an overview of research in alternative energy technologies
TRANSCRIPT
An overview of research in alternative An overview of research in alternative energy technologies based on energy technologies based on ManitobaManitoba’’s natural resourcess natural resources
Clayton H. Riddell Faculty of Environment,
Earth, and Resources Seminar Series
University of Manitoba, November 18, 2005
Dr. Eric BibeauDr. Eric BibeauMechanical & Industrial Engineering DeptMechanical & Industrial Engineering Dept
Manitoba Hydro/NSERC Chair Alternative EnergyManitoba Hydro/NSERC Chair Alternative Energy
OutlineOutline
1. Distributed alternative energy Generation
2. Anaerobic digesters for swine manure3. BioPowerl agricultural and forestry wastes
4. Kinetic turbinesl river currents
5. Icing of wind turbinesl regions prone to icing
Alternative Energy ChairAlternative Energy Chair
lWhy a Manitoba Hydro/NSERC chair– Pursuing cost-effective
alternative energy is one of the 10 important corporate goals for Manitoba Hydro
– Manitoba Hydro encourages l development and demonstration
of cost-effective alternative energy applications
l collaboration with the University of Manitoba
Average Marginal Newfoundland/Lab 0.02 0.00Prince Edward Island 0.50 0.81Nova Scotia 0.74 0.54New Brunswick 0.50 0.81Québec 0.01 0.00Ontario 0.24 0.54Manitoba 0.03 0.00Saskatchewan 0.83 0.54Alberta 0.91 0.54British-Columbia 0.03 0.00Territories 0.36 0.91Total Canada 0.22 0.43
Canadian Power Emission Factor (tonnes/MWhr)
Node
Primary
Energy
Node
Needs
Energy Node
FF RE RF
HT TR EE
Manitoba Energy Node
Node
Primary
Energy
Fossil Fuel
Renewable Energy
Renewable Fuels
Heat
TransportationE
lectricity
Energy
Conversion
Station
l Anaerobic digesters
l Kinetic turbines
l BioPower CHP
l Windl PHEV
Node
Needs
Alternative Alternative Energy SourcesEnergy Sources
Electricity (highest form)
Heat (lowest form)
Gas & Liquid Fuels
WindOcean
BiomassSteam
PVCollectorsHydro
GeothermalFission
Processing
Sola
r
Mech/Turbo Generator
Nuc
lear
Drivers Favoring Drivers Favoring AlternativeAlternative EnergyEnergy
Future gas production
Oil production Future oil production
Natural gas productionNatural gas production
RENEWABLES
EXPONENTIAL GROWTH
Courtesy Manitoba Hydro
Alternative Energy and Alternative Energy and Distributed GenerationDistributed Generation
l Power demand is increasing – population increasing
– standard of living increasing
– more people want access to electricity
l Carbon constrained world
l Distributed generation– 2.0 Billion without power
l new grid installation to rural areas have significant costs
l DG makes rural electrification possible
l Local employment
– Distributed renewable resource
129 coal power plant permit applications in the US (DOE database)
Alternative Energy ResearchAlternative Energy Researchl Fundamental approach
– investigate one aspect of a technology in detaill icing of wind turbines (effect of ice on power)
l Distributed generation system – investigate all aspects of one alternative energy technology
l focus on reducing capital, maintenance, operational cost
– systems must compete with other modes of generation
– Research – Develop – Demonstratel anaerobic digester, biomass, kinetic turbine
l GHG mitigation– find ways to reduce GHG by modeling of alternative energy
l PHEV
Anaerobic DigestersAnaerobic Digestersl Biological degradation
– Mesophilic bacteria (25oC-38oC)
l Bio-Gas CH4 & CO2
l Heat and powerl Reduction in
– CH4 from manure & heating– N20 from manure & heating– CO2 from displaced electricity and heating– Water usage– Odour from barn, lagoons & land
l Phosphates soil build-up avoidancel Organic fertilizer
Slurry In
Heat In
Heat InHeat In
Slurry In
Slurry In
Slurry In
Covered Lagoon
TPAD
Plug Flow
Complete Mix
Effluent Out Effluent Out
Effluent Out
Effluent Out
Anaerobic Digester ModelAnaerobic Digester Modell Develop numerical model for swine anaerobic digester
– heat transfer (Phase 1)
