Clean Energy Projects

Combined Heat & Power Technology Case Study

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 2 of 3

▪ Audubon Companies Avoiding the use of fired heaters to provide the same amount of energy services generally translates into reduced emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and other pollutants (see Figure 2). This can enable CHP projects to expedite air permi ng, and in some cases allow large volume projects to avoid Title V permi ng. Table 1 below summarizes an op mal CHP configura on for various gas processing plant capaci es, which includes all the power and thermal needs for a full central gathering facility. In the 1200 MMSCFD capacity example, the total savings in fuel efficiency can reach $500MM over a 15-year period when combining electricity and fuel savings. Works Cited "Combined Heat and Power Technology Fact Sheet Series." Https://, US Department of Energy, Nov. 2017, Reduced Emissions Case Study: Savings in Fuel Efficiency and Reduced Emissions Figure 2. Emissions benefit of CHP. CHP + WHRU CHP + WHRU CHP + WHRU Grid Power + Hot Oil Gas + Fired Heaters Total Facility Processing Capacity 400 MMSCFD 800 MMSCFD 1200 MMSCFD Total Facility Electrical Demand 50 MW 100 MW 150 MW Total Facility Thermal Demand 179 MMBTU/ hr 375 MMBTU/ hr 536 MMBTU/ hr $2.00/MMBTU Number of Turbines Required 1 2 3 Total Power Cost (Fuel/OPEX incl) 3.1 c/kWh 3.0 c/kWh 2.9 c/kWh 5.0 c/kWh Annual Electricity Savings $8.5 MMUSD $17.7 MMUSD $27.4 MMUSD - Annual Fuel Savings (Fired Heater) $3.7 MMUSD $7.4 MMUSD $11 MMUSD - CAPEX Payback Period 3.8 yrs 3.5 yrs 3.2 yrs - 1,350 TPY CO 2 Total Emissions 690 TPY CO 2 48% Reduc on 154 TPY NOx 42 TPY NOx 72% Reduc on 120 TPY CO 6 TPY CO 95% Reduc on

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

view archives of Clean Energy Projects - Combined Heat & Power Technology Case Study