The Feasibility of Alternative and Renewable Energy in … · Photo Courtesy of U.S. Department of Energy/National Renewable Energy Laboratory; Credit: City of Tulare, 2008. Slide

Accelerating Sustainable Manufacturing

Copyright ©2009 SEMATECH, Inc. SEMATECH, and the SEMATECH logo are registered servicemarks of SEMATECH, Inc. International SEMATECH Manufacturing Initiative, ISMI, Advanced Materials Research Center and AMRC are servicemarks of SEMATECH, Inc. All other servicemarks and trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

The Feasibility of Alternative and Renewable Energy in the Semiconductor Industry

January 28, 2010

Mike Frisch, Ph.D., P.E.ESH Project [email protected]

Slide 2

• Technologies

• Survey of ISMI member companies

• Economic comparisons of power generating technologies

• Incentives

• Member company site economic analysis

• Other renewable energy options (green power, RECs)

• Conclusions/What’s next?

OutlineOutline

Slide 3

• More fuel-efficient, less polluting than conventional technologies

• Can operate on natural gas, biomass, liquid fuels, coal, and hydrogen

• Investigated combined heat and power (CHP) and fuel cell technologies

Alternative TechnologiesAlternative Technologies

Slide 4

• Cogeneration - electricity and heat from power plant

• Trigeneration - electricity, heat, and chilled water from power plant

• Generation cost tied directly to energy prices

• Both are proven technologies used by several member companies

• System sizes of 1 to 50 MW

Combined Heat and PowerCombined Heat and Power

Slide 5

CHP - Gas Turbine or Engine With Heat Recovery Unit

CHP - Gas Turbine or Engine With Heat Recovery Unit

Source: EPA Combined Heat and Power Partnership Program

Slide 6

CHP - Steam Boiler With Steam Turbine CHP - Steam Boiler With Steam Turbine

Source: EPA Combined Heat and Power Partnership Program

Slide 7

Absorption ChillerAbsorption Chiller

• Uses waste heat to generate chilled water

Source: Johnson Controls, Inc. - Used with permission.

Slide 8

Historical CHP Capacity and Growth Needed to Achieve 20% of GenerationHistorical CHP Capacity and Growth

Needed to Achieve 20% of Generation

Source: Combined Heat and Power – Effective Energy Solutions for a Sustainable Future, © U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Industrial Technologies Program, 2008.

Slide 9

CHP Share of Total National Power Production

CHP Share of Total National Power Production

Source: Combined Heat and Power: Evaluating the benefits of greater global investment © Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development/International Energy Agency, 2008.

Slide 10

• Electricity and heat from hydrogen or methane from fossil or renewable sources, e.g., anaerobic digesters or landfills

• Very efficient, low emissions

• Proven, but expensive technology

• Cost varies with energy prices

• Readily installed at member company sites

• System sizes of 10 kW to 5+ MW

Fuel CellsFuel Cells

Photo Courtesy of U.S. Department of Energy/National Renewable Energy Laboratory; Credit: City of Tulare, 2008.

Slide 11

World Annual and Cumulative Fuel Cell MWe Installed

World Annual and Cumulative Fuel Cell MWe Installed

Source: Large Stationary Survey, 2008 © Fuel Cell Today, 2008.

Slide 12

• Non-polluting

• No fuel cost

• Success depends on location

• Investigated– Solar photovoltaic (PV)– Concentrating solar power (CSP)– Solar thermal (hot water)– Wind– Biomass– Geothermal– Hydrokinetic

Renewable TechnologiesRenewable Technologies

Slide 13

• Multiple types types– Silicon substrate (Si)– Thin film (TF)– Concentrating solar cells – relatively new

• Si and TF are proven technologies, enjoying rapid efficiency improvements and generous incentives


• System sizes 1 kW to 100+ MW

Solar PhotovoltaicSolar Photovoltaic

Photo Courtesy of 1house at a time, 2008. Photo Courtesy of U.S. DOE/NREL; Credit: Beck Energy, 2005

Photo Courtesy of SolFocus Inc., 2009

Slide 14

Solar Resources in the U.S. and GermanySolar Resources in the U.S. and Germany

Source: Photovoltaic Solar Resource: United States and Germany © U.S. DOE/NREL, 2008.

