Environmental Optimization of the Energy in an Electrical Network.

Transcription

DEMOCRATIC AND POPULAR ALGERIAN REPUBLIC
MINISTRY FOR THE HIGHER EDUCATION AND SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH.
RESEARCH.
University of Science and Technology of Oran
- Mohamed Boudiaf –
Faculty of Electrical Engineering
Department of Electrical Engineering
Specialty: Graduate School of Electrical Engineering
Optional: Electric Networks
Magister Thesis:
Thesis:
Environmental Optimization of the Energy in an Electrical
Network.
Presented by:
Allali Malika
Defended:
Defended: 21ST October 2012 in front the Jury
President:
resident: Pr. M. Rahli (USTOM).
Reporter: Dr. M.TAMALI. (BECHAR University).
Examiner 1: Pr. C. Benachaiba. (BECHAR University).
Examiner 2: Dr. M. Sellam. (BECHAR University).
Examiner 3: Dr. A. Allali. (USTOM).
Academic year….2011/2012
year….2011/2012
Environmental Optimization of the
Energy in an Electrical Network.
On peut prendre un grand plaisir
simplement en regardant le
monde, mais ce plaisir est accru si
les yeux de l’esprit peuvent
pénétrer à l’intérieure des objets
et voir ce qui s’y passe.
P.W. Atkins ;
Abstract:
This research lies within the scope of the environmental search for the solutions of optimizations
of energy in the electrical supply network (obligation to reduce the emission of CO2).
Indeed, the principal aiming of this research is the integration of the renewable resources (energy
independence and the sustainable development) that it pushes us to consider from now on the
energy problem not only according to the economic point of view, but also according to an
ecological point of view. This with us encouraged to develop our systems of energy on the basis of
generation distributed on a large scale including/understanding renewable energy and the highoutput solutions energetic.
Keywords:
Keywords:
Electrical network, Renewable energy, sustainable development, Emission CO2, Smarts grids,
optimization, cost,
Résumé :
Cette recherche s’inscrit dans le cadre de la recherche des solutions d’optimisations
environnementale de l’énergie dans le réseau électrique (l’obligation de réduire l’émission de
CO2).
En effet, la visée principale de cette recherche est l’intégration des ressources renouvelables
(l’indépendance énergétique et le développement durable) qu’il nous pousse à considérer
désormais le problème énergétique non seulement selon le point de vue économique, mais
également selon un point de vue écologique. Ceci à nous encouragé à développer nos systèmes
d’énergie sur la base de génération distribuée à grande échelle comprenant les énergies
renouvelables et les solutions à haut rendement énergétique.
Mots clés :
Réseau Electrique, Energie Renouvelable, Développement Durable, Emission de CO2, Smart Grid,
optimisation, le coût
Preface:
Little background....
Year 2002 – 2008; more than six years experience in the field of electricity in a private gas
and electricity works.
I never lost hope that will come one day and fill up my graduate studies. January 2008 I
decided to leave the company and prepare for the competition of post graduation I stayed
at home almost a year, 09 months of preparation at the end I succeeded. November 2008 I
had a job in the company of Algerienne Des Eaux (ADE) I occupied a position of design
engineers responsible for cell energy. Only one year of very hard work, but I am proud of
myself because I realized something.
I won the document you are about to read, so we must never lose your hopes.
First of all I would like to thank Allah for blessing me with the ability to complete this
work. This work couldn’t be complete without help and support of several people.
First my deep gratitude goes to my advisor, Professor Dr. M .Tamali who has provided me
invaluable support, guidance, patience, and encouragement.
Great thanks for my dear professor Pr. Rahli Mostéfa for his honest presidency.
I would like to express my appreciation to the examiners:
Pr. Benachaiba Chellali (Bechar University).
Dr. Sellam Mabrouk (Bechar University).
Dr. Allali Ahmed (USTO).
For their honest and faithful comments.
I would like to thank all my professors in University- of Bechar, and in USTO for their
care and encouragement.
My deep appreciations are for my parent, for their support and encouragement. Also I
thank my brother Salah and my dear sister Imene for their patience, ultimate support,
great generosity, and lovingness. I wish also to thank my dear sisters Amel Menasria,
Karima Maazouzi and Mouna chaar for everything.
Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this work directly or indirectly.
Malika Allali.
