Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Optimization of a wood-waste fuelled, indirectly-fired gas turbine cogeneration plant for sawmill applications Zaradic, Andrea Melissa 1994

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1994-0667.pdf [ 3.91MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0081035.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0081035-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0081035-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0081035-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0081035-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0081035-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0081035-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0081035-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0081035.ris

Full Text

OPTIMIZATION OF AWOOD-WASTE FUELLED, INDIRECTLY-FIREDGAS TURBINE COGENERATION PLANTFOR SAWMILL APPLICATIONSbyANDREA MELISSA ZARADICB.A.Sc., The University of British Columbia, 1988A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFMASTER OF APPLIED SCIENCEinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIESDepartment of Mechanical EngineeringWe accept this thesis as conformingto the required standardTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIASeptember 1994Andrea Melissa Zaradic, 1994In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.(SigDepartment of HA//CAL /AJEsJ,tf6The University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate 3P7.. D, /9’H-DE-6 (2/88)AbstractForests are a primary natural resource in the province ofBritish Columbia. Harvested trees are delivered to sawmills whichproduce lumber for domestic and export markets, wood chips for thepulp and paper industry and large volumes of wood waste.Traditionally, wood waste has been disposed of by openincineration. The government of British Columbia has mandated thatby 1996, all forms of open burning must be eliminated.In the past this form of biomass waste had very limitedeconomic value due to its limited application and use. The mostcommon use for forest residues was in pulp and paper mills where itwas utilized as a fuel for steam boilers for generating both heatand electricity.Until recently, very little incentive existed formanufacturers of wood wastes to generate electricity and/or heatdue to the very low electricity and natural gas prices. Thisscenario is beginning to change due to increased environmentalstandards.Cogeneration with wood waste, i.e. the simultaneous productionof heat and electricity, is proposed as a viable alternative forsupplying the heat and power requirements of a sawmill.Cogeneration has been utilized in the past, in the pulp and papersector, but has had very limited application in the sawmillindustry.In analyzing the application of a cogeneration system theamount of heat and power to be produced must be determined. Insome cases, the system is sized to match the electrical powerrequirements, while in other cases it is sized to meet the thermal11requirements. In order to achieve the best economic return fromthe system, both heat and power must be produced accordingly.These amounts are not intuitively obvious and an optimizationtechnique known as linear programming has been incorporated in thisanalysis to determine the optimum production levels of heat andpower.In general it was found that cash flow was maximized when thecogeneration system was sized to meet the thermal requirements ofthe sawmill. Production of electricity was not particularlyattractive due to low electricity rates.The overall conclusions indicate that cogeneration is aneconomically attractive option for disposing of wood wastes forthose sawmills which require large amounts of process heat,typically in the range of 20,000 kW (68 MMBtu/hr).i:i.iTable of ContentsAbstractTable of Contents ivList of Tables viList of Figures viiAcknowledgement x1.0 Introduction 11.1 Background 11.2 Potential Solution 21.3 System Description 21.4 Cogeneration Systems 31.5 Study Objectives 42.0 Reference Literature 53.0 Linear Programming 104.0 Physical Model Development 114.1 Option #l:Recuperated Gas Turbine using a Metal 12Heat Exchanger4.2 Option #2:Indirectly Fired Gas Turbine using a 13Ceramic Heat Exchanger4.3 Option #3:Recuperated Gas Turbine using an 14Atmospheric Fluidized Bed Combustor completewith an in-bed Heat Exchanger4.4 Production of Wood Waste 144.5 Thermodynamic Modelling 174.5.1 Basic Assumptions 184.5.2 Wood Waste Furnace/Combustor Analysis 194.5.3 Heat Exchanger Analysis 204.5.4 Gas Turbine Analysis 214.5.5 Natural Gas Burner Analysis 244.5.6 Process Heat Energy Available 264.5.7 Induced Draft Fan Power Requirements 284.5.8 Sawmill Sizes Analyzed 294.6 Equipment Pricing 304.6.1 Gas Turbine 314.6.2 Wood Waste Furnace/Combustor 324.6.3 High Temperature Heat Exchanger 334.6.4 Atmospheric Fluidized Bed System 345.0 Economic Model Development 355.1 Linear Programming (LP) Model Formulation 355.2 LP Parameters 355.2.1 Discount Factor 355.2.2 Hours of Operation 365.2.3 Wood Disposal Cost 375.2.4 Electricity Prices 385.2.5 Excess Electricity 395.2.6 Natural Gas Prices 405.2.7 Available Wood Waste 415.2.8 Corporate Tax 415.2.9 Material Handling 42iv5.3 Linear Programming Variables 425.4 Objective Function 435.5 Constraints 455.5.1 Electricity Demands and Charges 455.5.2 Capital Costs 465.5.3 Costs and Savings of Fuel and Heat 485.5.4 Operating and Maintenance Costs 495.5.5 Insurance and Property Tax 505.5.6 Capital Cost Allowance 505.6 Summary of the LP Model Base Case Assumptions 515.7 Sensitivity Analysis 536.0 Results of the Economic Model 556.1 Option #1 556.2 Option #2 586.3 Option #3 616.4 Comparison of the Base Case Analysis of Options 64#1, #2, #36.5 Payback Periods 657.0 Conclusions 68References 126Appendix A: Process Flow Values for Options 129#1, #2, #3Appendix B: Linear Programming Models for Options 171#1, #2, #3VList of TablesTable 1: Base Case Results for Option #1 70Table 2: Sensitivity Case #1, Decreased Discount Rate; 71Results for Option #1Table 3: Sensitivity Case #2, Electricity Purchase 72Price of 4.95 c1/kWh; Results for Option #1Table 4: Sensitivity Case #3, 100% Increase in 73Electricity Prices; Results for Option #1Table 5: Sensitivity Case #4, Increased Wood Waste 74Disposal Cost; Results for Option #1Table 6: Sensitivity Case #5, Increased Natural Gas 75Prices; Results for Option #1Table 7: Base Case Results for Option #2 76Table 8: Sensitivity Case #1, Decreased Discount Rate; 77Results for Option 42Table 9: Sensitivity Case #2, Electricity Purchase Price 78of 4.95 1/kWh; Results for Option #2Table 10: Sensitivity Case #3, 100% Increase in 79Electricity Prices; Results for Option #2Table 11: Sensitivity Case #4, Increased Wood Waste 80Disposal Cost; Results for Option #2Table 12: Sensitivity Case #5, Increased Natural Gas 81Prices; Results for Option #2Table 13: Sensitivity Case #6, Decreased Ceramic Heat 82Exchanger Cost; Results for Option #2Table 14: Base Case Results for Option #3 83Table 15: Sensitivity Case #1, Decreased Discount Rate; 84Results for Option #3Table 16: Sensitivity Case #2, Electricity Purchase 85Price of 4.95 c/kWh; Results for Option #3Table 17: Sensitivity Case #3, 100% Increase in 86Electricity Prices; Results for Option #3Table 18: Sensitivity Case #4, Increased Wood Waste 87Disposal Cost; Results for Option #3Table 19: Sensitivity Case #5, Increased Natural Gas 88Prices; Results for Option #3viList of FiguresFigure 1: Option #1: Wood Waste/Natural Gas Fired c/w 89Metallic Gas/Air Heat ExchangerFigure 2: Option #2: Wood Waste/Natural Gas Fired c/w 90Ceramic Gas/Air Heat ExchangerFigure 3: Option #3: Wood Waste/Natural Gas Fired c/w 91Atmospheric Fluidized Bed CombustorFigure 4: Gas Turbine Cost as a Function of Size 92Figure 5: Wood Waste Furnace/Combustor Cost vs Wood Fuel 93Feed RateFigure 6: Metal Heat Exchanger Cost vs Wood Fuel Feed 94RateFigure 7: Ceramic Heat Exchanger Cost vs Wood Fuel Feed 95RateFigure 8: ABB System Cost as a Function of Wood Fuel Feed 96RateFigure 9: Process Heat Generated as a Function of Turbine 97Power and Wood Waste Availability For Option #1Figure 10: Process Heat Generated as a Function of Turbine 98Power and Wood Waste Availability For Option #2Figure 11: Process Heat Generated as a Function of Turbine 99Power and Wood Waste Availability For Option #3Figure 12: Natural Gas Consumption Required For Top-Up of 100Turbine Inlet Temperature For Option #1Figure 13: Natural Gas Consumption Required For Top-Up of 101Turbine Inlet Temperature For Option #3Figure 14: Rate of Flue Gas Production vs Wood Fuel Feed 102Rate Into SystemFigure 15: Fan Power Required vs Wood Fuel Feed Rate Into 103System For Option #1Figure 16: Fan Power Required vs Wood Fuel Feed Rate Into 104System For Option #2Figure 17: Fan Power Required vs Wood Fuel Feed Rate Into 105System For Option #3Figure 18: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #1 106with a Process Heat Requirement of 10,000 kWviiFigure 19: Net Present Value for Option #1 with a Process 107Heat Requirement of 10,000 kWFigure 20: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #1 108with a Process Heat Requirement of 20,000 KwFigure 21: Net Present Value for Option #1 with a Process 109Heat Requirement of 20,000 kWFigure 22: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #2 110with a Process Heat Requirement of 10,000 kWFigure 23: Net Present Value for Option #2 with a Process 111Heat Requirement of 10,000 kWFigure 24: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #2 112with a Process Heat Requirement of 20,000 kWFigure 25: Net Present Value for Option #2 with a Process 113Heat Requirement of 20,000 kWFigure 26: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #3 114with a Process Heat Requirement of 10,000 kWFigure 27: Net Present Value for Option #3 with a Process 115Heat Requirement of 10,000 kWFigure 28: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #3 116with a Process Heat Requirement of 20,000 kWFigure 29: Net Present Value for Option #3 with a Process 117Heat Requirement of 20,000 kWFigure 30: Comparison of the Optimum Electricity Generation 118for the Base Case Results for Options #1, #2, #3Figure 31: Comparison of the Net Present Value for the Base 119Case Results for Options #1, #2, #3Figure 32: Option #1 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing 12080,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring10,000 kW of Process HeatFigure 33: Option #1 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing 12180,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring20,000 kW of Process HeatFigure 34: Option #2 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing 12280,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring10,000 kW of Process HeatFigure 35: Option #2 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing 12380,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring20,000 kW of Process HeatviiiFigure 36: Option #3 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing 12480,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring10,000 kW of Process HeatFigure 37: Option #3 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing 12580,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring20,000 kW of Process HeatixAcknowledgementsSpecial thanks to all those who contributed information,expertise and time to this research thesis.- B.C. Hydro- ABB Combustion- International Energy Systems- Solar Turbines- Salton Fabrication- Wellons- Heuristic Engineering- Kilborn Engineering Pacific Ltd.- Sandwell Engineering- Thermal Transfer Corporation- American Schack- Hague International- B.C. Council of Forest Industries- International Forest Products, MacDonald Cedar Division andFraser Mills Division- Science Council of British Columbia- Council of Forest Industries (COFI)- Ms. Sita Warren, H.A. Simons wood drying consultantThe financial support provided by B.C. Hydro and the ScienceCouncil of B.C. is gratefully acknowledged along with the AutoCaddrawing expertise provided by Kilborn Engineering Pacific Ltd.x1.0 Introduction1.1 BackgroundForestry is a major primary industry in the province ofBritish Columbia and relies heavily upon the harvesting andprocessing of lumber. Inherent to this industry are sawmills whichproduce dimension cut lumber for export to markets worldwide.During the processing of logs into dimension cut lumber alarge quantity of wood waste is produced in the form of bark, woodshavings, sawdust and trim ends. The production of these wastespresents a problem for both the sawmill operators and theenvironment. In the very recent past, these wastes wereincinerated in large ‘tee-pee’ or ‘bee-hive’ burners whichproduced large volumes of suspended particles and smoke due to verylow combustion temperatures. The British Columbia Ministry ofEnvironment has recently mandated that by 1996, all bee-hiveburners must be decommissioned due to their negative environmentalimpact. In addition to incineration, wood wastes have beendisposed of by landfilling which introduces the problem of soilleachates. Both incineration and landfilling are rapidly becomingobsolete methods by which to dispose of forestry related woodwastes.Inherent to the operation of a typical sawmill is the kilndrying of cut wood which occurs at the final processing stage.This energy is typically provided by natural gas, propane, butaneor oil. Of these options natural gas is the least costly but maynot always be available depending upon the location of the millrelative to the nearest natural gas pipeline. This introduces the1problem of purchasing and/or transporting fuels to the site whichis an added expense to the operation.1.2 Potential SolutionAn alternative to this problem, which will be investigated, isto introduce cogeneration to the sawmill. Cogeneration is thesimultaneous production of thermal and electrical energy. This canbe done by using either a gas or steam turbine, or both.Electricity is generated by the gas or steam turbine while thermalenergy is a byproduct. Cogeneration utilizes this byproduct heatwhich would have otherwise been wasted and hence increases theoverall system efficiency. The byproduct heat is often used togenerate steam for the process and/or for space heating.It is proposed to use cogeneration in a sawmill by using theavailable wood wastes to produce both electricity and process heatfor the plant. Specifically, the intent is to develop a systemwhich does not produce steam, hence the steam turbine/boiler optionhas been disregarded. This is due primarily to the high operatingand maintenance costs associated with a steam plant. Additionally,the relative installed cost per kilowatt for a simple cyclecombustion turbine is approximately one third the cost of an oil orgas fired steam plant (Butler, 1984). Therefore, the proposedcogeneration system will consist of a recuperated/indirectly-firedgas turbine with a wood waste furnace and high temperature heatexchanger.1.3 System DescriptionA gas turbine consists of both an air compressor and turbinesection with the turbine providing power to the compressor.Ambient air is drawn into the compressor where both the temperature2and pressure are elevated depending upon the pressure ratio. Theair is then passed into a combustion chamber where it is mixed withfuel and ignited. Upon completion of combustion, the combustionproducts’ temperature is increased to the required level prior toentering the turbine section. When the hot exhaust gas reaches theturbine it expands across the blades to atmospheric pressure,causing rotation of a shaft to produce both electricity and/orshaft work, as well as the necessary power to drive the compressor.A recuperated gas turbine is one in which the compressed airis preheated prior to entering the combustion chamber. Increasingthis air temperature lowers the amount of fuel which must beconsumed in the combustor, improving the overall system efficiency.An indirectly-fired gas turbine is one in which the heatenergy is provided entirely by an external source through a heatexchanger. Because no internal combustion takes place in thisprocess, hot air, not combustion gases expand across the turbine.1.4 Cogeneration SystemsIn the sawmill cogeneration system, it is proposed to evaluatethree different concepts of a recuperated/indirectly-fired gasturbine. These are labelled as Option #1, Option #2, and Option#3.Option #1 - Recuperated Gas Turbine using a Metal HeatExchangerOption #2 - Indirectly-f ired Gas Turbine using a Ceramic HeatExchangerOption #3 - Recuperated Gas Turbine using an AtmosphericFluidized Bed Combustor complete with an In-Bed Heat Exchanger31.5 Study ObjectivesThe overall objective of this study was to determine theoptimum allocation of wood waste resources in a typical sawmillenvironment for the production of thermal and electrical energy.The first step in this process was to develop a thermodynamicmodel for analyzing the mass and energy balances of the threecogeneration options. This was necessary in order to physicallydetermine the amounts of heat and electricity produced for aspecified amount of wood waste fuel consumed. For example, a givenflow of wood fuel into the plant can generate various combinationsof both heat and electricity.The second step in the process was to develop an economicmodel which would utilize the information acquired in thethermodynamic model and assign costs to producing those quantitiesof heat and electricity. The main objective of the economic modelwas to maximize benefits and minimize costs. The optimumallocation of both the available and required resources wasachieved by using linear programming.A key point to consider is that the resulting size of thecogeneration system is not intuitive. Wood fuel consumption is avariable along with the amount of electricity and heat beinggenerated. The established criteria is, the maximum amount of woodwaste available, the sawmill average and peak electricityrequirements, and the minimum heating requirements. The costs andsavings associated with the cogeneration plant are functions ofthese variables. Given these variables, linear programming wasused to determine the optimum size of the cogeneration system withrespect to maximizing cashf low.42.0 Reference LiteratureThe work of a number of authors, in both text books andjournals, was reviewed. In particular, emphasis was placed on thecombined use of linear programming and thermodynamics for theanalysis and optimization of power and heat systems.Hu (1985), in Cogeneration”, discusses the various levels ofcogeneration systems with respect to sizing. He outlines fourlevels of cogeneration:1. No Cogeneration - where only thermal energy isgenerated while electricity is purchased from theutility.2. Thermal—match Cogeneration - where the cogenerationsystem is sized to meet only the thermal needs ofthe process.3. Electrical-match Cogeneration - where thecogeneration system is sized to meet the electricaldemand of the process.4. Maximum Cogeneration - where the cogenerationsystem is sized according to a given set ofcriterion such as maximum cash flow, and also meetsa minimum return on investment or constrainedavailability of waste fuels.Hu (1985) states that there are many different criterion fordetermining the size of the system, one of which is maximizing theeconomic return. The criteria will differ between three differentowners: an industry, a utility, or a society. For the industrialfirm the only decision environment is the company, and theinvestment is judged by its cost effectiveness. For a society it5may be judged by its energy efficiency. The sizing of acogeneration system determines its economic attractiveness. Hu(1985) states that there is always an optimal size and that whenthe cash flow is to be maximized the optimal solution often occursat or above the Thermal-match case.The Thermal-match and Electrical-match cases are easily sizedsince the thermal and electrical requirements are known. Sizing ofthe Maximum Cogeneration case is not as simple since the optimumvalue will change depending on the stated objective andconstraints. The objective and constraints may be stated asfollows and incorporated into a linear programming problem:Objective: Maximize size with respect to maximum cashflow, maximum electricity generation, leastproduction cost, or other criterion.Constraints: Technical characteristics of the cogenerationsystem; availability of waste products and/orinexpensive fuels; environmental limits;required rate of return on investment; andother imposed requirements.Hu (1985) suggests the use of linear programming to solve thecase of Maximum Cogeneration.Butler (1984), in “Cogeneration”, compares the relativeinstalled cost of a cogeneration project consisting of a combustionturbine-generator and a combined cycled facility to a conventionalelectric utility fossil-fired steam plant. He indicates that therelative installed cost per kilowatt for a simple cycle combustionturbine is approximately one third the cost of an oil or gas-firedsteam plant. However, many different combinations of equipment6components, technology, and site specific parameters will causethis ratio to fluctuate. In general, the cost of the steam basedsystem exceeds that of the combustion based system.The following outlines Butlers’ (1984) basis for a financialand cash-flow analysis:1. Operating expenses consist of fuel costs, operating andmaintenance costs; property taxes and insurance; andinterest.2. Fuel costs are based on the plant operating at 75% of itscapacity.3. Operating and Maintenance Costs: the operating staffprovides supervision, administration, and technicalsupport for the plant and is also involved in billing andcollecting revenues. Technical maintenance includesrepair and overhaul of the facility. Other maintenancecosts include those for materials used in the maintenanceof nontechnical items. The work is performed by theoperating staff. On average, for a combined cycledoperation with a combustion turbine and waste heatrecovery steam generator, the cost is set atapproximately 4.0% of the capital cost.4. Property tax and insurance are assumed to be 2% of theequipment and materials capital cost per year.5. Interest on a loan is a yearly cost depending on theamount of the loan, interest rate and amortizationperiod.6. Electricity revenues: electricity sales prices and/orsavings are negotiated independently with the utility.77. Thermal revenues: revenue from the sale of thermalenergy or a savings resulting from the offset use ofprevious fuels.8. Depreciation: no allowance is made for depreciationsince it is assumed that the equipment can not be usedfor any other purpose. The scrap value of the equipmentat the end of the project life is zero. The opportunitycost is zero.9. Energy Investment Tax Credit: Butler states theconditions prevalent in the United States. Similarcredits in Canada fall under the Class 34 Capital CostAllowances.Payne (1985), in “The Cogeneration Sourcebook”, analyses theoptimum operation of a cogeneration system by developing empiricalrelationships. The optimization is done by using non-linearprogramming. The model consists of developing physicalrelationships and constraints of the process. The objective is tominimize costs. This consists partly of placing limits on theflows as necessary as well as incorporating the appropriate massbalances.Guinn discusses a procedure by which a cogeneration system isto be evaluated to determine whether or not it is cost effective.One indicator of project viability is a positive Net Present Value.In general, one of the industries in which cogeneration is viableis the Lumber and Wood Products Industry.Consonni, Lozza, and Macchi (1989), found that the linearapproach is adequate in a wide range of cogeneration operatingconditions. They found that linear optimization allows the8determination of the optimum control strategy.Gustafsson and Karlsson (1991) evaluated the optimum operationof a combined heat and power (CHP) plant by using linearprogramming. The objective function was total cost which was to beminimized. The constraints basically consisted of providing theminimum amounts of heat and electricity required as well as thephysical relationships between the amounts of heat and electricityproduced. The study was concluded by determining the optimalsolution for each month in the year by using linear programming.Ehmke (1990) utilized a modified version of the ELMO(Electrical Load Management Optimization) computer model. The ELMOmodel does not take into account equipment capital costs but ratheranalyses the operation of an existing system. Ehmke (1990)incorporated these costs into the model since these costs arerelated to equipment size. The main goal was to determine theoptimum size of cogeneration equipment.The objective function was to minimize total cost while theconstraints consisted of meeting the minimum heat and electricityrequirements along with the physical limitations of the equipment.Ehxnke models a physical temperature limitation by setting an upperbound on the maximum steam generation.Based in part on the work of these authors, it is proposed touse the linear programming optimization technique to determine theoptimum size of a combustion turbine based cogeneration system fora sawmill.93.0 Linear ProgrammingThe intent of this section is to very briefly describe theconcept of linear programming rather than provide a detailedmathematical description of the technique.A linear programming problem is one of maximizing orminimizing a linear function subject to a finite number of linearinequality constraints. The linear function that is to bemaximized or minimized is called the ‘objective function’ of theproblem. The problem is typically presented as follows:maximize: E c,xsubject to: E aljx) b1 (i = 1,2 m)xj 0 (j = 1,2 n)Linear programming first began in 1947 when G.B. Dantzigdeveloped the simplex method for solving linear programmingformulations of United States Air Force planning problems.Following this was the rapid development and use of this techniquein production management problems. These problems had beentraditionally analyzed by a trial and error, or hit and miss,approach guided only by experience and intuition. Linearprogramming will often show that the optimal solution is not alwaysintuitively obvious.Since the majority of linear programming problems consist ofa large number of variables and equations, they must be solved bythe use of a computer.A number of software packages exist on the market today whichuse the simplex method for solving these types of problems. Thesoftware package which was used in this study was developed at theUniversity of British Columbia, and is called ‘LINEAR’.104.0 Physical Model DevelopmentThe first step in the development of the physical model was todesign a basic process flowsheet for the system which wouldincorporate an indirectly-fired/recuperated gas turbine. Two majorcriteria for the system were that it be technically feasible andrealistic to build and operate.Three slightly differing systems were decided upon based inpart on previous work done by Canadian Resourcecon (1986, 1988,1990). Each of the three systems has been slightly modified inorder to incorporate the availability and physical limitations ofequipment on the market. Operating parameters and pricing wereobtained for each major piece of equipment from the respectivemanufacturers.The next step was to determine the size range of sawmills tobe analyzed along with their corresponding wood waste production,and consumption of heat and electricity. These variables are afunction of the type of wood processed as well as the size of thesawmill. In British Columbia these values typically differ betweencoastal and interior sawmills.The final step was to develop a thermodynamic model whichwould analyze the system and produce mass and energy balances forvarying input and output parameters, specifically the consumptionof wood waste which is the primary fuel. The intent of this modelwas to develop physical relationships between the wood waste fuelconsumption and the production of electricity and process heat.This technique is similar to the method described by Payne (1985).114.1 Option #1: Recuperated Gas Turbine using a Metal HeatExchangerOption #1 consists of a recuperated gas turbine coupled to ahigh temperature and pressure metal heat exchanger. A processflowsheet of the system is shown on Figure 1.Wood waste is burned in an atmospheric pressure refractorylined furnace, generating high temperature flue gases. The fluegas temperatures vary depending upon the moisture content of thewood and the amount of excess combustion air. For the purposes ofthis analysis, the values of wood moisture content and excess airhave been assumed to be 50% and 40%, respectively. The thermalcontent of wood decreases with increasing moisture content. At 50%moisture content and 40% excess air, the resulting flue gastemperature is 1095°C.Upon combustion, the flue gases pass through a metal heatexchanger where heat is transferred to the compressed air leavingthe gas turbine. Due to physical material restrictions of the heatexchanger, the maximum compressed air temperature achievable is650 °C. Since this is lower than the rated turbine inlettemperature, a natural gas burner must be incorporated to top upthe turbine inlet temperature.Exhaust from the turbine, process flow #14 on Figure 1, isused as a source of process heat. The second source of processheat is the excess energy available from the flue gases exiting themetal heat exchanger. These gases, flow #4, are again passedthrough a heat exchanger where energy is transferred to cleanambient air. This is preferable to the optional case of ‘directfiring’ into the kiln since no particulate material is carried12over. The remaining flue gases are passed through a cyclone priorto discharge into the atmosphere.Direct firing into the kiln consists of bypassing the heatexchanger, as shown, which is slightly less expensive. The majorproblem associated with this configuration is the carry over ofparticulate into the kiln which are subsequently deposited onto thelumber.The kiln air heat exchanger is labelled as an air/oil heatexchanger which is intended to indicate some of the currentlyavailable options for this purpose. Lumber kilns are often heatedby hot oil which is subsequently used to generate hot air. Theyare also often heated by steam. In any case, an allowance has beenmade for process heat whether it is by air, oil or steam.4.2 Option #2: Indirectly Fired Gas Turbine using a Ceramic HeatExchangerOption #2 is virtually identical to Option #1 with theexception of a ceramic heat exchanger replacing the metal heatexchanger. A process flowsheet of the system is shown on Figure 2.The basic idea behind using the ceramic heat exchanger is totake advantage of its very high operating temperatures. Unlike themetal heat exchanger which is limited in its operating temperature,the ceramic heat exchanger can achieve the required turbine inlettemperature.This configuration does not rely on natural gas for topping upof the turbine inlet temperature, although a gas burner is allowedfor as an option as indicated on the flowsheet. This isparticularly advantageous for those locations where natural gas isnot readily available.134.3 Option #3: Recuperated Gas Turbine using an AtmosphericFluidized Bed Combustor complete with an In-Bed Heat ExchangerOption #3 utilizes an atmospheric fluidized bed combustor(AFBC) complete with an in-bed heat exchanger. A process flowsheetof the system is shown on Figure 3. Wood waste is combusted andhigh temperature flue gases are generated. Energy is transferredto the turbine compressed air with a maximum achievable airtemperature of 815 C. Natural gas is required for top up of theturbine inlet temperature, but less is required than Option #1.Energy from the flue gases exiting the combustor are used both asa source of process heat in the drying kiln and for preheating ofthe AFBC combustion air. Turbine exhaust is also used as a sourceof process heat.4.4 Production of Wood WasteIn terms of a geographical description, sawmills in BritishColumbia are classified as being either on the coast or in theinterior of the province. A large portion of the coastal sawmillstypically process red cedar and a combination of hemlock and firknown as HemFir while interior mills process a combination ofspruce, pine, and fir known as S.P.F. Due to the differences inwood species and geographical location, factors such as the aniountof bark volume, moisture content, and wood density vary betweenthese two areas.Units of Measure:A common unit by which to measure the production of a sawmillis the foot board measure, or fbm. A unit of fbm is a lumbervolume and is equivalent to a piece of wood 1 foot long by 1 foot14wide by 1 inch thick. Based on this nominal dimension, 1000 fbmare equivalent to 83.33 cubic feet of lumber. However, it isimportant to realize that the actual cubic content depends on theactual lumber size. Average actual cubic volume production of acoastal sawmill is 66 ft3 of lumber per 1000 fbm while for aninterior sawmill it is 56 ft3 of lumber per 1000 fbm.Bark Volume:Bark volume is a difficult parameter to predict since itvaries with the tree species. On the coast, the bark volume ofHemlock is approximately 19.5% of the log volume while the barkvolumes of fir and red cedar are 13.4% and 16.1% of the logvolume, respectively. A weighted average of these three speciesdepending on the amounts processed results in an average barkvolume of 17.3% of the log volume. Making an allowance for voidvolume in the bark of 27% and loss in transport of 25% results ina net bark volume of 8.3% of the total log volume for coastalmills.With respect to interior mills, the bark volumes of spruce,pine and fir are 14.9%, 11.2% and 15.6% respectively, resulting inan average bark volume of 13.9%. Allowing for a 27% void volumeand a reduced transport loss of 15%, net bark volume isapproximately 8% of total log volume for an interior mill.Wood Waste Volume:The other major wood waste parameters are the production ofsawdust, planar shavings, and chip fines. These parameters varyslightly between the coastal and interior sawmills. A summary ofthe wood waste produced as a percentage of the log volume is givenas:15Coast Interior1. Bark 8.3% 8.0%2. Sawdust 10.0% 8.0%3. Planar Shavings 8.0% 6.0%4. Chip Fines 3.0% 3.0%This distribution of wood waste is expressed as a percentageof total log volume.It is common practice to express sawmill production in termsof cubic metres. The conversion factor between fbm and cubicmetres is known as the lumber recovery factor, or ‘LRF ‘, and is aratio between lumber output to log volume input. The LRF isexpressed as:LRF = nominal board ft. of lumbercubic metres of logsThe LRF varies slightly between coastal and interior sawmills,and based on typically values has been assumed to be 230 fbm/m3 forcoastal mills and 220 fbm/m3 for interior mills.Sawmill Sizes:Three sawmill size ranges were analyzed in order torepresent a range of sawmill wood waste production:1. 50 Million fbm/yr2. 150 Million fbm/yr3. 250 Million fbm/yrThese represent small to very large sawmills.Using the LRF, the average annual sawmill consumption in cubicmetres of logs can be determined, and then based on wood wastedistribution, annual wood waste production in cubic metres can bederived.The next step is to convert this volumetric output to a mass16output in terms of oven dry tonnes (ODT) per year. Moisturecontent plays a large role in determining actual mass amounts. ODTis used as a common unit of measure since it does not include anyallowance for moisture. Wood and bark densities vary slightly, andaverage values are given as follows in terms of oven dry kilogramsper cubic metre:Coastal Interior1. Bark 475 4902. Wood 365 385Using these results, the annual production of wood waste forthe three sawmill sizes expressed in ODT/yr is as follows:Coastal Interior1. 50 MMfbiu/yr 26,150 23,0002. 150 MMfbm/yr 78,440 69,0003. 250 MMfbm/yr 130,750 115,1004.5 Thermodynamic ModellingMass and energy balances were conducted for each of theoptions to determine all of the design parameters. A computerprogram was written to calculate the process flow parameters ateach stage in the system.Temperature, pressure, enthalpy, entropy, mass flow rate andmoisture content are calculated at each stage. These values varydepending on the incoming wood fuel flow-rate and turbine size,which ultimately determine the amounts of electricity generated,process heat generated and natural gas consumed. The resultingvalues are tabulated in Appendix A for each of Options #1, #2, and#3 for differing amounts of wood fuel flow-rate and turbine size.The following sections will summarize the assumptions made in17calculating the physical parameters in each of Options #1, #2 and#3.4.5.1 Basic AssumptionsThe first basic assumptions made were that of the ambientconditions. The conditions assumed for temperature andpressure were 20°C and 101.3 kPa, respectively.Air was assumed to be the working fluid. Properties ofair were taken from the thermodynamic tables at the relevanttemperatures and pressures. Properties of combustion gaseswere approximated to be those of air at the same temperatureand pressure.The moisture content of wood can vary significantlybetween species and geographical location. It has beenassumed that incoming moisture content of wood waste fuel is50%. This parameter, in part, determines the amount ofcombustion gases produced as well as the heating value of thefuel. Heating values of the wood waste fuel as a function ofmoisture content are given as follows:Moisture Content Heating Value (MJ/kg)1. 