Slide 15

Solar Resources in the WorldSolar Resources in the World

Source: Taken from energy [r]evolution, A Sustainable Global Energy Outlook, report -global energy scenario by European Renewable Energy Council and Greenpeace. www.energyblueprint.info/, 2008.

Slide 16

Solar PV, Existing World Capacity, 1995-2008

Solar PV, Existing World Capacity, 1995-2008

Gig

awat

ts

Slide 17

• Four types (clockwise from top)

– Linear Fresnel Reflector (not pictured)

– Central Receiver– Parabolic Dish– Parabolic Trough

• In early stages of commercialization

• System sizes 100 kW to 100 GW

Concentrating Solar PowerConcentrating Solar Power

Photo Courtesy of U.S. DOE/NREL; Credit: Sandia National Laboratories, 1989

Photo Courtesy of U.S. DOE/NREL; Credit: Sandia National

Laboratories, 2000

Photo Courtesy of U.S. DOE/NREL; Credit:

Gretz, Warren, 1991

Slide 18

Types of CSP SystemsTypes of CSP Systems

Source: Concentrating Solar Power Global Outlook 09: Why Renewable Energy is Hot, Greenpeace International, SolarPACES, and ESTELA, 2009.

Slide 19

CSP – Parabolic Trough Process Flow Diagram

CSP – Parabolic Trough Process Flow Diagram

Source: Concentrating Solar Power Commercial Application Study: Reducing Water Consumption of Concentrating Solar Power Electricity Generation, U.S. Department of Energy, 2008.

Slide 20

CSP Capacity – Spain and World, 2007-2009

CSP Capacity – Spain and World, 2007-2009

Source: Data taken from Concentrating Solar Power Global Outlook 09: Why Renewable Energy is Hot, Greenpeace International, SolarPACES, and ESTELA, 2009.

Slide 21

100 GW? Really?100 GW? Really?

• DESERTEC - EUMENA Concept– Network of renewable energy installations designed to provide

power to Europe, The Middle East, and North Africa– Water desalination and transport– http://www.desertec.org/fileadmin/do wnloads/DESERTEC-

WhiteBook_en_small.pdf

Slide 22

• Hot water or process heat– Open loop– Closed loop

• Well developed, efficient, and cost-effective



Solar ThermalSolar Thermal

Photo Courtesy of U.S. DOE/NREL; Credit: Spink, Todd, 2001

Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Evacuated Tube Hot Water Collector Installed by The Solar Guys, Australia

Slide 23

Annual Installed Capacity of Flat-plate and Evacuated Tube Collectors from 1999 to 2007

Annual Installed Capacity of Flat-plate and Evacuated Tube Collectors from 1999 to 2007

Source: IEA Solar Heating and Cooling Programme, Solar Heat Worldwide, 2009 edition, www.iea-shc.org.

Slide 24

• From large (7 MW) to small (3 kW) turbines

• Proven and cost-effective technology

• Small turbines may be suitable for member company sites


WindWind

100 kW Turbine 1.5 MW TurbinesOffshore Wind Farm

Photo Courtesy of U.S. DOE/NREL; Credit: Spink, Todd, 2008

Photo Courtesy of The Virginian-Pilot; Credit: Harper, Scott, 2009

Photo Courtesy of Northern Power Systems, 2009

Slide 25

U.S. Wind Capacity, 1999-2009U.S. Wind Capacity, 1999-2009

Source: AWEA 2nd Quarter 2009 Market Report, American Wind Energy Association, 2009.

Slide 26

Global Wind Capacity, 1996-2008Global Wind Capacity, 1996-2008

Source: Global Wind 2008 Report, Global Wind Energy Council, 2009.

Slide 27

• Burn as fuel to generate electricity and heat

• Often combined with alternative and conventional power generating systems

• Proven and cost-effective technologies

• More suitable for utilities

• System sizes 10 to 100+ MW

BiomassBiomass

Photo Courtesy of U.S. DOE/NREL; Credit: Gretz, Warren, 1997

Slide 28

Biomass and Other Renewables –Global Capacity

Biomass and Other Renewables –Global Capacity

Source: Annual Energy Review 2008, Energy Information Administration, 2009.

Slide 29

• Power from hot underground formations

• Proven and cost-effective technology

• Member company sites not located on such formations

• System sizes 1 MW to 50+ MW

GeothermalGeothermal

Source: Geothermal Education Office, Tiburon,

California, 2000.