i
CONTENTS
Abstract
Preface…………………………………………………………………………………………………...i
Contents………………………………………………………………………………………………...ii
Abbreviation…………………………………………………………………………………………....x
List of figures……………………………………………………………………………………..…..xiii
List of tables…………………………………………………………………………………………..xiv
INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………..01
INTRODUCTION
1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………..…01
2. Economic relations……………………………………………………………………………..…03
2.1. Investment cost CI(t)………………………………………………………………...….03
2.2. Energy cost CE(t)……………………………………………………………………..….04
2.3. Operating cost CO(t)……………………………………………………………….……04
3. The PV generator…………………………………………………………………………….……04
4. The installation of a photovoltaic system………………………………………………..……….04
4.1. Cost and profitability…………………………………………………………………………….04
4.1.1. Influence of the angle of incidence…………………………………..…04
4.1.2. Influence of the orientation……………………………………………..04
4.1.3. Influence of the angle of inclination…………………………………....04
5. Electricity Generation from Wind Energy…………………………………………………..……05
5.1. Introduction………………………………………………………..………05
5.2. Wind Farms……………………………………………………………..….05
6. Wind generator…………………………………………………………………………………….05
7. Wind farm installation………………………………………………………………………….…06
7.1. Advantages of the wind power…………………………………………………..……06
8. The storage………………………………………………………………………………………….06
9. The inverter…………………………………………………………………………………...……07
10. Outline of the Work…………………………………………………………………………..…07
ii
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL STUDY……………………………………………………………….……..08
STUDY
I- Introduction……………………………………………………………………….…..…....08
II- Conservation of Energy………………………………………………………………...…..09
III- The energy resources of the planet…………………………………………………...……09
III.1. Solar radiation…………………………………………………………………………………09
--- The set of hydrologic cycle ……………………………………………………….……09
--- Wind energy…………………………………………………………………….………09
--- The wave energy………………………………………………………………………..09
--- Biomass……………………………………………………………………………..…...09
--- Geothermal …………………………………………………………………………….10
--- The gravitational interactions Earth-Moon-Sun……………………………………...10
III.2. Non-renewable energy………………………………………………………………………10
---Nuclear……………………………………………………………………………….…10
IV. What is a ton of CO2 …………………………………………………………………………..11
IV.1. What is a ton of CO2 ………………………………………………………………..12
IV.2. Smart Grid…………………………………………………………………………...12
IV.2.1. Goals of the Smart Grid…………………………………………13
IV.2.2. What a smart grid is……………………………………………..13
IV.2.3. Smart grid functions……………………………………………..14
IV.2.4. Optimize assets…………………………………………….…….14
I. RENEWABLE ENERGY……………………………………………………………………15
ENERGY
I.1. What is ‘Renewable Energy’……………………………………………15
I.2. Why Renewable Energy………………………………………………..15
I.3. How is Renewable Energy defined…………………………………….16
A. Biomass Energy……………………………………………………………………………17
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
k)
Historical Background……………………………………………………………17
Biomass and Its Products…………………………………………………………19
Products of Biomass……………………………………………………………...20
Chemicals…………………………………………………………………………21
Energy……………………………………………………………………………..21
Transport Fuel…………………………………………………………………….22
Biomass Conversion………………………………………………………………23
Biochemical Conversion………………………………………………………….24
Thermo chemical Conversion…………………………………………………….24
Combustion………………………………………………………………………..26
Biogas………………………………………………………………………………27
iii
B / - Wind Power………………………………………………………………………………..…28
B / 1- Types of turbine……………………………………………………………….29
B / 2- How Wind Power Works…………………………………………………….29
C / - Photovoltaic Systems………………………………………………………………………....31
C / 1- Examples of Communities Using Solar/PV…………………………………...31
D / - Geothermal Systems……………………………………………………………………….....32
D / 1- How Geothermal Works……………………………………………………..33
D / 2 - Advantages of Geothermal…………………………………………………...33
E / - Nuclear Energy……………………………………………………………………………….34
E / 1 – Fission………………………………………………………………………...36
F/ Micro Grids……………………………………………………………………………………..38
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………….38
F / 1 - Definition of Micro Grids……………………………………………………39
F / 2 - Reasons for Micro grids………………………………………………………41
F / 3 - Management of Micro grid…………………………………………………..42
II.
II.
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ……………………………………………….……….43
II. 1 Sustainable development in ecological economics…………………………………………43
II.2 What is Sustainable Development……………………………………………………………43
II.3 Definitions……………………………………………………………………………………..44
II.4 Climate Change………………………………………………………………………………..46
II.4.2 Observed Climate Variability and Change………………………………...…46
II.4.3 Carbon in the Atmosphere………………………………………………...….48
II.4.4 Climate change and climate protection, indicators…………………….……48
II.4.5 Objectives and indicators…………………………………………………..…49
II.4.6 GHG emission overview………………………………………………………50
II.4.7 CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUEL COMBUSTION……………………………...52
II.5.Discussion…………………………………………………………………………………...…60
II.6.Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………..…61
iv
III.