0% 16.002. 10% 14.133. 20% 12.244. 30% 10.365. 40% 8.646. 50% 6.70These heating values allow for an average combustor efficiencyof 80% which accounts for potential losses during energyconversion.Percent excess air in the wood waste combustor has beenassumed to be 40%. Without the actual conditions and specific18manufacturers guidelines it is difficult to know the value ofthis parameter since it varies. The value of 40% was usedonly as an average and is in line with that used by industry.This parameter is a key factor in determining the amount ofcombustion gases produced.4.5.2 Wood Waste Furnace/Combustor AnalysisThe first step in analyzing the wood waste combustor wasto determine the chemistry of the wood fuel. Since this willvary slightly depending on the wood species it was determinedto use average values for the wood fuel based on results byGrace and Lim (1987). The percent dry ultimate (mass) analysisis as follows:Component Mass Percent1. Carbon (C) 52.8%2. Hydrogen (H2) 5.4%3. Oxygen (02) 36.9%4. Nitrogen (N2) 0.1%5. Sulphur (S) 0.2%6. Ash 4.6%The resulting stoichiometric air fuel ratio based on thisanalysis is 6.35 kg-air/kg-fuel. Allowing for the previouslystated excess air ratio of 40%, the resulting air fuel ratiois:AFactuai 8.89 kg—air/kg—fuelThe next step was to determine the mass and energybalance for the wood waste combustor by taking a controlvolume approach. The first law and conservation of mass wereused in determining the final conditions. For a given massflow rate of wood fuel, and by calculating the enthalpy of the19products, the resulting gas temperature was determined byinterpolation.4.5.3 Heat Exchanger AnalysisThe heat exchangers were assumed to be shell and tubecounterf low design and were analyzed based on energy balancesand limiting temperatures. In the case of the metal heatexchanger, in Option #1, the maximum allowable compressed airtemperature exiting the heat exchanger (flow #11) was set bythe manufacturers to be 650°C. In the case of the ceramicheat exchanger in Option #2, no temperature limit wasexpressed for these operating conditions. In the case of thein-bed heat exchanger for Option #3, the maximum allowablecompressed air temperature achievable is 870 °C.It is also important for practical reasons to quantify anapproach temperature for the heat exchangers. This is thetemperature difference between the cold inlet stream and thehot outlet stream. Based on manufacturers recommendations,the minimum approach temperature was 111 °C.Thermal energy available is determined by the amount ofwood fuel being consumed, which determines the rate ofcombustion gas production. The basic relationship fordetermining heat exchanger temperatures is a simple energybalance:MhCh(Thl—Th2) =The cold side inlet conditions are known for a given turbine.The hot side inlet temperature is known as well as the minimumexit temperature based on the approach value. The cold side20exit conditions are then determined. Should this resultingtemperature exceed the maximum allowable, the approachtemperature is increased accordingly until the maximum heatexchanger temperature is achieved.Allowances have been made for pressure drops. Industrystandard pressure drops of 0.50 kPa and 70 kPa have beenassumed for the shell and tube sides, respectively. Thesepressure drops will contribute to decreasing the netelectrical output of the cogeneration system.4.5.4 Gas Turbine AnalysisIn order to determine the performance characteristics ofthe gas turbine it was necessary to acquire specific operatinginformation from the manufacturer. The information availableconsisted of: 1) turbine inlet and outlet temperatures; 2) airmass flow; 2) fuel consumption; 3) pressure ratio; and 4)rated output power. Critical information which was notavailable was the compressor exit temperature and the turbineand compressor isentropic efficiencies.Based on given information, it was possible to determinethese unknown parameters. Since both turbine inlet and outlettemperatures were known, as well as mass flow and rated outputpower, it was possible to determine compressor work required.Compressor work = Turbine Power - Rated Powerwhere:Turbine Power = f(mass flow, inlet & outlet temperature)Given that compressor work can be calculated, and knowingmass flow and air inlet temperature, the compressor exit21temperature can also be calculated.Compressor exit temperature = f(mass flow, compressor work,inlet temperature)The next step was to determine the compressor isentropicefficiency. Compressor isentropic efficiency is defined as:compressor isentropic efficiency = ideal workactual workIdeal work occurs during isentropic compression where theisentropic temperature pressure relationship exists:Tout8 = (Pout)a-i/aTin (Pin)where: Tout8 = isentropic exit temperatureTin = inlet temperaturePout = exit pressurePin = inlet pressurea = gas constantBy the above expression the compressor efficiency is a ratioof ideal to actual work. This can be simplified to a ratio ofideal to actual enthalpy, and ultimately, to a ratio betweenisentropic temperature difference and actual temperaturedifference.= Tout5 — TinTout - Tinwhere: Tout = actual outlet temperature= compressor isentropic efficiencyUsing the above relationships, the isentropic compressorefficiency can be simplified to:22= Tin [(Pout/Pin)’ —1](Tout-Tin)Although compressor isentropic efficiency is useful to know,for the purposes of this model it is more important to knowthe compressor exit temperature. And as shown above, this canreadily be evaluated from the given information and physicalrelationships.The compressor exit temperature is also the inlettemperature to the main heat exchanger in the cogenerationsystem. It is not possible to determine the performancecharacteristics of the system without knowing this value.The turbine isentropic efficiency is calculated in asimilar manner. The calculation is more straight forwardsince both the turbine inlet and outlet temperatures areknown. Again, using the isentropic temperature pressurerelationship, the turbine isentropic efficiency is calculatedas follows:= [(Tin—Tout)/Tin]/[l — (Pout/Pin)’1where: = turbine isentropic efficiencyTin = turbine inlet temperatureTout = turbine outlet temperaturePout = turbine outlet pressurePin = turbine inlet pressureThe turbine isentropic efficiency is useful to know sincethe actual turbine output power will be affected by thepressure drop in the heat exchanger. By assuming that thisefficiency value will not change very much, the actual turbineoutput power and exit temperature can be calculated.234.5.5 Natural Gas Burner AnalysisIn the case of Options #1 and #3, the maximum heatexchanger temperature achievable is less than that requiredfor the turbine inlet temperature. It was therefore necessaryto introduce a natural gas burner into the system to elevatethe compressed air temperature leaving the heat exchanger.Natural gas was chosen as the fuel due to its availability,low cost, and popularity for this application. Other fuelsmay also be used.A control volume approach was used in determining theamount of natural gas required. Rather than calculate theflow-rate of natural gas required, the amount of energyrequired from the fuel was calculated. Natural gas istypically purchased based on unit energy consumption ingigajoules. Given that the turbine inlet temperature isknown, along with the compressed air temperature leaving theheat exchanger and entering the gas burner, and the air massflow rate, the natural gas energy required can be determined.Using the First Law:Gas Energy Required = M0t*h -where: M0 = mass flow of air out of burner into turbine;an allowance has been made for the increasedmass flow due to the natural gas fuel.= mass flow of air into burnerenthalpy of air out of burner; this isdetermined by the required turbine inlettemperature24h1 = enthalpy of air into burner; this isdetermined by the air temperature exiting themain heat exchangerThe amount of natural gas required to achieve the turbineinlet temperature is a function of both the amount of woodwaste fuel as well as the size of the gas turbine. The amountof wood fuel will determine the rate of production of the hightemperature flue gases and the amount of thermal energyavailable for transferring to the turbine compressed air. Fora given size of turbine and flue gas flowrate, once thecompressed air exiting the heat exchanger has achieved itsmaximum value, the amount of gas energy required becomesfixed. Once the flue gas flow-rate falls below this level theamount of gas required increases, until at a zero flue gasflow-rate the amount of gas required is defined by the turbinedesigned. Figures 12 and 13 show the resulting gas energyrequired versus the amount of wood fuel flow for a given sizeof gas turbine for Options #1 and #3 respectively. Option #2does not require natural gas. The following relationshipswere developed for the gas energy required:Relationship Feasible RangeOption #1:Gas 2.81 * genelec 6624 kg/hr Mf < 19908 kg/hrgenelec 7962 kWGas = 2.85 * genelec 19908 kg/hr Mf 33156 kg/hrgenelec 11943 kWOption #3:Gas = 1.75 * genelec 6624 kg/hr Mf < 19908 kg/hrgenelec 7962 kWGas = 180 * genelec 19908 kg/hr Mf 33156 kg/hrgenelec 11943 kW25where: Gas = amount of natural gas consumed (kW)Mf = flow rate of wood fuel (kg/hr)genelec = electricity generated (kW)4.5.6 Process Heat Energy AvailableThe exhaust gases from both the gas turbine and woodfurnace contain substantial amounts of thermal energy. Thesetwo sources of energy are utilized for the process heat/kilndrying application. Depending upon the relative flow ratesbetween the compressed air and flue gas, the energy availablefrom this source will vary. It is assumed that the flow rateof the compressed air is proportional to the size of theturbine. Similarly, the flow rate of the flue gas is afunction of the amount of wood fuel flowing through the plant.Therefore, the amount of process heat energy can be expressedas a function of both the wood fuel flow rate and the turbinesize.processheat f(genelec, Mf)The results for each of the three cogeneration options areplotted and shown on Figures 9, 10 and 11, respectively.For Options #1 and #3, the slope of the relationships arefairly constant for varying quantities of wood fuel flowrate.As expected, the amount of process heat energy increases withboth the turbine size and available wood waste. This increaseoccurs as a multiple of each different wood fuel flowrate.The objective was to establish a single relationship whichwould depict all cases of wood flowrate. This was done bytaking one relationship as the base case and scaling all theothers from this value as well as taking an average slope.26The resulting relationships for Options #1 and #3 are asfollows:Option #1:processheat = 1.926 * genelec + 1.26 * MfOption #3:processheat = 2.428 * genelec + 0.892 * MfThe results for Option #2 are slightly different. Theamount of process heat available actually decreases over arange of turbine power for a given amount of wood wasteconsumed. This is easily explained since the only source offuel in this process is the wood waste unlike in Options #1and #3 where natural gas is consumed. As the size of theturbine increases, for a given amount of wood wasteconsumption, more energy is required to run the turbine toachieve turbine inlet temperature and hence less energy isavailable for the process heat. In order for the turbines togenerate the rated power, natural gas must be introduced sinceinsufficient energy is available from the wood waste. Thistransition is the low point on each curve. This analysis onlyconsiders those values leading up to the point where woodwaste is the sole source of fuel for the process. Beyond thispoint it would defeat the purpose of using the ceramic heatexchanger since its main objective is to eliminate the needfor natural gas. The resulting relationship is as follows:Option #2:processheat -1.11 * genelec + 1.26 * Mf (kW)274.5.7 Induced Draft Fan Power RequirementsIn addition to generating electricity, the cogenerationsystem also consumes electricity to operate its own induceddraft and combustion fans. This draw of energy reduces theelectricity available for the sawmill. The net electricityavailable is expressed as follows:netelec = genelec - idfan (kW)where: netelec = net electricity available from thecogeneration system;genelec = amount of electricity beinggenerated by the cogenerationsystem;idfan = amount of electricity required tooperate the induced draft andcombustion fans.The amount of electricity required to operate the induceddraft fan is a function of both the pressure drop through thesystem and volumetric flow rate of the flue gases. Sincepressure drop is specific to the site layout of the plant, ithas been assumed, for Options #1 and #2, that a pressure dropof 40 inches water gauge is sufficient for a generalcalculation. Due to the fluidization requirements of Option#3 a pressure drop of 90 inches water gauge has been assumed.Volumetric flow rate of the flue gases, however, is directlyproportional to the flow of wood fuel into the system. Figure14 shows the rate of flue gas production as a function of theflow of wood fuel. The relationship is as follows:28fluegas = 2.4824 * Mf (SCFM)where fluegas = flowrate of flue gas in standardcubic feet per minute (SCFM)This relationship assumes that the amount of excess airavailable for combustion is 40% and that the moisture contentof the wood fuel is 50%.Actual flue gas production is then used to determine the powerrequired to operate the induced draft fan. Since pressuredrop has been fixed, the only variable is gas flow, orultimately, flow of wood fuel (Mf). The resultingrelationships for Options #1, #2 and #3 are as follows, andare also plotted on Figures 15, 16 and 17 respectively:Option #1:idfan = 0.013 * Mf (kW)Option #2:idfan = 0.013 * Mf (kW)Option #3:idfan = 0.029 * Mf (kW)where idfan = amount of electricity required, inkilowatts, to operate the induced draft andcombustion fans.4.5.8 Sawmill Sizes AnalyzedIn addition to evaluating a range of sawmill outputproduction rates (NNfbm/yr), both the electricity and processheat requirements must be known. Since these parameters canvary for sawmills of the same output production rate, adifferent range of sizes were analyzed.In terms of electricity requirements, there are twovalues which must be evaluated, the average demand and the29peak demand. These are explained in more detail in section5.2.4.In terms of the process heat requirements, this will varyby the amount of lumber that is kiln dried. Sawmills ofsimilar size will dry differing amounts of lumber depending ontheir product and target markets.The sizes analyzed are as follows:Sawmill Electricity (MW) ProcessSize Average Demand Peak Demand Heat(Mfbm/yr) (MW) (MW) (MW)50 3.0 to 40 4.0 to 8.0 10.0 to 30.0150 3.0 to 4.0 4.0 to 8.0 10.0 to 30.0250 3.0 to 4.0 4.0 to 8.0 10.0 to 30.04.6 Equipment PricingIn order to determine the actual costs and required sizes ofthe various components in the cogeneration system, it was necessaryto determine the range of feasible sizes to meet the process heatand electrical requirements. Physical relationships, based on theresults of the computer model, were determined for given flows ofwood fuel into the plant versus a range of gas turbine sizes.These relationships determine the effects upon the thermal andelectrical output of the system for a given set of inputs. Budgetpricing information was received directly from the manufacturersand distributors of all the major equipment components.304.6.1 Gas TurbineThe cost of the gas turbine was received from Kawasakifor a range of their gas turbine models ranging in size from660 kW to 3981 kW. Although the Kawasaki turbine is not anindirectly fired unit it was felt that due to its off-axis, orexternal combustor design, it would be the best suited formodification. An additional cost of 15% of the original costwas added for this potential modification. All sizes above3981 kW were assumed to be multiples of the existing sizes.Pricing was also received from Solar Turbines. The onlyapplicable turbine available from Solar is the 3 MW Centaurwhich in the past was configured for recuperated operation.It was decided to use the pricing available from Kawasaki dueto the greater flexibility and ease of establishing anindirectly fired unit. A regression analysis was performed onthe price data to determine a linear relationship between thecost and size. Figure 4 shows a graph depicting these data.The resulting linear relationship for the turbine cost versussize is:Turbine cost = f(turbine size)turbcost = 863 * genelec + 514,975 ($)for genelec 660 kWturbsize genelecWhere: turbcost the variable representing the costof the gas turbine Cs)genelec = size of the gas turbine, ie amountof electricity generated (kW)turbsize = size of the gas turbine (kW)314.6.2 Wood Waste Furnace/CombustorThe cost of the wood fuel furnace was acquired by both amanufacturer of cogeneration systems for sawmills, Wellons,and a local manufacturer of a wood furnace, HeuristicEngineering.The cost of the Wellons unit includes an allowance for amulticlone, used for removing air laden particulate from theflue gas, and an induced draft fan used to maintain thecontinuous flow of the flue gas. The cost of the Heuristicsystem includes all required fans and motors. The Heuristicunit does not require a multiclone.The cost of the system versus the rate of wood fuel flowis shown on Figure 5. The cost of the system is directlyproportional to the rate at which wood fuel is fed into thefurnace. The design of the system assumes that 40% excesscombustion air is used along with a wood moisture content of50%. Both these factors will affect the temperature and flowrate of the flue gas exiting the furnace. The Wellons unitwas used as the base case system due to its slightly highercost. The resulting cost relationship is as follows:Furnace cost = f(wood fuel flow rate)furnacecost = 73.7 * Mf + 1,023,583 ($)for Mf 6800 kg/hrfurnacesize = Mfwhere: furnacecost cost of the wood furnace system Cs)furnacesize = size of the furnace (kg/hr)Mf = flow of wood fuel (kg/hr)324.6.3 High Temperature Heat ExchangerThe price of the high temperature metal heat exchangerwas received from both “Thermal Transfer Corporation” and“American Schack Corporation Ltd.” (specialty manufacturers ofhigh temperature equipment). The cost of the ceramic heatexchanger was received from “Hague International” which is oneof the few manufacturers of this type of heat exchanger.It was decided to determine the cost of this componentbased upon equal flow rates between the flue gas andcompressed air. Figures 6 and 7 graphically show the heatexchanger cost versus the amount of wood fuel flow rate forthe metal and ceramic heat exchangers, respectively. Aregression analysis was performed in order to determine alinear cost relationship. The relationships are as follows:Heat exchanger cost = f(wood fuel flow rate)Metal Heat Exchanger:Hxcost = 14.76 * Mf + 88,074 ($)Hxsize = MfCeramic Heat Exchanger:CeHxcost = 103 * Mf + 4,433,914 Cs)CeHxsize = MfWhere: Hxcost = cost of the metal heat exchanger (5)Hxsize = size of the metal heat exchanger (kg/hr)CeHxcost = cost the ceramic heat exchanger ($)CeHxsize = size of the ceramic heat exchanger (kg/hr)The cost of the kiln/air heat exchanger which is used to heatthe kiln drying air is assumed to be the same as the cost ofthe metal heat exchanger.334.6.4 Atmospheric Fluidized Bed SystemThe cost of the atmospheric fluidized bed system wasreceived from ABB Combustion. Pricing was provided for acomplete system including all ancillary equipment with theexception of the gas turbine, and is based on the amount ofwood waste consumed. The prices are graphed on Figure 8. Alinear regression was performed in order to determine thelinear pricing relationship. The resulting price relationshipis:ABBcost = f(wood fuel flow rate)ABBcost = 551 * Mf — 800,000 ($)ABBsize MfWhere: ABBcost = cost of the complete AFBC system ($)ABBsize = size of the ABB system (kg/hr)345.0. Economic ModelThe main objective in sizing the cogeneration system is tomaximize its net present value or cashf low. A project life of 20years has been assumed in order to be in line with B.C. Hydr&sexpectations of an independent power producer. Inherent to thiscashf low calculation are the savings realized by generating bothheat and electricity as opposed to the purchase of these twocommodities. Additional savings are realized by not disposing ofthe wood waste fuel. Costs that arise as a result of thecogeneration system are the initial capital investment, yearlyoperating and maintenance, and yearly insurance and taxes.5.1 Linear Programming (LP) Model FormulationA Linear Programming (LP) model was developed in order todetermine the optimum size of a wood waste fired cogenerationsystem. The model was solved using a linear programming softwarepackage developed in the Mathematics department at UBC. The modelvaries slightly between Options #1, #2, and #3.Options #1 and #2 currently have 45 parameters, 58 constraintsand 54 variables. Option #3 has 45 parameters, 52 constraints and50 variables. A printout of the actual LP model formulation foreach Option is provided in Appendix B.5.2 LP ParametersIn the context of this LP model, parameters are defined asthose variables which are known and remain constant throughout theevaluation.5.2.1 Discount FactorIt is necessary to discount the future cashf low intotodays dollars for the 20 year project life. A real rate of35interest, or the marginal time preference rate (MTPR) has beenassumed to be 8%. In addition, inflation was accounted forand is assumed to be 4%. The resulting nominal interest rateis:= (1+i)*(l+f)_1 = 12.3%where: = nominal discount factor (%) = 12.3%i = real interest rate (%) 8%f = rate of inflation (%) 4%A discount factor 13 is then applied to each year i of thecashf low:13 =where i = i’th year in which the cash flow takes placef3 resulting discount factori = 1 ,20 yearsTwenty discount factors are used in the LP model. There isone discount factor for each project year with the exceptionof year 0.It has been assumed that the system start-up will occur inyear 1, with construction occurring fully in year 0.5.2.2 Hours of OperationThree different hours of operation have been assumed forthe sawmill and cogeneration plant. The sawmill is assumed tooperate on two shifts per day, 5 days per week, and 8 hoursper shift. This equates to 4,160 sawmill working hours peryear which is used to calculate any potential electricitysavings incurred by self generation. This factor is stated asfollows:hoursi = 4160 sawmill hours/year36The second hourly factor is the number of hours thatelectricity is actually being generated. This is assumed tooperate on a continuous basis, 24 hours/day, and 90% of a fullyear (ie 90% of 365 days). This factor is stated as follows:hours2 = 7884 cogeneration hours/yearThe third hourly factor is that time during which the sawmillis not operating and electricity is being generated. Sinceelectricity is generated continuously and the sawmill onlyoperates at specific times, this time period is simply thedifference between hours2 and hoursi.hours3 hours2 - hoursi5.2.3 Wood Disposal CostSawmills typically pay a price to dispose of theirunwanted wood wastes. Often they are able to sell thesewastes to pulp mills. This economic model assumes thatdisposal is the only alternative. The cost of this disposalvaries greatly between sawmills. Some mills are located neardisposal s.ites while others pay a high price for the disposal.A number of sawmill operators were questioned about theirdisposal costs and it was decided to use an average figure of$5/wet tonne or 0.5c1/kg.Assuming that disposal is the only alternative, any woodwhich is consumed in the cogeneration process presents asavings or credit in this amount. Given that the consumptionof this waste occurs during the operation of the cogenerationplant, or 7884 hours/year, the resulting unit credit is:dispcredit = 39.42 $-hrs/kg-yrWhen this disposal credit is multiplied with the actual amount37of wood being consumed on an hourly basis in the cogenerationsystem, a savings will result.Savings = dispcredit * Mf ($/yr)5.2.4 Electricity PricesThe consumption of electricity is essentially dividedinto two separate charges; demand charge and energy charge.Demand Charge:Consumers are charged for their maximum peak kilowattdemand consumption over a billing period which is typicallyone month. The charge is based on the value of this peakquantity in kilowatts. The demand charge is treated as aparameter in this economic model and follows B.C. Hydro’s rateschedules 1200 for general service of 35 kW and over. Thedemand charge is expressed as follows:dc = $6.37/kW/month or $76.44/kW/yearwhere dc = demand charge ($/kW/yr)Energy Charge:Energy charge is based on the continuous consumption ofelectricity over the billing period and is a reflection of theconsumers average demand. This charge is based on thecontinuous kilowatt-hour consumption of electricity and is setas a parameter in this model again using B.C. Hydro’s rateschedules 1200. The resulting energy charge is expressed asfollows:ec = 3.12 c/kWhwhere ec = energy charge ($/kWh)Combining the demand and energy charges into a single averageunit can be done by taking the capacity charge per kilowatt38hour and adding this value to the energy charge. Assumingthat the sawmill operates 4160 hours in a year, the demandcharge of $76.44/kW-yr becomes, l.84e/kWh. Adding to theenergy charge, a net energy charge based on continuousconsumption becomes:Net charge = 4.95 /kWhThis represents a potential unit savings of electricity whenself generation of electricity takes place.5.2.5 Excess ElectricityFirm Electricity:Should a company be willing and/or able to sell excessgenerated power, B.C. Hydro will pay to purchase thiselectricity. The purchase price is set by B.C. Hydro at itslong term marginal cost for producing this electricity in thatspecific part of the province. This model combines the priceof both energy and demand prices into one unit cost perkilowatt-hour. For the Lower Mainland beginning in 1994/95and over a project life of 20 years, the cost of new firmenergy is 3.04/kWh. The cost of new capacity is 34 $/kW/yr.Taking one year to be 8760 hours, the cost of new capacity isconverted to O.394/kWh in hourly units. The total cost ofthis electricity is then the sum of both the energy andcapacity costs and is expressed as:exci = 3.39 /kWhwhere exci = price paid per kWh for purchase by BC Hydroof firm electricityIn general, firm electricity is available only during thosehours when the sawmill is operating.39Secondary Electricity:Secondary electricity is that which is available duringoff-peak periods and is worth less than firm energy. In thismodel, secondary electricity is available only during thosehours when the sawmill is shutdown. Since the sawmilloperates 4160 hours per year out of a possible 6240 hours(which represents a 3 shift operation), secondary electricitywill be produced approximately 30% of the total time. Based onthis assumption, the value for secondary electricity isexpressed as:exc2 = 1.5 c/kWh5.2.6 Natural Gas PricesNatural gas prices vary between summer and winter, aswell as on the end use. Based on discussions with B.C. Gas,it was found that gas prices may be higher when consumed forheating purposes versus a cogeneration application. This isdue mostly to the utilities attempt to begin to promotecogeneration in the province. Four natural gas prices havebeen accounted for and provided by B.C. Gas. These prices areassumed to be parameters in the model and are stated asfollows:Heating: 1) Winter = $3.35/GJ = gascostiw2) Summer = $2.75/GJ = gascostisCogeneration: 1) Winter = $2.50/GJ gascost2w2) Summer = $1.95/GJ = gascost2sThe heating prices, cost per gigajoule consumed, are used tocalculate any savings introduced by generating heat from thewood fuel as opposed to purchasing natural gas. The40cogeneration prices are used to calculate the cost ofproviding supplemental fuel to the gas turbine.5.2.7 Available Wood WasteThe amount of wood waste available is a function of manyparameters, but most typically of the size of the sawmill.The size of a sawmill is usually stated as a function of theamount of board feet of dimension cut lumber producedannually. This factor can range anywhere between 50 millionboard feet per year (50 Mfbm/yr) to 300 million board feet peryear (300 Mfbm/yr). Given that the majority of sawmills fallinto the small to medium size range, three sawmill sizes willbe analyzed: 50 Mfbm/yr; 150 Mfbm/yr; and 250 Mfbm/yr. Theamount of wood waste produced annually is directlyproportional to the size of the sawmill and was previouslycalculated in Section 4.4:50 Mfbm/yr: woodwaste = 26,150 ODT/yr150 Mfbm/yr: woodwaste = 78,440 ODT/yr250 Mfbm/yr: woodwaste = 130,750 ODT/yrwhere: woodwaste = the variable describing the amountof wood waste produced annually.ODT/yr = a unit of measure used to describea quantity of wood with zeromoisture content.5.2.8 Corporate TaxA corporate tax rate of 43% has been assumed for thismodel in order to calculate any savings due to capital costallowances introduced for energy efficient producers ofelectricity and heat. The most common capital cost allowance41is the Class 34 accelerated capital cost allowance. Thepurpose of the allowance is to encourage industry to installnew capital equipment to reduce energy waste, decreasedependence on oil and use renewable energy.5.2.9 Material HandlingAn allowance has been made for the cost of installingwood waste fuel material handling equipment for thecogeneration system. An allowance of $600,000, for Options #1and #2, has been made for this factor and includes a 1 to 2day storage bin, screw conveyor and all necessary controls.Options #1 and #2:mathand = $600,000A material handling system for Option #3 was quoted by ABBcombustion as part of their overall package.Option #3:mathand = $800,000where: mathand = the variable representing the costof the material handling equipment.5.3 LP VariablesThere are over 50 variables in each of the models for Options#1, #2 and #3. A detailed description of each variable can befound within the LP model printouts in Appendix B. Some of the keyvariables are highlighted below:Mf: Is a measure of the amount of wood waste fuel beingprocessed by the plant in kg/hr. The cost andsizes of other components in the system are afunction of this variable.genelec: Is the amount of electricity being generated by the42heatenergy:gasenergy:processheat:= Edispcredit*Mf*B + E electricsave*i3 +Eexcl*hoursl*exelecl*131+E exc2*hours3*exelec2*13 +Eheatenergy*13 +E capital cost allowancesdi spcredit = disposal credit= amount of wood fuel consumed= savings realized by self generation ofelectricity= price paid by B.C. Hydro for purchasingfirm electricityprice paid by B.C. Hydro for purchasing43cogeneration plant. This variable determines thesize and cost of various pieces of equipment aswell as the amount of excess heat energy available.Is the yearly savings realized by displacingnatural gas for heating purposes and using the heatgenerated by the cogeneration process.Is the yearly cost of fuelling the gas turbine inorder to achieve the rated turbine inlettemperature.Is the amount of heat energy being produced by thecogeneration system.5.4 Objective FunctionThe objective of this model is to maximize cashf low (netpresent value) which is defined as benefits minus costs. Theobjective function is stated as follows:Objective Function:Maximize: Net Present Value (NPV) = benefits - costsbenefitswhere:Mfelectricsaveexc1exc2secondary electricityhoursi = hours of firm electricity generationduring sawmill operationhours3 = hours of secondary electricity generationduring sawmill shutdownexeleci = amount of firm excess electricityavailable for sale to B.C. Hydroexelec2 = amount of secondary excess electricityavailable for sale to B.C. Hydroheatenergy= savings in natural gas cost due to selfgeneration of heat energyi3 = discount factor for year i =1 ,20 yearscosts = total + Z gasenergy*13 + Z IT*13. + E O&M*13,where: total = total project capital cost in year 0gasenergy = cost of supplying natural gas to thegas turbineIT = yearly cost for insurance and property taxO&M = yearly operating and maintenance costS3 = discount factor for year i i=l,..... ,20yearsIt is assumed that the full capital cost occurs in year 0since financing is a very specific variable. Unlike theassumptions of Butler (1984), no loan financing is assumed.This is largely dependent on the owner and their respectivebank. In addition, no allowance for depreciation has beenmade since it has been assumed that the equipment can not beused for any other purpose. The scrap value of the equipment44at the end of the project life is zero. This assumption is inline with Butler (1984).5.5 ConstraintsThere are over 50 constraints in each of the models forOptions #1, #2 and #3. The following description highlights someof the key constraints. A detailed description of each constraintis provided in the LP model printouts in Appendix B.5.5.1 Electricity Demands and ChargesThree possible cases of electricity generation must beconsidered in order to determine the optimum generatingcapacity. For given peak and average electricity demands forthe sawmill, these three cases are stated as follows:Case 1: The net electricity production falls somewherebetween the sawmill peak and average demand.averagedemand netelec peakdemand;netelec = genelec - idfan;demandsave = dc*netelec;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;electricsave = energycharge + demandsave;exeleci = netelec - averagedemand;exelec2 netelec;The variable electricsave is a measure of thesavings incurred by generating electricity in therange between the peak and average demands.Case 2: The net electricity production falls somewherebelow the sawmill average demand.netelec averagedemand;netelec = genelec - idfan;45demandsave = dc*netelec;electricsave = ec*hoursl*netelec + demandsave;exeleci = 0;exelec2 = netelec;No excess electricity is produced during thesawmill operation in this case and the electricsavings is only a portion of the demand and energycharges.Case 3: The net electricity production falls somewhereabove the peakdemand.netelec peakdemand;netelec genelec - idfan;demandsave = dc*peakdemand;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;electricsave = energycharge + demandsave;exelecl = netelec - averagedemand;exelec2 netelec;In this case, the total electricity savings adds upto the entire electric bill of the sawmill. Thegreatest amount of excess electricity is producedin this case.5.5.2 Capital CostsThe capital costs of the wood furnace, heat exchanger andgas turbine were outlined in section 4.6. In each case, thesecosts were a function of the size of the equipment. Inaddition to the equipment costs, there are other costsassociated with designing and constructing the plant. Thesecosts are outlined as follows:46a) The total equipment capital cost:totalcapi = mathand + furnacecost + turbcost + hxcost;b) Installation of the equipment is 10% of the equipmentcapital cost:install = 0.10 * totalcapi;c) The equipment plus installation cost:totalcap2 = totalcapi + install;d) Ducting for the equipment is 10% of totalcap2:ductwork = 0.10 * totalcap2;e) Electrical is 14% of the totalcap2:electrical = 0.14 * totalcap2;f) Instrumentation is 5% of totalcap2:instrument 0.05 * totalcap2;g) Piping is 5% of the totalcap2piping = 0.05 * totalcap2;h) Structural including the building, concrete and civilworks is 15% of totalcap2structural = 0.15 * totalcap2;i) Totalcap3 is the overall equipment, installation andconnection costs:totalcap3 = totalcap2 + ductwork + electrical +instrument + piping + structural;j) Engineering costs are 7% of totalcap3:engineering = 0.07 * totalcap3;k) Construction management is 5% of totalcap3:constructm = 0.05 * totalcap3;1) Totalcap4 includes all direct and indirect costs:totalcap4 = totalcap3 + engineering + constructm;47m) A contingency of 10% is allowed for any potential changesto the design:contingency = 0.10 * totalcap4n) The total capital cost of the project results in beingapproximately 2 to 2.5 times the equipment costs. Thisis in line with published estimating guidelines in theMeans Building Construction Cost Data Handbook.total = totalcap4 + contingency;5.5.3 Costs and Savings of Fuel and HeatGas Energy Required:The amount of natural gas required for the gasturbine was outlined in Section 4.5.5.The associated cost of this gas consumption is expressedas:gasenergy = (7/12)*0.0036*hours2*gascost2s*gas +(5/12 )*0 0036*hours2*gascost2w*gasThe two parts of this equation represent the amount ofgas consumption cost in the summer and winter months(seven out of twelve months in the summer and five out of12 months in the winter).Plant Thermal Requirements:For a given amount of kiln heat used in the sawmill,the cogeneration system must be able to at least meetthis requirement. Therefore:kilnheat processheat;where: kilnheat amount of heat energy required inthe sawmill (kW).48processheat = amount of heat energy produced bythe cogeneration system.The physical relationship representing the amount of processheat produced was outlined in Section 4.5.6 for each ofOptions #1, #2 and #3.Heat Energy Savings:Assuming that natural gas is displaced by the availableprocess heat, a savings will result. This is stated asfollows:heatenergy = (7/12)*O . 0036*hours2*gascostls*processheat +(5/12 )*O . 