– anaerobic digestion coupled to flow (Phase 2)
– two-phase, liquid and mechanical mixing (Phase 3)
l Demonstrate numerically simple AD systems can operate economically in cold climates
l Design and optimize cost-effective anaerobic lagoon-type swine digester for cold climates– low solids
Develop tool Design system
UofM LagoonUofM LagoonDesignDesign
Preliminary Design Concept
Power
Gas
Digester Gas
Recycled Plastic Linked Boxes
Tsolid = 35Co
Recirc Compressor
Flexible Membrane
Hay
Distributer Pipe2 Clay Layers
Flax Straw
Recirc GasMixing+Heating
Liquid/Solid Manure
Warm Recirc Gas
Wind Compressor
BurnerGlycol Loop
Hot Glycol
Glycol Return Recirc Heat Exchanger
IC Engine
Digester ModelDigester Model Biogas
Unfrozen Soil
Cover
Frozen Soil
Manure
Straw
Waterproof Membranes
Ambient AirSolar Radiance
Qcover
Qwall
Qfloor
Qsolar
Qin
Qout
Qheating
T frozen
Tunfrozen
Tambient
0
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
8,000,000
9,000,000
10,000,000
04/08
/2004
04/09
/2004
04/10
/2004
04/11
/2004
04/20
/04
04/21
/04
04/22
/04
04/24
/04
04/26
/04
04/27
/04
04/28
/04
06/16
/04
06/17
/04
06/18
/04
Hea
t Flu
x (K
J)
Measured (kJ)1-D Predicted (kJ)
3-D Predicted (kJ)
l Phase 1– heat transfer
l 1-D modell 3-D CFD model
Digester ModelDigester Model
Digester ModelDigester Model
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Depth (m)
Hea
t lo
sses
(kW
)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Radius (m)
Hea
t lo
sses
(%
HH
V o
f B
iog
as)
Cover
FloorWallTotal Q% HHV
Depth
Radius
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Heat loss throughcover
Heat loss throughfloor
Heat loss throughwalls
Total heat loss
Hea
t lo
ss (
W)
rectangular with arch top
rectangular with flat top
cylinder with flat top
cylinder with conical bottom
lGeometry effect– Cover, walls, floor– % HHV of Biogas
Icing of wind turbine bladesIcing of wind turbine bladeslManitoba
– wind farms
l Ice issues– reduction in turbine
efficiency
– load imbalance from uneven shedding
l Impacts personnel safety– increase stresses on
wind turbine
– falling ice
100 MW
Call for 3.5 GW
Icing of wind turbine bladesIcing of wind turbine bladesl Icing research (3 Phases)
– experimental investigation of icing on wind turbine blades
– ice mitigation strategies
– numerical modelling of ice accretion
Icing Tunnel Icing Tunnel l Experimental Work
– icing tunnel
– test modelsl fixed wing
l 3 blade rotating model
– non-uniform ice shedding
– test mitigation techniques
– instrumentationl force balance/PIV
Mitigation StrategiesMitigation Strategiesl Develop predictive modeling
– ice melting model
– force balance on particles
l Combination strategies– e.g. coatings and heating
Kinetic TurbinesKinetic Turbines
KineticTurbinesKineticTurbines
l Convert flow kinetic energy into power
l Low environmental impact – does not require head, dam, or impoundment
– minimizes fish impact: screens; air; slow RPM
l Limited data – long term deployment; cold weather impact
– cost information; not commercially demonstrated
Why Kinetic Turbines in ManitobaWhy Kinetic Turbines in Manitobal Manitoba resource
– vast river system– requires flow velocities above 2.5 m/s
l Renewable energy technologyl Remote communities applicationl Fits hydro-base culturel Rapid deployment and modularl Base load generationl Likely cost effective distributed energyl Enhance and build research capacity at
the University of Manitoba
Modular Rapid DeploymentModular Rapid Deployment
600 kW twin unit (base load)Water velocity = 4.0 m/sWater density = 1000 kg/m3
1,800 kW (0.33 CF)Air velocity = 10 m/sAir density = 1 kg/m3
Water Air
150 m3.0 m
Unit does not exist yet
Power increases by: Velocity3 Density Area
Alternative Electrical Grid Energy Alternative Electrical Grid Energy
l Commercialized cost targets– $2,500 installed target
l low for small distributed scalel capital $1,000 /kW per unitl power control/connection $750 /kWl installation/permitting at $750 /kW