III. STUDY OF STANDARD NETWORK. ……………………….…….…….……………….62
III.1. Reliability of Supply……………………………………………………..…………………62
III.2. Supplying Electrical Energy of Good Quality………………………….…………………62
III.3. Economic Generation and Transmission………………………..……..…………………..62
III.4. Environmental Issues……………………………………………………………………….62
III.5. Structure of the Electrical Power System………………………………………………….63
III.5.1
III.5.2
III.5.3
III.5.4
Generation…………………………………………………………………..64
Transmission……………………………………………………………….65
Distribution…………………………………………………………………66
Demand……………………………………………………………………...66
III.6. Critical Infrastructures……………………………………………………………………...67
III.7. Grid system IEEE New England 39 nodes…………………………………………………68
Time of starting of the generators…………………………………………………..70
Characteristics of the transformers ………………………………………………...71
Characteristics of the lines………………………………………………………….71
III.8. Calculation CO2 emissions………………………………………………………………….72
III.9. Integration of distributed generation………………………………………………………72
III.9.1. Insertion of production decentralized like factor of reinforcement of means
of production of the electric system…………………………………………………….72
III.9.1. 1/ Potential contributions of distributed generation………………….72
III.9.2. Integration of distributed generation as a factor of vulnerability of the
electrical system……………………………………………………….……………..73
III.9.2.1/ Impacts of distributed generation on distribution network……………..74
III.9.2.2/ Impacts of distributed generation on the transport network…………....74
III.10. The plan of defense against major incidents - The recovery plan…………...……….....74
VI. STUDY OF LOCAL NETWORK…………………………...…………………..………..….76
NETWORK
IV. 1. Introduction …………………………………………………………………….…...76
IV.2. The Characteristics Of Contracts……………..……………………………….…......76
IV.3. The Power Placed at the Disposal (PPD) and the Maximum
Power Reached (MPR)……………………………………………………….……….77
IV.4. The electrical supply network (ADE)……………………………………………….77
IV.5. Consumption of energy in the electrical supply network (ADE)………………….78
IV.5. Optimization of reactive power……………………………………………………..84
v
IV.5.1. Introduction…………………………………………...…………….….84
IV.6. Calculation CO2 emissions of Algerienne Des Eaux ……………………………………86
IV.7. CONCLUSION (SOLUTIONS)………………………………...……………………….…88
1- Policy………………………………...…………………………........88
2- Economic………………………...…………………………….….....89
a) - Revision of the power placed at the disposal (PPD)…..….…89
b) - Stops in the hours points……………………………..……....89
d) - solutions to be proposed ……………………………..……....89
V. CASE STUDY………………………………………………………………..…………..………..90
STUDY
V.1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………….………..90
V.2. The political solution ………………………………………………………………….…….….90
V.3. The Economic solution is…………………………………………………………….………….91
V.3.1. Revision of the power placed at the disposal (PPD)………………….….………...91
V.3.2. Stops in the peak hours……………………………………………….…………….92
V.3.3. Solutions to be proposed ……………………………………………..…………….93
V.3.3.1. Stops in the peak hours in the year 2010………………..….…………..94
V.3.3.2. The installation of a photovoltaic system….…………..……………….94
V.3.3.2.a. Estimate the power of photovoltaic panels.………………….94
V.3.3.2.b. Technical characteristics………………….…………………..96
V.3.3.2.c. Solar pump……………………………………………………97
Possible uses of this solar pump……………………………………………………………………..97
• Solar pump submersible LORENTZ PS200 up to 50 m…………………98
• Solar pump submersible LORENTZ PS600 up to 180 m……………..…98
• Solar pump submersible LORENTZ PS1200 up to 240 m……………....98
• Solar pump submersible LORENTZ PS1800 up to 250 m (high flow)…99
• Solar Pump of surface Lorentz PS150 BOOST to 120m……………..….99
V.4. Some Solutions for reduction of the CO2 emissions in Algeria and in the world …………100
1- Reduction of the CO2 emissions: Algerian researchers develop a new fuel……………100
2- New Energy Algeria (NEA) ……………………………………………………………….100
vi
2.1. Strategic Objectives ………………………….………100
2.2. Characteristics / Projects ………………………….…100
2.3. Hybrid project Solar/Gas…………………………..…100
2.4. Wind Farm Projects ………………………………….101
3- First Hybrid Solar/Gas In The World (Hassi R'mel) ……………………………………..101
3.1. Structure of the Contract…………………………..…102
4- Peaceful nuclear power ……………………………………………………………………102
5- DESERTEC Project …………………………………………………………………………102
a. Description…………………………………………………….….102
b. History…………………………………………………………….103
c. Studies……………………………………………………………..103
6- Tax CO2 with Brussels………………………………………………………………………104
7- Mobile phones could be charged by the power of speech ……………………………..…104
8- Carbon Sequestration Storage …………………………………………………………...…105
9- Agriculture and the exploitation of the forests: (Protection of the forests) ……………..105
VI.