0036*hours2*gascostlw*processheatwhere: heatenergy = represents the dollar savingsrealized by displacing natural gas.The first and second parts of this equation represent savingsrealized in the sununer and winter, respectively.Maximum Available Wood Waste:As stated previously, the amount of wood waste availableis a function of the size of the sawmill.Mf woodwaste;exwood woodwaste - Mf;where exwood = the amount of wood waste which is notconsumed by the process.5.5.4 Operating and Maintenance CostsAt the feasibility study level of any project, theoperating and maintenance costs are usually taken to be apercentage of the total capital cost. For a steam based plantButler (1984) assumes this value to be 4% of the total capitalcost. These costs will be lower for a plant which does not49produce steam as is the case for the three cogenerationsystems proposed herein. An operating and maintenance cost of2.5% of equipment capital has therefore been assumed.Operating and maintenance costs are yearly expenses of theplant.OM = 0.025 * totalcap3;The variable totalcap3 does not include contingency.5.5.5 Insurance and Property TaxYearly insurance and property taxes are assumed to be apercentage of the total capital cost less the contingency.Butler (1984) assumes this value to be 2% while the study byH.A. Simons Ltd. assumes a value of 1.5%. This analysisassumes a value of 1.5%.IT = 0.015 * totalcap3;5.5.6 Capital Cost AllowanceA class 34 capital cost allowance is applicable for thisproject since the cogeneration system uses both a source ofwaste fuel and is energy efficient. This allowance isapplicable only if the company has profits in excess of thisamount. It is assumed that profits are sufficient for thecompany to take advantage of this tax credit. The credit hasbeen applied only against the capital cost of the gas turbineand wood furnace. This credit is 25% in year 0, 50% in yearland 25% in year2. It is calculated as follows:class34_1 = 0.25*corptax*(equipment capital costs) in year0class34_2 = O.50*corptax*(equipment capital costs) in yearlclass34_3 = 0.25*corptax*(equipment capital costs) in year2This tax credit is in line with the assumptions by Butler50(1984) who states an allowance for an Energy Investment TaxCredit.5.6 Summary of the LP Model Base Case Assumptions:The Base Case model of this economic analysis attempts torepresent a conservative estimate of the current market conditions.Electricity Prices:Based on B.C. Hydro Schedule 1200 for general service (35 kWand over)Demand Charge = $6.37/kW-demand/monthEnergy Charge = 3.12 /kWhNet energy price 4.95 c/kWhElectricity Purchase Prices:Firm electricity purchase prices were assumed for the LowerMainland over a 20 year term beginning in 1994/95Cost of New Capacity = $34/kW/yrCost of firm energy = 3.0 c/kWhNet energy purchase price = 3.43 cr/kWhSecondary electricity purchase prices were also assumed forthe Lower Mainland at approximately 30% availability. This sourceoccurs only during off-peak periods.Cost of secondary electricity = 1.5 q/kThNatural Gas Prices:Based on B.C. Gas rates for use in process heating andcogeneration applications.Price for process heat in winter = $3.35/GJPrice for process heat in summer = $2.75/GJPrice for cogeneration in winter = $2.50/GJPrice for cogeneration in summer = $1.95/GJ51Cogeneration prices are based on discussions with B.C. Gasindicating that these gas prices would be evaluated on anindividual basis. These prices would potentially be, costplus delivery.Discount Rate:The nominal discount rate was used for calculation of the netpresent value.Real discount rate = 8%Inflation rate 4%Nominal discount rate 12.3%Wood Waste Disposal Cost:Based on discussions with operating sawmills, an average costof disposal of $5/wet tonne was assumed.Hours of Operation:The sawmill was assumed to operate on 2 shifts per day, at 8hours/shift, 260 days per year resulting in 4160 operating hoursper year.The cogeneration plant was assumed to operate continuously 24hours/day at 90% capacity resulting in 7884 hours per year.The lumber drying kiln was assumed to operate the same numberof hours per year as the cogeneration plant.Standby electricity rates:No allowance was made for standby power since it becameevident that the majority of optimal solutions in the analysisindicated very low levels of power production and self generation.Corporate Tax Rate:A tax rate of 43% was assumed for calculation of the value ofcapital cost allowances.52Capital Cost Allowance:A Class 34 capital cost allowance was assumed against the costof the wood furnace and gas turbine. This allowance occurs inyears 0,1 and 2, with respective allowances of 25%, 50% and 25%.Pro-lect Duration:A project duration of 20 years was assumed. The cost ofcapital occurs in year 0 (no financing assumptions made) with theresulting revenues and costs beginning in year 1 and ending in year20.Size of sawmill:Three sawmill sizes were evaluated; 50 Mfbm/yr, 150 Mfbm/yrand 250 Mfbm/yr. The size is directly proportional to the amountof wood waste produced.Sawmill Kiln heat requirements:Three levels of heating requirements were evaluated; 10,000kW, 20,000 kW, and 30,000 kW. A typical coastal sawmill with alumber drying facility would require approximately 10,000 kW ofheat while an Interior sawmill would require 20,000 kW. The caseof 30,000 kW is unrealistic but was used as an upper bound.Sawmill electricity requirements:Sawmill average demand was varied between 3000 and 4000 kW.Peak demand was varied between 4000 and 8000 kW.5.7 Sensitivity AnalysisA number of parameters were varied from the Base Case in orderto establish the effects on the outcome of the optimal solution.Sensitivity #1: Decrease the real discount rate from 8%to 6%.Sensitivity #2: Increase both the firm and secondary53electricity purchase prices from3.43 ce/kWh and 1.5 /kWh, respectively,to the current net electricity prices of4.95 c/kWh.Sensitivity #3: Increase all electricity prices by 100%to reflect potential electricity pricesin other areas of North America.Sensitivity #4: Double the wood waste disposal cost from$5/wet tonne to $10/wet tonne.Sensitivity #5: Increase natural gas prices by 25%.546.0 Results of the Economic Model6.1 Option #1Each of the system components was evaluated and pricedindependently. None of these components are in the developmentstage and all are available for purchase. Natural gas is requiredfor top-up of the turbine inlet temperature since the metal heatexchanger can not achieve this temperature.Overall Results:Tables 1 to 6 show the results of the optimum level ofelectricity generation and the resulting net present value for thebase case and all the sensitivity cases. Note that both theoptimum electricity generation and the net present value are solvedfor a case which exactly meets the ‘Requiredt Process Heat, as wellas for an ‘Optimum’ level of Process heat.In general, the optimum level of process heat meets or exceedsthat required, with some exceptions at 20,000 kW and 30,000 kW ofheat required. These exceptions only occur when an insufficientamount of wood waste is available to meet the process heatrequirement. It is more economical to displace the heat load byburning more wood waste rather than increase the size of the gasturbine for the same application. Process heat is derived from twosources, the turbine exhaust and the high temperature flue gasesfrom the wood furnace.Wood Waste Utilization:Tables 1 to 6 also show the results of the optimum level ofwood waste usage for a given amount of wood waste availability.In all cases, when the required amount of process heat isgenerated, only a portion of the wood waste available is utilized.55When the optimum level of process heat is generated, the fullamount of wood waste is utilized. Any excess heat produced iswaste heat.Net Present Value and Optimum Electricity Generation:Tables I to 6 represent results for an average sawmillelectricity consumption of 3000 kW and a peak demand of 4000 kW.As the peak demand increased, the net present value (NPV) alsoincreased, with very little change to the optimum level ofelectricity generation. The only exception occurred when theelectricity prices were increased by 100%. In this case, theoptimum level of electricity generation equalled the peak demand.In all other cases, the optimum level of electricity generation wasthe minimum required to meet the optimum level of process heat.Based on this observation, very little incentive exists to produceelectricity beyond that which is required by the sawmill. However,it is advantageous to at least produce the required amounts ofprocess heat and a portion of the electricity.Process Heat Demand of 10,000 kW:Figure 18 is a plot of the results of the optimum level ofelectricity generation versus the available amount of wood waste,for a sawmill requiring 10,000 kW of process heat. In all cases,except sensitivity case #3, that the optimum level of electricitygeneration is that which is required to meet and/or exceed theprocess heat demand. This value increases slightly with theavailable wood waste since an increasingly larger induced draft fanis required, hence more electricity is consumed.The results for case #3 indicate that when electricity prices aredoubled, the optimum level of electricity generation is set to meet56the peak demand.Figure 19 shows the resulting net present value (NPV) for thesame sawmill depicted in Figure 18. The base case represents themost conservative results, with an increasing NPV for eachsensitivity case. Sensitivity case #4, increased wood disposalcost, has the greatest impact on the NPV and is the most sensitiveto the amount of wood waste available. The base case and theremaining sensitivity cases are indifferent to the amount of woodwaste available. This is due to the relatively low amount (10,000kW) of process heat required by this sawmill. Although much excessheat is produced, credit is only given for that which is required.It is encouraging to see that the NPV is positive in all cases.Process Heat Demand of 20,000 kW:Figure 20 shows the optimum level of electricity generationversus the available amount of wood waste, for a sawmill requiring20,000 kW of process heat. Similar to Figure 18, with the exceptionof cases #2 and #3, the optimum level of electricity generation isthat which is required to meet and/or exceed the process heatrequirement.The first exception, case #2, indicates that at the low levelof wood waste availability, a greater amount of electricitygeneration is required in order to meet the process heatrequirement. This quickly tapers off as the amount of availablewood waste increases and eventually meets up with the base caseresults.The second exception, case #3, indicates that the optimumlevel of electricity generation is set to meet the peak demand.This is slightly greater at the lower end of the available wood57waste since an insufficient amount of wood waste is available tomeet the process heat requirement and hence the size of the gasturbine must be increased.Figure 21 shows the resulting net present value for the samesawmill depicted in Figure 20. Again, the base case is clearlyconservative compared with the other sensitivity cases.Case #4 provides the best results at the higher levels of availablewood waste while case #3 provides the best results at the lowerlevels.In general, the results steadily increase up to approximately80,000 ODT/yr of wood waste which is representative of a 150Mfbm/yr sawmill. After that point, the NPV results begin to taperoff. This is due primarily to the steadily increasing optimumamount of process heat production which is a result of theincreasing amount of available wood waste. At the low levels ofavailable wood waste, it is difficult to achieve the required20,000 kW of heat. Once sufficient amounts of wood waste areavailable, this process heat savings has less of an impact on theNPV.6.2 Option #2The ceramic heat exchanger evaluated in this application iscurrently in the development and testing stage and is not readilyavailable on the market. The cost of the heat exchanger isexceptionally high reflecting its initial design and developmentcosts. As a result, it was difficult to conduct a fair evaluationof this concept in comparison to the equipment utilized by Options#1 and #3.58An additional sensitivity analysis, case #6, was required forthis option in order to investigate the effects of the capital costof the heat exchanger. The cost of the heat exchanger was reducedby 50% in order to simulate a more commonly produced item.Overall Results:Tables 7 to 13 show the results for the analysis of Option #2for the base case and sensitivity cases. Due to the nature of theindirectly fired turbine, it was necessary to increase the minimumsize of sawmill evaluated from 50 ?lMfbm/yr to 100 MNfbm/yr.Insufficient wood waste energy was available from the smallersawmill to independently run a gas turbine in the size rangeanalyzed and provide process heat. It should also be pointed outthat this process derives all its energy from the wood waste and iscompletely independent of natural gas.Similar to Option #1, the optimum level of process heatgenerated meets or exceeds that required.For a given amount of wood waste available, there is a maximumsize of gas turbine which can be indirectly fired since no naturalgas is utilized in this option. These maximums are 2043 kW for a100 MMfbm/yr miii, 3981 kW for a 150 MMfbm/yr mill and 7962 kW fora 250 MMfbm/yr mill. These values are also limited since someprocess heat must also be made available. In some of thesensitivity cases, it is optimal to generate these maximum amountsof electricity.Wood Waste Utilization:Tables 7 to 13 also show the results of the optimum level ofwood waste usage for a given amount of wood waste availability.The results indicate that only a portion of the available wood59wastes are utilized. This is due to the high cost of the heatexchanger which is directly proportional to the amount of woodwaste consumed.Net Present Value and Optimum Electricity Generation:Tables 7 to 13 represent a sawmill with an average electricityconsumption of 3000 kW and a peak demand of 4000 kW. It wasobserved that as the peak demand increased the NPV correspondinglyincreased, with very little change to the optimum level ofelectricity generation.Process Heat Demand of 10,000 kW:Figure 22 is a plot of the results of the optimum level ofelectricity generation versus the available amount of wood waste,for a sawmill requiring 10,000 kW of process heat. The base caseand sensitivity cases #1, #4, #5 and #6 recommend a very minimaloptimal electricity generation (less than the sawmill averagedemand) for production of the optimum amount of process heatrequired. The results for cases #2 and #3 indicate that themaximum amount of electricity should be generated for the specifiedamount of wood waste available. This maximum exceeds the sawmillaverage demand thereby producing surplus electricity.Figure 23 shows the resulting net present value for the samesawmill depicted in Figure 22. The base case represents the mostconservative results, with increasing NPV’s for each sensitivitycase. Unfortunately, the NPV is negative in all cases. It isevident that the decreased heat exchanger cost, case #6, has alarge impact on the results. Should this have been used as thebase case, the results of some of the sensitivity analyses wouldhave been shifted upwards into a potentially positive NPV.60Process Heat Demand of 20,000 kW:Figure 24 is a plot of the results of the optimum level ofelectricity generation for a sawmill requiring 20,000 kW of processheat. Similar to Figure 22, the optimum level of electricitygeneration for all cases except #2 and #3 is that which is requiredto meet the process heat demand. This value is less than thesawmill average demand. On the other hand, the solution recommendsgenerating the maximum amount of electricity possible for cases #2and #3, which is in excess of the sawmill average demand.Figure 25 depicts the corresponding NPV for the same sawmilldepicted in Figure 24. The majority of NPV values are negativewith a few exceptions. Both case #3 and #6 result in positiveNPV’s over a given range of wood waste availability.The present costs of this heat exchanger are not favourablefor this application. However, once the initial design anddevelopment costs have been eliminated, to potentially 50% of thepresent cost, this technology becomes economically feasible. Thissystem also has the added advantage that it does not rely onnatural gas which for many sawmills is difficult and/or impossibleto acquire due to geographical location.6.3 Option #3The entire system with the exception of the gas turbine hasbeen quoted as a turnkey plant by ABB Combustion. This has loweredthe overall cost of the system when compared to the individualpricing scheme for Option #1 and #2. It is also important to notethat the technology is readily available for all components in thissystem. Compared with Option #1, a smaller amount of natural gas61is required since the in—bed heat exchanger operates at highertemperatures.Overall Results:Tables 14 to 19 show the results of the optimum level ofelectricity generation and the resulting net present value for thebase case and all the sensitivity cases. As before, both theoptimum level of electricity generation and NPV are solved for botha case which exactly meets the ‘Required’ process heat, as well asfor an ‘Optimum’ level of process heat production. It isinteresting to see that in most cases the required amount ofprocess heat is equal to the optimum level of process heat. It isalso encouraging that the NPV is positive in all cases.Wood Waste Utilization:Tables 14 to 19 show results for the optimum level of woodwaste usage. A minimal amount of wood waste is used. The optimalsolution does not recommend full utilization of the wastes as inOption #1. This is due to the very efficient means by which thein-bed heat exchanger recovers energy for the gas turbine. Sincethe size and cost of the system are directly proportional to theamount of wood waste consumed, it is recommended to keep the systemas small as possible to meet the process heat requirement.Inherent to this high efficiency is an overall increase in theoptimal size of the turbine generator. In all cases, the turbinegenerators are considerably larger than in Option #1. This is alsodue to the higher fan operating requirements of the fluidized bedsystem. There is however, very minimal electricity generated aboveand beyond that which is required for both the sawmill andcogeneration plant once again suggesting that it is not very62attractive to generate electricity for sale.Process Heat Demand of 10,000 kW:Figure 26 is a plot of the results of the optimum level ofelectricity generation versus the available amount of wood waste,for a sawmill requiring 10,000 kW of process heat. Note that inall cases, with the exception of case #3, that the optimum level ofelectricity generation is that which is exactly required to meetthe process heat requirement. It also does not change with theamount of wood waste available since, as mentioned previously, theoptimal amount of wood waste usage has been kept at a minimum.Case #3 on the other hand recommends a much higher level ofelectricity generation, above what is required to meet the processheat requirement. This is due to the very high electricity priceswhich were modelled for this case.Figure 27 shows the resulting net present value for the samesawmill depicted in Figure 26. As expected, the base case isclearly the most conservative. The case which has the greatestimpact on the results is, once again, case #3. The NPV values donot change with the amount of available wood waste since thesolution recommends using only the minimum amount of wood wasteavailable to meet the process heat requirement.Process Heat Demand of 20,000 kW:Figure 28 is a plot of the results of the optimum level ofelectricity generation versus the available amount of wood waste,for a sawmill requiring 20,000 kW of process heat. Note that inall cases at the lower end of available wood waste, the optimumlevel of electricity generation is the same in order to meet theprocess heat demand. Once the available amount of wood waste63increases, the optimum levels of electricity generation begin tovary for each case. Case #4 recommends the lowest levels ofelectricity generation and the highest levels of wood waste usage.The base case and cases #1 and #5 recommend slightly higher levelsof electricity generation but lower levels of wood waste usage.Cases #2 and #3 recommend the highest levels of electricitygeneration with minimum levels of wood waste usage. In all casesthe process heat requirement is exactly met with varyingcombinations of wood waste usage and electricity generation.Figure 29 is a plot of the resulting net present value for thesame sawmill depicted in Figure 28. As expected, the base case isclearly conservative with case #3 returning the highest NPV. Case#4 shows an increasing NPV over a range of available wood wastesince the actual wood waste usage is increasing.6.4 Comparison of the Base Case Analysis of Options #1, #2, #3Figure 30 compares the Base Case results of the optimum levelof electricity generation for Options #l,#2, and #3 for both 10,000kW and 20,000 kW of process heat. In general, the results forOption #3 recommend the highest levels of electricity generationwhereas Options #1 and #2 have very similar results, around 1 MW.It is important to note that in all cases, the results forOption #3 exactly meet the process heat requirements. Options #1and #2 do not necessarily meet the process heat requirements beingeither less than or greater than what is required. In those casesin which the optimum process heat is less than the required processheat, it would be difficult from a practical viewpoint to introducea new source of heat, or maintain a portion of the existing heatsource, into the system. This would slightly favour Option #3.64Figure 31 compares the Net Present Value of the Base Case forOptions #1, #2, and #3. It is clear that at the present timeOption #2 is not feasible due to the very high developmental costsof the ceramic heat exchanger.At 10,000 kW of process heat both Options #1 and #3 have verysimilar results. This trend changes as the process heat isincreased to 20,000 kW. At the low end of available wood waste,Option #3 is more favourable. But as the amount of wood wasteincreases, Option #1 becomes increasingly more competitive andeventually surpasses Option #3 to become the most favourableoption.6.5 Payback PeriodsPayback periods were calculated based on a sawmill producing80,000 ODT/yr of wood waste which would correspond to a sawmillsize of approximately 150 Mfbm/yr. The results are shown for theBase Case only since this most closely models the current marketconditions in British Columbia.The results for Option #1 are shown on Figures 32 and 33.Figure 32 indicates an 18 year payback for a sawmill requiring10,000 kW of process heat, while Figure 33 indicates a payback of7 years for a process heat requirement of 20,000 kW. These resultsare not surprising since greater savings will be realized when alarger amount of process heat is displaced. However, this trendbegins to decrease when a greater amount of process heat isdisplaced due to the increasing capital cost.The results for Option #2 are shown on Figures 34 and 35. Itappears that no positive cash flow is reached in 20 years for6510,000 kW or 20,000 kW of process heat. This was to be expecteddue to the very high capital cost of the ceramic heat exchanger.The results for Option #3 are shown of Figures 36 and 37.Figure 36 indicates a 15.5 year payback for a sawmill requiring10,000 kW of process heat while Figure 37 indicates a 12 yearpayback for 20,000 kW of process heat.In general, Option #3 is favourable at the low end of bothprocess heat requirements and available wood waste. It is quicklysurpassed by Option #1 at the higher process heat and wood wasteavailability. This trend is due largely to the observation that itis more attractive to displace the process heat required ratherthan the electricity required. This is seen by the analysisresults which indicate that the optimum level of electricitygeneration is that which is only required to meet the process heatdemand, while in most cases the optimum process heat produced meetsor exceeds that required.It is important to note that the fluidized bed system, Option#3, is more efficient in transferring thermal energy to the turbinedue to the in-bed heat exchanger. Therefore, less energy is1wasted’ and more is available for the process heat application.On the other hand with Option #1, less energy is transferred to theturbine due to the relatively inefficient external heat exchanger,and more is available for the process heat. Because more energy is‘wasted’ in Option #1, the optimum size of the gas turbine is muchsmaller compared with the more efficient usage of Option #3 whichdictates a larger gas turbine. Based on the current economicclimate, the results have indicated smaller electricity productionand greater process heat production. Therefore Option #1 is66more attractive.Option #2 is not economically attractive at this time due tothe high heat exchanger capital cost. The ceramic heat exchangerdoes offer the very significant advantage that it’s operatingtemperatures are not effectively limited, and that an additionalsource of energy is not required.677.0 ConclusionsThe overall objective of this study was to determine theoptimum allocation of wood waste resources in a typical sawmillenvironment for the production of thermal and electrical energy,also known as cogeneration. Both physical and economic conditionswere utilized in a linear programming model to determine thisoptimum. Three slightly varying systems were analyzed and it wasfound that in each case the resulting trends were similar with somehaving advantages over the others. The method of using linearprogramming for this purpose appears to provide feasible resultswhich are in line with those achieved by the aforementionedauthors.Option #1 is technically feasible with the key equipment itemsreadily available on the market. Option #3 is technically feasibleand is available from ABB Combustion as a turnkey unit. This is anadded advantage since the system can be purchased complete. BothOptions #1 and #3 rely on a source of natural gas.Although Option #2 is also technically feasible, the ceramicheat exchanger is not yet available on the market. This hasdrastically increased its capital cost making it economicallyunattractive for this application. The major benefits are that itdoes not rely on a source of natural gas and the operatingtemperature limit is able to satisfy turbine inlet conditions.The dependence on natural gas by Options #1 and #3 could beeliminated by using a turbine which is fired at lower temperaturesor one which is specifically designed for hot air application. Atthe present time, with relatively low natural gas prices, this doesnot appear to be a significant advantage.68It was determined that it is economically feasible to displacethe process heat requirements with cogeneration by maximizing theheat production and minimizing the power production. Thisconclusion is directly in line with that determined by Hu (1985).Hu stated that the optimal solution often occurs at or above theThermal-match case when cash flow is to be maximized.In addition, it is economically feasible to efficiently burnthe entire volume of wood waste produced by the sawmill to generatekiln heat. This conclusion is not offset by the fact the amount ofheat generated is in excess of that which is required by theprocess. The surplus heat is effectively wasted but can be madeavailable for future power generation.It is not attractive at this time to generate excesselectricity for sale. The production and sale of electricitybecomes more attractive when the purchase price is increased toapproximately 5 c/kWh, as was shown by sensitivity case #2.The Net Present Value of the project increases as greateramounts of process heat are displaced. Option #3 is favourable atboth the lower process heat requirement and available wood waste.Option #1 becomes more attractive as the process heat and availablewood waste are increased.Payback periods range from 7 to 18 years and decrease asgreater amounts of process heat are displaced. Option #3 offersthe best payback period at lower levels of process heat whileOption #1 is advantageous at higher levels of process heat. Option#2 does not reach a positive cashf low in the established projectterm.69Table 1: Base Case Results for Option #1SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTI HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(Mufbm/yr) (ODTJyr) (kW) (kW)_______ (ODTIyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26,147 10,000 9,943 858 830 26,147 26.147 $52,475 $58767150 78,440 10,000 27,050 830 1,020 26,320 78,440 $79,929 $256,685250 130,734 10,000 44,111 830 1.212 26,320 130,734 $79,929 $433,55150 26,147 20.000 9,943 6.050 830 26.147 26,147 ($1,590,000 $58,767150 78,440 20,000 27,050 942 1.020 56.972 78,440 $6,420,000 $6,490,000250 130,734 20,000 44,111 942 1,212 56,972 130,734 $6,420,000 $667000050 26.147 30,000 9.943 11,243 830 26,147 26,147 ($4,860,000 $58,767150 78,440 30,000 27,050 2,552 1,020 78,440 78,440 $10,500,000 $10,900,000250 130.734 30.000 44,111 1,054 1.212 87,622 130,734 $12,800,000 $12,900,00070Table 2: Sensitivity Case #1, Decreased Discount Rate;Results for Option #1SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTI HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMIbmIyr) (ODTJyr) (kW) (kW) (ODT/yr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26,147 10.000 9943 858 830 26147 26147 $1,020,000 $1020000150 78.440 10,000 27050 830 1020 26320 78440 $1,040,000 $1640000250 130,734 10,000 44111 830 1212 26320 130734 $1,040,000 $2,230,00050 26,147 20,000 9943 6050 830 26147 26147 $250,638 $1,020,000150 78,440 20,000 27050 941 1020 56972 78440 $8,520,000 $8,770,000250 130,734 20,000 44111 941 1212 56972 130734 $8,520,000 $9,360,00050 26,147 30.000 9943 11243 830 26147 26147 ($2,390,000 $1,020,000150 78,440 30,000 27050 2552 1020 78440 78440 $13,700,000 $13,800,000250 130.734 30.000 44111 1054 1212 87622 130734 $16,000,000 $16,500,00071Table 3: Sensitivity Case #2, Electricity Purchase Price of4.95 c/kWh; Results for Option #1SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTI HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMI’bmlyr) (ODTIyr) (kW) (kW) (ODTJyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26,147 10.000 10000 858 858 26.147 26.147 $698448 $698,448150 78,440 10.000 27,050 830 1,020 26,320 78.440 $700,810 $877,565250 130,734 10,000 44,111 830 1,212 26,320 130,734 $700,810 $1,050,00050 26.147 20,000 20,000 6,050 6.050 26.147 26.147 $4,550,000 $4,550,000150 78.440 20.000 27,050 941 1,020 56,972 78.440 $7,040,000 $7,110,000250 130,734 20,000 44,111 941 1.212 56,972 130,734 $7,040,000 $7,290,00050 26,147 30.000 30.000 11,243 11,243 26,147 26,147 $7,830,000 $7,830,000150 78,440 30.000 30,000 2.552 2,552 78,440 78,440 $12,500,000 $12,500,000250 130.734 30.000 44.111 1.054 1,212 87,622 130,734 $13,400,000 $13,500,00072Table 4: Sensitivity Case #3, 100% Increase in ElectricityPrices; Results for Option #1SAWMIU AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTt HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMIbmIyr) (ODTIyr) (kW) (kW) (ODTIyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26,147 10,000 17,090 558 4.540 26,147 26.147 $1.370,000 $2,720,000150 78,440 10,000 34,197 858 4.732 26.147 78.440 $1,350,000 $2,810,000250 130,734 10,000 51,258 858 4.923 26,147 130,734 $1,350,000 $2,990,00050 26,147 20,000 20,000 6,050 6,050 26,147 26,147 $8,160,000 $8,160,000150 78,440 20.000 34,197 4,572 4.732 35,064 78.440 $8,890,000 $9,040,000250 130.734 20,000 51,258 4,572 4.923 35,064 130,734 $8,890,000 $9,220,00050 26.147 30.000 30,000 11,243 11,243 26,147 26,147 $11,700,000 $11,700,000150 78,440 30.000 34,197 4,684 4,732 65.715 78,440 $15,200,000 $15,300,000250 130,734 30.000 51,258 4.684 4.923 65.715 130,734 $15,200,000 $15,500,00073Table 5: Sensitivity Case *4, Increased Wood Waste DisposalCost; Results for Option *1SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTI HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMtbmIyr) (ODTJyr) (kW) (kW)________ (ODT/yr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26.147 10.000 9943 858 829 26.147 26.147 $1960000 $1,970,000150 78,440 10,000 27050 830 1.020 26.147 78,440 $2,000,000 $6,000,000250 130,734 10,000 44111 830 1,212 26,320 130,734 $2,000,000 $10,000,00050 26,147 20,000 9943 6,050 829 26,147 26,147 $323,880 $1,970,000150 78,440 20.000 27050 942 1.020 56,972 78,440 $10,600,000 $12,200,000250 130,734 20,000 44111 942 1.212 56.972 130.734 $10,600,000 $16,200,00050 26,147 30.000 9943 11.243 829 26,147 26.147 ($2,950,000 $1,970,000150 78.440 30.000 27050 2.552 1,020 78,440 78,440 $16,300,000 $16,600,000250 130,734 30.000 44111 1,054 1.212 87.622 130,734 $19.200.000 $22,500,00074Table 6: Sensitivity Case #5, Increased Natural Gas Prices;Results for Option #1SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTI HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMfbm/yr) (ODTJyr) (kW) (kW) (ODTlyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26,147 10.000 9,943 858 829 26,147 26.147 $1,340,000 $1,350,000150 78,440 10,000 27,050 830 1,020 26,320 78,440 $1,370,000 $1,500,000250 130,734 10,000 44,111 830 1,212 26,320 130,734 $1,370,000 $1,600,00050 26,147 20,000 9,943 6.050 829 26,147 26,147 ($397,897 $1,350,000150 78,440 20,000 27,050 942 1,020 56.972 78.440 $9,240,000 $9,300,000250 130,734 20,000 44,111 942 1,212 56.972 130,734 $9,240,000 $9,400,00050 26,147 30,000 9,943 11,243 829 26,147 26,147 ($3,770,000 $1,350,000150 78,440 30,000 27,050 2,552 1,020 78,440 78,440 $14,400,000 $14,800,000250 130,734 30,000 44,111 1.054 1,212 87,622 130,734 $17,100,000 $17,200,00075Table 7: Base Case Results for Option #2SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(Mufbmlyr) (ODTIyI) (kW) (kW) (ODTfyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat100 52,294 10,000 15,666 — 925 — 52.294 — ($12,400,000150 78.440 10,000 15,666 — 925 — 52.294 ($12,400,000250 130.734 10.000 15,666 6,030 925 52,294 52,294 $13.600.000)($12.400,000100 52,294 20,000 15,666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($5,590,000150 75.440 20.000 20.000 975 975 66,037 66,037 ($6,840,000250 130,734 20,000 20.000 975 975 66,037 66.037 ($6,840,000 ($6,840,000100 52,294 30,000 15,666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($5,590,000150 78.440 30,000 23,950 — 1,020 — 75,440 — ($4,980,000250 130,734 30.000 30,000 1.091 1,091 97,767 97.767 ($2,120,000 ($2,120,00076Table 8: Sensitivity Case #1, Decreased Discount Rate;Results for Option #2SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMfbmlyr) (ODTIyr) (kW) (kW (ODTIyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat100 52294 10,000 14,424 — 2,043 — 52.294 — ($11400000150 78,440 10,000 12,273 — 3.981 — 52,294 — ($11,300,000250 130,734 10.000 11.546 6.030 4,635 52.294 52,294 ($11,700.000)($11,200,000100 52.294 20,000 15.666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($7,420,000150 78,440 20.000 20,000 975 975 66,041 66,041 ($4,890,000 ($4890000250 130,734 20.000 20,000 975 975 66,041 66.041 ($4,890,000 ($4,890,000100 52,294 30.000 15,666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($7,420,000150 78,440 30,000 23,950 — 1,020 — 78,440 — ($2,580,000250 130,734 30,000 30.000 1.091 1,091 97,767 97,767 $953,226 $953,22677Table 9: Sensitivity Case #2, Electricity Purchase Price of4.95 c1/kWh; Results for Option #2SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMfbmjyr) (ODTIyr) (kW) (IcW) (ODTIyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat100 52,294 10.000 14,424 — 2,043 — 52,294 — ($11,000,000150 78,440 10,000 12,273 — 3,981 — 52.294 — ($9,410,000250 130,734 10,000 10,000 7,962 7,962 59,008 59,006 ($6,620,000 ($6,620,000100 52,294 20.000 14.424 — 2.043 — 52,294 — ($8,300,000150 78,440 20,000 20,000 3,981 3,981 76,493 76,493 ($4,440,000 ($4,440,000250 130,734 20,000 20,000 7,962 7,962 90.335 90.335 ($1,960,000 ($1,960,000100 52,294 30.000 14,424 — 2,043 — 52,294 — ($8,300,000150 78.440 30,000 20,665 — 3,981 — 78,440 — ($4,130,000250 130,734 30.000 30.000 7,962 7,962 121,658 121.658 $2,690,000 $269000078Table 10: Sensitivity Case #3, 100% Increase in ElectricityPrices; Results for Option #2SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMfbmIyr) (ODTIyr) (kW) (kW) (ODTIyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat I-feat Heat Heat100 52,294 10,000 14,424 — 2,043 — 52.294 — ($9,380,000150 78,440 10.000 12,273 — 3,981 — 52,294 — ($6,230,000250 130,734 10,000 10,000 7.962 7,962 59,008 59.008 ($2,930.000)1 ($2,930,000100 52,294 20,000 14,424 — 2,043 — 52,294 — ($6,620,000150 78,440 20.000 20,000 3,981 3,981 76,493 76,493 ($1,310,000 ($1,310,000250 130,734 20.000 20.000 7.962 7.962 90.335 90,335 $1,730,000 $1,730,000100 52,294 30,000 14,424 — 2,043 — 52,294 — ($6,620,000150 78,440 30,000 20,665 — 3,981 — 78.440 — ($1,000,000250 130,734 30,000 30,000 7.962 7,962 121,658 121.658 $6380000 $6,380,00079Table 11: Sensitivity Case #4, Increased Wood Waste DisposalCost; Results for Option #2SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMfbmIyr) (ODTIyr) (kW) (IcW) (ODTIyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat100 52.294 10,000 15,666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($8,590,000150 78.440 10,000 23.950 — 1,020 — 78.440 — ($7,930,000250 