Primary Energy Analysis

L-2 & L-3 EN 402 8

th
J anuary 2007
ENERGY FLOW DIAGRAM
PRIMARY ENERGY
ENERGY CONVERSION FACILITY
SECONDARY ENERGY
TRANSMISSION & DISTRN. SYSTEM
FINAL ENERGY
ENERGY UTILISATION EQUIPMENT & SYSTEMS
USEFUL ENERGY
END USE ACTIVITIES
(ENERGY SERVICES)
COAL, OIL, SOLAR, GAS
POWER PLANT,
REFINERIES
REFINED OIL,
ELECTRICITY
RAILWAYS, TRUCKS,
PIPELINES
WHAT CONSUMERS BUY
DELIVERED ENERGY
AUTOMOBILE, LAMP,
MOTOR, STOVE
MOTIVE POWER
RADIANT ENERGY
DISTANCE TRAVELLED,
ILLUMINATION,COOKED
FOOD etc..
Energy End Uses
Boiler, Geyser Fluid heated Heating
Fans,AC, refrig Space Cooled Cooling
motors Shaft work
Motive Power
Cycle, car, train,
motorcycle, bus
Distance
travelled
Transport
Incandescent
Fluorescent, CFL
Illumination Lighting
Chullah, stove Food Cooked Cooking
Device Energy Service End Use
Source : Energy After Rio: UNDP Publication.
Load curve of a typical day MSEB
(8/11/2000 source: WREB annual report-2001)
10260 MW
9892 MW
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112 1314 1516 17 1819 2021 2223 24
Time hours
D
e
m
a
n
d
,

M
W
morning
peak
Evening
peak
Total Load Curve of IIT
2 5 10 kVA
19 0 0 kVA
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324
Time ho urs
Working day
Non working day
Average power factor of the day
Working day-0.96
Non-working day-0.97
Load curve of Mechanical Building
54 kW
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Time (hr)
L
o
a
d

(
k
W
)
average 26 kW
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Primary Energy Analysis
Compare options based on primary
energy input
Primary Energy Analysis
Compare options based on primary energy
input
Example : Agricultural Water Pumping
3 GJ of end-use /year (typical value)
Options A) Electric motor-pump
B) Diesel engine-pump
C) Biomass Gasifier-Dual fuel
engine-pump
A)ELECTRIC MOTOR
COAL
COAL MINING/TRANSPORT
TRANSMISSION & DISTRN. SYSTEM
Electricity to Farmer
MOTOR
Pump output
POWER PLANT
PUMP

cm

pp

T&D

p
A)ELECTRIC MOTOR
COAL
COAL MINING/TRANSPORT
TRANSMISSION & DISTRN. SYSTEM
Electricity to Farmer
MOTOR
Pump output
POWER PLANT
PUMP

cm
90 %

pp
30 %

T&D
78 %

m
88 %

p
75 %
B) DIESEL ENGINE
CRUDE OIL
REFINERY
DIESEL TRANSPORT
Diesel to Farmer
DIESEL ENGINE
Pump output
PUMP

DT

p
B) DIESEL ENGINE
CRUDE OIL
REFINERY
DIESEL TRANSPORT
Diesel to Farmer
DIESEL ENGINE
Pump output
PUMP

R
92 %

DT
95 %

D
40 %

p
75 %
Comparison of Options
Motor-Pump
=
cm

pp

T&D

p
=0.9*0.3*0.78*0.88*0.75
=0.139 (13.9%)
Electricity bought=
3*10
6
/(3600*0.75*0.88)
=1263 kWh
Diesel Engine-Pump
=
R

DT

DT

p
=0.92*0.95*0.40*0.75
=0.262 (26.2%)
Diesel Input =
3/(0.75*0.4) = 10 GJ =
10*10
6
/(9700*4.18*0.85)
=290 litres
Comparison of Options
Motor-Pump
Energy cost Rs 1263
(@Rs 1/kWh)
Capital Cost Rs 12000
Power Cuts
1300 kg of coal
Coal relatively abundant
Diesel Engine-Pump
Energy cost Rs 4643
(@Rs 16/litre)
Capital Cost Rs 24000
Uninterrupted
300 kg of crude oil
Refinery Mix
Net Energy Analysis
Source : www.oilanalytics.org/neteng/neteng.htm
Gasifier Option
75% Diesel replacement
70% gasifier efficiency
75 litres diesel, 754 kg biomass
Biomass price Rs 1/kg Rs 1915
Capital Cost Rs 48000
Operation & Maintenance
Energy Inputs and Outputs-Power Plant
Source : www.oilanalytics.org/neteng/neteng.htm
Levels of Net Energy analysis
Source : www.oilanalytics.org/neteng/neteng.htm
Primary energy analysis of RME
Rapeseed Methyl Ester (RME)-Transport
Plant Production(incl fertilisers) 9000 MJ /ha
Harvesting, transport & oil extraction 5600 MJ /ha
60% to rapeseed oil (meal 40%) 8800 MJ /ha
Refining & Esterification 7900 MJ /ha
96% to RME (glycerine 4%) 16000 MJ /ha
Final transport 200 MJ /ha
Total annual 16,200 MJ /ha (Kaltschmitt et al,1997)
Diesel 4600 MJ (pre-chain) + 42500 (fuel) 47,100 MJ
Comparison of RME & Diesel
Parameter RME Diesel
PE (GJ ) 16.2 47.1
CO
2
equiv kg 1594 3752
CO
2
kg 1037 3523
SO
2
equiv g 12487 11813
SO
2
g 1670 2857
No
x
g 14274 12691
CO g 11689 11160
Annual values/ha fromKaltschmitt et al,1997 - Germany
Paper vs Polystyrene Cups
Hocking, Martin B. "Reusable and Disposable Cups: An Energy-Based Evaluation."
Environmental Management 18(6) pp. 889-899
www.ilea.org/lcas/hocking1994.html
Re-usable vs Disposable Cups
www.ilea.org/lcas/hocking1994.html
Hydrogen pathways
Photo chemical
Solar Energy Nuclear Energy Bio-Energy
Electricity
Wind
Thermal
Electrolysis Thermo chemical
Fossil-Fuel
Photo biological
Hydrogen
Gasification
Fermentation
Cracking + Shift Reaction
Fuel Cell
Applications
A-Distributed Power Generation Rating 100
kW
B- Vehicle 4 wheeler passenger car (Maruti
800)
Base Case A1- Diesel Engine Generator
(fuel diesel), A2 Gas Engine Generator (fuel
natural gas)
Base Case B1 - IC Engine - petrol , B2- CNG
engine
A1)DIESEL ENGINE
ELECTRICITY
OIL MINING/REFINING
DIESEL ENGINE
GENERATOR
TRANSPORT OF DIESEL