VI. DISCUSSION AND VALIDATION ………………………………………………………..106
VI.1. Systems and System Models…………………………………………………………………..106
VI.2. Optimization …………………………………………………………………………………..106
VI.3. Results and Discussion………………………………………………………………………...107
VI.3.1. Calculation of CO2 emissions (ADE) by the software…………………..107
VI.3.2. Carbon offsetting (Carbon compensation) ……………………………...107
VI.3.3. Integration of renewable resources …………………………………..…108
VI.3.3.1.The political solution ………………………………………………..109
VI.3.3.1.a/ The Economic solution ……………………………………...…...109
1.1. Revision of the power placed at the disposal (PPD)………….109
1.2. Stops in the peak hours………………………………………...109
VI.3.3.1.b/ Solutions to be proposed………………………….109
vii
VI.3.4. Simulation Results………………………………………………………………………..….109
VI.3.4.1. Free standing for 10% losses………………………………109
VI.3.4.2. Building integration for 10% losses…………………….…113
VI.3.4.3. Free standing for 20% losses……………………………….117
VI.3.4.4. Building integration for 20% losses………………………..121
VI.3.5. Interpretation of results……………………………………………………………………..125
VI.3.6. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………...126
VII. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK…………………………………………………….127
WORK
Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………………127
viii
Abbreviations
RE
Renewable Energy
European Union
EU
CIS
Commonwealth Of Independent States
GHG
Green House Gas
UNFCCC
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
EU ETS
EU Emission Trading System
DH
District Heating
OPEC
Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries
IGCC
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle
CO2
Carbon Dioxide
CH4
Methanol
H2
Hydrogen
C3
Glycerol
C4
Fumaric Acid
C5
Xylitol
C6
Glucaric Acid
Ar
Gallic Acid
AHFH
Army Hawaii Family Housing
MHPI
Military Housing Privatization Initiative
RTGs
Radioisotope Thermal Generators
EIA
Energy Information Administration
MG
Micro Grid
PCC
Point Of Common Coupling
PV
Photovoltaic
WT
Wind Turbine
FC
Fuel Cell
MT
Micro Turbine
DG
Diesel Generator
SD
Static Switch
LC
Local Controller
AVR
Automatic Voltage Regulator
EE
Ecological Economics
SD
Sustainable Development
CSR
Corporate Social Responsibility
GDP
Gross Domestic Product
OECD
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development
TPES
Total Primary Energy Supply
PV
Photovoltaic
DG
Distributed Generation
C.D.E.G.W Company of Distribution of Electricity and Gas of the West (SONELGAZ).
ADE
Algerienne Des Eaux
PPD
Power Placed at the Disposal
MPR
Maximum Power Reached
OPH
Off-Peak Hours
HP
Peaks Hour’s
FH
Full Hours
ix
React
ANOT
TA
IAT
Pconsu(t):
(t):
PPV (t)
PW (t):
(t):
GPV (t)
GW (t)
Ta (t)
Pp_PV
Pp_W
CI(t):
CE(t):
CO(t):
ADEME:
ADEME:
HCNG :
CDER:
NEAL:
DOE:
Energy Reactivates
Amount Net Of Tax
Total Amount
All Inclusive of Tax
Power Consumption
Solar Power
Wind Power
Sunning
Wind Speed
Ambient Temperature
Production Capacity For The Solar
Production Capacity For Wind
Investment Cost
Energy Cost
Operating Cost
Agence De L’environnement Et De La Maitrise De L’énergie
Hydrogen And Compressed Natural Gas
Center Of Development Of Renewable Energies
New Energy Algeria
Department of Energy
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig.1. Synoptic of the possible energy exchanges. …………………………………………………03
Fig.1:
Fig.1: The greenhouse effect. Credit: IPCC, 2007………………………………………………….08
Fig.2:
Fig.2: View a ton of CO2 ....…………………………………………………………………………...11
Fig.I.1:
Fig.I.1: Milestones in gasification development……………………………………………………...17
Fig.I.2
Fig.I.2:
I.2: Bus with an onboard gasifier during the Second World War……………………………...18
Fig.I.3:
Fig.I.3: Cooking stove using fire logs…………………………………………………………………21
Fig.I.4:
Fig.I.4: A biomass fired bubbling fluidized bed in Canada……………………………………….....22
Fig.I.5:
Fig.I.5: Two paths, biological and chemical, for conversion of biomass into fuel, gases, or
chemicals………………………………………………………………………………………………23
Fig.I.6:
Fig.I.6: Two biochemical routes for production of ethanol from (noncellulosic) sugar (a) and
(cellulosic) biomass (b)………………………………………………………………………………..25
Fig.I.7:
Fig.I.7: Thermo chemical routes for production of energy, gas, and ethanol………………………26
Fig.I.7:
Fig.I.7: Types of turbine………………………………………………………………………………29
Fig.I.8:
Fig.I.8: This photo shows scientist Melissa Douglas and part of the Z machine, an inertialelectrostatic confinement fusion apparatus at Sandia National Laboratories. In the device, giant
capacitors discharge through a grid of tungsten wires finer than human hairs, vaporizing them.
The tungsten ions implode inward at a million miles an hour. Braking strongly in the grip of a “Zpinch,” they emit powerful x-rays that compress a deuterium pellet, causing collisions between
the deuterium atoms that lead to fusion events……………………………………………………..38
Fig.I.9
Fig.I.9: Micro Grid Architecture……………………………………………………………………..40
Fig.I.10:
Fig.I.10: Example of MG on Kytnos Island (PV MORE and MODE projects.)………………….....41
Fig.
ig.II.1:
II.1: A representation of sustainability showing how both economy and society are constrained
by environmental limits………………………………………………………………………………45
Fig.II.2:
Fig.II.2: Scheme of sustainable development: at the confluence of three constituent parts………45
Fig.II.3
Fig.II.3:
II.3: Schematic frequency distribution of climate parameters both for present climate and
changed climate. Also a broadened distribution for a changed climate is shown ………………..47
Fig.