130,734 10,000 40,430 6,030 1,212 52,294 130.156 ($9,800,000 ($6,610,000100 52,294 20,000 15,666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($5,060,000150 78,440 20.000 23,950 975 1,020 66.037 78.440 ($2,010,000 ($1,690,000250 130,734 20,000 40,430 975 1,212 66,037 130.734 ($2,010,000 ($370,805100 52.294 30,000 15,666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($5,060,000150 78.440 30,000 23,950 — 1,020 — 78.440 — $766,357250 130.734 30,000 40,430 1,091 1,212 97,767 130,734 $5,020,000 $5,860,00080Table 12: Sensitivity Case #5, Increased Natural Gas Prices;Results for Option #2SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMtbmIyr) (ODTJyr) (1(W) (kW (ODTJyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat100 52,294 10.000 15.666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($10,900,000150 78.440 10,000 20,000 — 925 — 52.294 — ($10,900,000250 130.734 10,000 30,000 6,030 925 52.294 52,294 ($12,100,000) ($10,900,000100 52.294 20,000 15,666 — 925 — 52.294 — ($6,440,000150 78,440 20.000 20,000 975 975 66.037 66,037 ($3,720,000 ($3,720,000250 130,734 20.000 20,000 975 975 66,037 66.037 ($3,720,000 ($3,720,000100 52,294 30.000 15,666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($6,440,000150 78,440 30,000 20,000 — 1,020 — 78,440 — ($1,230,000250 130,734 30,000 30,000 1.091 1,091 97.767 97,767 $2,570,000 $2,570,00081Table 13: Sensitivity Case #6, Decreased Ceramic HeatExchanger Cost; Results for Option #2SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NEt PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMIbmIyr) (ODT/yr) (kW) (kW) (ODTfyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat100 52.294 10,000 15.666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($5,180,000150 78.440 10.000 15.666 — 925 — 52.294 — ($5,180,000250 130.734 10,000 15.666 6,030 925 52,294 52,294 ($6,380,000 ($5,180,000100 52.294 20,000 15.666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($1,640,000150 78.440 20.000 20.000 975 975 66,037 66,037 $850,211 $850,211250 130.734 20.000 30,000 975 975 66,037 66,037 $850,211 $850,211100 52.294 30,000 15,666 — 925 — 52,294 — ($1,640,000150 78,440 30,000 23,950 1,020 1,020 78,440 78,440 $3,120,000 $3,120,000250 130,734 30.000 30.000 1,091 1,091 97,767 97.767 $6,600,000 $6,600,00082Table 14: Base Case Results for Option #3SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICFIY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMIbmJyr) (ODT1yr) (kW) (kW) (ODTJyI) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26,147 10.000 10,000 1,685 1.685 26,147 26,147 $595,262 $595,262150 78,440 10,000 10.000 1,685 1,685 26,147 26,147 $595,262 $595,262250 130,734 10.000 10,000 1,685 1,685 26,147 26,147 $595,262 $595,26250 26,147 20.000 20.000 5,804 5,804 26.147 26,147 $2,600,000 $2,600,000150 78,440 20,000 20,000 4,750 4,750 37,461 37,461 $2,710,000 $2,710,000250 130,734 20.000 20.000 4.750 4,750 37.461 37,461 $2,710,000 $2,710,00050 26,147 30.000 25.240 — 7.962 26,147 26,147 — $2,950,000150 78,440 30,000 30,000 5,082 5,082 78,143 78,143 $3,780,000 $3,780,000250 130,734 30,000 30.000 5.082 5,082 78,143 78,143 $3,780,000 $3,780,00083Table 15: Sensitivity Case #1, Decreased Discount Rate;Results for Option #3SAWMILL. AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMtbmIyr) (ODTfyr) (kW) (kW) (OIJIfyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26,147 10,000 10.000 1.685 1,685 26,147 26.147 $1,700,000 $1,700,000150 78,440 10,000 10,000 1.685 1.685 26,147 26,147 $1,700,000 $1,700,000250 130.734 10,000 10,000 1,685 1,685 26,147 26,147 $1,700,000 $1,700,00050 26,147 20,000 20.000 5.803 5,803 26,147 26,147 $4,880,000 $4,880,000150 78.440 20,000 20,000 4,750 4,750 37,461 37,461 $5,010,000 $5,010,000250 130,734 20,000 20.000 4,750 4.750 37.461 37,461 $5,010,000 $5,010,00050 26.147 30000 25.240 — 7.962 26,147 26,147 — $5,740,000150 78,440 30000 30,000 5,082 5,082 78,149 78,149 $7,120,000 $7,120,000250 130,734 30000 30,000 5.082 5,082 78,149 78,149 $7,120,000 $7,120,00084Table 16: Sensitivity Case #2, Electricity Purchase Price of4.95 c/kWh; Results for Option #3SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMtbmiyr) (ODTIyr) (kW) (kW) (ODTIyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26147 10000 10,000 1,685 1,685 26147 26.147 $1,840,000 $1.840.000150 78.440 10.000 10,000 1,685 1.685 26,147 26.147 $1,840,000 $1,840,000250 130,734 10.000 10,000 1,685 1,685 26,147 26,147 $1,840,000 $1,840,00050 26,147 20,000 20,000 5.803 5.803 26,147 26.147 $8,280,000 $8280000150 78,440 20.000 20,000 5.803 5,803 26,147 26,147 $8,280,000 $8,280,000250 130,734 20.000 20,000 5.803 5,603 26.147 26,147 $8,280,000 $828000050 26,147 30,000 25.240 — 7,962 26,147 26,147 — $11,400,000150 78,440 30,000 30,000 7,962 7,962 47,210 47,210 $11,700,000 $11,700,000250 130,734 30,000 30,000 7,962 7.962 47,210 47.210 $11,700,000 $11,700,00085Table 17: Sensitivity Case #3, 100% Increase in ElectricityPrices; Results for Option #3SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMfbmJyr) (ODTiyr) (kW) (kW) (ODTIyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26,147 10,000 17,217 1,685 4,657 26,147 26,147 $3,140,000 $5,690,000150 78,440 10,000 17,217 1.685 4,657 26.147 26,147 $3,140,000 $5,690,000250 130,734 10,000 17,217 1,685 4.657 26,147 26.147 $3,140,000 $5,690,00050 26,147 20.000 20,000 5,803 5,803 26.147 26.147 $11,900,000 $11,900,000150 78,440 20,000 20,000 5,803 5,803 26,147 26,147 $11,900,000 $11,900,000250 130,734 20.000 20,000 5.803 5,803 26.147 26,147 $11,900,000 $11,900,00050 26.147 30,000 25.240 — 7,962 26,147 26,147 — $15,000,000150 - 78,440 30,000 30.000 7,962 7,962 47,210 47.210 $15,300,000 $15,300,000250 130,734 30,000 30,000 7,962 7.962 47,210 47,210 $15,300,000 $15,300,00086Table 18: Sensitivity Case *4, Increased Wood Waste DisposalCost; Results for Option #3SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMtbmlyr) (ODT/yr) (kW) (kWl (ODTfyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26.147 10,000 10.000 1,685 1,685 26.147 26,147 $2,510,000 $2,510,000150 78,440 10.000 10,000 1.006 1,006 33,438 33,438 $2,800,000 $2,800,000250 130,734 10.000 10,000 1,006 1.006 33,438 33.438 $2,800,000 $2,800,00050 26,147 20,000 20.000 5,803 5,603 26,147 26.147 $4,510,000 $4,510,000150 78.440 20,000 20,000 1,338 1,338 74,122 74.122 $6,850,000 $6,850,000250 130,734 20,000 20.000 1,338 1,338 74.122 74.122 $6,850,000 $6,850,00050 26.147 30,000 25,240 — 7,962 26,147 26,147 — $4,860,000150 78.440 30,000 30,000 5.042 5,042 78,583 78,583 $9,510,000 $9,510,000250 130,734 30,000 30.000 1,670 1,670 114.807 114,807 $10,900,000 $10,900,00087Table 19: Sensitivity Case #5, Increased Natural Gas Prices;Results for Option #3SAWMILL AVAILABLE PROCESS OPTIMUM WOOD WASTE NET PRESENTSIZE WOOD WASTE HEAT ELECTRICITY UTILIZATION VALUE(MMfbmIyr) (ODTJyr) (kW) (kW) (ODTIyr) (1994$)Required Optimum Required Optimum Required Optimum Required OptimumHeat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat50 26147 10,000 10,000 1,685 1.685 26.147 26,147 $1,820,000 $1,820,000150 78,440 10,000 10,000 1.685 1.685 26.147 26,147 $1,820,000 $1,820,000250 130,734 10,000 10,000 1.685 1,685 26,147 26,147 $1,820,000 $1,820,00050 26,147 20.000 20,000 5,803 5,803 26,147 26.147 $4,570,000 $4,570,000150 78.440 20,000 20,000 4,750 4,750 37,464 37,464 $4,890,000 $4,890,000250 130,734 20,000 20,000 4,750 4,750 37.464 37,464 $4,890,000 $4,890,00050 26,147 30,000 25.240 — 7,962 26,147 26,147 — $5,310,000150 78,440 30,000 30,000 5,082 5,082 78,149 78,149 $7,460,000 $7,460,000250 130,734 30.000 30.000 5,082 5,082 78,149 78.149 $7,460,000 $7,460,000881210 -8- LinearRegressionCl)-—Kawasaki SolarCL)4-2-I I I I0 2 4‘Phousands8 10 12 14Size (kW)Figure 4: Gas Turbine Cost as a Function of Size924000350030002500 Wellons CostCL)20001500 -Heuristic Cost1000 I I I5 10 15 ‘ousands25 30 35 40Feed Rate (Wet—Kg/hr)Figure 5: Wood Waste Furnace/Coinbustor Cost vs Wood Fuel FeedRate93800 -700 -600 -) ,500 -o Regression line400 -300 -200 Actual line100 I I I I I5 10 15 20 Thouds 30 35 40 45Feed Rate (Wet kg/hr)Figure 6: Metal Heat Exchanger Cost vs Wood Fuel Feed Rate94109L)8chRegression line6L)Actual line4 I I •I I5 10 15 20 Thounds 30 35 40 45Feed Rate (Wet kg/hr)Figure 7: Ceramic Heat Exchanger Cost vs Wood Fuel Feed Rate952015 -CL)5-0 I I I5 10 15 ousands 25 30 35 40Feed Rate (Wet kg/hr)Figure 8: ABB System Cost as a Function of Wood Fuel FeedRate9670 —130,750 ODT/yr605044oODT/:‘l— 40c.030C)C26,150 ODT/yr20-10- Turbine Exhaust Heat Only0 I I I0 2housands 8 10 12 14Turbine Power (kW)Figure 9: Process Heat Generated as a Function of TurbinePower and Wood Waste Availability For Option #1973O- zz78,440 ODT/yr52,300 ODT/yVVV10 -26,150 ODT/yrTurbine Exhaust Heat Only0 I I I I I0 2 4‘Aiousands 8 10 12 14Turbine Power (kW)Figure 10: Process Heat Generated as a Function of TurbinePower and Wood Waste Availability For Option #29870 —60 -130,750ODT,-50 -- 78,440 ODT/yr20-26,150 ODT/10 -Turbine Exhaust Heat OnlyI I I I I0 2 4 Phousancis 8 10 12 14Turbine Power (kW)Figure U: Process Heat Generated as a Function of TurbinePower and Wood Waste Availability For Option #39960/7962 kWU—V1235kW104ousands20 25Feed Rate (Wet kg/hr)Figure 12: Natural Gas Consumption Required For Top-Up ofTurbine Inlet Temperature For Option #1bJA Zd 011,943 kW504030201000Increasing Turbine SizeA3981 kWA-52043 kW30 35100605040I! Z“4_i 0C 2010300Feed kg/hr)Figure 13: Natural Gas Consumption Required For Top-Up ofTurbine Inlet Temperature For Option #30 5 10 25 30 35Rate (Wet101.1101009080c-)70r-r 05040302010 I0 10Thousa,c?s 30 40Feed Rate (Wet kg/hr)Figure 14: Rate of Flue Gas Production vs Wood Fuel Feed RateInto System102600500 -‘400300C200 -100 -0 I0 10Thousar 30 40Feed Rate (Wet kg/hr)Figure 15: Fan Power Required vs Wood Fuel Feed Rate IntoSystem For Option #1103600500 -30o-C200 -100 -0 I I0 10Thousaic?s 30 40Feed Rate (Wet kg/hr)Figure 16: Fan Power Required vs Wood Fuel Feed Rate IntoSystem For Option #2104130012001100100090O‘%._-‘ 800700C6005004003002001000 10Thousar 30 40Feed Rate (Wet kg/hr)Figure 17: Fan Power Required vs Wood Fuel Feed Rate IntoSystem For Option #310564 LegendBC — Base CaseCase #1 — Decreased Discount RateCase #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase Price- Case #3 — Increase Electricity Prices 100%Case #4 — Increase Wood Disposal CostCase #5 — Increased Natural Gas Prices• —2•—0 I I I I I20 40 60ThousRds 100 120 140Wood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 18: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #1 witha Process Heat Requirement of 10,000 kW10611Figure 19: Net Present Value for Option #1 with a ProcessHeat Requirement of 10,000 kWLegend‘I1Ctz:1)C109876543210#4- BC — Base CaseCase #1 — Decreased Discount Rate 7/Case #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase Price /7- Case #3 — Increase Electricity Prices 100%Case #4 — Increase Wood Disposal CostCase #5 — Increased Natural Gas Prices-#3A_A#220 40 60 80ThousandsWood Waste Available (ODT/yr)100 120 1401077160 80Thousands 100 120 140Wood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 20: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #1 witha Process Heat Requirement of 20,000 kW5ct140#3#2LegendBC — Base CaseCase #1 — Decreased Discount RateCase #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase PriceCase #3 — Increase Electricity Prices 100%Case #4 — Increase Wood Disposal CostCase #5 — Increased Natural Gas PricesBC, #1, #4, #52020 40I I I10820LegendBC — Base CaseCase #1 — Decreased Discount RateCase #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase Price #4Case #3 — Increase Electricity Prices 100%Case #4 — Increase Wood Disposal Cost15 - Case #5 — Increased Natural Gas Prices‘I#5#3#1-.#2 V BC5-z0 I I20 40 60 80 100 120 140ThousandsWood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 21: Net Present Value for Option 4$1 with a ProcessHeat Requirement of 20,000 kW1099LegendBC — Base Case #2, #38 Case #1 — Decreased Discount RateCase #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase PriceCase #3 — Increase all Electricity Prices 100% /7Case #4 — Increased Wood Disposal CostCase #5 — Increased Natural Gas PricesCase #6 — Decreased Heat Exchanger Cost 50% /‘6C•Ce0q’ S,,JJ 0ç4•c..) 3• .1.: 2#4BC, #1, #5, #60 I I I I I40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140ThousandsWood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 22: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #2 witha Process Heat Requirement of 10,000 kWno—2‘IzWood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 23: Net Present Value for Option #2 with a ProcessHeat Requirement of 10,000 kW0—3—4—5—6—7—8—9—10—11—12—13—14Legend#3BC — Base Case ACase #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase PriceCase #3 — Increase all Electricity Prices 100%Case #4 — Increased Wood Disposal CostCase #5 — Increased Natural Gas PricesCase #6— Decreased Heat ExchangerCo-#6#4#2#5BCI I— I —— I I I40 50 60 7080Th 90 100 110ousands 120 130 140112.98 - Legend#2,#3BC — Base Case /*Case #1 — Decreased Discount Rate /Case #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase Price- Case #3 — Increase all Electricity Prices 100%, Case #4 — Increased Wood Disposal Cost /Case #5 — Increased Natural Gas Prices VCase #6 — Decreased Heat Exchanger Cost 50% /6-C•-‘I.-M S‘J.d 0•C)•2-#41 —BC, #1, #5, #60 I I I I I40 50 60 70 80Thounds 100 110 120 130 140Wood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 24: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #2 witha Process Heat Requirement of 20,000 kW11220#4‘I__‘ —2 -#5C121) —6 -BCLegendBC — Base CaseCase #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase PriceCase #3 — Increase all Electricity Prices 100%Case #4 — Increased Wood Disposal CostCase #5 — Increased Natural Gas PricesCase #6 — Decreased Heat Exchanger Cost 50%—10 I I I I I I I I40 50 60 7080Th 90 100 110 120 130 140ousandsWood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 25: Net Present Value for Option #2 with a ProcessHeat Requirement of 20,000 kW1135#3IILegendBC — Base CaseCase #1 — Decreased Discount RateCase #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase PriceCase #3 — Increased Electricity Prices 100%Case #4 — Increased Wood Disposal CostCase #5 — Increased Natural Gas Pricesc 3-‘.1’ c4’-’ z•1_2BC,#1,#2,#50 I I20 40 60 Thousds 100 120 140Wood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 26: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #3 witha Process Heat Requirement of 10,000 kW1146>zFigure 27: Net Present Value for Option #3 with a ProcessHeat Requirement of 10,000 kW5-LegendBC — Base CaseCase #1 — Decreased Discount RateCase #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase PriceCase #3 — Increased Electricity Prices 100%Case #4 — Increased Wood Disposal CostCase #5 — Increased Natural Gas Prices#340210#2, #5*#1R20I I I IBC40 60 80 100 120ThousandsWood Waste Available (ODT/yr)140115760 80ThousandsWood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 28: Optimum Electricity Generation for Option #3 witha Process Heat Requirement of 20,000 kW—#2, #3BC, #1, #505-•Legend- BC — Base CaseCase #1 — Decreased Discount RateCase #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase PriceCase #3 — Increased Electricity Prices 100%Case #4 — Increased Wood Disposal Cost•‘t Case #5 — Increased Natural Gas Prices3-•#4120 40I-- I I100 120 14011613p —PLegendBC — Base CaseCase #1 — Decreased Discount RateCase #2 — Increased Electricity Purchase PriceCase #3 - Increased Electricity Prices 100%Case #4 — Increased Wood Disposal CostCase #5 — Increased Natural Gas Prices#2A A -A.BC.R40 60 80 100 120ThousandsWood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 29: Net Present Value for Option #3 with a ProcessHeat Requirement of 20,000 kW#3‘Iz01211109876543220I I I1401176—.\ 5C••40 60 ThouJRds 100 120Wood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 30: Comparison of the Optimum Electricity Generationfor the Base Case Results for Options #1, #2, #3Legend4FzCLine A = Option #1; 10,000 kW of Process HeatLine B = Option #2; 10,000 kW of Process HeatLine C = Option #3; 10,000 kW of Process HeatLine D = Option #1; 20,000 kW of Process HeatLine B = Option #2; 20,000 kW of Process HeatLine F = Option #3; 20,000 kW of Process HeatA2a a aC10AA,DB20I I I I I14011810_5-CLegend.2 Line A = Option #1; 10,000 kW of Process HeatLine B = Option #2; 10,000 kW of Process HeatLine C = Option #3; 10,000 kW of Process HeatLine D = Option #1; 20,000 kW of Process Heat-5- Line E = Option #2; 20,000 kW of Process HeatLine F = Option #3; 20,000 kW of Process HeatZ -io—15 I I I20 40 60 Thousds 100 120 140Wood Waste Available (ODT/yr)Figure 31: Comparison of the Net Present Value for the BaseCase Results for Options #1, #2, #320—2 -Payback Period4 Approximately 18 yea—12 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011121314151617181920YearsFigure 32: Option #1 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing80,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring10,000 kW of Process Heat120105>07 Payback Period— Approximately 7 yearsC)-10—15 I I I I I I I I I0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20YearsFigure 33: Option #1 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing80,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring20,000 kW of Process Heat121—11—12—13 -CN —14 -15- Project does notz reach a Positive—16 - Cashflow- -18--19-—20 -—2[ I I I I I I I I0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20YearsFigure 34: Option 42 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing80,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring10,000 kW of Process Heat122•lzI.. —10 -Project does notz reach a Positive—is - CashflowC)C..) —20 -I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20YearsFigure 35: Option #2 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing80,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring20,000 kW of Process Heat12310,—. —1 -C —2 -3- Payback PeriodApproximately 15.5 Years_9 I .1 I I I I I I I I I I I I0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20YearsFigure 36: Option #3 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing80,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring10,000 kW of Process Heat1245Payback PeriodApproximately 12 YearsEC.)C)-15-—20 I I I I I I I I I I0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20YearsFigure 37: Option #3 Payback Period for a Sawmill Producing80,000 ODT/yr of Wood Waste and Requiring20,000 kW of Process Heat125ReferencesBammert, K. “Twenty-Five Years of Operating Experience withthe Coal Fired Closed-Cycle Gas Turbine Cogeneration Plant atCoburg”. 28th International Gas Turbine Conference and Exhibit.Phoenix, Arizona, 1983.British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority, ResourceManagement and System Planning. The Cost of New Electricity Supplyin British Columbia. January 1993.British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority. Electric Tariff.Effective April 1, 1991.British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority. Cogeneration inBritish Columbia. November 1990.Butler, C.H. Copeneration. New York: McGraw Hill, 1984.Canadian Resourcecon Ltd. 1993. Preliminary Report,Electricity Generation From B.C. Wood Residues, Issues andOpportunities.Canadian Resourcecon Ltd. 1986. A Woodwaste—fuelled.Indirectly-Fired Gas Turbine Cocreneration Plant For SawmillApplications. Phase I: Preliminary Engineering Design andFinancial Evaluation. Report of Contract Fil No. 51SZ 23216-6-6120. Renewable Energy Branch; Energy Mines and Resources Canada.Canadian Resourcecon Ltd. 1988. A Woodwaste-fuelled,Indirectly-Fired Gas Turbine Coaeneration Plant For SawmillApplications. Phase II: Site Specific Preliminary Engineering andFinancial Evaluation. Report of Contract File No. 51SZ 23283-7-6038. Renewable Energy Branch; Energy Mines and Resources Canada.Canadian Resourcecon Ltd. 1990. A Woodwaste—fuelled.Indirectly-Fired Gas Turbine Cocreneration Plant For SawmillApplications. Phase III: Preliminary Engineering and FinancialAnalysis of Alternative Configurations. Report of Contract FileNo. 57SZ- 23283-8-6058. Renewable Energy Branch; Energy Mines andResources Canada.Consonni, S., Lozza, G., and Macchi, E. “Optimization ofCogeneration Systems Operation, Part A: Prime Movers Modelization”.ASME Copen—Turbo 3rd International Svmosium, Nice France. 1989.pp. 313—322.Chvatal, Vasek. Linear Proaramming. New York: W.H. Freemanand Company, 1983.Dobie, J., Nielson, R.W., and Wright, D.M. Conversion Factorsfor the Forest Products Industry in Western Canada. SpecialPublication No. SP—24R. Forintek Canada Corp.126Editors of Means Building Construction Cost Data 1991. 4thAnnual Western Edition. Kingston, MA. R.S. Means Company Inc.,1990.Ehiuke, H.J. “Size Optimization For Cogeneration Plants”.Energy. Vol. 15, No. 1, (1990), PP. 35—44.Fowler, Ramsey H. The Little, Brown Handbook. 2nd edition.Ed. Little and Brown. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1983.Grace, J.R. and Lim, C.J. “Circulating Fluidized BedCombustion of Coal, Woodwastes and Pitch”. Department of ChemicalEngineering and Pulp and Paper Centre. University of BritishColumbia. Vancouver, B.C. December, 1987.Gudinundson, K. Production Coordinator, International ForestProducts Ltd., MacDonald Cedar Division. Personal Interview. July26, 1993.Guinn, G.R. Assessing the Feasibility of Cost-EffectiveIndustrial Cocreneration. Alabama Cogeneration Manual.Gustafsson, 5.1. and Karisson, B.G. “Linear ProgrammingOptimization in CHP Networks”. Heat Recovery Systems & CHP.Vol. II, No.4, (1991), pp. 231—238.H.A. Simons Ltd., Consulting Engineers. “Preliminary Study ofPower Generation Options for International Forest Products Ltd.”July 1992.Holman, J.P. Heat Transfer. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-HillBook Company, 1986.Hu, David. Coçreneration. Reston Publishing Co., 1985.Israel, Robert. Linear Programming and Network FlowProgramming User’s Manual. Vancouver: University of BritishColumbia, 1992.Kuan, Dennet. Chips and Residues Manager. InternationalForest Products Ltd., Fraser Mills Division. Personal Interview.August 6, 1993.Lipsey, Purvis, Sparks, and Steiner. Economics. 4th edition.New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1982.Mueller, Kurt. Project Estimator, Kilborn Engineering PacificLtd. Personal Interview. October 22, 1993.Payne, F.W. The Cocreneration Sourcebook. 1985.Pourkariiui, Bijan. B.C. Gas Sales. Telephone Interview.127November 8, 1993.Sonntag, Richard E., and Van Wylen Gordon J. Fundamentals ofClassical Thermodynamics. 3rd Edition SI. New York: Wiley, 1985.Sugden, Robert, and Williams, Alan. The principles ofpractical cost—benefit analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1978.Turek, D.G. , et. al. “Cogeneration With A Fluidized Bed AirHeater”. ASME. 1991, pp. 1057—1065.Province of. British Columbia Ministry of Forests. TowardsImproved Utilization of Forest Industry Mill Residues in BritishColumbia. File No. 200—01, 1991.128Appendix A:Process Flow Values forOptions #1, #2, #3129OhOPTION #1: METALLIC HEAT EXCHANGERFLOW TEMP PRESSUREdegC kPa#1 20.0#2 20.0#3 1,094.1 103.1#7 20.0 101.3#15 200 171.2Cp3 and CplS = 1.21 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A -hA#4i 863.6 102.6Si 315.0 101.35i 315.0 103.8#8i 0.0 0.0#9i 20.0 101.3#lOi 378.1 942.1#hhi 650.0 872.2#12i 20.0 872.2#13i 910.0 872.2#14i 469.4 101.3#16i 625.1 101.3#17i 551.4 101.3Cp4i and CpSi = 1.17 1.05CplOi and Cplhi = 1.06 1.13Cpl6i = 1.12POWER GENERATEDFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYENTHALPY ENTROPYkJ/kg kJ/kgK= 20= 101.3= 50= 26,147= 50= 50= 6509.19.19.10.08.28.28.20.18.38.39.111.4MOISTURE%H2050.050.010.20.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Ambient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Max compressed air temperature via HX (C)PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSEXERGY MASSkJ/kg kg/sec1.81.8698.8 9.10.0 8:244.1 9.11,476.0293.2293.21,203.6594.5594.50.0293.2661.1958.81,257.9759.1930.8848.94.12.. 52.33.93.23.20.02.52.73.13.43.43.73.6489.992.994.90.0•0.0315.4495.1710.5184.8294.9242:3GAS HEAT (kW)RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)(kW) andENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUEKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (IcW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS1,2355,783= 1,114=12,345= 3,859= 9,642= 0= 2,839=0.322=70.8=54.7131Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23#4ii 899.4 102.6 1,245.4 4.0 521.1 9.1 10.2#5ii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 9.1 10.2#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 9.1 10.2#Bii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 9.3 0.0#lOii 449.0 1,134.6 737.0 2.7 374.8 9.3 0.0#llii 650.0 1,064.7 958.8 3.0 495.1 9.3 0.0#l2ii 20.0 1,064.7 0.1 0.0#l3ii 1,140.0 1,064.7 1,531.0 3.5 938.6 9.4 0.0#l4ii 586.4 101.3 887.7 3.6 266.2 9.4 0.0#l6ii 666.6 101.3 977.5 3.7 326.7 9.1 0.0#l7ii 626.0 101.3 931.8 3.7 296.0 18.5 0.0Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.17 1.05CplOii and Cpllii = 1.08 1.13Cpl6ii = 1.13POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 1,915 2,043ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =12,345TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) = 5,584 6,206KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =11,790ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) = 6,071HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.312FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =74.4SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =60.9Turbine No.3:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23#4iii 712.5 102.6 1,029.6 3.8 364.1 9.1 10.2#Siii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 9.1 10.2#6iii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 9.1 10.2#8iii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 18.6 0.0#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.8 370.3 18.6 0.0#lliii 650.0 1,054.5 958.8 3.0 504.7 18.6 0.0#i2iii 20.0 1,054.5 0.2 0.0#l3iii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 921.9 18.8 0.0#l4iii 581.9 101.3 8827 3.6 256.5 18.8 0.0#l6iii 452.9 101.3 741.3 3.4 174.1 9.1 0.0#l7iii 540.3 101.3. 836.6 3.6 229.7 27.9 0.0Cp4iii and Cp5iii = 1.14 1.05Cpi0iii and Cplliii = 1.08 1.13Cpl6iii = 1.08POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kw) = 3,615 3,981ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =12,345TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =11,074 4,064KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =15,138ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =11,891HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0. 595FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYV =77.4SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =65.7132OPTION #1: METALLIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill.annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Max compressed air temperature via lix (C)PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS= 20= 101.3= 50= 26,147= 50= 50= 650FLOW TEMPdeg C20.020.01,094.120.020.0and Cp15 = 1.21Turbine. No.1:Manufacturer :.KawasakiModel No.:712.5315.0315.00.020.0453.2650.020.01,130.0581.9452.9540.31,476.0293.2293.2EXERGY MASSki/kg kg/sec1.81.89.18.29.19.19.19.10.018.618.618.60.218.818.89.127.9= 3,615=12, 345=11,074=15, 138= 0=11,891=0. 595=77.4=66.2MOISTURE%H2050.050.010.20.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0#1#2#3#7#15Cp3PRESSURE ENTEALPY ENTROPYkPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK103.1101.3171.21.014.1 698.82.5 0.02.3 44.1364.192.994.90.00.0376.7511.0928.2262.9174.1234.0Unit of the MiT - 23#4i 102.6 1,029.6 3.8U 101.3 594.5 3.2.f3i 103.8 594.5 3.2#8i 0.0 0.0 0.0#9i 101.3 293.2 2.5#lOi 1,124.4 741.5 2.7#lli 1,054.5 958.8 3.0#12i 1,054.5#13i 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5#14i 101.3 882.7 3.6#16i 101.3 741.3 3.4#17i 101.3 836.6 3.5Cp4i and Cp5i = 1.14 1.05CplOi and Cplli = 1.08 1.13Cpl6i = 1.08POWER GENERATED (kW) and RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY3,9814,064133251.192.994.90.00.0376.7511.0928.2262.978.8227.1Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of the MiT - 23#4ii 564.2 102.6 863.0#5ii 315.0 101.3 594.5#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5#8ii 0.0 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2#lOii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5#llii 589.9 1,054.5 891.5#lZii 20.0 1,054.5#l3ii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0#l4ii 581.9 101.3 882.7#l6ii 287.3 101.3 565.5#l7ii 526.1 101.3 821.0Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.11 1.05CplOii and Cpllii = 1.08 1.13Cpi6ii = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESSKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer : Kawasaki3.63.23.20.02.52.72.93.53.63.23.5POWER (kW)FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)10.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.09.19.19.10.037.237.237.20.537.637.69.146.6= 7,230 7,962=12, 345=22,148 2,470=24,618.= •0=26,565=0. 827=81.9=78.19.19.19.10.055.855.855.80.856.456.49.165.4=10, 84511, 943=12, 345=33,222 2,470=35, 692= 0=42,977=0. 827=84.1=77.2Model No.: 3#4iii 564.2#Siii 315.0#6iii 315.0#8iii 0.0#9iii 20.0#l0iii 453.2#lliii 544.3#l2iii 20.0#l3iii 1,130.0#l4iii 581.9#l6iii 287.3#l7iii 542.2Cp4iii and Cp5iii =Cpl0iii and CpiliiiCpl6iii = 1.04POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASEDTURBINE EXHAUSTUnits of the102.6101.3103.80.0101.31,124.41,054.51,054.51,054.5101.3101.3101.31.11 1.05= 1.08 1.13MiT - 23863.0594.5594.50.0293.2741.5841.0,519.0882.7565.5838.7251.192.994.9•0.00.0370.3426.6921.9256.578.8231.93.63.23.20.02.52.82.93.53.63.23.6POWER (kW)(kW) AND RATED OUTPUTIN COMBUSTOR (kW)HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY134OPTION #1: METALLIC HEAT EXCHANGERTEMPdeg C20.020.01,094.120.020.0and Cp15 = 1.21Turbine No.1:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: M1A -hA#4i 1,017.3 102.65i 315.0 101.3315.0 103.8#8i 0.0 0.0#9i 20.0 101.3#lOi 378.1 942.1#lli 650.0 872.2#12i 20.0 872.2#13i 910.0 812.2#14i 469.4 101.3#16i 804.4 101.3#17i 728.1 101.3Cp4i and Cp5i = 1.20 1.05CplOi and Cplli = 1.06 1.13Cpl6i = 1.16POWER GENERATEDAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Max compressed air temperature via HX (C)PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS(kW) andENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYMOISTURE%H2050.050.010.20.00.0= 1,114 1,235=37, 033= 3,85922,902=26,761= 0= 2,839=0.107=69..9=53.8= 20= 101.3=150= 78,440= 50= 50= 650FLOW#1#2#3#7#15Cp3PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MASSkPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec5.55.5103.1 1,476.0 4.1 698.8 27.2101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 24.6171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1 27.21.011,384.4594.5594.50.0293.2661.1958.81,257.9759.11,135.01,047.3RATED OUTPUT627.. 092.994.90.00.0315.4495.1710.5184.8438.5379.34.13.23.20.02.52.73.13.43.43.93.8POWER (kW)27.227.227.20.08.28.28.20.18.38.327.235.510.210.210.20.00.00.0.0.00.00.00.00.00.0135#4ii 1,029.2#Sii 315.0#6ii 315.0#8ii 0.0#9ii 20.0#lOii 449.0#llii 650.0#l2ii 20.0#l3ii 1,140.0#l4ii 586.4#l6ii 818.5#l7ii 759.8Cp4ii and Cp5ii =CplOii and CplliiCpl6ii = 1.16#4iii 966.9#5iii 315.0#6iii 315.0#8iii 0.0#9iii 20.0#l0iii 453.2#lliii 650.0#l2iii 20.0#l3iii 1,130.0#l4iii 581.9#l6iii 7452#l7iii 679.2Cp4iii and Cp5iii =Cpl0iii and CplliiiCpl6iii = 1.15POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASED102.6101.3103.80.0101.31,134.61,064.71,064.71,064.7101.3101.3• 101.31.20 1.05= 1.08 1.13102.6101.3103.80.0101.31,124.41,054.51,054.51,054.5101.3101.3101.31.19 1.05= 1.08 1.13(kW) AND RATED OUTPUTIN COMBUSTOR (kW)EXCESS= 1,915 2,043=37, 0335,58423,345=28, 929= 06,071=0.312=71.6=56.6= 3,615 3,981=37,033=11,07421,051=32, 125= 0=11, 891=0.198=73.1=59.1Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 231,398.6594.5594.50.0293.2737.0958.81,531.0887.71,151.31,083.64.13.23.20.02.. 52.73.03.53.63.93.8637.992994.90.00.0374.8495.1938.6266.2450.3403.127.227.227.20.09.39.39.30.19.49.427.236.6POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 2310.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.01,324.8594.5594.50.0293.2741.5958.81,519.0882.71,066.9991.7581.292.994•90.00.0•370.3504.7921.9256.5389.4335.24.03.23.20.02.52.83.03.53.63.83.7POWER (kW)27.227.227.20.018.618.618.60.218.818.827.246.0TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) ANDKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYFLUE GAS HEAT (kW)2.36OPTION #1: METALLIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C) = 20Atmospheric Pressure (kPa) = 101.3PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm) =150Annual wood waste production (ODT) = 78,440Initial wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Target wood waste moisture Content (%) = 50Max compressed air temperature via MX (C) = 650PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS103.1101.3171.21.01FLOW TEMP PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MASSdeg C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec#1 20.0 5.5#2 20.0 5.5#3 1,094.1 4.1 698.8 27.2#7 20.0 2.5 0.0 24.6#15 20.0 2.3 44.1 27.2Cp3 and CplS = 1.21Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: Kawasaki1,476.0293.2293.2Model No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 231,324.8594.5594.50.0293.2741.5958.8MOISTURE%H2050.050.010.20.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0581.292.994.90.00.0376.7511.0928.2262.9389.4337.727.227.227.20.018.618.618.60;218.818.827.246.0#4i 966.9 102.6 4.05i 315.0 101.3 3.2..i 315.0 103.8 3.2#8i 0.0 0.0 0.0#9i 20.0 101.3 2.5#lOi 453.2 1,124.4 2.7#lli 650.0 1,054.5 3.0#12i 20.0 1,054.5#13i 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5#14i 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6#l6i 745.2 101.3 1,066.9 3.8#17i 679.2 101.3 991.7 3.7Cp4i and Cp5i = 1.19 1.05Cpl0i and Cpili = 1.08 1.13Cpl6i = 1.15POWER GENERATED (kW) and RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 3,615 3,981ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (.kW) =37033TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) PND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =11,07421,051KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =32,125ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =11,891HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.198FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =73.1SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =59.3137Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: 3#4iii 712.5#5iii 315.0#6iii 315.0#Biii 0.0#9iii 20.0#l0iii 453.2#lliii 650.0#l2iii 20.0#l3iii 1,130.0#l4iii 581.9#l6iii 452.9#l7iii 540.3Cp4iii and Cp5iii =Cpl0iii and CplliiiCpl6iii = 1.08POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASEDTURBINE EXHAUSTUnits of102.6101.3103.80.0101.31,124.41,054.51,054.51,054.5101.3101.3101.31.14 1.05= 1.08 1.1327.227.227.20.055.855.855.80.656.456.427.283.6=10,84511,943=37,033=33,22212,191=45, 413= 0=35, 674=0. 595=77.:4=65.810.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Turbine No.2:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of the MiT - 234t4ii 839.7 102.6 1,175.9 3.9 469.4 27.2 10.2#5ii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 27.2 10.2#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 27.2 10.2#8ii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 37.2 0.0#lOii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 37.2 0.0#llii 650.0 1,054.5 958.8 3.0 511.0 37.2 0.0#l2ii 20.0 1,054.5 0.4 0.0#l3ii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 37.6 0.0#l4ii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 37.6 0.0#l6ii 597.6 101.3 900.1 3.6 274.5 27.2 0.0#l7ii 588.5 101.3 890.0 3.6 267.8 64.8 0.0Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.16 1.05CplOii and Cpllii = 1.08 1.13Cpl6ii = 1.11POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 7,230 7,962ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =37,033TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =22,14816,512KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =38,660ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =23,782HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.397FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =75.5SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =63.2Turbine No.3:the MiT - 231,029.6594.5594.50.0293.2741.5958.81,519.0882.7741.3836.63.83.23.20.02.52.83.03.53.63.43.6364.192.994.90.00.0370.3504.7921.9256.5174.1229.7(kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)IN COMBUSTOR (kW)HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY138OPTION #1: METALLIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C) = 20Atmospheric Pressure (kPa) = 101.3PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm) =250Annual wood waste production (ODT) =130,734Initial wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Target wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Max compressed air temperature via LIX (C) = 650PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS1,476.0293.2293.21,421.0594.5594.50.0293.2661.1958.81,257.9759.11,177.11,112.5FLOW TEMP PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MASS MOISTUREdeg C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H2O#1 20.0 9.2 50.0#2 20.0 9.2 :50.0#3 1,094.1 103.1 45.3 . 