single family
Price: Natural gas from the grid
€/m3
0.9262
€/m3
0.8953
€/kWh
0.1686
€/kWh
0.2301
€/kWh
0.3010
€/kWh
0.3524
Price: sell of electric energy to the grid
€/kWh
0.07841
Specific cost of FC‐based microCHP
€/kW
6248
Cost of the plant (including auxiliary boiler and €/kW
8248
%
7.0
(for thermal energy production)
Price: Natural gas from the grid
(for electric energy production)
Price: electric energy from the grid
(from 0 to 1800 kWh/yr)
Price: electric energy from the grid
(from 1800 to 2640 kWh/yr)
Price: electric energy from the grid
(from 2640 to 4440 kWh/yr)
Price: electric energy from the grid
(more than 4440 kWh/yr)
battery)
discount rate
13
Energy and economic benefits of the adoption of FC‐based microCHP
FC-based microCHP: economic analysis in residential loads (ex. 1 kWe)
Economic recovery compared to hypothesis 0 ‐ Load following
Economic recovery compared to hypothesis 0 ‐ No modulation
Investment (8248 €)
80% Investment (6998 €)
50% Investment (5124 €)
30% Investment (3874 €)
70% Investment (6373 €)
Investment (8248 €)
80% Investment (6998 €)
50% Investment (5124 €)
30% Investment (3874 €)
70% Investment (6373 €)
6000,00
4000,00
4000,00
2000,00
2000,00
0
1
2
3
4
5
‐2000,00
6
7
8
9
10
VAN (€)
VAN (€)
0,00
0,00
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
‐2000,00
‐4000,00
‐4000,00
‐6000,00
‐6000,00
‐8000,00
‐8000,00
Year
Year
14
Notes on RC&S situation in EU for FC‐based microCHP installation
Position Paper on RC&S
Content:
• Previous projects
• Analysis of the International and
European RC&S for fuel cell mCHP
systems status (and other mCHP
technologies)
• Analysis of the RC&S status related
to fuel cell mCHP installation in
Countries involved in the ene.field
project
• The position of ene.field
15
Notes on RC&S situation in EU for FC‐based microCHP installation
Position Paper on RC&S
16
Notes on RC&S situation in EU for FC‐based microCHP installation
Codes and Standards:
Non-homogeneity in Europe. Each country adopts International and European Standards (mainly EN 50465
and IEC EN 62282 series) , but supplemented by own versions containing own requirements. Mix of standards
that results as a problem for manufacturers that want to install their products throughout Europe.
In some case, not consistency among standards dealing with the same topic (e.g. EN 50465 and IEC EN
62282)
Topic Comment
Connection to low‐voltage distribution networks (EN 50438)
Each European Country has it own national version that supplements this standard.
IEC EN 62282 series
These standards are highly considered, but they refer to Fuel Cell Power Systems and not to microCHP systems. Therefore, the values of the parameter limits (e.g., CO limits) are not adequate.
Gas pipeline installations
There are different ranges of pressure values concerning the applicability of standards related to this topic. Heating system sizes
The range of outputs for this system is not homogeneous
throughout Europe.
Natural gas quality, air quality
A lack of harmonization has been observed in the former case, while the second topic is not even considered.
17
Notes on Energy Labeling
Delegated Regulation EU 811/2013 supplementing Directive 2010/30/EU
Comparison of seasonal space heating energy efficiency in two different cases: •
a CHP device sized on the electrical demand coupled with a supplementary heater •
as a comparison case, a heat pump
LOADS: Yearly demands for an average European single family house
Yearly demand
Electrical
Heating + DHW
Value [kWh/yr]
7000
18000
18
Notes on Energy Labeling
Delegated Regulation EU 811/2013 supplementing Directive 2010/30/EU
µ-CHP
Case Study
FC electrical
efficiency
FC thermal efficiency
ηS (CHP + supplementary heater)
Energy class
Case 1CHPel
25%
60%
125.9%
A++
Case 2CHPel
35%
50%
142.3%
A++
Case 3CHPel
60%
25%
183.1%
A+++
ηS [%]
heat pumps
240,00
230,00
220,00
210,00
200,00
190,00
180,00
170,00
160,00
150,00
140,00
130,00
120,00
110,00
100,00
90,00
80,00
70,00
60,00
50,00
=50%
SCOP=4.5
=45%
SCOP=4.0
=50%
=45%
=40% SCOP=4.0 SCOP=4.5
SCOP=4.5
Class A+++
Class A++
=40%
SCOP=4.0
=40%
SCOP=3.5
Class A+
Class A
Class B
Class C
Class D
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Case study
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
19
Notes on Energy Labeling
Delegated Regulation EU 811/2013 supplementing Directive 2010/30/EU
140%
A+
=40%
SCOP=3.5
[kWh/yr]
A++
ηel=35%
ηth=50%
180%
ηel=60%
=40%
ηth=25%
SCOP=4.5
[kWh/yr]
A+++
20
ene.field – coordination team contact details
•
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you wish to get additional information about the ene.field systems or would like to be put in contact with one or several of the FC mCHP manufacturers involved in the project.
•
v
COGEN Europe is the project co‐ordinator and the leader of the dissemination Work Package.
•
Element Energy is the work package leader coordinating the implementation of the demonstration sites under ene.field.
Fiona Riddoch (ene.field Coordinator)
Email: [email protected]
Direct line: +32 2 772 82 90
Lisa Ruf (Field trial management)
Email: lisa.ruf@element‐energy.co.uk
Direct line: +44(0)330 119 0986
21

Download Report