Fig.II.4:
II.4: Global mean near surface air temperature since 1856 (Meteorological Office of the United
Kingdom)…………………………………………………………………………………………......48
Fig.II.5:
Fig.II.5: CO2 emissions by fuel in Algeria……………………………………………………….......59
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig.II.6:
Fig.II.6: CO2 emissions by fuel in Africa…………………………………………………………..…59
Fig.II.7:
Fig.II.7: CO2 emissions by fuel in the World………………………………………………………...60
Fig.III
Fig.III.
III.1: Structure of an electrical power system…………………………………………………...64
Fig.III.2
ig.III.2:
III.2: Grid system IEEE New ENgland 39 nodes…………………………………………………68
Fig.IV
Fig.IV.1
IV.1:
.1: Power Placed at the Disposal and the Maximum Power Reached for the year 07………77
Figure IV.2:
IV.2: The electrical supply network (ADE)…………………………………………………..77
Fig.IV.3:
Fig.IV.3: Power Placed at the Disposal and the Maximum Power Reached for the years 07-08-0910………………………………………………………………………………………………………80
Fig.IV.4
Fig.IV.4:
IV.4: Consumption of Energy in the Off-Peak Hours per Quarter for the Years 07-08-0910………………………………………………………………………………………………………81
Fig.IV.5
Fig.IV.5:
IV.5: Consumption of Energy in the Full Hours per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10…....82
Fig.IV.6
Fig.IV.6:
IV.6: Consumption of energy in the Peaks Hours per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10…..83
Fig.IV.7:
Fig.IV.7: Consumption of Energy Reactivates per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10…...………84
Fig.IV.8:
Fig.IV.8: Total Amount with All Inclusive of Tax per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10………85
Fig.IV.9:
Fig.IV.9: CO2 emissions of (ADE) per (t) for a real consumption……………………………….…86
Fig.IV.10:
Fig.IV.10: CO2 emissions of (ADE) per (t) for an overall consumption……………………….…...87
Fig.IV.11:
Fig.IV.11: CO2 emissions of (ADE) per (t) for a real consumption…………………………….…...87
Fig.IV.12:
Fig.IV.12: CO2 emissions of (ADE) per (t) for an overall consumption…………………………….88
Fig.V.1. Monocrystalline solar module 130 Wp VICTRON - High efficiency……………………..95
Fig.V.2. LORENTZ PS (200-600-1200-1800) submersible solar pump up to (50-180-240-250)m
………………………………………………………………………………………………...97
Fig.V.3. PS200……………………………………………………………………………………..…..98
Fig.V.4. PS600…………………………………………………………………………………..……..98
Fig.V.5. PS1200………………………………………………………………………………….……98
Fig.V.6. PS1800……………………………………………………………………………………….99
Fig.V.7. PS150 BOOST…………………………………………………………………………….…99
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig.V.8.Hybrid
power station of Hassi R' mel………………………………………………….…..101
Fig.V.8.
Fig.V.9: CO2 Capture and Storage…………………………………………………………………...105
Fig.VI.1. Monthly energy output from fixed-angle PV system (Free standing for 10%
losses)………………………………………………………………………………………..112
Fig.VI.2. Monthly in-plane irradiation for fixed angle (Free standing for 10% losses)………112
Fig.VI.3. Outline of horizon with sun path for winter and summer solstice (Free standing for
10% losses)………………………………………………………………………………….113
Fig.VI.4. Monthly energy output from fixed-angle PV system (Building integration for 10%
losses)………………………………………………………………………………………..116
Fig.VI.5. Monthly in-plane irradiation for fixed angle (Building integration for 10%
losses)………………………………………………………………………………………..116
Fig.VI.6. Outline of horizon with sun path for winter and summer solstice. (Building integration
for 10% losses)………………………………………………………………………………117
Fig.VI.7. Monthly energy output from fixed-angle PV system (Free standing for 20%
losses)………………………………………………………………………………………..120
Fig.VI.8. Monthly in-plane irradiation for fixed angle (Free standing for 20% losses)………120
Fig.VI.9. Outline of horizon with sun path for winter and summer solstice (Free standing for
20% losses)…………………………………………………………………………………..121
Fig.VI.10. Monthly energy output from fixed-angle PV system (Building integration for 20%
losses)………………………………………………………………………………………..124
Fig.VI.11. Monthly in-plane irradiation for fixed angle (Building integration for 20%
losses)………………………………………………………………………………………..124
Fig.VI.12. Outline of horizon with sun path for winter and summer solstice. (Building
integration for 20% losses)…………………………………………………………………125
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Tab.1
Tab.1: estimating quantities of renewable energy and share exploitable…………………………..10
Tab.2:
Tab.2: ………………………………………………………………………………………………….10
Tab.I.1:
Tab.I.1: Sources of Biomass.. ………………………………………………………………………....19
Tab.I.2:
Tab.I.2: comparisons of four major thermo chemical conversions processes………………………26
Tab.I.3:
Tab.I.3: Masses of Some Particles Important to Nuclear Energy……………………………………36
Tab.I.4:
Tab.I.4: Uranium Isotopes. …………………………………………………………………………...36
Tab.II.1
Tab.II.1:
II.1: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach. ………………………………………………………..52
Tab.II.2
Tab.II.2:
II.2: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach - Coal/peat. …………………………………………...52
Tab.II.3
Tab.II.3:
II.3: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach – Oil. ………………………………………………….52
Tab.II.4
Tab.II.4:
II.4: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach – Gas. …………………………………………………53
Tab.II.5
Tab.II.5:
II.5: CO2 emissions: Reference Approach. …………………………………………...................53
Tab.II.6
Tab.II.6:
II.6: CO2 emissions from international marine bunkers. ………………………………………53
Tab.II.7
Tab.II.7:
II.7: CO2 emissions from international aviation bunkers. …………………………………..…53
Tab.II.8
Tab.II.8:
II.8: CO2 emissions by sector in 2008*.………………………………………………….………54
Tab.II.9
Tab.II.9:
II.9: CO2 emissions with electricity and heat allocated to consuming sectors * in 2008……..54
Tab.II.10
Tab.II.10:
II.10: Total primary energy supply.……………………………………………………………..54
Tab.