10.2ff7 20.0 101.3 40.9 0.0#15 20.0 171.2 45.3 0.0Cp3 and CplS = 1.21 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A -hA#4i l048.0 102.6 10.25i 315.0 101.3 10.2..6i 315.0 103.8 10.2#81 0.0 0.0 0.0#91 20.0 101.3 0.0#lOi 378.1 942.1 0.0#lli 650.0 872.2 0.0#12i 20.0 872.2 0.0#13i 910.0 872.2 0.0#14i 469.4 101.3 0.0#16i 840.8 101.3 0.0#17i 784.9 101.3 0.0Cp4i and CpSi = 1.20 1.05CplOi and Cplhi = 1.06 1.13Cpl6i = 1.16POWER GENERATED4.12.52.34.13.23.20.02.52.73.13.43.43.93.8698.80.044.1655 • 492.994.90.00.0315.4495.1710.5184.846943425.345.3-45.345.30.0•8.28.28.20.18.38.345.353.6(kW) and RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = .1,114 1,235ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =61,723TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =‘3,85940,079KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =43,938ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) = 2,839HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS 0.064FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY. 69.8SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =538139Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23#4ii 1,055.2 102.6 1,429.5 4.1 662.0 45.3 10.2#5ii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 45.3 10.2#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 45.3 10.2#8ii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 9.3 0.0#lOii 449.0 1,134.6 737.0 2.7 374.8 9.3 0.0#llii 650.0 1,064.7 958.8 3.0 495.1 9.3 0.0#l2ii 20.0 1,064.7 0.1 0.0#l3ii 1,140.0 1,064.7 1,531.0 3.5 938.6 9.4 0.0#l4ii 586.4 101.3 887.7 3.6 266.2 9.4 0.0#l6ii 849.2 101.3 1,186.9 3.9 476.6 45.3 0.0#l7ii 804.9 101.3 1,135.6 3.9 440.5 54.7 0.0Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.20 1.05CplOii and Cpllii = 1.08 1.13Cpl6ii = 1.16POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 1,915 2,043ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =61,723TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) = 5,58440,527KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =46,111ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) = 6,071HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.312FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =70.8SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =55.6Turbine No.3:. Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23#4iii 1,017.8 102.6 1,385.1 4.1 627.5 453 10.2#5iii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 45.3 10.2#6iii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 45.3 10.2#8iii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 18.6 0.0#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.8 370.3 18.6 0.0#lliii 650.0 1,054.5 958.8 3.0 504.7 18.6 0.0#l2iii 20.0 1,054.5 0.2 0.0#l3iii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 921.9 18.8 0.0#l4iii 581.9 101.3. 882.7 3.6 256.5 18.8 0.0#l6iii 805.0 101.3 1,135.7 3.9 439.0 45.3 0.0#i7iii 740.6 101.3 1,061.6 3.8 385.5 641 0.0Cp4iii and Cp5iii = 1.20 1.05Cpl0iii and Cplliii = 1.08 1.13Cpi6iii = 1.16POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT .(kW)HEAT (kW) ANDKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GASHEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY(kW)=3,615 3,981=61,723=11, 07438, 204=49, 278= 0=11, 891=0.119=71.9=57.2140OPTION #1: METALLIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Max compressed air temperature via lix (C)= 20= 101.3=250=130,734= 50= 50= 650PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSFLOW TEMP PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MASS MOISTUREdeg C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H2O#1 20.0 9.2 50.0#2 20.0 9.2 50.0#3 1,094.1 103.1 1,476.0 4.1 698.8 45.3 10.2#7 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 40.9 0.0#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1 45.3 0.0Cp3 and Cp15 = 1.21 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 23#4i 1,017.8 102.6 1,385.1 4.1 627.5 45.3 10.2‘5i 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 45.3 10.2Ai 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 45.3 10.2#8i 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 18.6 0.0#lOi 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 18.6 0.0#lli 650.0 1,054.5 958.8 3.0 511.0 18.6 0.0#121 20.0 1,054.5 0.2 0.0#13i 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 18.8 0.0#14i 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 18.8 0.0#16i 805.0 101.3 1,135.7 3.9 439.0 45.3 0.0#17i 740.6 101.3 1,061.6 3.8 387.4 64.1 0.0Cp4i and Cp5i = 1.20 1.05CplOi and Cpili = 1.08 1.13Cpl6i = 1.16POWER GENERATED (kW) and RATED OUTPUT = 3,615 3,981ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =61,723TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =11,07438,204KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =49,278ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =11,891HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS 0l19POWER (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY• =71.9=57.4141Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of the MiT - 23#4ii 941.5 102.6 1,294.9 4.0 558.4 45.3 10.2#5ii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 45.3 10.2#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 45.3#8ii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 37.2 0.0#lOii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 37.2 0.0#llii 650.0 1,054.5 958.8 3.0 511.0 37.2 0.0#l2ii 20.0 1,054.5 0.4 0.0#l3ii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 37.6 0.0#l4ii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 37.6 0.0#l6ii 715.5 101.3 1,033.0 3.8 365.4 45.3 0.0#l7ii 655.4 101.3 964.9 3.7 318.9 82.9 0.0Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.18 1.05CplOii and Cpliii = 1.08 1.13Cpl6ii = 1.14POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 7,230 7,962ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =61,723TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS- HEAT (kW) =22,14833,545KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =55,693ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =23,782HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.307FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =73.6SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =60.2Turbine No.3:Manufacturer Kawasaki-Model No.: 3 Units of the MiT - 23 -#4iii 865.2 .102.6 1,205.5 3.9 491.3 45.3 10.2#5iii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 45.3 10.2#6iii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 45.3 10.2#8iii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2- 2.5 0.0 55.8 0.0#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.8 370.3 55.8 0.0#lliii 650.0 1,054.5 958.8 3.0 504.7 55.8 0.0#i2iii 20.0 1,054.5 - 0.6 0.0ltl3iii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 921.9 56.4 0.0#l4iii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 256.5 56.4 0.0#l6iii 627.0 101.3 932.9 3.7 296.3 45.3 0.0#l7iii 602.0 101.3 905.1 3.6 274.3 101.7 0.0Cp4iii and Cp5iii = 1.17 1.05Cpl0iii and Cpiiiii = 1.08 1.13Cpl6iii = 1.12POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) =10,84511,943ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =61,723TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =33,22229,007KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =62,230ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =35,674HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.357FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =75.0SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =62.1142OPTION #2: CERAMIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C) = 20Atmospheric Pressure (kPa) = 101.3PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT) = 26,147Initial wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Target wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Maximum Heat Exchanger Pressure (kPa) = 1200= 50PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSFLOW TEMP PRESS. ENTH. ENTR. EXER. MASS MOISTURE# C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK k.J/kg kg/sec %H2O#1 20.0 1.8 50.0#2 20.0 1.8 50.0#3 1,094.1 103.1 1,476.0 4.1 698.8 9.1 10.2#7 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 8.2 0.0#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1 9.1 0.0Cp3 and Cp15 = 1.21 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A -hA-‘#4i 620.1 102.6 925.3 3.6 292.3 9.1 10.25i 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 9.1 10.2J5i 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 9.1 10.2#8i 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 8.2 0.0#lOi 378.1 942.1 661.1 2.7 315.4 8.2 0.0#lhi 910.0 872.2 1,257.9 3.4 710.5 8.2 0.0#12i 20.0 872.2 0.0 0.0#13i 910.0 872.2 1,257.9 3.4 710.5 8.3 0.0#14i 469.4 101.3 759.1 3.4 184.8 8.3 0.0#16i 349.4 101.3 630.6’ 3.3 111.6 9.1 0.0#17i 407.1 101.3 692.0 3.4 146.5 17.4 0.0Cp4i and Cp5i = 1.12 1.05CplOi and Cplli = 1.06 1.18Cpl6i = 1.06POWER GENERATED (KW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 1,114 1,235ENERGY RELEASED INCOMBUSTOR (kW) =12,345TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =3,859 3,060KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) = 6,920ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) = 0HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS 0.743FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY ‘ =65.1SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =45.1143#4 ii#5 ii#6 ii#8 ii#9 ii#10 ii#llii#12 ii#l3ii#l4ii#l6ii#l7iiTurbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23560.0 102.6 858.4 3.6 248.1315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.020.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 -449.0 1,134.6 737.0 2.7 374.8974.0 1,064.7 1,333.2 3.4 784.420.0 1,064.71,140.0 1,064.7 1,531.0 3.5 938.6586.4 101.3 887.7 3.6 266.2282.7 101.3 560.7 3.1 76.5439.8 101.3 727.1 3.4 173.0Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.11 1.05CplOii. and Cpllii = 1.08 1.22Cpl6ii = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23#4iii 564.2 863.0 3.6 251.1#5iii 315.0 594.5 3.2 92.9#6iii 315.0 594.5 3.2 94.9#8iii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9iii 20.0 293.2 2.5 0.0#lOiii 453.2 741.5 2.7 376.7#lliii 713.8 1,031.0 3.1 561.0#l2iii 20.09.19.19.10.09.39.39.30.09.49.49.118.5= 1,915=12,345= 5,584= 8,011= 0= 2,203=0. 828=68.2=53.39.19.19.10.018.618.618.60.218.818.8.9.127.910.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0•0.0102.6101.3103.80.0101.31,124.41,054.51,054.51,054.5 1,519.0101.3 882.7101.3 565.5101.3 779.41.11 1.05= 1.08 1.212,0432,4263,9812,470#l3iii 1,130.0#l4iii 581.9#l6iii .287.3#l7iii 488.1Cp4iii.and Cp5iii =Cpl0iii and CplliiiCpl6iii = 1.04POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASED3.53.63.23.5928.2262.978.8203.0POWER .(kW)(kW) AND RATED OUTPUTIN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEATKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY= 3,615=12,345(kW) =11,074=13, 544= 0=10, 399=0. 827=75.4=64.1144OPTION #2: CERANIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C) 20Atmospheric Pressure (kPa) = 101.3PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT) = 26,147Initial wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Target wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Maximum Heat Exchanger Pressure (kPa) = 1200= 50TEMPCEXER.kJ/kgFLOW#1#2#3#7#15Cp3#4 i#8i#9i#lOi#lli#12i#13 i#14i#16i#17iPROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSPRESS. ENTH. ENTR.kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK20.020.01,094.1 103.1 1,476.0 4.1 698.820.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.020.0 171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1and Cp15 = 1.21 1.01VTurbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 23564.2 102.6 863.0 3.6 251.1315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.020.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0.453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7713.8 1,054.5 1,031.0 3.1 561.020.0 1,054.51,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9287.3 101.3 565.5. 3.2 78.8488.1 101.3 779.4 35 203.0MOISTURE%H2050.050.010.20.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.03,9812,470MASSkg/sec1.81.89.18.29.19.19.19.10..018.618.618.60.218818.89.127.9= 3,61512j345=11,074=13,544= 0=10, 399:..0827V=75.4=64.1Cp4i and Cp5i = 1.11 1.05CplOi and Cplli = 1.08 1.21Cpl6i = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESSKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCY VSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYPOWER (kW)FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)145Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of the MiT - 23#4ii 564.2 102.6 863.0 3.6 251.1 9.1 10.2#5ii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 9.1 10.2#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 9.1 10.2#Bii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0- 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 37.2 0.0#lOii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 37.2 0.0#llii 583.5 1,054.5 884.4 2.9 461.0 37.2 0.0#l2ii 20.0 1,054.5 0.5 0.0#l3ii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 37.6 0.0#l4ii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 37.6 0.0#l6ii 287.3 101.3 565.5 3.2 78.8 9.1 0.0#l7ii 526.1 101.3 821.0 3.5 227.1 46.6 0.0Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.11 1.05CplOii and Cpliii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6ii = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 7,230 7,962ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =12,345TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =22,148 2,470KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =24,618ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =26,859HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.827FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =81.2SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =73.6Turbine No.3:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: 3 Units of the MiT - 23#4iii 564.2 102.6 863.0 3.6 251.1 9.1 10.2#5iii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 9.1 10.2#6iii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 9.1 10.2#8iii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 55.8 0.0#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 55.8 0.0#lliii 540.0 1,054.5 836.3 2.9 429.9 55.8 0.0#i2iii 20.0 1,054.5 0.8 0.0#l3iii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 56.4 0.0#i4iii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 56.4 0.0#l6iii 287.3 101.3 565.5 3.2 78.8 9.1 0.0#l7iii 542.2 101.3 838.7 3.5 237.4 65.4 0.0Cp4iii and Cp5iii = 1.11 1.05Cpl0iii and Cplliii = 1.08 1.21Cpi6iii = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) =10,84511,943ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =12,345TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =33,222 2,470KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =35,692ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =43,268HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.827FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =83.7SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =77.7146OPTION #2: CERAMIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C) = 20Atmospheric Pressure (kPa) = 101.3PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT) = 52,294Initial wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Target wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Maximum Heat Exchanger Pressure (kPa) = 1200= 100PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSFLOW TEMP PRESS. ENTH. ENTR. EXER. MASS MOISTURE# C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H20#1 20.0 3.7 50.0#2 20.0 3.7 500#3 1,094.1 103.1 1,476.0 4.1 698.8 18.1 10.2#7 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 16.4 0.0#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1 18.1 0.0Cp3 and Cp15 = 1.21 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: M1A -hA#4i 857.1 102.6 1,196.1 3.9 484.4 18.1 10.2i 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 18.1 10.2...i 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 18.1 10.2#8i 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 8.2 0.0#lOi 378.1 942.1 661.1 2.7 315.4 8.2 0.0#lli 910.0 872.2 1,257.9 3.4 710.5 8.2 0.0#12i 20.0 872.2 0.0 0.0#13i 910.0 872.2 1,257.9 3.4 710.5 8.3 0.0#14i 469.4 101.3 759.1 3.4 184.8 8.3 0.0#16i 617.7 101.3 922.5 3.6 289.4 18.1 0.0#17i 571.7 101.3 871.3 3.6 256.6 26.4 0.0Cp4i and CpSi = 1.17 1.05CplOi and Cphli = 1.06 1.18Cpl6i 1.12POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 1,114 1,235ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =24,689TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) = 3,85911,415KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =15,274ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) = 0HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.743FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =66.4SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =47.61471,059.4594.5594.50.0293.2737.01,531.03.8 385.13.2 92.93.2 94.90.0 0.0’2.5 0.02.7 374.83.5 938.6Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23#4ii 738.7 102.6#5ii 315.0 101.3#6ii 315.0 103.8#8ii 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3#lOii 449.0 1,134.6#llii 1,140.0 1,064.7#l2ii 20.0 1,064.7#l3ii 1,140.0 1,064.7 1,531.0 3.5 938.6#l4ii 586.4 101.3 887.7 3.6 266.2#l6ii 482.4 101.3 773.2 3.5 193.3#l7ii 518.1 101.3 812.3 3.5 218.2Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.14 1.05CplOii and Cpllii = 1.08 1.22Cpl6ii = 1.09POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:18.118.118.10.09.3.9.39.30.09.49.418.127.5= 1,915=24, 689= 5,584=14,291= 0= 0=1. 071=65.6=47.818.118.118.10.018.618.618.60.118.818.818.136.910.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.02,0438,70610.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0.0.03,981.4,940Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23#4iii 564.2 102.6#5iii 315.0 101.3#6iii 315.0 103.8#8iii 0.0 0.0#9iii 20.0 101.3#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4#lliii 974.5 1,054.5#l2iii 20.0 1,054.5#l3iii 1,130.0 1,054.5#l4iii 581.9 101.3#l6iii 287.3 101.3#l7iii 439.6 101.3Cp4iii and Cp5iii = 1.11 1.05Cpl0iii and Cplliii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6iii = 1.04POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASED863.0594.5594.50.0293.2741.51,333.71,519.0882.7565.5726.. 9251.192.994.90.00.0376.7784.0928.2262.978.8172.53.63.23.20.02.52.73.43.53.63.23.4POWER (kW)(kW) AND RATED OUTPUT.IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEATKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY= 3,615=24,689(kW) =11,074=16, 014= 0= 4,143=0.827=68.1=52.7148OPTION #2: CERAMIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Heat Exchanger Pressure (kPa)= 20= 101.3=100= 52,294= 50= 50= 1200TEMPCEXER.kJ/kgFLOW#1#2#3#7#15Cp3#4 i#8i#9i#10 i#lli#12i#13 i#14 i#16 i#17iPROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSPRESS. ENTH. ENTR.kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK20.020.01,094.1 103.1 1,476.0 4.1 698.820.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.020.0 171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1and Cp15 = 1.21 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 23564.2 102.6 863.0 3.6 251.1315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.020.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7974.5 1,054.5 1,333.7 3.4 784.020.0 1,054.51,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9287.3 101.3 565.5 3.2 78.8439.6 101.3 726.9 3.4 172.5MOISTURE%H2O50.050.010.20.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.03,9814,940MASSkg/sec3.73.718.116.418.118.118.1•18.10.018.618.618.60.118.818.818.136.9= 3,615=24, 689=11,074=16, 014= 0= 4,143=0.827=68.1=527Cp4i and Cp5i = 1.11 1.05CplOi and Cpili = 1.08 1.21Cpi6i = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESSKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYPOWER (kW)FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)149Turbine No.2:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of the MiT — 23#4ii 564.2 102.6 863.0 3.6 251.1 18.1 10.2#5ii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 18.1 10.2#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 18.1 10.2#Bii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 .37.2 0.0#lOii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 37.2 0.0#ilii 713.8 1,054.5 1,031.0 3.1 561.0 37.2 0.0#l2ii 20.0 1,054.5 0.4 0.0#l3ii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 37.6 0.0#l4ii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 37.6 0.0#l6ii 287.3 101.3 565.5 3.2 78.8 18.1 0.0#l7ii 488.1 101.3 779.4 3.5 203.0 55.7 0.0Cp4ii and Cpsii = 1.11 1.05CpiOii and Cpilii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6ii = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kWj = 7,230 7,962ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =24,689TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =22,148 4,940KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =27,088ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =20,797HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.827FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =75.4SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =64.2Turbine No.3:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 3 Units of the MiT - 23#4iii 564.2 102.6 863.0 3.6.’ 251.1 18.1 10.2#Siii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 18.1 10.2#6iii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 18.1 10.2#8iii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 55.8 0.0#loiii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 55.8 0.0#lliii 626.9 1,054.5 932.9 3.0 493.3 55.8 0.0#i2iii 20.0 1,054.5 0.7 0.0#l3iii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 56.4 0.0#l4iii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 56.4 0.0#l6iii 287.3 101.3 565.5 3.2 78.8 18.1 0.0#l7iii 511.9 101.3 805.4 3.5 218.1 74.5 0.0Cp4iii and Cp5iii = 1.11 1.05Cpl0iii and Cplliii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6iii = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT. POWER (kW) =10,84511,943ENERGY REL-EASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) . =24,689TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS{EAT (kW) =33,222 4,940KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =38,162ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =37,284HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.827FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY. =79.1SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY .‘ =70.1150OPTION #2: CERAMIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Heat Exchanger Pressure (kPa)FLOW TEMP PRESS.# C kPa#1 20.0#2 20.0#3 1,094.1 103.1#7 20.0 101.3#15 20.0 171.2Cp3 and Cp15 = 1.21 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A -hA#4i 936.1 102.6315.0 101.3315.0 103.8#8i 0.0 0.0#9i 20.0 101.3#lOi 378.1 942.1#lli 910.0 872.2#12i 20.0 872.2#13i 910.0 872.2#14i 469.4 101.3#16i 709.3 101.3#17i 654.3 101.3Cp4i and CpSi = 1.18 1.05CplOi and Cplli = 1.06 1.18Cpl6i = 1.14POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASEDPROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSTURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) ANDKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY= 20= 101.3=150= 78,440= 50= 50= 1200553.692.994.90.00.0315.4710.5710.5184.8360.4319.4MASSkg/sec5.55.527.224.627.2= 1,114 1,235=37, 033= 3,85919,934=23, 793= 0= 00.743=67.3=49.3ENTH. ENTR. EXER.kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg698.80.044.11,476.0293.2293.21,288.5594.5594.50.0293.2661.11,257.91,257.9759.11,025.9963.64.12.52.34.03.23.20.02.52.73.43.43.43.83.7MOISTURE%H2O50.050.010.20.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00..00.00.00.027.227.227.20.08.28.28.20.08.38.327.235.5(kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)IN COMBUSTOR (kW)EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)151Turbine No.2:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23ff4ii 857.1 102.6 1,196.1 3.9 484.4#5ii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9#8ii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0#lOii 449.0 1,134.6 737.0 2.1 374.8#llii 1,140.0 1,064.7 1,531.0 3.5 938.6#lZii 20.0 1,064.7#l3ii 1,140.0 1,064.7 1,531.0 3.5 938.6#l4ii 586.4 101.3 887.7 3.6 266.2#l6ii 617.7. 101.3 922.5 3.7 289.4#l7ii 609.7 101.3 913.6 3.6 283.5Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.17 1.05CplOii and Cpllii = 1.08 1.22Cpl6ii = 1.12POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW. EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23#4iii 630.2 102.6 936.6 3.7 299.8#5iii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9#6iii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9#8iii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0ltloiii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7#lliii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2#l2iii 20.0 1,054.5#l3iii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2#l4iii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9#l6iii 360.6 101.3 642.5 3.3 118.0#l7iii 452.3 101.3 740.6 3.4 177.2Cp4iii and Cp5iii = 1.12 1.05Cpl0iii and Cplliii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6iii = 1.06POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) VTURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS VFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOD LAW EFFICIENCY10.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00;00.00.00.00.00.027.227.227.20.09.39.39.30.09.49.427.236.6= 1,915 2,043=37, 033= 5,58417,123=22, 707= 0= -0=1.071=66.5=48.927.227.227.20.018.618.618.60.018.818.827.246.0=3f615 3,981=37, 033=11,074 9,504=20, 578= 0= 0=1. 056=65.3=47.3152OPTION #2: CERAMIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Heat Exchanger Pressure (kPa)PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSFLOW TEMP PRESS. ENTH. ENTR.C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK#1 20.0#2 20.0#3 1,094.1 103.1 1,476.0 4.1#7 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 2.3Cp3 and Cp15 = 1.21 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 23#4i 630.2 102.6 936.6 3.7315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2#Bi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5#lOi 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7#lli 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5#12i 20.0 1,054.5#13i 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5#14i 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6#16i 360.6 101.3 642.5 3.3#17i 452.3 101.3 740.6 3.4Cp4i and CpSi = 1.12 1.05CplOi and Cplii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6i = 1.06POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEATKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY299.892.994.90.00.0376.7928.2928.2262.9118.0177.2= 3,615=37,033(kW) =11,074=20,578= 0= 0=1.056=65.3=47.3= 20= 101.3=150= 78,440= 50= 50= 1200EXER.kJ/kg698.80.044.1MASSkg/sec5.55.527224.627.227.227.227.20.018.618.618.60.018.818.827.246.0MOISTURE%H2O50.050.010.20.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.03,9819,504153Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of the MiT - 23#4ii 564.2 102.6 863.0 3.6 251.1 27.2 10.2#5ii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 27...2 10.2#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 27.2 10.2#8ii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 37.2 0.0#lOii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 37.2 0.0#ilii 844.1 1,054.5 1,181.0 3.2 669.2 37.2 0.0#l2ii 20.0 1,054.50.3 0.0#i3ii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 37.6 0.0#l4ii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 37.6 0.0#l6ii 287.3 101.3 565.5 3.2 78.8 27.2 0.0#l7ii 460.5 101.3 749.5 3.4 185.6 64.8 0.0Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.11 1.05CplOii and Cpilii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6ii = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 7,230 7,962ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =37,033TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =22,148 7,410KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)=29,558ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)= 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =14,599HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.827.FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY=71.2SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY=57.6Turbine No.3:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 3 Units of the MiT - 23#4iii 564.2 102.6 863.0 3.6 251.1 27.2 10.2#5iii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 27.2 10.2#6iii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 27.2 10.2#8iii 00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 55.8 0.0#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 55.8 0.0#lliii 713.8 1,054.5 1,031.0 3.1 561.0 55.8 0.0#l2iii 20.0 1,054.50.6 0.0#l3iii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 56.4 0.0#l4iii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 56.4 0.0#l6iii 287.3 101.3 565.5 3.2 78.8 27.2 0.0#i7iii 488.1 101.3 779.4 3.5 203.0 83.6 : 0.0Cp4iii. and Cp5iii = 1.11 1.05Cploiii and Cplliii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6iii = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW). =10,84511,943ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW). =37,033TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =33,222 .7,410KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)=40,632ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)= 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =31,196HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =0.827FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY=75.4SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY=64.3154OPTION #2: CERAMIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Heat Exchanger Pressure (kPa)= 20= 101.3=250=130,734= 50= 50= 1200FLOW TEMP PRESS.# C kPa#1 20.0#2 20.0#3 1,094.1#7 20.0#15 20.0Cp3 and Cp15 = 1.21Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A -hA#4i 999.3 102.6315.0 101.3315.0 103.8#8i 0.0 0.0ff9i 20.0 101.3#lOi 378.1 942.1#lli 910.0 •872.2#12i 20.0 872.2#13i 910.0 872.2#14i 469.4 101.3#16i 783.3 101.3#17i 736.0 101.3Cp4i and CpSi = 1.19 1.05CplOi and Cplli = 1.06 1.18Cpl6i 1.15POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASED= 1,114 1,235=61,723= 3,85937,064=40, 923= 0= 0=0.743=68.1=50.9PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS103.1101.3171.21.01ENTH. ENTR. EXER. MASS MOISTUREkJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H2O9.2 50.09.2 50.01,476.0 4.1 698.8 45.3 10.2293.2 2.5 0.0 40.9 0.0293.2 2.3 44.1 45.3 0.01,363.2 4.1 610.6 45.3 10.2594.5 3.2 92.9 .45.3 10.2594.5 3.2 94.9 45.3 10.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0293.2 2.5 0.0 8.2 0.0661.1 2.7 315.4 8.2 0.01,257.9 3.4 710.5 8.2 0.00.0 0.01,257.9 3.4 710.5 8.3 0.0759.1 3.4 184.8 8.3 0.01,110.6 3.8 420.7 45.3 0.01,056.3 3.8 384.3 536 0.0(kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUEGAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY155Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23#4ii 951.9 102.6 1,307.2 4.0 567.8 45.3#5ii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 45.3 10.2#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 45.3 10.2#8ii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 9.3 0.0#lOii 449.0 1,134.6 737.0 2.7 374.8 9.3 0.0#llii 1,140.0 1,064.7 1,531.0 3.5 938.6 9.3 0.0#l2ii 20.0 1,064.7 0.0 0.0#l3ii 1,140.0 1,064.7 1,531.0 3.5 938.6 9.4 0.0#l4ii 586.4 101.3 887.7 3.6 266.2 9.4 0.0#l6ii 727.7 101.3 1,046.8 3.8 375.1 45.3 0.0#l7ii 703.7 101.3 1,019.5 3.8 356.4 54.7 0.0Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.18 1.05CplOii and Cpllii = 1.08 1.22Cpl6ii = 1.14POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 1,915 2,043ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =61,723TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) = 5,58434,174KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =39,758ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) = 0HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =1.071FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY . =67.5SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =50.5Turbine No.3:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23#4iii 815.8 10.2#5iii 315.0 10.2#6iii 315.0 10.2#8iii 0.0 0.0#9iii 20.0 0.0#l0iii 453.2 0.0#iliii 1,130.0 0.0#l2iii 20.0 0.0#l3iii 1,130.0 0.0#i4iii 581.9 0.0#l6iii 570.1 0.0#l7iii. 573.6. o.oCp4iii and Cp5iii =Cploiii and CplliiiCpl6iii = 1.11POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASED102.6101.3103.80.0101.31,124.41,054.51,054.51,054.5101.3101.31o1.31,148.1594.5594.50.0293.2741.51,519.01,519.0882.7869.5873.43.93.23.20.02.52.73.53.53.63.63.6449.092.994.9.0.00.0376.7928.2928.2.62.9254.3256.81.16 1.05= 1.08 1.21(kW) AND RATED OUTPUT. POWER (kW)IN COMBUSTOR (kW)EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)45.345.345.30.018.618.618.60.018.818.845.364.1= 3,615 3,981=61, 723=11,07426,133=37,207= 0= 0=1. 056=66.1=48.2TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) ANDKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY156OPTION #2: CERANIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C) = 20Atmospheric Pressure (kPa) = 101.3PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm) =250Annual wood waste production (ODT) =130,734Initial wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Target wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Maximum Heat Exchanger Pressure (kPa) = 1200PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSFLOW TEMP PRESS. ENTH. ENTR. EXER. MASS MOISTUREC kPa . kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H20#1 20.0 9.2 50.0#2 20.0 9.2 50.0#3 1,094.1 103.1 1,476.0 4.1 698.8 45.3 10.2#7 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 .40.9 0.0#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1 .45.3 0.0Cp3 and Cp15 = 1.21 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 23#4i 815.8 102.6 1,148.1 3.9 449.0 45.3 10.25i 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 45.3 10.2315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 45.3 10.2#8i 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 18.6 0.0#lOi 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 18.6 0.0#lli 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 18.6 0.0#12i 20.0 1,054.5 00 0.0#13i 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0. 3.5 928.2 18.8 0.0#14i 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 18.8 0.0#16i 570.1 101.3 869.5. 3.6 254.3 45.3 0.0#17i 573.6 101.3 873.4 3.6 256.8 64.1 0.0Cp4i and Cp5i = 1.16 1.05CplOi and Cplli = 1.08 1.21Cpl6i = 1.11POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 3,615 3,981ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =61,723TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =11,07426,133KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =37,207ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) 0HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =1.056FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY. =66.1.SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY. =48.2157Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units oftt4ii 564.2 102.6#5ii 315.0 101.3#6ii 315.0 103.8#8ii 0.0 0.0#gii 20.0 101.3#lOii 453.2 1,124.4ffllii 1,104.8 1,054.5#l2ii 20.0 1,054.5#l3ii 1,130.0 1,054.5#l4ii 581.9 101.3#l6ii 287.3 101.3ftl7ii 423.2 101.3Dp4ii and Cpsii = 1.11 1.05CplOii and Cpllii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6ii = 1.04POWER GENERATEDthe MiT - 23863.0594.5594.50.0293.2741.51,488.81,519.0882.7565.5709.23.63.23.20.02.52.73.53.53.63.23.4251.192.994.90.00.0376.7904.4928.2262.978.8162.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.045.345.345.30.037237.237.20.037.637.645.382.9= 7,230 7,962=61, 723=22,14812, 349=34, 497= 0= 1,876=1. 017=65.6=49.045.345345.30.055.855.855.80.356.456.445.3101.7=10,84511,943=61, 723=33,22212,349=45, 571= 0=18, 761=0.827=70.1=55.9(kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: 3 Units of the MiT - 23#4iii 564.2 102.6 863.0 3.6 251.1#5iii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9#6iii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9#8iii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7#iliii 887.6 1,054.5 1,231.6 3.3 706.7#l2iii 20.0 1,054.5#l3iii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2#l4iii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9#l6iii 287.3 101.3 565.5 3.2 78.8#l7iii 452.9 101.3 741.3 3.4 180.8Cp4iii and Cp5iii = 1.11 1.05Cploiii and Cplliii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6iii = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY158OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLIJIDIZED BED AIR HEATERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (t4fbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)= 20= 101.3= 50= 26,147= 50= 50= 815POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (KW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS:FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYPROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS4.12.53.22.3610.45.294.144.1FLOW TEMP PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MASS FLOW MOISTURE# deg C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H20#1 20.0 1.8 50.0#2 20.0 1.8 50.0#3 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 9.1 10.2#7 20.0 187.5 293.2 8.2 0.0#8 315.0 117.6 594.5 8.2 0.0#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 9.1 0.0Cp7, Cp8 and Cp15 = 1.01 1.05 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A -hA#4ai 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 10.2#4i 497.9 102.6 790.1 10.2#5i 232.0 101.3 508.2 10.2#6i 232.0 101.3 508.2 10.2#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 0.0#lOi 378.1 942.1 661.1 0.0#llai 815.0#hli 815.0 802.3 1,147.2 0.0#12i 20.0 802.3 0.0#l3i 910.0 802.3 1,257.9 0.0#14i 482.0 101.3 772.7 0.0#16i 566.8 101.3 865.9 0.0#17i 526.5 101.3 821.4 0.0Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6i = 1.03 1.114.13.53.03.12.52.73.33.43.53.63.5610.4203.651.750.70.0315.4621.4703.5193.0251.9223.89.19.19.19.18.28.28.20.08.38.39.117.4= 1,001=12, 345= 3,972= 9,165= 0= 1,123=75.5=35.91,2355,194159POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23#4aiii 744.5 103.1 1,066.0 3.8 389.0#4iii 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 203.6#5iii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7*6iii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 50.7#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0#i0iii 453.2 l,124.4 741.5 2.7 384.4#llaiii 688.2#lliii 815.0 984.6 1,147.2 3.2 646.4#i2iii 20.0 984.6#i3iii 1,130.0 984.6 1,519.0 3.5 930.2#l4iii 593.3 101.3 895.3 3.6 279.1ffi6iii 283.0 101.3 561.0 3.1 76.6#i7iii 494.6 101.3 786.5 3.4 213.2Cp4aiii and Cp4 = 1.14 1.09Cp5 and Cpi6iii = 1.03 1.04(kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.2:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23#4aii 1,000.0 103.1#4ii 497.9 102.6#5ii 232.0 101.3#6ii 232.0 101.3#9ii 20.0 101.3#iOii 449.0 1,134.6#llaii 815.0#llii 815.0 994.8#l2ii 20.0 994.8#l3ii 1,140.0 994.8#l4ii 597.8 101.3#l6ii 566.8 101.3#i7ii 582.6 101.3Cp4aii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpi6ii = 1.03 1.111,364.0790.1.508.2508.2293.2737.01,147.21,531.0900.3865.9883.44.