l Twin: 2 x 60 kW = 120 kW (2.5 m/s)– 40 c/kW diesel example = 0.42 Million/yr
l GHG credit
– unit 120 kW x $2,500/kW = 0.30 Million
Previous 40 kW per unit
Remote ApplicationsRemote Applications
l Can opens Northern Communities for energy utilization on a sustainable basis
l Environmentally sound technology
l Reduces transport of diesel/oil northward
l Applications– remote communities, logging camps, mines,
fishing lodges, locations with limited grid capacity, Native communities, diesel generation displacement
Commercialization Commercialization and R&D Objectivesand R&D Objectives
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.1 2.3 2.6 3.1 4.1 5.1 6.2 7.2
Flow velocity (m/s)
Po
wer
(kW
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 4.5 5.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0
Thou
sand
s
Flow velocity (Knots)
Fo
rces
(lb
f)
Power (kW)
Drag (lbf)
Torque (lbf)
Ocean/Demos
60 kW DemoProject
UofM R&D/targets
UEK 8 feet and shrouded turbine
Kinetic Turbine Modeling Kinetic Turbine Modeling
Station
River
Bridge
Flow Spillway
Proposed Kinetic Turbine Proposed Kinetic Turbine Demo ProjectDemo Project
Kinetic Turbine ProjectKinetic Turbine Project
lWill test for the first time a kinetic turbine in cold weather climates – 1 year period; cold climate; higher power density
– River application; grid connected
– Higher flow velocity UEK kinetic turbine (2.5 m/s)
– Develop safety and procedures protocols
– Understand the potential in Manitoba
lMay prove new viable small-hydro application for remote communities
Flow Measurements Flow Measurements
Velocity downstream walkway Pointe du Bois June 13, 2005
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5Depth (m)
Vel
oci
ty (
m/s
)
5.0 m
8.0 m
10.8 m
13 m
16 m
ADCP Flow Measurements
Turbine Flow Meter
Testing of Testing of Kinetic TurbineKinetic Turbine
FlowBoat Cable
Walkway BridgeWinch
Turbine
Boat
Turbine Cable
2 Cemented Cables
Data
Data
AC
DC
AC120V
120V
Heater
Heater
480VAC3 PhaseTo Grid
From Plant
OutsideCamera
DAQLaptop
Turbine
Boat
UnderwaterCamera
T1 Wirelessto Internet(0.01 Hz)
AtcoTrailer
DC/AC
AC/DC
HydroLaptop
VoltageCurrentVibrationVel & TurbulencePressure dropsTemperatures
Distributed CHP TechnologiesDistributed CHP Technologies
Brayton Hybrid Cycle (BHC)
Entropic Rankine Cycle (ERC)
l Distributed CHP– Waste: forestry and agriculture biomass residues– Industrial waste heat
Target: $2,500 /kW Turnkey
Target: $2,500 /kW Turnkey
BioPower ExampleBioPower ExampleRemote CommunitiesRemote Communities
Power 1 MWe
Heat 4 MWth
Need Components
Power Wind turbine 3.3 MWe
Heat Oil furnace 4.7 MWth
Power Water turbine 1.3 MWe
Heat Oil furnace 4.7 MWth
Power 1.0 MWe
Heat 0.0 MWth
Kinetic turbine
Biomass
System Size
Biomass CHP
Community
Requirements
System
Wind with storage
NPK Marsh FilterNPK Marsh Filter
2001
Vegetation Class Area Covered Hectares (ha)
% of Total Marsh Area
Bulrush (Scirpus) 317.1 1.2 River Rushes 166.3 0.6 Cattail (Typha) 4533.8 17.6 Giant Reed (Phragmites) 522.6 2.0
Vegetation maps Netley-
Libau Marsh 2001
Netley 1979 Area Moisture HHVPlant Available kJ/kg
Species (ha) min max (%) min max Dry
Cattail 4987 8,528 118,267 17.1 7,070 98,043 18,229Bulrush 3247 3,215 32,584 18.2 2,629 26,653 17,447Reed Grass 650 1,112 1,170 12.8 969 1,020 17,285Rushes, Sedges.. 922 954 6,638 12.4 836 5,819 15,838Sum 9,806 13,808 158,659 11,505 131,535Weighted average 16.7 18,024
Harvest Biomass(Wet tonne) (Dry tonne)
From: Evaluation of a wetland-biopower concept for nutrient removal and value recovery from the Netley-Libeau marsh at Lake WinnipegN. Cicek, S. Lambert, H.D. Venema, K.R. Snelgrove, and E.L. Bibeau
Lake Winnipeg Value PropositionLake Winnipeg Value Proposition
Small
Condensing Steam
Small steam with
cogeneration
Organic Rankine
Cycle
Air Brayton
cycle
Entropic cycle Gasification1
Heat recovery loss (MW)
8.0 8.0 7.8 12.3 5.3 11.0
Cycle loss (MW)
15.2 16.5 15.3 12.1 7.2 10.5