Tab.II.11:
II.11: Total primary energy supply. ………………………………………………………….…55
Tab.II.12
Tab.II.12:
II.12: GDP using exchange rates. ……………………………………………………………….55
Tab.
Tab.II.13:
II.13: GDP using purchasing power parities.……………………………………………………55
Tab.
Tab.II.14:
II.14: Population…………………………………………………………………………………55
Tab.II.15
Tab.II.15:
II.15: CO2 emissions / TPES.……………………………………………………………………..56
Tab.
Tab.II.16:
II.16: CO2 emissions / GDP using exchange rates.……………………………………………...56
Tab.
Tab.II.17:
II.17: CO2 Emissions / GDP using purchasing power parities. ………………………………..56
Tab.
Tab.II.18:
II.18: CO2 emissions / population. ……………………………………………………………....56
xiv
LIST OF TABLES
Tab.
Tab.II.19:
II.19: CO2 emissions per kWh from electricity and heat generation*…………………….……57
Tab.II.20
Tab.II.20:
II.20: CO2 emissions per kWh from electricity and heat generation using coal/peat*………..57
Tab.II.21
Tab.II.21:
II.21: CO2 emissions per kWh from electricity and heat generation using oil*……………….58
Tab.
Tab.II.22:
II.22: CO2 emissions per kWh from electricity and heat generation using gas*………………58
Tab.
Tab.II.23:
II.23: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach - Coal/peat/ Oil and gas: I n Algeria……………......58
Tab.
Tab.II.24:
II.24: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach - Coal/peat/ Oil and gas: In Africa…………………59
Tab.
Tab.II.25:
II.25: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach - Coal/peat/ Oil and gas: In the World……………60
Tab.III.
Tab.III.1
III.1: State of production and consumption of the grid system……………………………….69
Tab.III.
Tab.III.2
III.2: Characteristics of the generators. …………………………………………………….......70
Tab.III.
Tab.III.3
III.3: Time criticizes restarting of the thermal and nuclear generators………………………70
Tab.III.
Tab.III.4
III.4: Characteristics of the lines of the grid system. ………………………………………….71
Tab.I
Tab.IV.1:
V.1: Subscription Contract. ……………………………………………………………………76
Tab.
Tab.IV.2
V.2: Consumption of energy in the (off-peak hours, the peaks hour’s, the full hours
and the energy reactivates) for the year 2007. ………………………………………………….......78
Tab.I
Tab.IV.3
V.3: Consumption of energy in the (off-peak hours, the peaks hour’s, the full hours and the
energy reactivates) for the year 2008. ……………………………………………………………….78
Tab.I
Tab.IV.4
energy reactivates) for the year 2009.………………………………………………………………..79
Tab.I
Tab.IV.5
energy reactivates) for the year 2010.………………………………………………………………..79
Tab.IV.6
Tab.IV.6:
IV.6: Power placed at the disposal and Maximum power reached for the years 07-08-0910.……………………………………………………………………………………………………...79
Tab.IV.7
Tab.IV.7:
IV.7: The amount net of tax of the (PPD and MPR).…………………………………………...80
Tab.IV.8:
Tab.IV.8: Consumption of Energy (off-peak hours, the peaks hour’s, the full hours and the energy
reactivates) per Quarter for the Year 07. …………………………………………………………….80
Tab.IV.9:
Tab.IV.9: Consumption of Energy (off-peak hours, the peaks hour’s, the full hours and the energy
reactivates) per Quarter for the Year 08. …………………………………………………………….80
xv
LIST OF TABLES
Tab.IV.10
Tab.IV.10:
.IV.10: Consumption of Energy in the (off-peak hours, the peaks hour’s, the full hours and the
energy reactivates) per Quarter for the Year 09…………………………………………….……….81
Tab.IV.11: Consumption of Energy in the (off-peak hours, the peaks hour’s, the full hours and the
energy reactivates) per Quarter for the Year 09…………………………………………….……….81
Tab.IV.12
Tab.IV.12: Consumption of Energy in the off-peak hours per Quarter for the Years 07- 08 – 09 -10
………………………………………………………………………………………………………....81
Tab.IV.13
Tab.IV.13: Consumption of Energy in the full hours per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10.…….82
Tab.IV.14
Tab.IV.14: Consumption of Energy in the peaks hour’s, the per Quarter for the Year 07-08-09-10
………………………………………………………………………………………………...……….82
Tab.IV.15
Tab.IV.15: Consumption of Energy Reactivates per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10………...83
Tab.IV.16
Tab.IV.16: Total Amount with All Inclusive of Tax per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10
…………………………………………….……………………………………………………..…….85
Tab.IV.17
Tab.IV.17: For a real consumption ………………………………………………………….……….86
Tab.IV.18
Tab.IV.18: For an overall consumption …………………………………………….……………….86