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6610.4203.651.750.70.0374.8639.5932.9274.6251.9263.510.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.09.19.19.19.19.39.39.30.19.49.49.118.5= 1,797 2,043=12, 345= 5,703 5,194=10,896= 0= 4,124=77.1=45.89.19.19.19.118.618.618.60.118.818.89.127.9= 3,377 3,981=12,345=11,312 2,429=13, 741= 0= 7,998=84.1=55.9POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASED160OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLUIDIZED BED AIR HEATERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)= 20= 101.3= 50= 26,147= 50= 50= 815POWER (KW)POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEATKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY= 3,377 3,981=12, 345(kW) =11,312 2,429= 13,741= 7,998=84.1=55.2PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSFLOW TEMP PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MASS FLOW MOISTURE# deg C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H20#1 20.0 1.8 50.0#2 20.0 1.8 50.0#3 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.]. 610.4 9.1 10.2#7 20.0 187.5 293.2 2.5 5.2 8.2 0.0#8 315.0 117.6 594.5 3.2 94.1 8.2 0.0#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1 9.1 0.0Cp7. Cp8 and Cp15 = 1.01 1.05 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 23#4ai 744.5 103.1 1,066.0 3.8 389.0 9.1 10.2#4i 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 203.6 9.1 10.2#5i 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7 9.1 10.2#6i 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 50.7 9.1 10.2#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 18.6 0.0#lOi 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 18.6 0.0#liai 688.2#lli 815.0 984.6 1,147.2 3.2 638.6 18.6 0.0#12i 20.0 984.6 0.1 0.0#13i 1,130.0 984.6 1,519.0 3.5 922.5 18.8 0.0#14i 593.3 101.3 895.3 3.6 271.3 18.8 0.0#16i 283.0 101.3 561;0 3.1 76.6 9.1 0.0#17i 494.6 101.3 786.5 3.5 207.9 27.9 0.0Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.14 1.09Cp5 and Cpi6i = 1.03 1.04161POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASEDthe MiT — 23Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of#4aii 572.1 103.1 871.7 3.6 255.9 9.1 10.2#4ii 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 203.6 9.1 10.2#5ii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7 9.1 10.2#6ii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 50.7 91 10.2#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 37.2 0.0#lOii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 37.2 0.0#llaii 572.1#llii 679.2 984.6 991.7 2.8 606.2 37.2 0.0#l2ii 20.0 984.6 0.4 0.0#i3ii 1,130.0 984.6 1,519.0 3.3 1,000.8 37.6 0.0#i4ii 593.3 101.3 895.3 3.4 349.7 37.6 0.0#l6ii 97.8 101..3 371.5 2.7 9.0 9.1 0.0#l7ii 501.0 101.3 793.5 3.2 283.4 46.6 0.0Cp4aii and Cp4 = 1.11 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6ii = 1.03 1.01POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 6,753 7,962ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =12,345TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =22,625 711KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =23,336ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =22,422FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =86.5SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =76.9Turbine No.3:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: 3 Units of the MiT - 23#4aiii 532.8 103.1 828.3 3.5 227.9 9.1 10.2#4iii 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 203.6 9.1 10.2#5iii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7 9.1 10.2#6iii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 50.7 9.1 10.2#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 55.8 0.0#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 384.4 55.8 0.0#llaiii 532.8#lliii 611.3 984.6 915.4 2.8 543.9 55.8 0.0#i2iii 20.0 984.6 0.7 0.0ffl3iii 1,130.0 984.6 1,519.0 3.3 990.5 56.4 0.0#l4iii 593.3 101.3 895.3 3.4 339.4 56.4 0.0#l6iii 56.5 101.3 329.8 2.6 2.4 9.1 0.0i7iii 522.4 101.3 817.0 3.3 292.7 65.4 0.0Cp4aiii and Cp4 =1.10 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6iii = 1.03 1.01(kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) =10,13011,943IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =12,345TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =33,937 332KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =34,270ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =38,366FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =87.6SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =81.8162OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLUIDIZED BED AIR HEATERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS(kW) AND RATED OUTPUTIN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESSKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY= 20= 101.3=150= 78,440= 50= 50= 815FLOW TEMP PRESSURE ENTI{ALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MASS FLOW# deg C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec#1 20.0 5.5#2 20.0 5.5#3 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.1 610.4 27.2#7 20.0 187.5 293.2 2.5 5.2 24.6#8 315.0 117.6 594.5 3.2 94.1 24.6#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1 27.2Cp7, Cp8 and Cp15 = 1.01 1.05 1.01Turbine No.1:) Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A -hA#4ai 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.1 610.4 27.2#4i 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 203.6 27.2#5i 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7 27.2#6i 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 50.7 27.2#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 8.2#lOi 378.1 942.1 661.1 2.7 315.4 8.2#hlai 815.0#lhi 815.0 802.3 1,147.2 3.3 621.4 8.2#12i 20.0 802.3 0.0#13i 910.0 802.3 1,257.9 3.4 703.5 8.3#14i 482.0 101.3 772.7 3.5 193.0 8.3#16i 566.8 101.3 865.9 3.6 251.9 27.2#17i 547.1 101.3 844.1 3.6 238.2 35.5Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6i = 1.03 1.11POWER GENERATED POWER (KW)ENERGY RELEASEDFLUE GAS HEAT (kW)MOISTURE%H2050.050.010.20.00.00.010.210.210.210 .20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0= 1,001 1,235=37, 0333,97215,581= 19,552= 0= 1,123.=53;9=22.4163• POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASED1,364.0790.1508.2508.2293.2737.01,147.21,531.0900.3865.9874.74.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6610.4203.651.750.70.0374.8639.5932.9274.6251.9257.8Turbine No.2:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23#4aii 1,000.0 103.1ff4ii 497.9 102.6#5ii 232.0 101.3#6ii 232.0 101.3#9ii 20.0 101.3#lOii 449.0 1,134.6#llaii 815.0#llii 815.0 994.8#l2ii 20.0 994.8#l3ii 1,140.0 994.8#l4ii 597.8 101.3#l6ii 566.8 101.3#l7ii 574.8 101.3Cp4aii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6ii = 1.03 1.11.POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESSKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23#4aiii 1,000.0 103.1#4iii 497.9 102.6#5iii 232.0 101.3#6iii 232.0 101.3#9iii 20.0 101.3#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4#llaiii 815.0#lliii 815.0#l2iii 20.0#l3iii 1,130.0#l4iii 593.3#l6iii 566.8#l7iii 577.7Cp4aiii and Cp4 =Cp5 and Cpl6iii =FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)10.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.027.227.227.227.29.39.39.30.19.49.427.236.6= 1,797 2,043=37, 033= 5,70315,581=21,284= 0= 4,124=56.1=27.327.227.227.227.218.618.618.60.118.818.827.246.0= 3,377 3,981=37, 033=11, 31215, 581=26, 893= 0= 7,998=67.2=37.11,364.0790.1508.2508.2293.2741.51,147.21,519.0895.3865.9877.9984.6984.6984.6101.3101.3101.31.19 1.091.03 1.11610.4203.651.750.70.0384.4646.4930.2279.1251.9263.04.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6POWER (kW)(kW) AND RATED OUTPUTIN CO!4USTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) VENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY164OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLUIDIZED BED AIR HEATERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS= 20= 101.3=150= 78,440= 50= 50= 815POWER (KW)POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY= 3,377 3,981=37,033=11,31215,581= 26,893= 0= 7,998=67.2=36.8TEMPdeg C20.020.01,000.020.0315.020.0and Cp15FLOW#1#2#3#7#8#15Cp7,#4aiPRESSURE ENTHALPYkPa kJ/kgCp8Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 231,000.0 103.1 1,364.0103.1187.5117.6171.2.01 1.05=11,364.0293.2594.5293.21.01EXERGY MASS FLOWkJ/kg kg/sec5.55.5610.4 27.25.2 24.694.1 24.644.1 27.2ENTROPYkJ/kgK4.12.53.22.34.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6#4 i#5i#6i#9 i#lOi#llai#ili#12 i#13 i#14 i#16i#17i497.9232.0232.020.0453.2815.0815.020.01,130.0593.3566.8577.7MOISTURE%H2O50.050.010.20.00.00.010.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0102.6101.3101.3101.31,124.4984.6984.6984.6101.3101.3101.31.091.11790.1508.2508.2293.2741.51,147.21,519.0895.3865.9877.9610.4203.651.750.70.0376.7638.6922.5271.3251.9259.9Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.19Cp5 and Cpl6i = 1.0327.227.2.27.227.218.6.18.61860.118.818.827.24602.65Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of103.1102.6101.3101.3101.31,124.4#4aii 982.6#4ii 497.9#5ii 232.0#6ii 232.0#9ii 20.0#lOii 453.2#llaii 802.0#llii 815.0*l2ii 20.0#l3ii 1,130.0#l4ii 593.3#l6ii 547.1#l7ii 574.0Cp4aii and Cp4 = 1.19Cp5 and Cpl6ii = 1.034.03.53.03.12.52.7the MiT — 231,343.4790.1508.2508.2293.2741.51,147.21,519.0895.3844.2873.9594.5203.651.750.70.0376.7984.6984.6984.6101.3101.3101.31.091.103.2 638.63.53.63.63.6922.5271.3238.0257.3POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 3 Units of10.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.210.20..00.00.00.00.00.00.00.027.227.227.227.237.237.237.20.337.637.627.264.8= 6,753 7,962=37,033=22,62514,991=37, 615= 0=15, 996=83.7=51.327.227.227.227.255.855.855.80.456.456.427.283.6=10,13011,943=37,033=33,937 7,285=41,223= 0=23, 993=84.1=56.1#4aiii 744.4 103.1#4iii 497.9 102.6#Siii 232.0 101.3#6iii 232.0 101.3ff9iii 20.0 101.3#i0iii 453.2 1,124.4#llaiii 688.2#lliii 815.0 984.6#l2iii 20.0 984.6tti3iii 1,130.0 984.6#l4iii 593.3 101.3#l6iii 282.9 101.3#l7iii 494.6 101.3Cp4aiii and Cp4 = 1.14 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6iii = 1.03 1.04the MiT - 231,066.0790.1508.2508.2293.2741.51,147.21,519.0895.3561.0786.53.83.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.13.4388.9203.651.750.70.0384.4646.4930.2279.176.6213.2POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY166OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLUIDIZED BED AIR HEATERPOWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASED= 20= 101.3=250=130, 734= 50= 50= 815Ambient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSTEMP PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MPSS FLOWdeg C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec9.29.245.340.940.945.3FLOW#1#2#3#7#8#15Cp7,1,364.0293.2594.5293.21.014.12.53.22.320.020.01,000.0 103.120.0 187.5315.0 117.620.0 171.2Cp8 and Cp15 = 1.01 1.05Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A -ilA1,000.0 103.1497.9 102.6232.0 101.3232.0 101.320.0 101.3378.1 942.1815.0610.45.294.144.1#4ai#4 i#5 i#6i#9 i#lOi#llai#lli 815.0#12i 20.0#13i 910.0#14i 482.0#16i 566.8#l7i 553.8Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.19Cp5 and Cpl6i = 1.03MOISTURE%H2050.050.010.20.00.00.010.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.01,364.0790.1508.2508.2293.2661.11,147.21,257.972.7865.9851.5802.3802.3802.3101.3101.3101.31.091.11610.4203.651.750.70.0315.4621.4703.5193.0251 9242.84.13.53.03.12.52.73.33.43.53.63.6POWER (KW)45.3.45.345.345.38.28.28.20.08 ..38.345.353.6,= 1,001 1,235=61,723= 3,97225,968= 29,9400= 1,123=49..2=19.5(kW) AND RATED OUTPUTIN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY167POWER (kW)Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23#4aii 1,000.0 103.1#4ii 497.9 102.6#5ii 232.0 101.3#6ii 232.0 101.3#9ii 20.0 101.3#lOii 449.0 1,134.6#llaii 815.0#llii 815.0 994.8#l2ii 20.0 994.8#l3ii 1,140.0 994.8#l4ii 597.8 101.3#l6ii 566.8 101.3#l7ii 572.1 101.3Cp4aii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6ii = 1.03 1.111,364.0790.1508.2508.2293.2737.01,147.21,531.0900.3865.9871.84.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6610.4203.651.750.70.0374.8639.5932.9274.6251.9255.8POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)10.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23#4aiii 1,000.0 103.1#4iii 497.9 102.6#Siii 232.0 101.3#6.iii 232.0 101.3#9iii#i0iii#llaiii#iliii#l2iii#l3iii#i4iii#i6iii#i7iiiCp4ai ii45.345.345.345.39.39.39.30.19.49.445.354.7= 1,797 2,043=61, 723= 5,70325,968=31,671= 0= 4,124=50.8=22.745.345.345.345.318.618.618.60.118.818.845.364.1= 3,377 3,981=61, 723=11,31225,968=37,280= 0= 7,998=58.3=29.320.0453.2815.0815.020.0i130.0593.3566.8574.6and Cp4 =CpS and Cpi6iii =1,364.0790.1508.2508.2293.2741.51,147.21,519.0895.3865.9874.5101.31,124.4984.6984.6984.6101.3101.3101.31.19 1.091.03 1.114.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6610.4203.651.750.70.0384.4646.4930.2279.1251.9259.9POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY168OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLUIDIZED BED AIR HEATERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASEDPROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS= 20= 101.3=250=130,734= 50= 50= 815610.45.294.144.1FLOW TEMP PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MASS FLOW MOISTURE# deg C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H20#1 20.0 9.2 50.0#2 20.0 9.2 50.0#3 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 45.3 10.2#7 20.0 187.5 293.2 40.9 0.0#8 315.0 117.6 594.5 40.9 0.0#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 45.3 0.0Cp7, Cp8 and Cp15 = 1.01 1.05 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 23#4ai 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 10.2#4i 497.9 102.6 790.1 10.2#5i 232.0 101.3 508.2 10.2#6i 232.0 101.3 508.2 10.2#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 0.0#lOi 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 0.0#llai 815.0#lii 815.0 984.6 1,147.2 0.0#12i 20.0 984.6 0.0#13i 1,130.0 984.6 1,519.0 0.0#14i 593.3 101.3 895.3 0.0#16i 566.8 101.3 865.9 0.0#17i 574.6 101.3 874.5 0.0Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6i = 1.03 1.114.12.53.22.34.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6610.4203.651.750.70.0376.7638.6922.5271.3251.9257.645.345.345.345.318.618.618.60.118.818.845.364.1= 3,377 3,981=61,723=11, 31225, .968= 37,280= 0= 7,998=58.3=29.1.POWER (KW)(kW) AND RATED OUTPUTIN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY169= 6,753 7,962=61, 723=22,62525,968=48, 593= 0=15, 996=71.2=40.3610.4 45.3 10.2203.6 45.3 10.251.7 45.3 10.250.7 45.3 10.20.0 55.8 0.0384.4 55.8 0.0646.4 55.8 0.00.4 0.0930.2 56.4 0.0279.1 56.4 0.0251.9 45.3 0.0267.0 101.7 0.0Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of#4aii 1,000.0 103.1#4ii 497.9 102.6#5ii 232.0 101.3#6ii 232.0 101.3#9ii 20.0 101.3#lOii 453.2 1,124.4#llaii 815.0#llii 815.0 984.6#l2ii 20.0 984.6#l3ii 1,130.0 984.6#l4ii 593.3 101.3#l6ii 566.8 101.3#l7ii 578.9 101.3Cp4aii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09CpS and Cpl6ii = 1.03 1.11the MiT - 231,364.0790.1508.2508.2293.2741.51,147.21,519.0895.3865.. 9879.24.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6610.4203.651.750.70.0376.7638.6922.5271.3251.9260.745.345.345.345.337.237 .237.20.337.637.645.382.910.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESSKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: 3 Units of the MiT - 23#4aiii 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.1#4iii 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5#Siii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0#6iii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 . 2.5#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7#llaiii 815.0#liiii 815.0 984.6 1,147.2 3.2#l2iii 20.0 984.6#i3iii 1,130.0 984.6 1,519.0 3.5#l4iii 593.3 101.3 895.3 3.6#l6iii 566.8 101.3 865.9 3.6#l7iii 581.5 101.3 882.2 3.6Cp4aiii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6iii = 1.03 1.11POWER (kW)POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY=10,13011,943=61, 723=33, 93725, 968=59, 905= 0=23, 993=81.7=49.9170Appendix B:Linear Programming Modelsfor Options #1, #2, #3171I OPTION #1 - METALLIC HEAT EXCHANGERi = real discount rate (%)f = inflation rate (%)I ir = nominal discount rate (%)Discount — year 1Discount — year 2Discount — year 3Discount — year 4Discount — year 5Discount — year 6Discount — year 7Discount — year 8Discount — year 9Discount — year 10Discount — year 11Discount — year 12Discount — year 13Discount — year 14Discount — year 15Discount — year 16Discount — year 17Discount — year 18Discount — year 19Discount — year 20! Wood waste Disposal Credit ($-hrs/kg-yr)I 5$/green tonne= 39.42 $-hrs/kg-yrI Hours of Operation per year! Sawmill operating hours/yr! 2 shifts/day @ 26odays/yr @ 8hrs/shift1 Hours of electricity production/yr1 90% of 365 days/yr @ 24 hrs/dayhours3 = hours2—hoursl; I Hours over which maximum excessI electricity is producedhours4 = 292; 1 Standby hours = l0%*365 days*8 hrs/daydc = 76.44; ! Rate Schedule 1200’s:! Demand charge = $6.37/kW/month =I $76.44/kW/yrdcstand = 0.00665; 1 Standby demand chargeec = 0.0312; Rate Schedule 1200’s:I Energy Charge = 0.0312 $/kWhecstand = 0.02599; 1 Standby energy chargeexcl = 0.0343; 1 Firm electricity purchase priceI including energy & capacity 0.0343 $/kWhexc2 = 0.015; ! Secondary electricity purchase price 0.015 $/kWhDiscount Factors over 20 yearsconstraints 58;I BEGINNING OF PARAMETER LISTparameters 45i=0.08;f=0.04;ir =(1+i)*(1+f)—l;Bl = 1/(1+ir);B2 = 1/(l+ir)’’2;B3 = 1/(1+ir)A3;. IB4 = 1/(1+ir)”4; IB5 = l/(l+ir)”5; IB6 = l/(1+ir)A6;B7 = l/(1+ir)’7;B8 =B9 = l/(1+ir)’9;BlO = 1/(1+ir)’lO;!Bil = 1/(l+ir)’ll;IB12 = 1/(1+ir)’l2;!B13 = l/(1+ir)’13;!Bl4 = 1/(l+ir)’14;IB15 = l/(1+ir)A15;!B16 = l/(1+ir)Al6;!Bl7 = 1/(l+ir)’l7;!Bl8 = l/(1+ir)’18;!B19 = l/(l+ir)”19;IB20 = 1/(1+ir)”20;!dispcredit = 39.42;hoursl = 4160;hours2 = 7884;172pf = 0.90; 1 Plant power factorgascostiw = 3.35; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for process heat in winter(3.35)gascostls = 2.75; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for process heat in suimuer(2.75)gascost2w = 2.50; ! Gas cost $/GJ for cogen in winter(2.50)gascost2s = 1.95; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for cogen in summer(l.95)woodwaste = 19908;proheat = 20000;avdeiuand = 3000;pkdeiuand = 4000;corptax = 0.43;mathand = 600000;I END OF PARAMETER LIST! Maximum available wood waste (kg/hr)I Plant heating required (kW)I Average demand (kW)! Peak demand (kw)I Corporate Tax rate (%)I Allowance for a material handling system1 VARIABLE LIST:! Mf = flow rate of wood fuel (kg/hr)! Exwood = wood not consumed as fuel = Woodwaste — Mf (kg/hr)I peakdemand = peak electricity demand (kw)1 averagedemand = average electricity demand (kw)I demandsave = savings in demand charge ($)I demandchge = cost of supplying peak demand ($)I energycharge = cost of continuous energy supply ($)totaicharge = demandcharge + energycharge ($)1 electricsave = electricity savings ($)I genelec = amount of electricity being generated (kw)1 exeleci = amount of electricity in excess of average demand= netelec — averagedemandexelec2 = netelec! netelec = net electricity output (kW)1 standbypower = amount of standby power demanded (kW)1 standbycost = cost of standby power ($)! idfan = electricity required to run id fan (kW)1 dryercost = cost of wood waste dryer ($)1 dryersize = size of wood waste dryer (kg/hr)1 furnacecost = cost of wood combustor ($)1 furnacesize = size of wood combustor (kg/hr)I turbcost = cost of gas turbine ($)I turbsize = size of gas turbine (kw)I mthxcost = cost of the metal gas/air heat exchanger ($)I mthxsize = size of gas/air heat exchanger! hxcost = cost of the kiln/air heat exchanger ($)! hxsize = size of kiln/air heat exchanger (kg/hr)1 multicost = cost of multiclone ($)1 multisize = size of multiclone! totalcapi = equipment capital cast ($)! install = cost of installation & delivery ($)! totalcap2 = totalcapi + install ($)I ductwork = cost of ductwork ($)! electrical = cost of electrical ($)I instrument = cost of instrumentation ($)! piping = cost of piping ($)! structural = cost of structural/civil ($)173totalcap3 = totalcap2 + duct.+elec.+instr.+pip.+struc Cs)! engineering = cost of engineering ($)constructm = cost of construction management ($)I totalcap4 = totalcap3 + eng.+constrm ($)1 contingency = % of totalcap4 ($)1 total = project total capital cost ($)! gas = amount of gas energy consumed (kw)! gasenergy = cost of gas consumed ($)! kilnheat = kiln heat required (kw)! processheat = total plant thermal requirements (kw)I heatenergy = cost of providing the process heat ($)I benefits = project benefits over life of project ($)1 costs = project costs over life of project ($)I OM = yearly operating and maintenanace costsI class34_l = class 34 tax credit in year of purchaseI class34_2 = class 34 tax credit in year 1I class34_3 = class 34 tax credit in year 2I IT = yearly insurance and property taxvariables 54 Mf Exwood demandsave demandchge energychargetotalcharge genelec exeleci exelec2 dryercost dryersize furnacecostfurnacesize turbcost turbsize mthxcost mthxsize hxcost hxsizetotalcapi install totalcap2 ductwork peakdeiuand averagedemandprocessheat electrical instrument piping structural totalcap3engineering constructiu totalcap4 contingency total gas gasenergyelectricsave kilnheat heatenergy benefits costs standbypowerstandbycost multicost multisizeOM class34_1 class342 class343 IT netelec idfan;I OBJECTIVE FUNCTION:maximizebenefits — costs [cashflow);1 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONSTRAINTS:I BENEFITS (savings):Benefits =dispcredit*Bl*Mf+dispcredit*B2*Mf+dispcredit*B3*Mf+dispcredit*B4*Mf+dispcredit*B5*Mf+dispcredit*B6*Mf+dispcredit*B7 *Mf+dispcredit*B8*Mf+dispcredit*B9*Mf+dispcredit*BlO*Mf+dispcredit*Bll*Mf+dispcredit*B12*Mf-i-dispcredit*B13*Mf+dispcredit*B14*Mf+djspcredjt*B15*Mf+dispcredjt*B16*Mf+dispcredit*B17*Mf+dispcredit*B18*Mf+dispcredit*B19*Mf+dispcredit*B2O*Mf+Bl*electricsave+ B2*electricsave +B3*electricsave + B4*electricsave + B5*electricsave +B6*electricsave + B7*electricsave + B8*electricsave+B9 *electricsave+BlO*electricsave+ B11*electricsave+Bl2 *electrjcsave+B13*electricsave+B14*electricsave+B15*electricsave+B16*electricsave+B17*electricsave+BiB*eiectricsave+B19*electricsave+B20*electricsave+exci*hoursl*Bl*exeleci + excl*hoursi*B2*exeieci+excl*hoursi*B3*exeleci + excl*hoursi*B4*exelecl +174excl*hoursl*B5*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B6*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B7*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B8*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B9*exelecl + excl*hoursl*BlO*exelecl +excl*hoursl*Bl1*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B12*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B13*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B14*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B15*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B16*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B17*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B18*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B19*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B20*exelecl +exc2 *hours3*Bl*exelec2 + exc2 *hours3 *B2 *exelec2+exc2*hours3*B3*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B4*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B5*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B6*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B7*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B8*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B9*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B1O*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B11*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B12*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B13*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B14*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B15*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B16*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B17*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B18*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B19*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B20*exelec2 +B1*heatenergy + B2*heatenergy +B3*heatenergy + B4*heatenergy + B5*heatenergy +B6*heatenergy + B7*heatenergy + B8*heatenergy +B9*heatenergy + B1O*heatenergy + Bl1*heatenergy +B12*heatenergy + B13*heatenergy + B14*heatenergy +B15*heatenergy + B16*heatenerqy + B17*heatenergy +B18*heatenergy + B19*heatenergy + B20*heatenergy +class34_1 + Bl*class34_2 + B2*class34_3 [benefit);I COSTS:costs = total ÷ Bl*gasenergy + B2*gasenergy +B3*gasenergy + B4*gasenergy + B5*gasenergy + B6*gasenergy +B7*gasenergy + B8*gasenergy + B9*gasenergy + BlO*gasenergy +B11*gasenergy + B12*gasenerqy + B13*gasenergy + B14*gasenergy +B15*gasenergy + B16*gasenergy + B17*gasenergy + B18*gasenergy +B19*gasenergy + B20*gasenergy +B1*IT + B2*IT + B3*IT +B4*IT + B5*IT + B6*IT +B7*IT + B8*IT + B9*IT +BlO*IT + Bll*IT + B12*IT +B13*IT + B14*IT + B15*IT +B16*IT + B17*IT + Bl8*IT +B19*IT + B20*IT +Bl*OM + B2*OM + B3*OM + B4*OM + B5*OM +B6*OM + B7*OM + B8*OM + B9*OM + BlO*OM + Bll*OM +B12*OM + B13*OM + B14*OM + B15*OM + B16*OM + B17*OM +B18*OM + B19*OM + B20*OM +B1*standbycost+B2*standbycost+B3*standbycost+B4*standbycost+B5 *standbycost+B6*standbycost+B7 *standbycost+B8*standbycost+B9*stan bycost+B1O*standbycost+Bll*standbycost+B12*standbycost+B13 *standbycost+B14*standbycost+Bl5*standbycost+B16*standbycost+B17*standbycost+B18*standbycost+B19*standbycost+B2O*standbycost[cost);I ELECTRICITY DEMANDS AND CHARGES:3.75averagedeiuand =avdeinand;peakdemand =pkdemand;! CASE 1: averagedeniand <= netelec <= peakdemand!netelec <= peakdeiuand [power];Inetelec >= averagedemand;!netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;!demandsave = dc*netelec;ldemandchge = dc*peakdemand;1 energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;!totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;!electricsave = energycharge + deinandsave;!standbypower = 0;1 standbycost=hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower+hours4 *ecstand*standbypower;! CASE 2: netelec <= avergedemandnetelec <= averagedemand [power);netelec >= 660;netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;deinandsave = dc*netelec;demandchge = dc*peakdemand;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;electricsave = ec*hoursl*netelec + demandsave;stancibypower = 0;standbycost = hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower +hours4 *ecstand*standbypower;! CASE 3: netelec >= peakdemandI netelec >= peakdemand [power);!netelec <= 12000;!netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;!demandsave = demandchge;!demandchge = dc*peakdemand;I energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;!totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;!electricsave = totalcharge;lstandbypower = 0;!standbycost = hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower +! hours4 *ecstand*standbypower;I EXCESS ELECTRICITY PRODUCED! CASE 1:!exelecl = netelec — averagedemand; ! During sawmill operationlexelec2 = netelec; I Sawmill shutdown! CASE 2:exeleci = 0;exelec2 = netelec;1 CASE 3:lexeleci = netelec — averagedemand;!exelec2 = netelec;2.76I CAPITAL COSTS:! Hog fuel dryerdryercost = 0; 1 No hog fuel dryer is required for metal HXdryersize = 0;furnacecost = 73.7 Mf + 1023583; ! Wood waste combustor (Furnace):furnacesize = Mf;! Gas Turbine: Kawasakiturbcost = 883 genelec + 514975;turbsize = genelec;I Metal Kiln/Air Heat Exchanger:hxcost = l4.76Mf + 88074;hxsize = Mf;! Metal Gas/Air Heat Exchanger:mthxcost = 14.76Mf + 88074;mthxsize = Mf;multicost = 0;multisize = 0;! Option Direct Firing!mthxcost = 0;!mthxsize = 0;!multicost = 3.39*Mf + 11600;!multisize = Mf;! Total Capital No.1:totalcapl = mathand + dryercost + furnacecost + turbcost +mthxcost + hxcost + multicost;! Installation and Labour = 10% of totalcapi:install = 0.10 totalcapi;! Total Capital No.2:totalcap2 = install + totalcapl;I Ductwork = 10% of totalcap2:ductwork = 0.10 totalcap2;I Electrical = 14% of totalcap2:electrical = 0.14 totalcap2;Instrumentation = 5% of totalcap2:instrument = 0.05 totalcap2;1 Piping = 5% of totalcap2:piping = 0.05 totalcap2;Structural = 15% of totalcap2:structural = 0.l5*totalcap2;New Capital, totalcap3:totalcap3 = totalcap2 + ductwork + electrical + instrument÷ piping + structural;I Engineering costs = 7% of totalcap3:engineering = 0.07 totalcap3;I Construction Management = 5% of totalcap3:constructm = 0.05 totalcap3;I New total, totalcap4:totalcap4 = totalcap3 + engineering + constructm;! Contingency = 10%:contingency = 0.10 totalcap4;I PROJECT TOTAL CAPITAL COST:total = totalcap4 + contingency;177PHYSICAL REL?TIONSHIPS AND CONSTRAINTS:Gas energy required:Case 1 wood flow:!gas = 2.81 genelec; 1 When 6624 <= Mf <= 19908 kg/hr!genelec <= 11943;17962;! Case 2 wood flow:gas = 2.85 genelec; ! When 19908 <= Mf <= 33,156 kg/hrgenelec <= 11943;gasenergy = 7/12*0. 0036*hours2*gascost2s*gas+ 5/12*0.0036*hours2*gascost2w*gas; ! cost of gas for cogen! Kiln Heating: Made available from processprocessheat = 1.926*genelec + 1.26*Mf; I This includes heat from1 both the turbine exhaust! and the excess flue gasI Plant thermal requirements:kilnheat = proheat;processheat >= kilnheat [heat);!OR!processheat <= kilnheat [heat);I Heatenergy savings assuming gas is displaced:heatenergy = (7/12) *0.003 6*hours2*gascostls*kilnheat+ (5/12)*0.0036*hours2*gascostlw*kilnheat; ! for process heat!ORheatenergy = (7/12) *0.003 6*hours2*gascostls*processheat! + (5/12)*0.0036*hours2*gascostlw*processheat; I for process heatI Maximum Availabe wood waste (kg/hr):6624 <= Mf; I Minimum feasible flow requiredMf <= WoodWaste;Exwood = Woodwaste - Mf;I ID FAN POWER REQUIREMENTSidfan = 0.013*Mf; I ID fan power in kW for standard combustorI OPERATING AND MAINTENANCEOM = 0.025 totalcap3; 1 2.5% of Totalcap3I INSURANCE AND PROPERTY TAXIT = 0.015 totalcap3; ! 1.5% of Totalcap3178I CLASS 34 INCOME TAX CREDITclass34_1 = 0. 25*corptax*turbcost+O. 25*corptax*furnacecost;class34_2 = 0. 50*corptax*turbcost+0. 50*corptax*furnacecost;class34_3 = 0. 25*corptax*turbcost+O. 25*corptax*furnacecost;end179! OPTION #2 - CERAMIC HEAT EXCHANGERi = 0.08;f = 0.04;= 1/(l+ir);= 1/(1+ir)”2;= 1/(1+ir)’3;.= l/(l+ir)”4;= l/(l+ir)”5;= l/(l+ir)’6;= l/(l+ir)’7;= l/(l+ir)”8; != l/(l+ir)’9;= l/(l+ir)’lO;!= 1/(1+ir)’11;!= 1/(l+ir)”12;!= 1/(1+ir)’13;!= 1/(l+ir)’14;!= 1/(l+ir)’15;!= l/(l+ir)A16;!= 1/(l+ir)’17;!= 1/(1+ir)’18;!= 1/(1+ir)’19;!= l/(l+ir)”20;!dispcredit = 39.42;hoursl = 4160;hours2 = 7884;I Discount Factors over 20 years1 i = real discount rate (%)I f = inflation rate (%)1 ir = nominal discount rate (%)Discount — year 1Discount — year 2Discount — year 3Discount — year 4Discount — year 5Discount — year 6Discount — year 7Discount — year 8Discount — year 9Discount — year 10Discount — year 11Discount — year 12Discount — year 13Discount — year 14Discount — year 15Discount — year 16Discount — year 17Discount — year 18Discount — year 19Discount - year 20! Wood waste Disposal Credit ($-hrs/kg—yr)1 5$/green tonne= 39.42 $-hrs/kg-yr! Hours of Operation per year! Sawmill operating hours/yr! 2 shifts/day @ 26odays/yr @ 8hrs/shiftI Hours of electricity production/yr1 90% of 365 days/yr @ 24 hrs/dayhours3 = hours2—hoursl; ! Hours over which maximum excess1 electricity is producedhours4 = 292; ! Standby hours = 10%*365 days*8 hrs/daydc = 76.44; 1 Rate Schedule 1200’s:! Demand charge = $6.37/kW/month =I $76.44/]cW/yrdcstand = 0.00665; 1 Standby demand chargeI Rate Schedule 1200’s:Energy Charge = 0.0312 $/kWhI Standby energy chargeexci = 0.0343; 1 Firm electricity purchase price1 including energy & capacity 0.0343 $/kWhexc2 = 0.015; 1 Secondary electricity purchase price 0.015 $/kWhconstraints 58;I BEGINNING OF PARAMETER LISTparameters 45irBiB2B3B4B5B6B7B8B9BlOBilB12B13B14B15B16B17BiBB19B2 0ec = 0.0312;ecstand = 0.02599;180pf = 0.90; ! Plant power factorgascostiw = 3.35; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for process heat in winter(3.35)gascostis = 2.75; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for process heat in summer(2.75)gascost2w = 2.50; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for cogen in winter(2.50)gascost2s = 1.95; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for cogen in summer(l.95)woodwaste = 19908; ! Maximum available wood waste (kg/hr)proheat = 20000; 1 Plant heating required (kW)avdemand = 3000; 1 Average demand (kW)pkdemand = 4000; 1 Peak demand (kw)corptax = 0.43; 1 Corporate Tax rate (%)inathand = 600000; 1 Allowance for a material handling systemI END OF PARAMETER LIST! VARIABLE LIST:Mf = flow rate of wood fuel (kg/hr)I Exwood = wood not consumed as fuel = Woodwaste — Mf (kg/hr)! peakdemand = peak electricity demand (kw)averagedemand = average electricity demand (kw)I demandsave = savings in demand charge ($)demandchge = cost of supplying peak demand ($)I energycharge = cost of continuous energy supply ($)totalcharge = demandcharge + energycharge ($)1 electricsave = electricity savings ($)I genelec = amount of electricity being generated (kw)exeleci = amount of electricity in excess of average demand= netelec — averagedemandexelec2 = netelecnetelec = net electricity output (kW)! standbypower = amount of standby power demanded (kW)I standbycost = cost of standby power ($)idfan = electricity required to run id fan (kW)I dryercost = cost of wood waste dryer ($)I dryersize = size of wood waste dryer (kg/hr)I furnacecost = cost of wood combustor ($)! furnacesize = size of wood coinbustor (kg/hr)! turbcost = cost of gas turbine ($)! turbsize = size of gas turbine (kw)! cehxcost = cost of the ceramic gas/air heat exchanger ($)! cehxsize = size of gas/air heat exchanger! hxcost = cost of the kiln/air heat exchanger ($)I hxsize = size of kiln/air heat exchanger (kg/hr)! multicost = cost of iuulticlone ($)I multisize = size of inulticloneI totalcapi = equipment capital cost ($)I install = cost of installation & delivery ($)! totalcap2 = totalcapi + install ($)I ductwork = cost of ductwork ($)I electrical = cost of electrical ($)instrument = cost of instrumentation ($)1 piping = cost of piping ($)I structural = cost of structural/civil ($)181totalcap3 = totalcap2 + duct.+elec.+instr.+pip.+struc ($)engineering = cost of engineering ($)constructm = cost of construction management ($)I totalcap4 = totalcap3 + eng.+constrm ($)! contingency = % of totalcap4 ($)1 total = project total capital cost ($)1 gas = amount of gas energy consumed (kw)1 gasenergy = cost of gas consumed ($)1 kilnheat = kiln heat required (kw)! processheat = total plant thermal requirements (kw)1 heatenergy = cost of providing the process heat ($)I benefits = project benefits over life of project ($)! costs = project costs over life of project ($)! 