Cogeneration Technology Alternatives Study (CTAS). Volume 5: Cogeneration systems results

The use of various advanced energy conversion systems is examined and compared with each other and with current technology systems for savings in fuel energy, costs, and emissions in individual plants and on a national level. About fifty industrial processes from the largest energy consuming sectors were used as a basis for matching a similar number of energy conversion systems that are considered as candidate which can be made available by the 1985 to 2000 time period. The sectors considered included food, textiles, lumber, paper, chemicals, petroleum, glass, and primary metals. The energy conversion systems included steam and gas turbines, diesels, thermionics, stirling, closed cycle and steam injected gas turbines, and fuel cells. Fuels considered were coal, both coal and petroleum based residual and distillate liquid fuels, and low Btu gas obtained through the on site gasification of coal. The methodology and results of matching the cogeneration energy conversion systems to approximately 50 industrial processes are described. Results include fuel energy saved, levelized annual energy cost saved, return on investment, and operational factors relative to the noncogeneration base cases

Cogeneration Technology Alternatives Study (CTAS). Volume 1: Summary

Various advanced energy conversion systems that can use coal or coal-derived fuels for industrial cogeneration applications were compared to provide information needed by DOE to establish research and development funding priorities for advanced-technology systems that could significantly advance the use of coal or coal-derived fuels in industrial cogeneration. Steam turbines, diesel engines, open-cycle gas turbines, combined cycles, closed-cycle gas turbines, Stirling engines, phosphoric acid fuel cells, molten carbonate fuel cells, and thermionics were studied with technology advancements appropriate for the 1985-2000 time period. The various advanced systems were compared and evaluated for wide diversity of representative industrial plants on the basis of fuel energy savings, annual energy cost savings, emissions savings, and rate of return on investment as compared with purchasing electricity from a utility and providing process heat with an on-site boiler. Also included in the comparisons and evaluations are results extrapolated to the national level