Slide 30

World Geothermal InvestmentWorld Geothermal Investment

Source: 13.1. Global Geothermal: A Snapshot and Look Forward, Proceedings from World Bank’s GeoFund –IGA International Geothermal Workshop, with permission from New Energy Finance, 2009.

Slide 31

Global Geothermal CapacityGlobal Geothermal Capacity

Source: Data Taken From Renewable Energy-geothermal: Cumulative installed geothermal power capacity, British Petroleum and International Geothermal Association, 2008.

Slide 32

• Types– Elevated storage – hydroelectric dams– Wave power– Tidal power

• Wave and tidal power still under development

• Not suitable for member company sites

• System sizes 100 kW to 20+ GW

HydrokineticHydrokinetic

Pelamis Wave Energy Converter

Verdant Power

Turbines

Photo Courtesy of Wikipedia Commons Public Domain; Credit: unknown, 2008 Photo Courtesy of Verdant Power Inc., 2009

Slide 33

Global Hydroelectric Output, 1983-2008Global Hydroelectric Output, 1983-2008

Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2009, BP p.l.c., 2009.

Slide 34

Applicability to Member Company SitesApplicability to Member Company Sites

• Technology robust and readily installed at member company sites– Solar PV – Silicon & Thin Film (10 to 1000 kW)– Solar Thermal – (80 to 1000 kW)– Small Wind (10 to 100 kW)– Fuel Cells (10 kW to 10 MW)– Combined Heat & Power (Cogen/Trigen) (1 to 20 MW)

• Not applicable to most member company sites– CSP – Early stages of commercialization– Onshore Wind – Difficult to permit, limited sites– Offshore Wind – Limited access– Geothermal – Limited access– Hydroelectric – Limited access– Biomass & Conventional Technologies (Coal, IGCC, CT, CCGT,

nuclear) – Fuel handling and permitting difficulties

Slide 35

Survey of ISMI Member CompaniesSurvey of ISMI Member Companies

• Responses– 12 of 16 member companies responded

– 19 responses received

– 28 sites reported

• AE/RE Installations– 5 member companies have no installations

– 7 member companies have a total of 12 installations

• Installed - Solar Photovoltaic (PV), Solar Thermal, Geothermal, Cogeneration, Trigeneration, NaS Batteries

• Not Installed - Wind, Biomass, Hydrokinetic and Fuel Cells

• 10 of 19 Respondents (7 of 12 member companies) Prefer Solar PV

Slide 36

Existing Alternative Energy/Renewable Energy Installations at Member Company Sites

Existing Alternative Energy/Renewable Energy Installations at Member Company Sites

0

1

2

3

4

5

Solar-PV Combined Heat &Power

Geothermal(Cooling)

Solar Thermal NaS Battery

Nu

mb

er o

f M

C In

stal

lati

on

s

% of total site power0.04

0.01

conf

conf

0.22

conf 30

50

20

100

92

conf

Slide 37

Alternative Energy/Renewable Energy Installations Under Evaluation

Alternative Energy/Renewable Energy Installations Under Evaluation

0

1

2

3

4

5

Solar-PV CombinedHeat &Power

Wind Geothermal(Cooling)

Fuel Cell BiomassBoilers

All Forms

Inst

alla

tio

ns

Un

der

Eva

luat

ion

by

MC

s

Slide 38

Alternative Energy/Renewable Energy Installation Technology Preference

Alternative Energy/Renewable Energy Installation Technology Preference

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Solar-PV Not Specified Combined Heat& Power

Geothermal(Cooling)

Solar Thermal Wind

AE

/RE

Inst

alla

tio

n T

ech

no

log

y P

refe

ren

ce

Slide 39

Member Company Maximum Payback Time on Energy Projects

Member Company Maximum Payback Time on Energy Projects

20

10

54

32 2 2

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

Individual Member Company Responses

MC

Max

imu

m P

ayb

ack

Tim

e o

n E

ner

gy

Pro

ject

s (Y

ears

)

3 Additional Responses:N/A

No ResponseNPV to alternatives or close

Slide 40

Economic Comparisons of Power Generating TechnologiesEconomic Comparisons of Power Generating Technologies

• Installed Capital Costs– Reported in $/kW of nameplate capacity– Does not take into account capacity factor or fuel costs– Shows initial investment cost, but poor indicator of overall cost of

producing electricity

• Levelized Cost of Electricity– Ratio of total costs to power generated over the plant lifetime– Reported in $/MWhr– Includes capital, installation, fixed and variable operating and

maintenance, insurance, and financing costs– Accounts for capacity factor– Reported with and without incentives– Cost of carbon emissions not included– Best measure of cost of electricity, especially for new generation