OM
95 %

TD
97%

DE
40 %
CRUDE OIL

GEN
95 %
A2) GAS ENGINE
ELECTRICITY
EXTRACTION
GAS ENGINE
GENERATOR
NATURAL GAS TRANSPORT

OM
95 %

TD
97%

DE
42 %
NATURAL GAS

GEN
95 %
FUEL CELL (NG)
NATURAL GAS
EXTRACTION
NATURAL GAS TRANSPORT
HYDROGEN
STEAM REFORMING
ELECTRICITY
PEM FUEL CELL

R
95 %

GT
97 %

FC
40 %
(50%)
POWER CONDITIONING

REF
85 %

PC
95 %
Distributed Generation
A1 Overall efficiency 35%
0.246 kg of crude /kWh of electricity
A2 Overall efficiency 37%
0.25 kg of Natural gas/kWh of
electricity
Fuel cell Overall efficiency 30% 0.307 kg
of Natural gas/kWh of electricity
(37% like A2 FC eff 50%)
Carbon Emissions
A1 Crude oil (86% Carbon)
0.211 kg Carbon/kWh
A2- Natural gas (75% Carbon)
0.187 kg Carbon/kWh
Fuel cell ( 18 kg of Carbon / 1 GJ of Hydrogen
energy SMR)
FC eff 0.4 - 0.171 kg Carbon/kWh
0.5- 0.136 kg Carbon/kWh
Vehicle Application
Weight (excl engine
+tank) 550 kg
Passengers (max)
350 kg
Maruti
CR 0.01
CD 0.4
2m2 front area
100 km travel /day
Tank Engine
Petrol 40 kg 60 kg
CNG 140 kg 60 kg
FC 130 kg 15 M
+15 FC
kg
B1) PETROL ENGINE
SHAFT WORK
OIL MINING/REFINING
IC ENGINE
TRANSMISSION
TRANSPORT OF PETROL

OM
95 %

TP
97%

PE
30 %
CRUDE OIL

TRANS
70 %
B2) GAS ENGINE
SHAFT WORK
EXTRACTION
COMPRESSION
CNG ENGINE
NATURAL GAS TRANSPORT

OM
95 %

TD
97%

C
90%
NATURAL GAS

GE
40%
TRANSMISSION
TR70%
FUEL CELL (NG)

E
95 %

GT
97 %

FC
40 %

REF
85 %

PC
95 %
SHAFT WORK
NATURAL GAS
EXTRACTION
NATURAL GAS TRANSPORT
HYDROGEN
STEAM REFORMING
ELECTRICITY
PEM FUEL CELL
POWER CONDITIONING
MOTOR
TRANSMISSION

m
90%

TR
91%
Vehicle Comparison
B1 Overall efficiency 19.4%
3.31 kg of crude /100 km of travel
B2 Overall efficiency 23.2%
3.0 kg of Natural gas/ 100 km of
travel
Fuel cell Overall efficiency 24.3%
2.82 kg of Natural gas/ 100 km of travel
Vehicle Carbon Emissions
B1 Crude oil (86% Carbon)
2.84 kg Carbon/100 km of travel
B2- Natural gas (75% Carbon)
2.25 kg Carbon/ 100 km of travel
Fuel cell ( 18 kg of Carbon / 1 GJ of
Hydrogen energy SMR)
FC 2.11 kg Carbon/100 km of travel
Decision Types / Perspectives
System selection
Yes/No
Best possible amongst
options
System / Component
Design
Decide Operating
Strategy
Decide Policies
End Users
Manufacturers
Utility
Society /
Government
Others
Criteria
Cost - Initial Cost, Operating Cost,
Life Cycle Cost
Reliability-Availability, Unmet Energy
Emissions - Local, Global
Sustainability
Equity
References
www.oilanalytics.org/neteng/neteng.htm
P. L. Spath, M. K. Mann, Life Cycle Assessment of Renewable Hydrogen
Production via Wind/Electrolyses, NREL / MP-560-35404, February
2004, Colorado, USDOE.
Hocking, Martin B. "Reusable and Disposable Cups: An Energy-
Based Evaluation." Environmental Management 18(6) pp. 889-899
Hocking, M.B, Paper vs Polystyrene: A complex choice, Science, 251:
504-505, 1991
A. Sarkar, R. Banerjee, Net Energy Analysis of hydrogen storage
options, International J ournal of Hydrogen Energy 30 (2005), pp 867-
877.
K. T. Chan, Y. S. Wong, C. C. Chan, An overview of energy sources for
electric vehicles, Energy Conversion & Management 40 (1999), pp
1021-1039.