014 = yearly operating and maintenanace costs! class34_1 = class 34 tax credit in year of purchase! class34_2 = class 34 tax credit in year 1I class34_3 = class 34 tax credit in year 2! IT = yearly insurance and property taxvariables 54 Mf Exwood demandsave demandchge energychargetotalcharge genelec exeleci exelec2 dryercost dryersize furnacecostfurnacesize turbcost turbsize cehxcost cehxsize hxcost hxsizetotalcapi install totalcap2 ductwork peakdemand averagedemandprocessheat electrical instrument piping structural totalcap3engineering constructm totalcap4 contingency total gas gasenergyelectricsave kilnheat heatenergy benefits costs standbypowerstandbycost multicost multisizeOH class34_1 class34_2 class34_3 IT netelec idfan;OBJECTIVE FUNCTION:maximizebenefits — costs [cashflow);I SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONSTRAINTS:! BENEFITS (savings):Benefits =dispcredit*B1*Mf+dispcredit*B2*Mf+dispcredit*B3 *Mf+dispcredit*B4 *14f+dispcredit*B5*Mf+dispcredit*B6*Nf+dispcredit*B7*Mf+dispcredit*B8*Mf-i-dispcredit*Bg*Mf+dispcredit*Blo*Mf+dispcredit*Bll*Mf+dispcredit*B12*Mf+dispcredit*Bl3 *Mf+dispcredit*B14*Mf+dispcredit*Bl5*Mf+dispcredit*Bl6*Mf+dispcredit*B17*Mf+dispcredit*B18*Mf+dispcredit*Bl9 *Mf+dispcredit*B2O*Mf+Bl*electricsave+ B2*electricsave +B3*electricsave ÷ B4*electricsave + B5*electricsave +B6*electricsave + B7*electricsave ÷ B8*electricsave+B9*electricsave+B1O*electricsave+ Bll*electricsave+B12*electrjcsave+B13*electrjcsave+Bl4*electrjcsave+Bl5*electricsave+B16*electricsave+Bl7*electrjcsave+Bl8*electrjcsave+B19*electricsave+B2O*electricsave+excl*hoursl*Bl*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B2*exelecl+excl*hoursl*B3*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B4*exelecl +182excl*hoursl*B5*exelecl ÷ excl*hoursl*B6*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B7*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B8*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B9*exelecl + excl*hoursl*BlO*exelecl +excl*hoursl*Bll*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B12*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B13*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B14*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B15*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B16*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B17*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B18*exelecl +excl*hoursl*Bl9*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B20*exelecl +exc2*hours3*B1*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B2*exelec2+exc2*hours3*B3*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B4*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B5*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B6*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B7*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B8*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B9*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*BlO*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*Bll*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B12*exelec2 ÷exc2*hours3*Bl3*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B14*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B15*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B16*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*Bl7*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B18*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B19*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B20*exelec2 +Bl*heatenergy + B2*heatenergy +B3*heatenergy + B4*heatenergy + B5*heatenergy +B6*heatenergy + B7*heatenergy + B8*heatenergy ÷B9*heatenergy + BlO*heatenergy + B1l*heatenergy +B12*heatenergy + B13*heatenergy + B14*heatenergy +B15*heatenergy + B16*heatenergy + B17*heatenergy +B18*heatenergy + B19*heatenergy + B20*heatenergy +class34_l + Bl*class34_2 ÷ B2*class34_3 [benefit];I COSTS:costs = total + B1*gasenergy + B2*gasenergy +B3*gasenergy + B4*gasenergy + B5*gasenergy + B6*gasenergy +B7*gasenergy + B8*gasenergy + B9*gasenergy + BlO*gasenergy +B1l*gasenergy + B12*gasenergy + B13*gasenergy + B14*gasenergy +B15*gasenergy + B16*gasenergy + B17*gasenergy + B18*gasenergy +B19*gasenergy + B20*gasenergy +Bl*IT + B2*IT + B3*IT +B4*IT + B5*IT + B6*IT +B7*IT + B8*IT + B9*IT +BlO*IT + Bll*IT + B12*IT +B13*IT + B14*IT + B15*IT ÷B16*IT + B17*IT + B18*IT +B19*IT + B20*IT +B1*OM ÷ B2*OM + B3*OM + B4*OM + B5*OM ÷B6*OM + B7*OM + B8*OM + B9*OM + B1O*OM + Bll*OM +B12*OM + B13*OM + B14*014 + B15*OM + B16*OM + B17*OM +B18*OM + B19*OM + B20*OM +B1*standbycost+B2*standbycost+B3*standbycost+B4*standbycost+B5 * standbycost+B6*standbycost+B7 *standbycost+B8 *standbycost+B9 * standbycost+Bl0*standbycost+Bl 1 *standbycost+B12 *standbycost+B13B17 *stanycost+B18*stanycost+B19*stanycost+B2O*standbycost[cost];I ELECTRICITY DEMANDS AND CHARGES:183averagedemand =avdeiuand;peakdemand =pkdemand;! CASE 1: averagedemand <= netelec <= peakdemand!netelec <= peakdemand [power];!netelec >= averagedemand;!netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;!demandsave = dc*netelec;!demandchge = dc*peakdemand;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;!totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;!electricsave = energycharge ÷ demandsave;!standbypower = 0;standbycost=hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower+hours4 *ecstand*standbypower;I CASE 2: netelec <= avergedemandnetelec <= averagedeluand [power);netelec >= 660;netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;demandsave = dc*netelec;demandchge = dc*peakdemand;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;electricsave = ec*hoursl*netelec + demandsave;standbypower = 0;standbycost = hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower +hours4 *ecstand*standbypower;CASE 3: netelec >= peakdemandI netelec >= peakdemand [power];Inetelec <= 12000;!netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;!demandsave = deiuandchge;!demandchge = dc*peakdemand;I energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedeinand;!totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;!electricsave = totaicharge;!standbypower = 0;!standbycost = hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower +hours4*ecstand*standbypower;! EXCESS ELECTRICITY PRODUCEDCASE 1:!exelecl = netelec — averagedemand; I During sawmill operation!exelec2 = netelec; 1 Sawmill shutdown1 CASE 2:exeleci = 0;exelec2 = netelec;! CASE 3:!exelecl = netelec — averagedemand;!exelec2 = netelec;184! CAPITAL COSTS:! Hog fuel dryerdryercost = 0; ! No hog fuel dryer is required for metal HXdryersize = 0;furnacecost = 73.7 Mf + 1023583; ! Wood waste combustor (Furnace):furnacesize = Mf;! Gas Turbine: Kawasakiturbcost = 883 genelec + 514975;turbsize = genelec;! Ceramic Gas/Air Heat Exchanger:cehxcost = 103*Mf ÷ 4433914;cehxsize = Mf;! Metal Kiln/Air Heat Exchanger:hxcost = 14.76Mf + 88074;hxsize = Mf;multicost = 0;multisize = 0;! Option Direct Firing!hxcost = 0;!hxsize = 0;!multicost = 3.39*Mf + 11600;!multisize = Mf;! Total Capital No.1:totalcapi = mathand + dryercost + furnacecost + turbcost +cehxcost + hxcost ÷ multicost;! Installation and Labour = 10% of totalcapi:install = 0.10 totalcapi;! Total Capital No.2:totalcap2 = install ÷ totalcapi;! Ductwork = 10% of totalcap2:ductwork = 0.10 totalcap2;! Electrical = 14% of totalcap2:electrical = 0.14 totalcap2;Instrumentation = 5% of totalcap2:instrument = 0.05 totalcap2;1 Piping = 5% of totalcap2:piping = 0.05 totalcap2;I Structural = 15% of totalcap2:structural = 0.15*totalcap2;I New Capital, totalcap3:totalcap3 = totalcap2 + ductwork + electrical + instrument+ piping + structural;I Engineering costs = 7% of totalcap3:engineering = 0.07 totalcap3;I Construction Management = 5% of totalcap3:constructm = 0.05 totalcap3;I New total, totalcap4:totalcap4 = totalcap3 + engineering + constructm;I Contingency = 10%:contingency = 0.10 totalcap4;1 PROJECT TOTAL CAPITAL COST:185total = totalcap4 + contingency;I PHYSICAL RELATIONSHIPS AND CONSTRAINTS:1 Gas energy required:1 Case 1 wood flow: ! Mf <= 13248 kg/hr!gas = 0;!genelec <= 2043;! Case 2 wood flow: 1 13248 < Mf <= 19,908 kg/hrgas = 0;genelec <= 3981;.1 Case 3 wood flow: 1 19,908 < Mf <= 33,156 kg/hr!gas = 0;!genelec <= 7962;gasenergy = 7/12*0.003 6*hours2*gascost2s*gas+ 5/l2*0.0036*hours2*gascost2w*gas; I cost of gas for cogen1 Kiln Heating: Made available from processprocessheat = -l.ll*genelec + 1.26*Mf;1 Plant thermal requirements:kilnheat = proheat;lprocessheat <= kilnheat [heat];IORprocessheat >= kilnheat [heat];1 Heatenergy savings assuming gas is displaced:heatenergy = (7/12) *0. 0036*hours2*gascostls*processheat+ (5/12) *0.003 6*hours2*gascostlw*processheat;bRheatenergy = (7/12) *0.003 6*hours2*gascostls*kilnheat+(5/12) *0.003 6*hours2*gascostlw*kilnheat;I Maximum Availabe wood waste (kg/hr):13248 <= Mf; I Minimum feasible flow requiredMf <= WoodWaste;Exwood = Woodwaste - Mf;I ID FAN POWER REQUIREMENTSidfan = 0.013*Mf; ! ID fan power in kW for standard combustor186Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23#4ii 951.9 102.6 1,307.2 4.0 567.8#5ii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9#8ii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0#lOii 449.0 1,134.6 737.0 2.7 374.8#llii 1,140.0 1,064.7 1,531.0 3.5 938.6#l2ii 20.0 1,064.7#l3ii 1,140.0 1,064.7 1,531.0 3.5 938.6#l4ii 586.4 101.3 887.7 3.6 266.2#l6ii 727.7 101.3 1,046.8 3.8 375.1#l7ii 703.7 101.3 1,019.5 3.8 356.4Cp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.18 1.05CplOii and Cpllii = 1.08 1.22Cpl6ii = 1.14POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23#4iii 815.8 102.6 1,148.1 3.9 449.0#5iii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9#6iii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9#8iii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .0.0#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 00#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7#liiii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2#l2iii 20.0 1,054.5#l3iii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2#l4iii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9#l6iii 570.1 101.3 869.5 3.6 254.3#l7iii. 573.6 101. 873.4 3.6 256.8Cp4iii and Cp5iii = 1.16 1.05Cpl0iii and Cplliii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6iii = 1.11POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT. POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY45.3 10.245.3 io.45.3 io.0.0 0.09.3 0.09.3 0.09.3 0.00.0 0.09.4 0.09.4 0.045.3 0.054.7 0.0= 1,915 2,043=61, 723= 5,58434,174=39, 758== 0=1. 071=67.5=50.545.3 10.245.3 10.245.3 10.20.0 0.018.6 0.018.6 0.018.6 0.00.0 0.018.8 0.018.8 0.045.3 0.064.1 0.0= 3,615 3,981=61, 723=11,07426,133=37, 207= 0= 0=1.056=66.1=48.2156OPTION #2: CERAMIC HEAT EXCHANGERAmbient Temperature (C) = 20Atmospheric Pressure (kPa) = 101.3PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm) =250Annual wood waste production (ODT) =130,734Initial wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Target wood waste moisture content (%) = 50Maximum Heat Exchanger Pressure (kPa) = 1200TEMPCFLOW#1#2#3#7#15Cp3#4i5i•6i#8i#9 i#lOi#lli#12i#13i#14 i#16i#17iPROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSPRESS. ENTH. ENTR. EXER. MASS MOISTUREkPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H2020.0V 9.2 50.0• 20.0 9.2 50.01,094.1 103.1 1,476.0 4.1 698.8 45.3 10.220.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 40.9 0.020.0 171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1 45.3 0.0and Cp15 = 1.21 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 23815.8 102.6 1,148.1 3.9 449.0 45.3 10.2315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 45.3 10.2315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 45.3 10.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.020.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 18.6 0.0453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 18.6 0.01,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 18.6 0.020.0 1,054.5 V 0.0 0.01,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 18.8 0.0581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9V18.8 0.0570.1 101.3 869.5. 3.6 254.3 45.3 0.0573.6 101.3 873.4 3.6 256.8 64.1 0.0Cp4i and Cp5i = 1.16 1.05CpiOi and Cplli = 1.08 1.21Cpl6i = 1.11POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESSKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYPOWER (kW)FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)= 3,615 3,981=61, 723=11,07426,133=37, 207= 0= 0=1.056=66.1=48.22.57Manufacturer:KawasakiTurbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of the MiT - 23#4ii 564.2 102.6 863.0 3.6 251.1 45.3 10.2#Sii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 45.3 10.2#6ii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 45.3 10.2#8ii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 37.2 0.0#lOii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 37.2 0.0#liii 1,104.8 1,054.5 1,488.8 3.5 904.4 37.2 0.0#l2ii 20.0 1,054.5 0.0 0.0#l3ii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 37.6 0.0#l4ii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 37.6 0.0#l6ii 287.3 101.3 565.5 3.2 78.8 45.3 0.0ftl7ii 423.2 101.3 709.2 3.4 162.2 82.9 0.0Dp4ii and Cp5ii = 1.11 1.05CplOii and Cpllii = 1.08 1.21Cpl6ii = 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 7,230 7,962ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =61,723TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =22,14812,349KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =34,497ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) = 1,876HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESS =1.017FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =65.6SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =49.0Turbine No.3:Model No.: 3 Units of the MiT - 23#4iii 564.2 102.6 863.0 3.6 251.1 45.3 10.2#5iii 315.0 101.3 594.5 3.2 92.9 45.3 10.2#6iii 315.0 103.8 594.5 3.2 94.9 45.3 10.24t8iii 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0#9iii 20.0 -101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 55.8 0.0#i0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 55.8 0.0#iliii 887.6 1,054.5 1,231.6 3.3 706.7 55.8 0.0#i2iii 20.0 1,054.5 0.3 0.0#l3iii 1,130.0 1,054.5 1,519.0 3.5 928.2 56.4 0.0#l4iii 581.9 101.3 882.7 3.6 262.9 •56.4 0.0#l6iii 287.3 101.3 565.5 3.2 78.8 45.3 0.0#l7iii. 452.9 101.3 741.3 3.4 180.8 101.7 0.0Cp4iii and Cp5iii = 1.11 1.05Cpi0iii and Cplliii = 1.08 1.21Cpi6iii = 1.04POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASEDPOWER (kW)(kW) AND RATED OUTPUTIN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)HEAT EXCHANGER EFFECTIVENESSFIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY=10,84511,943=61, 723=33,22212,349=45, 571= 0=18, 761=0. 827=70.1=55.9158OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLUIDIZED BED AIR HEATERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:VSawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)= 20= 101.3= 50= 26,147= 50= 50= 815POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS:FLUEKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYPOWER (KW) VGAS HEAT (kW)= 1,001 1,235=12, 345= 3,972 5,194= 9,165= 0= 1,123=75.5=35.9PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSFLOW TEMP PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MASS FLOW MOISTURE# deg C kPa kJfkg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H20#1 20.0 1.8 50.0#2 20.0 1.8 50.0#3 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.1. 610.4 9.1 10.2#7 20.0 187.5 293.2 2.5 5.2 8.2 0.0#8 315.0 117.6 594.5 3.2 94.1 8V.2 0.0#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1 9.1 V 0.0Cp7, Cp8 and Cp15 = 1.01 1.05 1.01 VTurbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A -hA#4ai 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.1 610.4 9.1 10.2#4i 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 203.6 9.1 10.2#5i 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7 9.1 10.2#6i 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 50.7 9.1 10.2#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 8.2 0.0#lOi 378.1 942.1 661.1 2.7 315.4 8.2 0.0#llai 815.0VV#lli 815.0 802.3 1,147.2 3.3 621.4 8.2 0.0#12i 20.0 802.3 0.0 0.0#13i 910.0 802.3 1,257.9 3.4 703.5 8.3 00#14i 482.0 101.3 772.7 3.5 193.0 8.3 0.0#16i 566.8 101.3 865.9 3.6 251.9 9.1 0.0#17i 526.5 101.3 821.4 3.5 223.8 17.4 0.0Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6i = 1.03 1.11159Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23#4aii 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.1 610.4 9.1 10.2#4ii 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 203.6 9.1 10.2#Sii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7 9.1 10.2#6ii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3,1 50.7 9.1 10.2#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 9.3 0.0fflOii 449.0 1,134.6 737.0 2.7 374.8 9.3 0.0#llaii 815.0#llii 815.0 994.8 1,147.2 3.2 639.5 9.3 0.0#l2ii 20.0 994.8 0.1 0.0#l3ii 1,140.0 994.8 1,531.0 3.5 932.9 9.4 0.0#l4ii 597.8 101.3 900.3 3.6 274.6 9.4 0.0#l6ii 566.8 101.3 865.9 3.6 251.9 9.1 0.0#l7ii 582.6 101.3 883.4 3.6 263.5 18.5 0.0Cp4aii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6ii = 1.03 1.11POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 1,797 2,043ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =12,345TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) = 5,703 5,194KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =10,896ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) = 4,124FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =77.1SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =45.8Turbine No.3:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23744.5 103.1 1,066.0 3.8 389.0 9.1 10.2497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 203.6 9.1 10.2232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7 9.1 10.2232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 50.7 9.1 10.220.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 18.6 0.0453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 384.4 18.6 0.0688.2815.0 984.6 1,147.2 3.2 646.4 18.6 0.020.0 984.6 0.1 0.01,130.0 984.6 1,519.0 3.5 930.2 18.8 0.0593.3 101.3 895.3 3.6 279.1 18.8 0.0283.0 101.3 561.0 3.1 76.6 9.1 0.0494.6 101.3 786.5 3.4 213.2 27.9 0.0and Cp4 = 1.14 1.09Cpl6iii = 1.03 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW)AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 3,377 3,981ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =12345TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =11,312 2,429KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =13,741ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) = 7,998FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =84.1SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =55.9#4aiii#4iii#5i ii#6iii#9iii#i0iii.#llaiii#lliii#l2iii#l3iii#l4iii#l6iii#l7iiiCp4ai iiCp5 and160OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLUIDIZED BED AIR HEATERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)= 20= 101.3= 50= 26,147= 50= 50= 815(kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (KW)IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEATKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYPROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSPRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPYkPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK610.45.294.144.1FLOW TEMP EXERGY MASS FLOW# deg C kJ/kg kg/sec#1 20.0 1.8#2 20.0 1.8#3 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 9.1#7 20.0 187.5 293.2 8.2#8 315.0 117.6 594.5 8.2#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 9.1Cp7. Cp8 and Cp15 = 1.01 1.05 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 23#4ai 744.5 103.1 1,066.0#4i 497.9 102.6 790.1#5i 232.0 101.3 508.2#6i 232.0 101.3 508.2#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2#lOi 453.2 1,124.4 741.5#llai 688.2#lli 815.0 984.6 1,147.2#12i 20.0 984.6#l3i 1,130.0 984.6 1,519.0#14i 593.3 101.3 895.3#16i 283.0 101.3 561.0#17i 494.6 101.3 786.5Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.14 1.09CpS and Cpl6i = 1.03 1.044.].2.53.22.33.83.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.13.5MOISTURE%H2O50.050.010.20.00.00.010.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.03,9812,429389.0203.651.750.70.0376.7638.6922.5271.376.6207.99.19.19.19.118.618.618.60.118.818.89.127.9POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASED= 3,377=12, 345(kW) =11,312= 13,741=.. 0= 7,998=84.1=55.2161.Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of the MiT - 23103.1102.6101.3101.3101.31,124.4#4aii 572.1#4ii 497.9#5ii 232.0#6ii 232.0#9ii 20.0#lOii 453.2#llaii 572.1#llii 679.2#l2ii 20.0#l3ii 1,130.0#l4ii 593.3#l6ii 97.8#l7ii 501.0Cpdaii and Cp4 = 1.11Cp5 and Cpl6ii = 1.03871.7790.1508.2508.2293.2741.5991.71,519.0895.3371.5793.53.63.53.03.12.52.72.83.33.42.73.2984.6984.6984.6101.310l..3101.31.091.01255.9203.651.750.70.0376.7606.21,000.8349.79.0283.4POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: 3 Units of the10.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.09.19.19.19.137.237.237.20.437.637.69.146.6= 6,753 7,962=12, 345=22,625 711=23, 336= 0=22, 422=86.5=76.99.19.19.19.155.855.855.80.756.456.49.165.4=10,13011,943=12, 345=33,937 332=34, 270= 0=38, 366=87.6=81.8#4aiii 532.8 103.1#4iii . 497.9 102.6#5iii 232.0 101.3#6iii 232.0 101.3#9iii 20.0 101.3#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4#llaiii 532.8#lliii 611.3 984.6#l2iii 20.0 984.6#l3iii 1,130.0 984.6#l4iii 593.3 101.3#l6iii 56.5 101.3#l7iii 522.4 101.3Cp4aiii and Cp4 =1.10 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6iii = 1.03 1.013.53.53.03.12.52.7MiT - 23828.3790.1508.2508.2293.2.741.5915.41,519.0895.3329.8817.0227.9203.651.750.70.0384.42.8 543.93.33.42.63.3990.5339.42.4292.7POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY162OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLUIDIZED BED AIR HEATERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS= 20= 101.3=150= 78,440= 50= 50= 815FLOW TEMP PRESSURE# degC kPa#1 20.0#2 20.0#3 1,000.0 103.1#7 20.0 187.5#8 315.0 117.6#15 20.0 171.2Cp7, Cp8 and Cp15 = 1.01 1.05Turbine No.1:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A -hA#4ai 1,000.0 103.1#4i 497.9 102.6#5i 232.0 101.3#6i 232.0 101.3#9i 20.0 101.3#lOi 378.1 942.1#llai 815.0#lli 815.0 802.3#12i 20.0 802.3#13i 910.0 802.3#14i 482.0 101.3#16i 566.8 101.3#17i 547.1 101.3Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6i = 1.03 1.11ENTHALPY ENTROPYkJ/kg kJ/kgK1,364.0293.2594.5293.21.01(kW) AND RATED OUTPUTIN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESSKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYEXERGY MASS FLOWkJ/kg kg/sec5.55.527.224.624.627.28.20.08.38.327.235.5MOISTURE%H2050.050.010.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.0o;o0.0610.45.294.144.14.12.53.22.34.13.53.03.12.52.71,364.0790.1508.2508.2293.2661.127.227.227.227.28.28.21,147.2 3.310.210.210.210.20.00.0•610.4203.651.750.70.0315.4621.4703.5193.0251.9238.21,257.9772.7865.9844.1POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASED3.43.53.63.6POWER (KW)FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)= 1,001 1,235=37,0333,97215,581= 19,552= 0= 1,123=53.9=22.4163POWER (kW)POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY= 3,377 3,981=37, 033=11,31215,581=26, 893= 0= 7,998=67.2=37.1Turbine No.2:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23#4aii 1,000.0 103.1ff4ii 497.9 102.6#5ii 232.0 101.3#6ii 232.0 101.3#9ii 20.0 101.3#lOii 449.0 1,134.6#llaii 815.0#llii 815.0 994.8#l2ii 20.0 994.8#l3ii 1,140.0 994.8#l4ii 597.8 101.3#l6ii 566.8 101.3#17ii 574.8 101.3Cp4aii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6ii = 1.03 1.111,364.0790.1508.2508.2293.2737.01,147.21,531.0900.3865.9874.74.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6610.4203.651.750.70.0374.8639.5932.9274.6251.9257.810.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: MiT — 23#4aiii 1,000.0 103.127.227.227.227.29.39.39.30.19.49.427.236.6= 1,797 2,043=37, 033= 5,70315,581=21, 284= 0= 4,124=56.1=27.327.227.227.227.218.618618.60.118.818.827.246.0#4iii 497.9#Siii 232.0#6iii 232. 0#9iii 20.0#l0iii 453.2#llaiii 815.0#lliii 815.0#l2iii 20.0#l3iii 1,130.0#i4iii 593.3#l6iii 566.8#l7iii 577.7Cp4aiii and Cp4 =Cp5 and Cpl6iii =102.6101.3101.3101.31,124.4984.6984.6984.6101.3101.3101.31.19 1.091.03 1.111,364.0790.1508.2508.. 2293.2741.51,147.21,519.0895.3865.9877.94.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6610.4203.651.750.70.0384.4646.4930.2279.1251.9263.010.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0164OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLIJIDIZED BED AIR HEATERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial’wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS= 20= 101.3=150= 78,440= 50= 50= 815POWER (KW)POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEATKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY= 3,377 3,981=37, 033(kW) =11,31215,581= 26,8930= 7,998=67.2=36.8FLOW##1#2#3#7#8#15Cp7,PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPYkPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK• TEMPdeg C20.020.01,000.020.0315.020.0Cp8 and Cp15103.1187.5117.6171.2= 1.01 1.051,364.0293.2594.5293.21.01EXERGY MASS FLOWkJ/kg kg/sec5.55.5610.4 27.252 24.694.1 24.644.1 27.2Turbine No.1:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the M1T — 231,000.0 103.1 1,364.04.12.53.22.34.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6#4ai#4i 497.9 102.6 790.1#5i 232.0 101.3 508.2#6i 232.0 101.3 508.2#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2#lOi 453.2 1,124.4 741.5#llai 815.0#lli 815.0 984.6 1,147.2#12i 20.0 984.6#l3i 1,130.0 984.6 1,519.0#14i 593.3 101.3 895.3#16i 566.8 101.3 865.9#17i 577.7 101.3 877.9Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6i = 1.03 1.11MOISTURE%H2050.050.010.20.00.00.010.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0610.4203.651.750.70.0376.7638.6922.5271.3251.9259.927.227.2.27.227.218.6.18.618.60.118.818.827.246.0165Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of#4aii 982.6 103.1#4ii 497.9 102.6#5ii 232.0 101.3#6ii 232.0 101.3#9ii 20.0 101.3#lOii 453.2 1,124.4#llaii 802.0#llii 815.0 984.6#l2ii 20.0 984.6#l3ii 1,130.0 984.6#l4ii 593.3 101.3#l6ii 547.1 101.3#l7ii 574.0 101.3Cp4aii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6ii = 1.03 1.104.03.53.03.12.52.7the MiT - 231,343.4790.1508.2508.2293.2741.51,147.21,519.0895.3844.2873.9594.5203.651.750.70.0376.73.2 638.63.53.63.63.6922.5271.3238.0257.310.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.210:20..00.00.00.00.00.00.00.027.227.227.227.237.237.237.20.337.637.627.264.8= 6,753 7,962=37, 033=22,62514,991=37,615= 0=15,996=83.7=51.327.227.227.227.255.855.855.80.456.456.427.283.6=10,13011,943=37,033=33,937 7,285=41,223= 0=23, 993=84.1=56.1POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 3 Units of the MiT - 23#4aiii 744.4 103.1 1,066.0 3.8 388.9#4iii 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 203.6#5iii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7#6iii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 50.7#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0#l0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 384.4#ilaiii 688.2#liiii 815.0 984.6 1,147.2 3.2 646.4#l2iii 20.0 984.6#l3iii 1,130.0 984. 1,519.0 3.5 930.2#l4iii 593.3 101.3 895.3 3.6 279.1#i6iii 282.9 101.3 561.0 3.1 76.6#i7iii 494.6 101.3 786.5 3.4 213.2Cp4aiii and Cp4 = 1.14 1.09CpS and Cpl6iii = 1.03 1.04POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY166OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLUIDIZED BED AIR HEATERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbin)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)= 20= 101.3=250=130, 734= 50= 50= 815POWER (KW)POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEATKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY= 1,001 1,235=61,723(kW) = 3,97225,968= 29,9400= 1,123=49..2=19.5PROCESS FLOW CONDITIONSFLOW TEMP PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MASS FLOW MOISTURE# deg C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H20#1 20.0 9.2 50.0#2 20.0 9.2 50.0#3 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.1 610.4 45.3 10.2#7 20.0 187.5 293.2 2.5 5.2 40.9 0.0#8 315.0 117.6 594.5 3.2 94.1 40.9 0.0#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 2.3 44.1 45.3 0.0Cp7, Cp8 and Cp15 = 1.01 1.05 1.01, Turbine No.1:Manufacturer:Kawasaki- -Model No.: M1A -hA#4ai 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.1 610.4 45.3 10.2#4i 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 203.6 45.3 10.2#5i 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7 45.3 10.2#6i 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 50.7 45.3 10.2#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 8.2 0.0#lOi 378.1 942.1 661.1 2.7 315.4 8.2 0.0#llai 815.0#lhi 815.0 802.3 1,147.2 3.3 621.4 8.2 0.0#12i 20.0 802.3 0.0 0.0#13i 910.0 802.3 1,257.9 3.4 703.5 8.3 0.0#14i 482.0 101.3 72.7 3.5 193.0 8.3 0.0#16i 566.8 101.3 865.9 3.6 25-1.9 45.3 0.0#17i 553.8 101.3 851.5 3.6 242.8 53.6 0.0Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6i = 1.03 1.11167POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW)ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.3:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: MiT - 23#4aiii 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.1 610.4#4iii 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 2036#Siii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7#6iii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 50.7#9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2. 2.5 0.0-#lOiii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 384.4#llaiii 815.0#iliii 815.0 984.6 1,147.2 3.2 646.4#l2iii. 20.0 984.6#l3iii 1130.0 984.6 1,519.0 3.5 930.2#l4iii 593.3 101.3 895.3 3.6 279.1#l6iii 566.8 101.3 865.9 3.6 251.9#l7iii 574.6 101.3 874.5 3.6 259.9Cp4aiii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09CpS and Cpl6iii = 1.03 1.11POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESSKILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCYTurbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: M1A - 23#4aii 1,000.0 103.1#4ii 497.9 102.6#5ii 232.0 101.3#6ii 232.0 101.3#9ii 20.0 101.3#lOii 449.0 1,134.6#llaii 8.15.0#ilii 815.0 994.8#l2ii 20.0 994.8#l3ii 1,140.0 994.8#l4ii 597.8 101.3#l6ii 566.8 -101.3#l7ii 572.1 101.3Cp4aii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6ii = 1.03 1.111,364.0790.1508.2508.2293.2737.01,147.21,531.0900.3865.9871.84.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.6.6610.4203.651.750.70.0374.8639.5932.9274.6251.9255.810.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.010.210.210.210.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.045.345.345.345.39.39.39.30.19.49.445.354.7= 1,797 2,043=61, 723= 5,70325,968=31,671= 0= 4,124=50.8=22.745.345.345.345.318.618.618.60.118.818.845.364.1= 3,377 3,981=61, 723=11,31225,968=37,280= 0= 7,998=58.3=29.3POWER (kW)FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)168OPTION #3: ATMOSPHERIC FLUIDIZED BED AIR HEATERAmbient Temperature (C)Atmospheric Pressure (kPa)PLANT CONDITIONS:Sawmill annual capacity (Mfbm)Annual wood waste production (ODT)Initial wood waste moisture content (%)Target wood waste moisture content (%)Maximum Air Tube Temperature (C)POWER GENERATEDENERGY RELEASEDPROCESS FLOW CONDITIONS= 20= 101.3=250=130,734= 50= 50= 815610.45.294.144.1FLOW TEMP PRESSURE ENTHALPY ENTROPY EXERGY MASS FLOW MOISTURE# deg C kPa kJ/kg kJ/kgK kJ/kg kg/sec %H20#1 20.0 9.2 50.0#2 20.0 9.2 50.0#3 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 45.3 10.2#7 20.0 187.5 293.2 40.9 0.0#8 315.0 117.6 594.5 40.9 0.0#15 20.0 171.2 293.2 45.3 0.0Cp7, Cp8 and Cp15 = 1.01 1.05 1.01Turbine No.1:Manufacturer : KawasakiModel No.: 1 Unit of the MiT - 23#4ai 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 10.2#4i 497.9 102.6 790.1 10.2#5i 232.0 101.3 508.2 10.2#6i 232.0 101.3 508.2 10.2#9i 20.0 101.3 293.2 0.0#lOi 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 0.0#llai 815.0#lli 815.0 984.6 1,147.2 0.0#12i 20.0 984.6 0.0#l3i 1,130.0 984.6 1,519.0 0.0#14i 593.3 101.3 895.3 0.0#16i 566.8 101.3 865.9 0.0#17i 574.6 101.3 874.5 0.0Cp4ai and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6i = 1.03 1.114.12.53.22.34.13.53.03.12.52.73.23.53.63.63.6610.4203.651.750.70.0376.7638.6922.5271.3251.9257.645.345.345.345.318.618.618.60.118.818.845.364.1= 3,377 3,981=61,723=11, 31225, 968= 37,280= 0= 7,998=58.3=29.1POWER (KW)(kW) AND RATED OUTPUTIN COMBUSTOR (kW)TUREINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY169POWER (kW)POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUTENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW)TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW)KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW)ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW)ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW)FIRST LAW EFFICIENCYSECOND LAW EFFICIENCY=10,13011,943=61, 723=33, 93725, 968=59, 905= 0=23, 993=81.7=49.9Turbine No.2:Manufacturer: KawasakiModel No.: 2 Units of the MiT - 23#4aii 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.1 610.4 45.3 10.2#4ii 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 203.6 45.3 10.2#5ii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 51.7 45.3 10.2#6ii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 50.7 45.3 10.2#9ii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0 37.2 0.0#lOii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 376.7 37.2 0.0#ilaii 815.0#ilii 815.0 984.6 1,147.2 3.2 638.6 37.2 0.0#l2ii 20.0 984.6 0.3 0.0#l3ii 1,130.0 984.6 1,519.0 3.5 922.5 37.6 0.0#l4ii 593.3 101.3 895.3 3.6 271.3 37.6 0.0#l6ii 566.8 101.3 865.9 3.6 251.9 45.3 0.0#l7ii 578.9 101.3 879.2 3.6 260.7 82.9 0.0Cp4aii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6ii = 1.03 1.11POWER GENERATED (kW) AND RATED OUTPUT POWER (kW) = 6,753 7,962ENERGY RELEASED IN COMBUSTOR (kW) =61,723TURBINE EXHAUST HEAT (kW) AND EXCESS FLUE GAS HEAT (kW) =22,62525,968KILN HEAT AVAILABLE (kW) =48,593ENERGY REQUIRED IN DRYER (kW) = 0ENERGY INPUT FROM NATURAL GAS (kW) =15,996FIRST LAW EFFICIENCY =71.2SECOND LAW EFFICIENCY =40.3Turbine No.3:Manufacturer:KawasakiModel No.: 3 Units of the MiT - 23#4aiii 1,000.0 103.1 1,364.0 4.1 10.2#4iii 497.9 102.6 790.1 3.5 10.2#Siii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.0 10.2#6iii 232.0 101.3 508.2 3.1 10.2ff9iii 20.0 101.3 293.2 2.5 0.0#i0iii 453.2 1,124.4 741.5 2.7 0.0#ilaiii 815.0fflliii 815.0 984.6 0.0#i2iii 20.0 984.6 0.0#l3iii 1,130.0 984.6 0.0#l4iii 593.3 101.3 0.0#l6iii 566.8 101.3 0.0#l7iii 581.5 101.3 0.0Cp4aiii and Cp4 = 1.19 1.09Cp5 and Cpl6iii = 1.03 1.11610.4203.651.750.70.0384.4646.4930.2279.1251.9267.01,147.21,519.0895.3865.9882.245.345.345.345.355.855.855.80.456.456.445.3101.73.23.53.63.63.6170Appendix B:Linear Programming Modelsfor Options #1, #2, #3171OPTION #1 - METALLIC HEAT EXCHANGERi=0.08;f=0.04;ir =(1+i)*(l+f)—1;Bl = l/(1+ir);B2 = l/(l+ir)’’2;B3 = l/(1+ir)”3;B4 = 1/(l+ir)A4;B5 = l/(l+ir)’5;B6 = l/(l+ir)”6;B7 = 1/(1+ir)’7;B8 =B9 = l/(l+ir)’9;BlO = l/(l+ir)”lO;!Bli = 1/(l+ir)A11;!B12 = l/(1+ir)”12;!Bl3 = l/(1+ir)A13;!Bl4 = 1/(1+ir)14;!Bl5 = 1/(1+ir)’’l5;!B16 = 1/(1+ir)’l6;!B17 = l/(1+ir)’17;!B18 = 1/(1+ir)’18;!B19 = l/(l+ir)”19;!B20 = 1/(1+ir)A20;!dispcredit = 39.42;hoursi = 4160;hours2 = 7884;I Discount Factors over 20 yearsi = real discount rate (%)f = inflation rate (%)I ir = nominal discount rate (%)Discount — year 1Discount — year 2Discount — year 3Discount — year 4Discount — year 5Discount — year 6Discount — year 7Discount — year 8Discount — year 9Discount — year 10Discount — year 11Discount — year 12Discount — year 13Discount — year 14Discount — year 15Discount — year 16Discount — year 17Discount — year 18Discount — year 19Discount — year 20I Wood waste Disposal Credit ($-hrs/kg-yr)! 5$/green tonne= 39.42 $-hrs/kg-yr! Hours of Operation per yearI Sawmill operating hours/yr! 2 shifts/day @ 26odays/yr @ Bhrs/shiftI Hours of electricity production/yr! 90% of 365 days/yr @ 24 hrs/dayhours3 = hours2—hoursl; I Hours over which maximum excess! electricity is producedhours4 = 292; 1 Standby hours = 10%*365 days*8 hrs/daydc = 76.44; ! Rate Schedule 1200’s:I Demand charge = $6.37/kW/month =I $76.44/kW/yrdcstand = 0.00665; 1 Standby demand chargeec = 0.0312; 1 Rate Schedule 1200’s:! Energy Charge = 0.0312 $/kWhecstand = 0.02599; 1 Standby energy chargeexcl = 0.0343; 1 Firm electricity purchase priceI including energy & capacity 0.0343 $/kWhexc2 = 0.015; 1 Secondary electricity purchase price 0.015 $/kWhconstraints 58;1 BEGINNING OF PARAMETER LISTparameters 45172pf = 0.90; I Plant power factorgascostlw = 3.35; ! Gas cost $/GJ for process heat in winter(3.35)gascostis = 2.75; ! Gas cost $/GJ for process heat in summer(2.75)gascost2w = 2.50; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for cogen in winter(2.50)gascost2s = 1.95; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for cogen in summer(l.95)woodwaste = 19908; ! Maximum available wood waste (kg/hr)proheat = 20000; ! Plant heating required (kW)avdemand = 3000; 1 Average demand (kW)pkdemand = 4000; ! Peak demand (kw)corptax = 0.43; 1 Corporate Tax rate (%)mathand = 600000; 1 Allowance for a material handling systemI END OF PARAMETER LISTI VARIABLE LIST:1 Mf = flow rate of wood fuel (kg/hr)I Exwood = wood not consumed as fuel = Woodwaste — Mf (kg/hr)! peakdemand = peak electricity demand (kw)1 averagedemand = average electricity demand (kw)1 demandsave = savings in demand charge ($)! demandchge = cost of supplying peak demand ($)I energycharge = cost of continuous energy supply ($)totalcharge = demandcharge + energycharge ($)1 electricsave = electricity savings ($)I genelec = amount of electricity being generated (kw)1 exelecl = amount of electricity in excess of average demand= netelec — averagedemand1 exelec2 = netelec1 netelec = net electricity output (kW)1 standbypower = amount of standby power demanded (kW)1 standbycost = cost of standby power ($)idfan = electricity required to run id fan (kW)1 dryercost = cost of wood waste dryer ($)dryersize = size of wood waste dryer (kg/hr)1 furnacecost = cost of wood combustor ($)I furnacesize = size of wood combustor (kg/hr)1 turbcost = cost of gas turbine ($)! turbsize = size of gas turbine (kw)I mthxcost = cost of the metal gas/air heat exchanger ($)I mthxsize = size of gas/air heat exchangerI hxcost = cost of the kiln/air heat exchanger ($)I hxsize = size of kiln/air heat exchanger (kg/hr)1 multicost = cost of multiclone ($)I multisize = size of multicloneI totalcapl = equipment capital cast ($)I install = cost of installation & delivery ($)! totalcap2 = totalcapl + install ($)! ductwork = cost of ductwork ($)! electrical = cost of electrical ($)I instrument = cost of instrumentation ($)1 piping = cost of piping ($)1 structural = cost of structural/civil ($)173totalcap3 = totalcap2 + duct.