Slide 41

Installed Capital Costs for Renewable, Alternative, and Conventional Sources of Electricity, United States

(Sources: CPUC, PACE Global Energy Services, NREL, Lazard, National Fuel Cell Research Center, DOE, ExxonMobil, USEPA, AWEA, CanWEA)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Solar P

V - Silic

on

Solar P

V - Thin

Film

Solar T

herm

al (T

roug

h)

Small

Wind

(< 1

00 kW

)Ons

hore

Wind

Offsho

re W

indBiom

ass

Geoth

erm

alHyd

roele

ctric

Fuel C

ell (M

C, PA, S

O)

Combin

ed H

eat &

Pow

er (<

5 M

W)

Combin

ed H

eat &

Pow

er (>

5 M

W)

Coal

Inte

grat

ed G

asific

ation

Com

b. C

ycle

Gas T

urbin

e (P

eakin

g)

Comb.

Cyc

le Gas

Tur

bine

Nuclea

r

Technology

Cap

ital

Co

st (

US

$/kW

, nam

epla

te) Renewable Alternative Conventional

Slide 42

Levelized Cost of Electricity for Renewable, Alternative, and Conventional Sources – No Incentives

(Sources: World Economic Forum, REN21, CPUC, Lazard, CEC, Photon Consulting)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Solar P

V - Silic

on

Solar P

V - Thin

Film

Solar T

herm

al (T

roug

h)

Small

Wind

(< 1

00 kW

)Ons

hore

Wind

Offsho

re W

indBiom

ass

Geoth

erm

alHyd

roele

ctric

Fuel C

ell (M

C, PA, S

O)

Combin

ed H

eat &

Pow

er (<

5 M

W)

Combin

ed H

eat &

Pow

er (>

5 M

W)

Coal

Inte

grat

ed G

asific

ation

Com

b. C

ycle

Gas T

urbin

e (P

eakin

g)

Comb.

Cyc

le Gas

Tur

bine

Nuclea

r

Technology

Lev

eliz

ed C

ost

of

Ele

ctri

city

(U

S$/

MW

hr) Renewable Alternative Conventional

Slide 43

Levelized Cost of Electricity for Renewable, Alternative, and Conventional Sources – With Incentives

(Sources: CPUC, Lazard, NREL, CEC)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Solar P

V - Silic

on

Solar P

V - Thin

Film

Solar T

herm

al (T

roug

h)

Small

Wind

(< 1

00 kW

)Ons

hore

Wind

Offsho

re W

indBiom

ass

Geoth

erm

alHyd

roele

ctric

Fuel C

ell (M

C, PA, S

O)

Combin

ed H

eat &

Pow

er (<

5 M

W)

Combin

ed H

eat &

Pow

er (>

5 M

W)

Coal

Inte

grat

ed G

asific

ation

Com

b. C

ycle

Gas T

urbin

e (P

eakin

g)

Comb.

Cyc

le Gas

Tur

bine

Nuclea

r

Technology

Lev

eliz

ed C

ost

of

Ele

ctri

city

(U

S$/

MW

hr)

Renewable Alternative Conventional

Slide 44

IncentivesIncentives

– Incentives are financial tools used by governments, utilities, and other entities to subsidize and encourage the adoption of alternative and renewable technologies.

– Many types• Feed In Tariff (FIT) – payment per kWhr generated to a renewable energy

producer. The cost is usually distributed over all electricity users.• Investment Tax Credit (ITC) – reduction in tax, usually a percentage of

installed capital cost. Now available in the U.S. as a grant.• Depreciation Deduction (D) – allowing depreciation of installed capital to be

deducted from taxes. U.S. uses Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS) plus bonus depreciation (60, 16, 10, 6, 6, 2% over years one through six).

• Production Incentive (PI) – payment per kWhr generated, which is in addition to the value of the electricity on the open market. Usually offered by states, local utilities, or other entities.

• Rebate (R) – payment per kW installed. In U.S. is offered by state governments and local utilities.