Tab.IV.19
Tab.IV.19: For a real consumption ………………………………………………………….……….87
Tab.IV.2
Tab.IV.20: For an overall consumption …………………………………………….……………….88
Tab.V.2: Revision of the (PPD) in the year 2010………………………………………………...…91
Tab.V.3: Gain Realized in the year 2010……………………………………………………………92
Tab.V.4: Stops in the Peak hours in the year 2010……………………………………………..…..92
Tab.V.5: Consumption of energy in ADE (St.Tr. Djorf Torba. Kenadsa/Bechar)…………….93
Tab.V.6: Outages during peak hour’s Station de Traitement of Djorf Torba …………………94
Table VI.1: For a real consumption: (CO2 emissions of (ADE) by the software)……..…………107
Table.VI.2: For a real consumption: (CO2 emissions According to the Summit of Copenhagen
there is 3300 kWh electricity = 1000 kg of CO2)………………………………………………….107
Table.VI.3: Global Warming Potential of gas……………………………………………………..107
Table.VI.4: Carbon compensation………………………………………………………………...108
Table.VI.5
Table.VI.5: Fixed system……………………………………………………………………………110
xvi
LIST OF TABLES
Table.VI.6
Table.VI.6: Vertical axis tracking system optimal…………………………………………………....110
Table.VI.7
Table.VI.7: Inclined axis tracking system optimal…………………………………………………...111
Table.VI.8
Table.VI.8: 2-axis tracking system……………………………………………………………………111
Table.VI.9
Table.VI.9 : Fixed system……………………………………………………………………………...114
Table.VI.10 : Vertical axis tracking system optimal………………………………………………….114
Table.VI.11 : Inclined axis tracking system optimal…………………………………………………115
Table.VI.12 : 2-axis tracking system………………………………………………………………….115
Table.VI.13 : Fixed system…………………………………………………………………………….118
Table.VI.14 : Vertical axis tracking system optimal………………………………………………….118
Table.VI.15 : Inclined axis tracking system optimal…………………………………………………119
Table.VI.16 : 2-axis tracking system………………………………………………………………….119
Table.VI.17 : Fixed system……………………………………………………………………………121
Table.VI.18 : Vertical axis tracking system optimal…………………………………………………121
Table.VI.19 : 2-axis tracking system …………………………………………………………………123
Table.VI.20 : Vertical axis tracking system optimal …………………………………………………123
xvii
INTRODUCTION
Environmental
Optimization of the
Energy in an
Electrical Network.
ENVIRONMENTAL OPTIMIZATION OF THE ENERGY IN AN ELECTRICAL NETWORK
Introduction:
Introduction:
1. Introduction:
Energy is a thermodynamic quantity equivalent to the capacity of a physical system to produce
work or heat. It is essential to life. If we live better than our primitive ancestors, it is because we
use more energy to do work, to produce heat, and to move people and goods. Energy can exist in
various forms (chemical, Mechanical, electrical, light, etc.). It is in the process of transforming
energy from one form to another that we are able to harness part of it for our own use.
Energy is related to a fundamental symmetry of nature: the invariance of the physical laws under
translation in time. In simple words this means that any experiment reproduced at a later time
under the same conditions should give the same results. This symmetry law leads to the
conservation of the physical quantity which is energy. There are also other symmetries which lead
to important conservation laws. Space invariance with respect to translation or rotation leads
respectively to conservation laws for momentum and angular momentum. This means that if we
translate or rotate an experimental arrangement we will get the same experimental results.
Conservation of energy, momentum, and angular momentum are of basic importance and govern
the processes occurring in the universe. [1]
Energy and information are two elements fundamentals of our modern society, both are produced,
transported, processed, stored ...Many similarities exist between energy and information except
that our "manipulations" energy can seriously disrupt our environment because our requirements
in terms of transport and comfort are growing at a disproportionate rate our energy needs. Since
the dawn of humanity, we burn: first wood, then fossil (coal, oil, gas), then uranium. In Just over a
century, electricity, modern form of Energy Excellence, took a prominent plan. Its production
accounts for one third of the consumption Global energy, mainly in thermo-mechanical machines
of poor performance.