Power generated (MWe)
3.03 1.75 3.13 1.83 3.68 4.71
Cogeneration heat (MWth)
0.0 15.0 14.5 0.0 16.4 0.0
1Assumes Producer gas has heat value of 5.5 MJ/m3 and cooled down to room temperature
l Nutrient from Red River to Lake Winnipeg– average 32,765 ton/yr of N; 4,905 ton/yr of P
l Biomass harvesting – 3.1-4.2% of N; 3.8-4.7% of P
l Nutrient removal City of Winnipeg– reduce N by 2,200 ton and P 260 ton in Red River
– estimated cost $181 million or $80,000 per ton of N
l Energy production
Why DG CHP Systems Using Biomass and Why DG CHP Systems Using Biomass and Waste Heat are UncommonWaste Heat are Uncommon
lLow Cost: the primary need
l Independence: must not affect process
lSimplicity: reduce operator qualifications
lRuggedness: allow remote locations
lMaintenance Free: reducing cost
lAutomated: simple to operate
Biomass AdvantageBiomass Advantage
l Utilization success has been limited to specific large-scale applications
l Expanded use of biomass favors distributed approach– biomass resource is distributed– CHP applicable to smaller scale– transportation costs eliminated– minimizes power grid upgrades
Biomass Energy ConversionBiomass Energy Conversionl Entropic Rankine Cycle
–simple technology
– twice the power compared to a steam based system
–produces hot glycol 90ºC-115ºC for cogeneration
–small components
–no certified operators
Industrial Waste Heat ApplicationIndustrial Waste Heat Application
NG
SOUR GASNATURAL GAS
TURBINE SALT BATH HEATER
to REGENERATOR
TOWER
COMPRESSOR
COOLER
COMPRESSEDGAS
AIR INLET 10°C
REGENERATOR GAS PRE- HEATER
COOLANT 90°C
COOLANT 58°C
ENTROPIC TURBION SYSTEM
TURBINE EXHAUST
THERMAL ENERGY
ELECTRICAL POWER
TO PROCESS TO DISPLACE NATURAL GASTO DISPLACE AND SELL
GREEN POWER Ent
ropi
c C
ycle
BioEnergy in a BioEnergy in a Northern CommunityNorthern Community
2 MWe Community Subsidized Power System BioPower SystemPower (2 MWe) tonne CO2 0 tonne CO2
Heat (10 MWth) tonne CO2 0 tonne CO2
Total tonne CO2 0 tonne CO2
115532305534,608
Power: Diesel Fuel Turbion™ CHPNorthern Community
Heat: Oil Biomass (local or pellets)2 BD tonne/MWe-hr
Power
Heat
~233 liters/ MWe-hr~2.83 Kg CO2/ liter
~93 liters/ MWth-hr~2.83 Kg CO2/ liter
~1 MWe-hr~No GHG
~5 MWth-hr~No GHG
BioPower SystemSubsidized Power System
(Biomass district heat already installed)
CHOICES?
Power: Diesel Fuel Turbion™ CHPNorthern Community
Heat: Oil Biomass (local or pellets)2 BD tonne/MWe-hr
Power
Heat
~233 liters/ MWe-hr~2.83 Kg CO2/ liter
~93 liters/ MWth-hr~2.83 Kg CO2/ liter
~1 MWe-hr~No GHG
~5 MWth-hr~No GHG
BioPower SystemSubsidized Power System
(Biomass district heat already installed)
CHOICES?
1
Distributed BioPowerDistributed BioPowerCHP Conversion ChartCHP Conversion Chart
Note: Results are for 50% moistures content
Bio-oil GasificationSyngas
AirBrayton
Large Steam
Overall Power Efficiency 6.6% 7.8% 7.4% 25.0%Electricity (kWhr/Bdtonne) 363 440 420 1420Heat (kWhr/Bdtonne) - - - -Overall Cogen Efficiency 6.4% 7.8% 7.4% 25.0%
SmallSteam
SmallSteam CHP
OrganicRankine Entropic
Overall Power Efficiency 9.9% 5.7% 10.2% 12.0%Electricity (kWhr/Bdtonne) 563 324 580 682Heat (kWhr/Bdtonne) - 2,936 2,713 3,066Overall Cogen Efficiency 9.9% 53.9% 54.5% 67.5%
1
Distributed BioPowerDistributed BioPowerCHP Revenue ChartCHP Revenue Chart
Note: Results are for 50% moistures content
$0.070 per kWhr$0.030 per kWhr
Canadian DollarsPower (90% use) Heat (60% use) Total
Bio-oil $23 $23Gasification Syngas $28 $28Air Brayton Cycle $26 $26Large Steam $89 $89Small Steam $35 $35Small Steam CHP $20 $53 $73Organic Rankine Cycle $37 $49 $85Entropic Reankine cycle $43 $55 $98
Revenue per BDTon Biomass
Electrical Power (1 cent subsidy included)Natural Gas
*Revenue for distributed biopower systems using 50% MC biomass
lManitoba Hydro/NSERC Chair in Alternative Energy
AcknowledgementAcknowledgement
Alternative energy presentationAlternative energy presentation
l http://www.umanitoba.ca/engineering/mech_and_ind/prof/bibeau/