Slide 45

Available Incentives – by CountryAvailable Incentives – by Country

ITCITCITCITCITCITCITCITCITCJapan

FITFITFITFITFITFITItaly

FITFITFITIsrael

ITC/DDITC/DDITC/DDITC/DDITC/DDITC/DDITC/DDITC/DDITC/DDU.S.

FITTaiwan

FITFITFITFITFITScotland

Singapore

DDDDDDDDDDMalaysia

FITFITITC/FITKorea

FITITCITC/FITFITITCFITFITIreland

FITFITFITFITFITFITGermany

FITFITChina

FITFITFITAustria

HydroGeothermalBiomassWindSolar

ThermalCSPSolar PVCHPFuel CellsCountry

FIT = Feed in TariffITC = Investment Tax Credit or Grant

DD = Depreciation Deduction

Slide 46

Available Incentives – by U.S. StateAvailable Incentives – by U.S. State

RRNew York

ITCITCITCITCITC/PINew Mex.

R/PIITCR/PIMass.

PIPIWash.

Virginia

FITFITFITITC/RITC/R/FIT/PIVermont

FITFITFITFITITC/PIFITPI/RUtah

RTexas

R/PIPIFIT/PI/ROregon

PIPIPIR/PIRPIR/PIPIPIMaine

PIPIIdaho

FITFITFIT/RRFITFIT/RRCalifornia

ITCITC/PIITCITC/RArizona

HydroGeothermalBiomassWindSolar

ThermalCSPSolar PVCHPFuel CellsState

FIT = Feed in TariffITC = Investment Tax Credit or Grant

PI = Production IncentiveR = State or Local Rebate

Slide 47

Member Company Site Economic AnalysisMember Company Site Economic Analysis

• Analyzed solar PV – Si, solar thermal, small wind, fuel cell, and combined heat & power

• Simple payback period– Based on U.S. capital, installation, and O&M costs– Incentives included for each location– Industrial electricity rates for each location– Natural gas cost = 8.00 US$/million BTU

• Sites with a payback > 50 years are not shown

• Conversion efficiency, manufacturing costs, incentives, regulations, and fuel and electricity costs are rapidly changing, so these analyses must be updated frequently.

Slide 48

ISMI Member Company LocationsISMI Member Company Locations

Slide 49

Economic Analysis of 19.5 to 50 kW (DC) Solar PV-Si Roof-Mounted System

(based on U.S. installed cost 103K to 265K USD, systems sized to maximize incentives)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Austin

East F

ishkil

l

Yorkto

wn Heig

hts

Hudso

nCha

ndler

Essex

Junc

tion

Hwasun

gGihe

ung

Rosev

illeRio

Ranch

oSan

ta C

lara

Arlingt

onDall

asKiry

at G

atHou

ston

Sherm

anAve

zzan

oTuc

son

Freibu

rgFre

ising

Camas

Dresd

en

Regen

sbur

gLe

hiVilla

chCor

vallis

Hillsbo

ro

South

Por

tland

Beijing

Boise

Nampa

Japa

nM

anas

sas

Shang

hai

SW Ja

pan

Singap

ore

Leixl

ipKuli

m

Facility/Fab Location

Sim

ple

Pay

bac

k P

erio

d (

Yea

rs)

Slide 50

Economic Analysis of 350 kW (DC) Solar PV-Si Roof-Mounted System

(based on U.S. installed cost 1.941 million USD)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Giheun

gHwas

ung

Essex

Junc

tion

Avezz

ano

Tucso

nRio

Ranch

oHud

son

Santa

Clar

aFre

iburg

Freisi

ngRos

eville

Kiryat

Gat

Dresd

en

Regen

sbur

gCha

ndler

Villach

East F

ishkil

l

Yorkto

wn Heig

hts

Arlingt

onDall

asShe

rman

South

Por

tland

Housto

nBeij

ingBois

eNam

paM

anas

sas

Shang

hai

Japa

n (1

)Le

hiAus

tinJa

pan

(2)

Camas

Corva

llisHills

boro

Singap

ore

Kulim

Leixl

ip


Sim

ple

Pay

bac

k P

erio

d (

year

s)

Slide 51

Comparison of 19.5-50 kW to 350 kW Systems(Solar PV-Si, Roof-Mounted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Austin