+elec.+instr.+pip.+struc ($)! engineering = cost of engineering ($)1 constructm = cost of construction management ($)I totalcap4 = totalcap3 + eng.+constrm ($)1 contingency = % of totalcap4 ($)I total = project total capital cost ($)! gas = amount of gas energy consumed (kw)! gasenergy = cost of gas consumed ($)! kilnheat = kiln heat required (kw)! processheat = total plant thermal requirements (kw)! heatenergy = cost of providing the process heat ($)I benefits = project benefits over life of project ($)1 costs = project costs over life of project ($)1 OM = yearly operating and maintenanace costs! class34_l = class 34 tax credit in year of purchase! class34_2 = class 34 tax credit in year 1! class34_3 = class 34 tax credit in year 2! IT = yearly insurance and property taxvariables 54 Mf Exwood demandsave demandchge energychargetotalcharge genelec exeleci exelec2 dryercost dryersize furnacecostfurnacesize turbcost turbsize mthxcost mthxsize hxcost hxsizetotalcapi install totalcap2 ductwork peakdemand averagedemandprocessheat electrical instrument piping structural totalcap3engineering constructm totalcap4 contingency total gas gasenergyelectricsave kilnheat heatenergy benefits costs standbypowerstandbycost multicost multisizeOM class34_l class34_2 class343 IT netelec idfan;I OBJECTIVE FUNCTION:maximizebenefits — costs [cashflow);I SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONSTRAINTS:1 BENEFITS (savings):Benefits =dispcredit*Bl*Mf+dispcredit*B2*Mf+dispcredit*B3*Mf+dispcredit*B4 *Mf+dispcredit*B5*Mf+dispcredit*B6*Mf+dispcredit*B7*Mf+dispcredit*B8*Mf+dispcredit*B9*Mf+dispcredit*Blo*Mf+dispcredit*Bll*Mf+dispcredit*B12*Mf+dispcredit*B13 *Mf+dispcredit*Bl4*Mf+dispcredit*B15*Mf+dispcredit*B16*Mf+dispcredit*B17*Mf+dispcredit*B18*Mf+dispcredit*B19 *Mf+dispcredit*B2O*Mf+Bl*electricsave+ B2*electricsave +B3*electricsave + B4*electricsave + B5*electricsave +B6*electricsave + B7*electricsave + B8*electricsave+B9 *electrjcsave+BlO*electrjcsave+ B11*electricsave+Bl2 *electricsave+B13*electrjcsave+Bl4*electrjcsave+Bl5*electricsave+B16*electricsave+B17*electrjcsave+BiB*electricsave+B19*electrjcsave+B20*electrjcsave+exci*hoursi*Bl*exeleci + excl*hoursi*B2*exelecl+excl*hoursi*B3*exeleci + excl*hoursi*B4*exelecl +174excl*hoursl*B5*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B6*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B7*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B8*eXelecl +excl*hoursl*B9*exelecl + excl*hoursl*BlO*exelecl +excl*hoursl*Bll*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B12*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B13*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B14*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B15*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B16*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B17*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B18*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B19*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B20*exelecl +exc2*hours3 *B1*exelec2 + exc2*hours3 *B2*exelec2+exc2*hours3*B3*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B4*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B5*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B6*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B7*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B8*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B9*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B1O*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*Bll*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B12*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B13*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B14*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B15*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B16*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B17*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B18*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B19*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B20*exelec2 +B1*heatenergy + B2*heatenergy +B3*heatenergy + B4*heatenergy + B5*heatenergy +B6*heatenergy + B7*heatenergy + B8*heatenergy +B9*heatenergy + B1O*heatenergy + B11*heatenergy +B12*heatenergy + B13*heatenergy + B14*heatenergy +B15*heatenergy + B16*heatenergy + B17*heatenergy +B18*heatenergy + B19*heatenergy + B20*heatenergy +class34_1 + Bl*class34_2 + B2*class34_3 [benefit];! COSTS:costs = total + Bl*gasenergy + B2*gasenergy +B3*gasenergy + B4*gasenergy + B5*gasenergy + B6*gasenergy +B7*gasenergy + B8*gasenergy + B9*gasenergy + BlO*gasenergy +B1l*gasenergy + B12*gasenergy + B13*gasenergy + B14*gasenergy +B15*gasenergy + B16*gasenergy + B17*gasenergy + B18*gasenergy +B19*gasenergy + B20*gasenergy +B1*IT + B2*IT + B3*IT +B4*IT + B5*IT + B6*IT +B7*IT + B8*IT + B9*IT +BlO*IT + Bll*IT + B12*IT +B13*IT + B14*IT + B15*IT +B16*IT + B17*IT + B18*IT +B19*IT + B20*IT +B1*OM + B2*OM + B3*OM + B4*OM + B5*OM +B6*OM + B7*OM + B8*OM + B9*OM + BlO*OM + Bll*OM +B12*OM + B13*O!4 + B14*OM + B15*OM + B16*OM + B17*OM +B18*014 + B19*OM + B20*OM +B1*standbycost+B2*stanclbycost+B3*standbycost+B4*standbycost+B5 *standbycost+B6*standbycost+B7 *standbycost+B8*standbycost-IB9 *standbycost+B1O*standbycost+B11*standbycost+B12 *standbycost+B13 *standbycost+B14*standbycost+B15*standbycost+B16*standbycost+B17*standbycost+B18*standbycost+B19*standbycost+B2O*standbycost[cost);I ELECTRICITY DEMANDS AND CHARGES:175averagedemand =avdeniand;peakdemand =pkdemand;1 CASE 1: averagedemand <S netelec <= peakdemand1 netelec <= peakdemand [power);!netelec >= averagedemand;!netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;!demandsave = dc*netelec;!deinandchge = dc*peakdemand;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;!totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;!electricsave = energycharge + demandsave;!standbypower = 0;standbycost=hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower+hours4 *ecstand*stanypower;! CASE 2: netelec <= avergedeinandnetelec <= averagedemand [power);netelec >= 660;netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;demandsave = dc*netelec;demandchge = dc*peakdemand;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;totalcharge = demandchge ÷ energycharge;electricsave = ec*hoursl*netelec + deinandsave;standbypower = 0;standbycost = hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower +hours4 *ecstand*standbypower;1 CASE 3: netelec >= peakdemand1 netelec >= peakdemand [power];!netelec <= 12000;!netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;I demandsave = demandchge;ldemandchge = dc*peakdemand;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;!totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;!electricsave = totaicharge;Istandbypower = 0;!standbycost = hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower +! hours4 *ecstand*standbypower;1 EXCESS ELECTRICITY PRODUCED! CASE 1:!exelecl = netelec — averagedemand; I During sawmill operation!exelec2 = netelec; ! Sawmill shutdownI CASE 2:exeleci = 0;exelec2 = netelec;! CASE 3:lexeleci = netelec — averagedemand;Iexelec2 = netelec;1761 CAPITAL COSTS:I Hog fuel dryerdryercost = 0; 1 No hog fuel dryer is required for metal HXdryersize = 0;furnacecost = 73 • 7 Mf + 1023583; ! Wood waste combustor (Furnace):furnacesize = Mf;I Gas Turbine: Kawasakiturbcost = 883 genelec + 514975;turbsize = genelec;I Metal Kiln/Air Heat Exchanger:hxcost = 14.76Mf + 88074;hxsize = Mf;1 Metal Gas/Air Heat Exchanger:mthxcost = 14.76Mf + 88074;mthxsize = Mf;multicost = 0;multisize = 0;I Option Direct Firing!iuthxcost = 0;!iuthxsize = 0;!multicost = 3.39*Mf + 11600;!multisize = Mf;1 Total Capital No.1:totalcapi = mathand + dryercost + furnacecost + turbcost +iuthxcost + hxcost + inulticost;1 Installation and Labour = 10% of totalcapi:install = 0.10 totalcapi;! Total Capital No.2:totalcap2 = install + totalcapi;! Ductwork = 10% of totalcap2:ductwork = 0.10 totalcap2;I Electrical = 14% of totalcap2:electrical = 0.14 totalcap2;Instrumentation = 5% of totalcap2:instrument = 0.05 totalcap2;1 Piping = 5% of totalcap2:piping = 0.05 totalcap2;Structural = 15% of totalcap2:structural = 0.l5*totalcap2;I New Capital, totalcap3:totalcap3 = totalcap2 + ductwork + electrical + instrument+ piping + structural;I Engineering costs = 7% of totalcap3:engineering = 0.07 totalcap3;! Construction Management = 5% of totalcap3:constructm = 0.05 totalcap3;New total, totalcap4:totalcap4 = totalcap3 + engineering + constructm;1 Contingency = 10%:contingency = 0.10 totalcap4;I PROJECT TOTAL CAPITAL COST:total = totalcap4 + contingency;177PHYSICAL RELaTIONSHIPS AND CONSTRAINTS:I Gas energy required:Case 1 wood flow:Igas = 2.81 genelec; I When 6624 <= Mf <= 19908 kg/hr!genelec <= 11943;!7962;1 Case 2 wood flow:gas = 2.85 genelec; ! When 19908 <= Mf <= 33,156 kg/hrgenelec <= 11943;gasenergy = 7/12*0. 0036*hours2*gascost2s*gas+ 5/l2*0.0036*hours2*gascost2w*gas; ! cost of gas for cogenI Kiln Heating: Made available from processprocessheat = 1.926*genelec + 1.26*Mf; ! This includes heat from! both the turbine exhaust! and the excess flue gasI Plant thermal requirements:kilnheat = proheat;processheat >= kilnheat [heat);bRlprocessheat <= kilnheat [heat);I Heatenergy savings assuming gas is displaced:heatenergy = (7/12) *0.003 6*hours2*gascostls*kilnheat+ (5/12) *0.003 6*hours2*gascostlw*kilnheat; ! for process heatbR!heatenergy = (7/12) *0. 003 6*hours2*gascostls*processheat! + (5/12)*0.0036*hours2*gascostlw*processheat; I for process heatI Maximum Availabe wood waste (kg/hr):6624 <= Mf; I Minimum feasible flow requiredMf <= WoodWaste;Exwood = Woodwaste - Mf;I ID FAN POWER REQUIREMENTSidfan = 0.013*Mf; I ID fan power in kW for standard combustorI OPERATING AND MAINTENANCEOM = 0.025 totalcap3; 1 2.5% of Totalcap3I INSURANCE AND PROPERTY TAXIT = 0.015 totalcap3; 1 1.5% of Totalcap3178I CLASS 34 INCOME TAX CREDITclass34_1 = 0. 25*corptax*turbcost+O. 25*corptax*furnacecost;class34_2 = 0. 5O*corptax*turbcost+0. 50*corptax*furnacecost;class34_3 = 0. 25*corptax*turbcost+O. 25*corptax*furnacecost;end179OPTION #2 - CERAMIC HEAT EXCHANGERirBiB2B3B4B5B6B7B8B9BlOBliB12B13B14B15B16B17BiBB19B2 0=(1+i)*(1+f)—1;= i/(1+ir);= 1/(1+ir)’2;= 1/(1+ir)’3;.= l/(l+ir)A4;= 1/(1+ir)’5;= 1/(1+ir)’6;= 1/(1+ir)’7;= l/(l+ir)”8; != l/(l+ir)’9; != 1/(l+ir)’10;!= l/(l+ir)’1l;!= 1/(1+ir)’12;!= 1/(1+ir)A13;!= l/(1+ir)’14;!= l/(l+ir)’15;!= 1/(1+ir)’16;I= l/(1+ir)’17;!= 1/(1+ir)’18;!= 1/(l+ir)’19;!= l/(l+ir)”20;!Discount — yearDiscount — yearDiscount — yearDiscount — yearDiscount — yearDiscount — yearDiscount — yearDiscount — year iiDiscount — year 12Discount — year 13Discount — year 14Discount - year 15Discount — year 16Discount — year 17Discount — year 18Discount — year 19Discount — year 20hours3 = hours2—hoursl; ! Hours over which maximum excessI electricity is producedhours4 = 292; 1 Standby hours = l0%*365 days*8 hrs/daydc = 76.44; ! Rate Schedule 1200’s:I Demand charge = $6.37/kW/month =I $76.44/kW/yrdcstand = 0.00665; 1 Standby demand chargeec = 0.0312; 1 Rate Schedule 1200’s:I Energy Charge = 0.0312 $/kWhecstand = 0.02599; 1 Standby energy chargeexci = 0.0343; 1 Firm electricity purchase priceI including energy & capacity 0.0343 $/kWhexc2 = 0.015; 1 Secondary electricity purchase price 0.015 $/kWhconstraints 58;I BEGINNING OF PARAMETER LISTparameters 45i = 0.08;f = 0.04;1 Discount Factors over 20 yearsI i = real discount rate (%)I f = inflation rate (%)1 ir = nominal discount rate (%)Discount — year 1Discount — year 2Discount — year 345678910dispcredit = 39.42;hoursi = 4160;hours2 = 7884;1 Wood waste Disposal Credit ($-hrs/kg-yr)I 5$/green tonne= 39.42 $-hrs/kg-yr! Hours of Operation per year! Sawmill operating hours/yr1 2 shifts/day @ 26odays/yr @ Bhrs/shiftI Hours of electricity production/yr1 90% of 365 days/yr 0 24 hrs/day180corptax = 0.43; 1 Corporate Tax rate (%)mathand = 600000; 1 Allowance for a material handling systemI END OF PARAMETER LISTVARIABLE LIST:Mf = flow rate of wood fuel (kg/hr)Exwood = wood not consumed as fuel = Woodwaste — Mf (kg/hr)peakdemand = peak electricity demand (kw)averagedemand = average electricity demand (kw)deiuandsave = savings in demand charge ($)deinandchge = cost of supplying peak demand ($)energycharge = cost of continuous energy supply ($)totaicharge = demandcharge + energycharge ($)electricsave = electricity savings ($)genelec = amount of electricity being generated (kw)exeleci = amount of electricity in excess of average demand= netelec — averagedemandexelec2 = netelecnetelec = net electricity output (kW)standbypower = amount of standby power demanded (kW)standbycost = cost of standby power ($)idfan = electricity required to run id fan (kW)dryercost = cost of wood waste dryer ($)dryersize = size of wood waste dryer (kg/hr)furnacecost = cost of wood combustor ($)furnacesize = size of wood combustor (kg/hr)turbcost = cost of gas turbine ($)turbsize = size of gas turbine (kw)cehxcost = cost of the ceramic gas/air heat exchanger ($)cehxsize = size of gas/air heat exchangerhxcost = cost of the kiln/air heat exchanger ($)hxsize = size of kiln/air heat exchanger (kg/hr)multicost = cost of multiclone ($)multisize = size of multiclonetotalcapi = equipment capital cost ($)install = cost of installation & delivery ($)totalcap2 = totalcapi + install ($)ductwork = cost of ductwork ($)electrical = cost of electrical ($)instrument = cost of instrumentation ($)piping = cost of piping ($)structural = cost of structural/civil ($)pf = 0.90; 1 Plant power factorgascostiw = 3.35;gascostis = 2.75;gascost2w = 2.50;gascost2s = 1.95;woodwaste = 19908;proheat = 20000;avdemand = 3000;pkdemand = 4000;I Gas cost $/GJ for process heat in winter(3.35)! Gas cost $/GJ for process heat in suminer(2.75)1 Gas cost $/GJ for cogen in winter(2.50)I Gas cost $/GJ for cogen in summer(l.95)I Maximum available wood waste (kg/hr)I Plant heating required (kW)I Average demand (kW)I Peak demand (kw)181I totalcap3 = totalcap2 + duct.+elec.+instr.+pip.+struc ($)I engineering = cost of engineering ($)! constructm = cost of construction management ($)totalcap4 = totalcap3 + eng.+constrm ($)I contingency = % of totalcap4 ($)total = project total capital cost ($)I gas = amount of gas energy consumed (kw)gasenergy = cost of gas consumed ($)! kilnheat = kiln heat required (kw)I processheat = total plant thermal requirements (kw)heatenergy = cost of providing the process heat ($)I benefits = project benefits over life of project ($)I costs = project costs over life of project ($)I OH = yearly operating and maintenanace costs1 class34_l = class 34 tax credit in year of purchaseI class34_2 = class 34 tax credit in year 1class34_3 = class 34 tax credit in year 21 IT = yearly insurance and property taxvariables 54 Hf Exwood demandsave deiuandchge energychargetotalcharge genelec exeleci exelec2 dryercost dryersize furnacecostfurnacesize turbcost turbsize cehxcost cehxsize hxcost hxsizetotalcapl install totalcap2 ductwork peakdeiuand averagedemandprocessheat electrical instrument piping structural totalcap3engineering constructm totalcap4 contingency total gas gasenergyelectricsave kilnheat heatenergy benefits costs standbypowerstandbycost multicost multisizeOH class34_l class342 class34_3 IT netelec idfan;OBJECTIVE FUNCTION:maximizebenefits - costs [cashflow];1 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONSTRAINTS:! BENEFITS (savings):Benefits =dispcredit*Bl*Mf+dispcredit*B2*Mf+dispcredit*B3*Mf+dispcredit*B4 *Mf+dispcredit*B5*Mf+dispcredit*B6*Mf+dispcredit*B7*Mf+dispcredit*B8*Mf+dispcredit*B9*Mf+dispcredit*BlO*Mf+dispcredit*Bll*Mf+dispcredit*B12*Mf+dispcredit*Bl3 *Mf+dispcredit*B14*Mf+dispcredit*Bl5*Hf+dispcredit*Bl6*Mf+dispcredit*Bl7*Mf+dispcredit*B18*Mf+dispcredit*Bl9 *Mf+dispcredit*B2O*Mf+Bl*electricsave+ B2*electricsave +B3*electricsave + B4*electricsave + B5*electricsave +B6*electricsave + B7*electricsave + B8*electricsave+B9*electricsave+B1O*electricsave+ Bll*electricsave+B12 *electricsave+B13*electricsave+B14*electricsave+Bl5*electrjcsave+B16*electricsave+Bl7*electricsave+Bl8*electricsave+B19*electrjcsave+B2O*electricsave+excl*hoursl*Bl*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B2*exelecl+excl*hoursl*B3*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B4*exelecl +182excl*hoursl*B5*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B6*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B7*exelecl + excl*hoursl*88*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B9*exelecl + excl*hoursl*BlO*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B11*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B12*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B13*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B14*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B15*exelecl ÷ excl*hoursl*B16*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B17*exelecl ÷ excl*hoursl*B18*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B19*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B20*exelecl +exc2*hours3*Bl*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B2*exelec2+exc2*hours3*B3*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B4*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B5*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B6*exelec2 +exc2 *hours3*B7*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B8*exelec2 +exc2*hours3 *B9*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*BlO*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B11*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B12*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B13*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B14*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B15*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B16*exelec2 ÷exc2*hours3*B17*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B18*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B19*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B20*exelec2 +B1*heatenergy + B2*heatenergy ÷B3*heatenergy + B4*heatenergy + B5*heatenergy +B6*heatenergy + B7*heatenergy + B8*heatenergy ÷B9*heatenergy ÷ BlO*heatenergy + Bll*heatenergy +B12*heatenergy + B13*heatenergy + B14*heatenergy +B15*heatenergy + B16*heatenergy + B17*heatenergy +B18*heatenergy + B19*heatenergy ÷ B20*heatenergy +class34_1 + Bl*class34_2 + B2*class34_3 [benefit);! COSTS:costs = total + Bl*gasenergy + B2*gasenergy +B3*gasenergy + B4*gasenergy + 85*gasenergy + B6*gasenergy +B7*gasenergy + B8*gasenergy + B9*gasenerqy + B1O*gasenergy +Bll*gasenergy + B12*gasenergy + B13*gasenergy + B14*gasenergy +B15*gasenergy ÷ B16*gasenergy + B17*gasenergy + B18*gasenergy +B19*gasenergy + B20*gasenergy +Bl*IT + B2*IT + B3*IT ÷B4*IT + B5*IT + B6*IT +B7*IT + B8*IT + B9*IT +BlO*IT + Bll*IT + B12*IT +B13*IT + B14*IT ÷ B15*IT +B16*IT + B17*IT + B18*IT +B19*IT + B20*IT +Bl*OM + B2*OM + B3*014 + B4*OM + B5*OM +B6*OM + B7*OM + B8*OM + B9*OM + BlO*OM + Bll*OM +B12*OM + B13*OM ÷ B14*OM + B15*OM + B16*OM + B17*OM +B18*OM ÷ B19*OM + B20*OM +Bi*standbycost+B2 *standbycost+B3 *standbycost+B4 *standbycost-iB5 *standbycost+B6 *standbycost+B7*standbycost+B8 *standbycost+B9*standbycost+B1O*stanycost+Bl1*stanycost+B12*standbycost+B13 *standbycost+B14*standbycost+B15*stanycost+B16*standbycost+B17*standbycost+B18*standbycost+B19*standbycost+B2O*standbycost[cost);I ELECTRICITY DEMANDS AND CHARGES:183averagedemand =avdemand;peakdeiuand =pkdemand;I CASE 1: averagedemand <= netelec <= peakdemand! netelec <= peakdemand [power);!netelec >= averagedemand;!netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;!demandsave = dc*netelec;!demandchge = dc*peakdeiuand;1 energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedeiuand;!totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;Ielectricsave = energycharge + demandsave;Istandbypower = 0;I standbycost=hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower+I hours4 *ecstand*standbypower;CASE 2: netelec <= avergedemandnetelec <= averagedemand [power];netelec >= 660;netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;demandsave = dc*netelec;demandchge = dc*pea]cdemand;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;electricsave = ec*hoursl*netelec + demandsave;standbypower = 0;standbycost = hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower +hours4 *ecstand*standbypower;CASE 3: netelec >= peakdemand!netelec >= peakdemand [power);Inetelec <= 12000;Inetelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;Idemandsave = demandchge;!demandchge = dc*peakdeniand;I energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedeiuand;Itotalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;Ielectricsave = totalcharge;!standbypower = 0;!standbycost = hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower +I hours4 *ecstand*standbypower;I EXCESS ELECTRICITY PRODUCEDCASE 1:lexeleci = netelec — averagedemand; ! During sawmill operation!exelec2 = netelec; ! Sawmill shutdown1 CASE 2:exeleci = 0;exelec2 = netelec;! CASE 3:!exelecl = netelec — averagedemand;!exelec2 = netelec;184CAPITAL COSTS:1 Hog fuel dryerdryercost = 0; 1 No hog fuel dryer is required for metal HXdryersize = 0;furnacecost = 73 • 7 Mf + 1023583; 1 Wood waste combustor (Furnace):furnacesize = Hf;! Gas Turbine: Kawasakiturbcost = 883 genelec + 514975;turbsize = genelec;1 Ceramic Gas/Air Heat Exchanger:cehxcost = l03*Mf + 4433914;cehxsize = Hf;I Metal Kiln/Air Heat Exchanger:hxcost = l4.76Mf + 88074;hxsize = Hf;multicost = 0;multisize = 0;1 Option Direct Firing!hxcost = 0;!hxsize = 0;!multicost = 3.39*Mf + 11600;!multisize = Hf;! Total Capital No.1:totalcapl = mathand + dryercost + furnacecost + turbcost +cehxcost ÷ hxcost + multicost;Installation and Labour = 10% of totalcapl:install = 0.10 totalcapi;1 Total Capital No.2:totalcap2 = install + totalcapi;! Ductwork = 10% of totalcap2:ductwork = 0.10 totalcap2;I Electrical = 14% of totalcap2:electrical = 0.14 totalcap2;Instrumentation = 5% of totalcap2:instrument = 0.05 totalcap2;! Piping = 5% of totalcap2:piping = 0.05 totalcap2;1 Structural = 15% of totalcap2:structural = 0.15*totalcap2;New Capital, totalcap3:totalcap3 = totalcap2 + ductwork + electrical + instrument+ piping + structural;! Engineering costs = 7% of totalcap3:engineering = 0.07 totalcap3;I Construction Management = 5% of totalcap3:constructm = 0.05 totalcap3;New total, totalcap4:totalcap4 = totalcap3 + engineering + constructin;I Contingency = 10%:contingency = 0.10 totalcapd;I PROJECT TOTAL CAPITAL COST:185total = totalcap4 + contingency;! PHYSICAL RELATIONSHIPS AND CONSTRAINTS:Gas energy required:Case 1 wood flow: I Hf <= 13248 kg/hrIgas = 0;Igenelec <= 2043;1 Case 2 wood flow: ! 13248 < Hf <= 19,908 kg/hrgas = 0;genelec <= 3981;.! Case 3 wood flow: 1 19,908 < Hf <= 33,156 kg/hr!gas = 0;!genelec <= 7962;gasenergy = 7/12*0. 0036*hours2*gascost2s*gas+ 5/12*0.0036*hours2*gascost2w*gas; I cost of gas for cogenI Kiln Heating: Made available from processprocessheat = —1.11*genelec + l.26*Mf;I Plant thermal requirements:kilnheat = proheat;!processheat <= kilnheat [heat];!ORprocessheat >= kilnheat [heat);I Heatenergy savings assuming gas is displaced:heatenergy = (7/12) *0. 0036*hours2*gascostls*processheat1 + (5/12) *0. 0036*hours2*gascostlw*processheat;IORheatenergy = (7/12.) *0. 0036*hours2*gascostls*kilnheat+(5/12) *0. 0036*hours2*gascostlw*kilnheat;I Maximum Availabe wood waste (kg/hr):13248 <= Hf; I Minimum feasible flow requiredHf <= WoodWaste;Exwood = Woodwaste - Hf;I ID FAN POWER REQUIREMENTSidfan = 0.013*Mf; I ID fan power in kW for standard combustor186OPERATING AND MAINTENANCEOM=O.O25totalcap3; ! 2.5% of Totalcap3I INSURANCE AND PROPERTY TAXIT = 0.015 totalcap3; ! 1.5% of Totalcap3CLASS 34 INCOME TAX CREDITclass34_1 = 0. 25*corptax*turbcost+0 . 25*corptax*furnacecost;class34_2 = 0. 50*corptax*turbcost+0. 50*corptax*furnacecost;class34_3 = 0. 25.*corptax*turbcost+0. 25*corptax*furnacecost;end187! OPTION #3 - ATMOSPHERIC FLUIDIZED BED SYSTEMi = 0.08;f=O.04;ir =(1+i)*(l+f)—1;Bi = 1/(1-I-ir);B2 = l/(l+ir)’2;B3 = 1/(1+ir)’3;.B4 = 1/(1+ir)’4;B5 = 1/(1+ir)’5; IB6 = 1/(1+ir)A6;B7 = 1/(1+ir)7; IB8 = 1/(l+ir)A8;B9 = 1/(1+ir)’9;BlO = 1/(l+ir)A10;!Bli = 1/(1+ir)’ll;!B12 = 1/(1+ir)’12;!B13 = 1/(1+ir)”13;!B14 = 1/(1+ir)’14;!B15 = l/(l+ir)A15;!B16 = 1/(1+ir)A16;!B17 = l/(1+ir)’17;!BiB = 1/(1+ir)”18;!B19 = i/(1+ir)A19;!B20 = i/(1+ir)A20;!dispcredit = 39.42;hoursi = 4160;hours2 = 7884;Discount Factors over 20 yearsi = real discount rate (%)f = inflation rate (%)I ir = nominal discount rate (%)Discount — year 1Discount — year 2Discount — year 3Discount — year 4Discount — year 5Discount — year 6Discount — year 7Discount — year 8Discount — year 9Discount — year 10Discount — year 11Discount — year 12Discount — year 13Discount — year 14Discount — year 15Discount — year 16Discount - year 17Discount — year 18Discount — year 19Discount — year 20I Wood waste Disposal Credit ($-hrs/kg-yr)! 5$/green tonne= 39.42 $-hrs/kg-yr! Hours of Operation per year! Sawmill operating hours/yr! 2 shifts/day @ 26odays/yr @ 8hrs/shift1 Hours of electricity production/yr1 90% of 365 days/yr @ 24 hrs/dayconstraints 52;I BEGINNING OF PARAMETER LISTparameters 45hours3 = hours2—hoursi; 1 Hours over which maximum excessI electricity is producedhours4 = 292; 1 Standby hours = 10%*365 days*8 hrs/daydc = 76.44; 1 Rate Schedule 1200’s:1 Demand charge = $6.37/kW/month =$76. 44/kW/yrdcstand = 0.00665; 1 Standby demand chargeec = 0.0312; 1 Rate Schedule 1200’s:! Energy Charge = 0.0312 S/kWhecstand = 0.02599; ! Standby energy chargeexci = 0.0343; 1 Firm electricity purchase priceI including energy & capacity 0.0343 $/kWhexc2 = 0.015; 1 Secondary electricity purchase price 0.015 S/kWh188pf = 0.90; Plant power factorgascostiw = 3.35; ! Gas cost $/GJ for process heat in winter(3.35)gascostis = 2.75; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for process heat in suimuer(2.75)gascost2w = 2.50; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for cogen in winter(2.50)gascost2s = 1.95; 1 Gas cost $/GJ for cogen in summer(l.95)woodwaste = 19908; ! Maximum available wood waste (kg/hr)proheat = 20000; ! Plant heating required (kW)avdemand = 3000; ! Average demand (kW)pkdemand = 4000; ! Peak demand (kw)corptax = 0.43; ! Corporate Tax rate (%)luathand = 800000; ! Allowance for a material handling system1 END OF PARAMETER LIST1 VARIABLE LIST:1 Mf = flow rate of wood fuel (kg/hr)I Exwood = wood not consumed as fuel = Woodwaste — Mf (kg/hr)1 peakdemand = peak electricity demand (kw)1 averagedeluand = average electricity demand (kw)1 demandsave = savings in demand charge ($)I demandchge = cost of supplying peak demand ($)1 energycharge = cost of continuous energy supply ($)totaicharge = demandcharge + energycharge ($)! electricsave = electricity savings ($)! genelec = amount of electricity being generated (kw)! exeleci = amount of electricity in excess of average demand= netelec — averagedemandexelec2 = netelec! netelec = net electricity output (kW)! standbypower = amount of standby power demanded (kW)I standbycost = cost of standby power ($)! idfan = electricity required to run id fan (kW)dryercost = cost of wood waste dryer ($)I dryersize = size of wood waste dryer (kg/hr)I fluidbedcost = cost of fluid bed system ($)I fluidbedsize = size of fluid bed system (kg/hr)I turbcost = cost of gas turbine ($)I turbsize = size of gas turbine (kw)I totalcapi = equipment capital cost, excluding fluid bed ($)! install = cost of installation & delivery ($)! totalcap2 = totalcapi + install ($)! ductwork = cost of ductwork ($)I electrical = cost of electrical ($)I instrument = cost of instrumentation ($)I piping = cost of piping ($)! structural = cost of structural/civil ($)totalcap3 = totalcap2 + duct.+elec.+instr.+pip.+struc ($)I engineering = cost of engineering ($)! constructm = cost of construction management ($)totalcap4 = totalcap3 + eng.-i-constrm ($)I contingency = % of totalcap4 ($)! total = project total capital cost ($)189! gas = amount of gas energy consumed (kw)! gasenergy = cost of gas consumed ($)! kilnheat = kiln heat required (kw)! processheat = total plant thermal requirements (kw)! heatenergy = cost of providing the process heat ($)! benefits = project benefits over life of project ($)! costs = project costs over life of project ($)! OM = yearly operating and maintenanace costs! class34_l = class 34 tax credit in year of purchase! class34_2 = class 34 tax credit in year 1! class34_3 = class 34 tax credit in year 2! IT = yearly insurance and property taxvariables 50 Mf Exwood demandsave demandchge energychargetotalcharge genelec exelecl exelec2 dryercost dryersizefluidbedcost fluidbedsize turbcost turbsizetotalcapi install totalcap2 ductwork peakdemand averagedeiuandprocessheat electrical instrument piping structural totalcap3engineering constructin totalcap4 contingency total gas gasenergyelectricsave kilnheat heatenergy benefits costs standbypowerstandbycost multicost multisizeOM class34_l class34_2 class34_3 IT netelec idfan;OBJECTIVE FUNCTION:maximizebenefits — costs [cashflow);1 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONSTRAINTS:1 BENEFITS (savings):Benefits =dispcredit*Bl*Mf+dispcredit*B2*Mf+dispcredit*B3*Mf+dispcredit*B4*Mf+dispcredit*B5*Mf+dispcredit*B6*Mf+dispcredit*B7*Mf+dispcredit*B8*Mf+dispcredit*B9*Mf+dispcredit*Bl0 *Mf+dispcredit*B1l*Mf+dispcredit*B12*Mf+dispcredit*Bl3 *Mf+dispcredit*B14*Mf+dispcredit*B15*Mf+dispcredit*B16*Mf+dispcredit*B17*Mf+dispcredit*Bl8*Mf+dispcredit*Bl9*Mf+dispcredit*B20*Mf+Bl*electricsave+ B2*electricsave +B3*electricsave ÷ B4*electricsave + B5*electricsave +B6*electricsave ÷ B7*electricsave + B8*electricsave+B9 *electrjcsave+BlO*electrjcsave+ B1l*electricsave+B12 *electrjcsave+Bl3*electrjcsave+B14*electrjcsave+Bl5*electricsave+B16*electricsave+B17*electricsave+BiB*electricsave+Bl9*electrjcsave+B20*electricsave+excl*hoursl*Bl*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B2*exeleci+excl*hoursl*B3*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B4*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B5*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B6*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B7*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B8*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B9*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B1O*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B11*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B12*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B13*exelecl + excl*hoursl*Bl4*exelecl ÷excl*hoursl*Bl5*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B16*exelecl +190excl*hoursl*B17*exelecl + excl*hoursl*B18*exelecl +excl*hoursl*B19*exelecj. + excl*hoursl*B20*exelecl +exc2*hours3*Bl*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B2*exelec2+exc2*hours3*B3*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B4*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B5*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B6*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B7*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B8*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B9*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*BlO*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*Bll*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B12*exelec2 +exc2 *hours3 *B13 *exelec2 + exc2 *hours3 *B14 *exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B15*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B16*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B17*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B18*exelec2 +exc2*hours3*B19*exelec2 + exc2*hours3*B20*exelec2 +Bl*heatenergy + B2*heatenergy +B3*heatenergy + B4*heatenergy + B5*heatenergy +B6*heatenergy + B7*heatenergy + B8*heatenergy +B9*heatenergy + B1O*heatenergy + Bll*heatenergy +B12*heatenergy + B13*heatenergy + B14*heatenergy +B15*heatenergy + B16*heatenergy + B17*heatenergy +B18*heatenergy + B19*heatenergy + B20*heatenergy +class34_l + Bl*class34_2 + B2*class34_3 [benefit];COSTS:costs = total + Bl*gasenergy + B2*gasenergy +B3*gasenergy + B4*gasenergy + B5*gasenergy + B6*gasenergy +B7*gasenergy + B8*gasenergy + B9*gasenergy + BlO*gasenerqy +Bll*gasenergy + B12*gasenergy + B13*gasenergy + B14*gasenergy +Bl5*gasenergy + B16*gasenergy + B17*gasenergy + B18*gasenergy +B19*gasenerqy + B20*gasenergy +Bl*IT + B2*IT + B3*IT +B4*IT + B5*IT + B6*IT +B7*IT + B8*IT + B9*IT +B1O*IT + Bll*IT + B12*IT +B13*IT ÷ B14*IT + B15*IT +B16*IT + B17*IT + B18*IT +B19*IT + B20*IT +Bl*OM + B2*OM + B3*OM + B4*OM + B5*OM +B6*OM + B7*OM + B8*OM + B9*OM + BlO*OM + Bll*OM +B12*OM + B13*OM + B14*OM + Bl5*OM + B16*OM + B17*OM +B18*OM + B19*OM + B20*OM +Bl*standbycost+B2 * standbycost+B3*standbycost+B4*standbycost+B5 * standbycost+B6*standbycost+B7*standbycost+B8*standbycost+B9*standbycost+BlO*standbycost+Bll*standbycost+B12*standbycost+B13 *standbycost+B14*standbycost+B15*standbycost+B16*standbycost+B17*standbycost+B18*standbycost+B19*standbycost+B2O*standbycost[cost];I ELECTRICITY DEMANDS AND CHARGES:averagedemand =avdemand;peakdemand =pkdemand;I CASE 1: averagedemand <= netelec <= peakdemandnetelec <= peakdemand [power];191netelec >= averagedemand;netelec = 0.9*genelec_idfan;demandsave = dc*netelec;demandchge = dc*peakdemand;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedeniand;totaicharge = demandchge + energycharge;electricsave = energycharge + demandsave;standbypower = 0;standbycost=hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower+hours4 *ecstand*standbypower;! CASE 2: netelec <= avergedemand!netelec <= averagedemand [power);!netelec >= 660;Inetelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;!demandsave = dc*netelec;!demandchge = dc*peakdemand;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;!totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;!electricsave = ec*hoursl*netelec + demandsave;!standbypower = 0;!standbycost = hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower +hours4*ecstand*standbypower;! CASE 3: netelec >= peakdemand1 netelec >= peakdemand [power);Inetelec <= 12000;!netelec = 0.9*genelec—idfan;!demandsave = demandchge;!demandchge = dc*peakdemand;energycharge = ec*hoursl*averagedemand;!totalcharge = demandchge + energycharge;!electricsave = totalcharge;!standbypower = 0;!standbycost = hours4*pf*dcstand*standbypower +hours4*ecstand*standbypower;! EXCESS ELECTRICITY PRODUCEDI CASE 1:exelecl = netelec — averagedemand; I During sawmill operationexelec2 = netelec; ! Sawmill shutdown! CASE 2:!exelecl = 0;!exelec2 = netelec;I CASE 3:!exelecl = netelec — averagedemand;!exelec2 = netelec;I CAPITAL COSTS:I Hog fuel dryerdryercost = 0; 1 No hog fuel dryer is required for metal HXdryersize = 0;192! Complete Fluid Bed Systemfluidbedcost = 551 Mf — 800000;fluidbedsize = Mf;! Gas Turbine: Kawasakiturbcost = 883 genelec ÷ 514975;turbsize = genelec;! Total Capital No.1:totalcapi = dryercost + turbcost;I Installation and Labour = 10% of totalcapl:install = 0.10 totalcapi;I Total Capital No.2:totalcap2 = install + totalcapi;I. Ductwork = 10% of totalcap2:ductwork = 0.10 totalcap2;I Electrical = 14% of totalcap2:electrical = 0.14 totalcap2;I Instrumentation = 5% of totalcap2:instrument = 0.05 totalcap2;I Piping = 5% of totalcap2:piping = 0.05 totalcap2;I Structural = 15% of totalcap2:structural = 0.15*totalcap2;New Capital, totalcap3:totalcap3 = totalcap2 + ductwork + electrical + instrument+ piping + structural;I Engineering costs = 7% of totalcap3:engineering = 0.07 totalcap3;! Construction Management = 5% of totalcap3:constructm = 0.05 totalcap3;New total, totalcap4:totalcap4 = totalcap3 + engineering + constructiu +fluidbedcost + mathand;! Contingency = 10%:contingency = 0.lO*totalcap4;PROJECT TOTAL CAPITAL COST:total = totalcap4 + contingency;I PHYSICAL RELATIONSHIPS AND CONSTRAINTS:! Gas energy required:I Case 1 wood flow:gas = 1.75 genelec; ! When 6624 <= Mf <= 19908 kg/hrgenelec <= 7962;6624 <= Mf;1 Case 2 wood flow:!gas = 1.80 genelec; I When 19908 <= Mf <= 33,156 kg/hrIgenelec <= 11943;!l9908 <= Hf;gasenergy = 7/12*0. 0036*hours2*gascost2s*gas+ 5/l2*0.0036*hours2*gascost2w*gas; 1 cost of gas for cogen1931 Kiln Heating: Made available from processprocessheat = 2.428*genelec + 0.892*Mf; ! This includes heat from! both the turbine exhaust! and the excess flue gasI Plant thermal requirements:kilnheat = proheat;!processheat >= kilnheat [heat);bRprocessheat <= kilnheat [heat);I Heatenergy savings assuming gas is displaced:!heatenergy = (7/12) *0. 0036*hours2*gascostls*kilnheat! + (5/12)*0.0036*hours2*gascostlw*kilnheat; 1 for process heatbRheatenergy = (7/12) *0. 0036*hours2*gascostls*processheat+ (5/12)*0.0036*hours2*gascostlw*processheat; 1 for process heat1 Maximum Availabe wood waste (kg/hr):Mf <= WoodWaste;Exwood = Woodwaste - Mf;I ID FAN POWER REQUIREMENTSidfan = 0.029*Mf; I ID fan power in kW for standard combustorOPERATING AND MAINTENANCEOM = 0.025 totalcap3 + 0.025*fluidbedcost;! 2.5% of material costsI INSURANCE AND PROPERTY TAXIT = 0.015 totalcap3 + 0.015*fluidbedcost;! 1.5% of material costsI CLASS 34 INCOME TAX CREDITclass34_1 = 0. 25*corptax*turbcost+0. 25*corptax*0. 3*fluidbedcost;class34_2 = 0. 50*corptax*turbcost+0. 50*corptax*0. 3*fluidbedcost;class34_3 = 0.25*corptax*turbcost+0.25*corptax*0.3*fluidbedcost;end194

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0081035/manifest

Comment

Related Items