East F

ishkil

l

Yorkto

wn Heig

hts

Hudso

nCha

ndler

Essex

Junc

tion

Hwasun

gGihe

ung

Rosev

illeRio

Ranch

oSan

ta C

lara

Arlingt

onDall

asKiry

at G

atHou

ston

Sherm

anAve

zzan

oTuc

son

Freibu

rgFre

ising

Camas

Dresd

en

Regen

sbur

gLe

hiVilla

chCor

vallis

Hillsbo

ro

South

Por

tland

Beijing

Boise

Nampa

Japa

nM

anas

sas

Shang

hai

SW Ja

pan

Singap

ore

Leixl

ipKuli

m


Sim

ple

Pay

bac

k P

erio

d (

Yea

rs) 19.5 - 50 kW

350 kW

Slide 52

Economic Analysis of 837 kW Solar Thermal System Fab Industrial Hot Water Loop

(180 deg F supply, 150 deg F return, based on U.S. installed cost 1.08 million USD)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Tucso

nCha

ndler

Hudso

nRio

Ranch

oSan

ta C

lara

Rosev

ille Lehi

Sherm

anArlin

gton

Dallas

Nampa

Boise

Austin

Essex

Junc

tion

South

Por

tland

Man

assa

s


Sim

ple

Pay

bac

k P

erio

d (

year

s)

Slide 53

Economic Analysis of 80 kW Solar Thermal System Facility Domestic Usage

(120 deg F supply, based on U.S. installed cost 160K USD)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Hudso

nCha

ndler

Tucso

nSan

ta C

lara

Rosev

ille Lehi

Rio Ran

cho

Essex

Junc

tion

Arlingt

onDall

asShe

rman

Boise

Nampa

Austin

South

Por

tland

Man

assa

sHou

ston

East F

ishkil

l

Yorkto

wn Heig

htsCor

vallis

Camas

Hillsbo

roJa

pan

(1)

Kulim

Giheun

gHwas

ung

Kiryat

Gat

Japa

n (2

)Sing

apor

eBeij

ing


Sim

ple

Pay

bac

k P

erio

d (

year

s)

Slide 54

Economic Analysis of 100 kW (DC) Wind Turbine System

(based on U.S. installed cost 386K USD)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Green

ock (

prop

osed

)Tat

eyam

aHud

son

Avezz

ano

Arlingt

onDall

asShe

rman

Essex

Junc

tion

Leixl

ip

Yorkto

wn Heig

hts

Japa

n (G

roup

1)

South

Por

tland

Housto

nM

anas

sas

Austin

Japa

n (G

roup

2)

Kiryat

Gat

Nampa

Boise

Shang

hai

East F

ishkil

lBeij

ingCam

asRio

Ranch

oHills

boro

Corva

llis


Sim

ple

Pay

bac

k P

erio

d (

year

s)

Slide 55

Economic Analysis of 1 MW Fuel Cell System(based on U.S. installed cost 4.1 million USD)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Korea Avezzano Leixlip Greenock (proposed) Villach


Sim

ple

Pay

bac

k P

erio

d (

Yea

rs)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

Ind

ustrial E

lectricity Rate ($/kW

hr)

Simple Payback Period (Years)

Industrial Electricity Rate (USD/kWhr)

Slide 56

Economic Analysis of 10 MWCombined Heat and Power System

(based on U.S. installed cost 12 million USD)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Avezz

ano

Leixl

ip

Green

ock (

prop

osed

)

Japa

n

Villach

Hudso

n

New Y

ork

Singap

ore

South

Por

tland

Califo

rnia

Essex

Junc

tion

Kiryat

Gat

Germ

any


Sim

ple

Pay

bac

k P

erio

d (

Yea

rs)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

Ind

ustrial E

lectricity Rate (U

SD

/kWh

r)

Simple Payback Period (Years)

Industrial Electricity Rate (USD/kWhr)

Slide 57

10 MW Combined Heat and Power SystemImpact of Natural Gas Price(based on U.S. installed cost 12 million USD)

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

18.00

Avezz

ano

Leixl

ip

Green

ock (

prop

osed

)Ja

pan

Villach

Hudso

nNew

Yor

kSing

apor

e

South

Por

tland

Califo

rnia

Essex

Junc

tion

Kiryat

Gat

Germ

any

Texas

(non

-Aus

tin)

Man

assa

sAriz

ona

Kulim

Rio Ran

cho

Austin

Korea

Camas

Hsinch

uId

aho

Lehi

Orego

nChin

a


Sim

ple

Pay

bac

k P

erio

d (

Yea

rs)

3.5 USD/mil BTU

8 USD/mil BTU

13 USD/mil BTU

Slide 58

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 19.5-50 kW Solar - PV

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 19.5-50 kW Solar - PV

Austin

Rio Rancho

Chandler

Hwasung

Gihueng

East Fishkill

Yorktown Heights

Hudson

Roseville

Essex Junction

Slide 59

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 350 kW Solar - PV

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 350 kW Solar - PV

Hwasung

Gihueng

Essex Junction

Slide 60

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 80 kW Solar Thermal - Domestic

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 80 kW Solar Thermal - Domestic

Chandler

Hudson

Slide 61

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 100 kW Wind Turbine

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 100 kW Wind Turbine

Greenock

Slide 62

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 1 MW Fuel Cell

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 1 MW Fuel Cell

Hwasung

Gihueng

Avezzano

Slide 63

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 10 MW CHP

(Nat. Gas Cost = 8 USD/million BTU)

Member Company Locations with < 5-yr Payback 10 MW CHP

(Nat. Gas Cost = 8 USD/million BTU)

Avezzano

Villach

East Fishkill

Leixlip

Greenock

Japan

Singapore

Yorktown Heights

Hudson

Slide 64

Summary of AE/RE Technologies at Member Company Sites (< 5-yr Payback)

Summary of AE/RE Technologies at Member Company Sites (< 5-yr Payback)

Solar PV - small Solar (350 kW) Wind (100 kW)Solar Thermal Fuel Cell CHP

Slide 65

Other Renewable Energy Options (1)Other Renewable Energy Options (1)

Green Power – renewable power available from local utilities– A way to support the renewable energy

industry and reduce environmental impact

– Available to most member company sites– In some cases, can select technology

(solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, hydrokinetic) to support preferred or lower impact technology

– Cost premium of 0.5 to 10 U.S. cents/kWhr

– Hedge against rising electricity costs– Six of ten member companies with sites

in the U.S. purchase green power

City CountryGreen Power

Available?Austria YesChina Trial BasisGermany YesIreland Yes but not certifiedIsrael NoItaly YesJapan YesKorea NoMalaysia NoScotland Yes but not certifiedSingapore Yes but not certifiedTaiwan No

Arlington US YesAustin US Yes but not certifiedBoise US YesCamas US YesChandler US YesCorvallis US YesDallas US YesEast Fishkill US YesEssex Junction US Yes but not certifiedHillsboro US YesHouston US YesHudson US YesLehi US YesManassas US YesNampa US YesRio Rancho US YesRoseville US Yes but not certifiedSanta Clara US YesSherman US YesSouth Portland US NoTucson US YesYorktown Heights US Yes

Slide 66

Other Renewable Energy Options (2)Other Renewable Energy Options (2)

• Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) – “represents the property rights to the environmental, social, and other nonpower qualities of renewable electricity generation. A REC, and its associated attributes and benefits, can be sold separately from the underlying physical electricity associated with a renewable-based generation source” EPA, 2009– 1 REC = 1 MWhr– Available to all member companies, only 1 of 14 purchases RECs– Can get them from any source and apply them to any facility– Prices can vary from $5 to $90 and depend on many factors– Another way to support the renewable energy industry and reduce

environmental impact

Green Power vs. RECs vs. AE/RE Installations?

Slide 67

ConclusionsConclusions

• Technologies readily installed at member company sites include solar PV, solar thermal, small wind, fuel cells, and CHP.

• Rapidly declining costs and generous incentives currently give some technologies at some sites payback periods of 1 to 5 years, which fit within most member company requirements.

• The most promising AE technology is CHP, which can generate 100% of facility power usage.

• The most promising RE technology is Solar-PV, but most power used at a facility will still come from the grid.

Slide 68

What’s Next?What’s Next?

• Increased deployment of technologies will continue to bring downcosts and increase conversion efficiencies.

• Carbon cap & trade regulations and tight fuel supplies will increase conventional electricity costs.

• Governments and utilities will scale back incentives for technologies that reach price parity in order to encourage manufacturers to continue cost reduction and efficiency improvement.

• For many technologies, price parity without incentives will be reached within 5 to 10 years.

Slide 69

Thank You !!Thank You !!

Documents

The Feasibility of Alternative and Renewable Energy in … · Photo Courtesy of U.S. Department of Energy/National Renewable Energy Laboratory; Credit: City of Tulare, 2008. Slide