The large-scale combustion of fossil fuels leads to massive release of various compounds which one
begins to suspect that they alter balances of the planet; moreover, it is likely that we have
exhausted their reserves during the century next. Nuclear waste, despite their reprocessing, and
pile up, when their producers are unscrupulous, they end up in places not listed. Certainly,
nuclear fusion gave a lot of hope but the technological problems it raises are far from being
resolved.
Meanwhile, nature provides us, generously and fairly well distributed over the earth, a quantity of
energy (renewable) very largely sufficient to meet our needs. It is a multitude of technology
solutions for used on a large scale or small, whether for produce heat, mechanical energy or
electricity, which in turn can be transformed.
So why energy utilization renewable only develops does not faster? The reasons are both political
and economic. In Indeed, the current prices of fossil fuels are very down and hinder the
emergence of new technologies inevitably more expensive as they have not reached mass
production. Meanwhile, an increasing proportion of the population concerned, often rightly, of
the dangers associated with the use of fossil fuels and nuclear fission.
1
This fraction of the population, on the one hand, and the many industrial lobbies, on the other
hand, exert their influences the political level to address the balance of their side but, for now, the
latter are still the most powerful.
The trend towards deregulation is becoming increasingly prevalent worldwide. Deregulation
allows the gradual privatization in generation and distribution of electric energy. It finally leads to
decentralization in the modes of operation of the electrical system and diversity in ways of
generating and distributing energy.
On the other hand, in recent decades, a variety of reasons such as:
•
•
•
•
The need to reduce the emission of greenhouse gas emissions (Kyoto Protocol in 1997)
The threat of depletion of fossil energy.
The issue of energy independence.
Sustainable Development.
Now we look to push the energy issue not only by economic standpoint, but also as an ecological
standpoint. This has encouraged many countries to develop their energy system based on largescale distributed generation including renewable energy and energy-efficient solutions.
Distributed Productions have very interesting potential contributions in terms of energy and
economy. However, depending on their rate of penetration, these new energy sources could have
significant consequences on the operation and security of power systems. To insert a massive
Productions Distributed system, these impacts will be found not only in the distribution system,
where most Productions distributed connected, but they will affect the whole system in terms of:
Uncertainty in the planning of production means.
Increase the vulnerability in the operating result:
Change of the operating reserve margin.
Sensitivity Productions distributed to disruptions in the network.
Complexity of coordinating the management of the network.
For these and others we are going to study the “Algerienne des Eaux (ADE)” which is one of the
largest consumers of energy in our Bechar city; we will try to propose an integration of a
renewable source on the level of consumption, since near the sites of consumption, thus reducing
the cost of transport, on-line losses, and the call of reactivates power on the level of the source
station;
2
Algerienn
Algerienne
Des Eaux
Bechar
Wind
SONELGAZ
PV sys.
Fig.1.
Fig.1. Synoptic of the possible energy exchanges.
We want to satisfy the energy demand of the (ADE). We have at our disposal the network, of the
systems of ecological, wind and solar production,
•
•
•
Algerienne Des Eaux (A
ADE)
DE consumption: Pconsu(t);
Producer Solar produces at time t, respectively, a power PPV (t)
The manufacturer produces wind at time t, respectively, a power PW (t).
These ratings depend on:
•
Solar and wind fields whose time distribution is given respectively by the functions:
GPV (t) (sunning in W/m²)
GW (t) (wind speed in m/s);
• Ambient temperature Ta (t) (in ° C);
• Production capacity in terms of peak power installed.
For the solar Pp_PV,
For wind Pp_W (watts peak);
2. Economic relations:
relations:
We define the cost of energy produced or consumed C(t)
C(t) for a given element, at time "t" (t in
hours) as the sum of investment costs, respectively CI (purchase and installation), CE energy
and use CO (operation and maintenance): C(t)
C(t) = CI(t)
(t) + CE(t)
(t) + CO(t).
2.1. Investment cost CI(t):
This cost depends on the maximum capacity of the elements :(P
:(Pp_PV, Pp_W).
3
2.2. Energy cost CE(t):
This cost depends on the power produced or consumed at time t and the maximum power that can
be received or returned by the element.
2.3. Operating cost CO(t):
This cost can be decomposed into an annual maintenance cost which depends on the capacity of
the installation and maintenance costs associated with wear-dependent production:
3. The PV generator:
generator:
The price of a PV system must take into account the actual items. It is split between all the
materials conversion, labor and commissioning of the plant. The material here includes:
Photovoltaic panels, mounting brackets, converters and cable connections needed. The total cost
of the PV system varies depending on the source, especially as the rapidly expansion is
accompanied by a rapid decrease in panel prices and the share of the plant can undergo large
dispersions of the difficulties. Converters, still produced in small series, should incur significant
cost reductions in the future with a peak watt installed cost of normal descending when the power
increases. [2]
Once
the
system
is
installed,
there
is
a
cost
of
operation
and
maintenance.
4. The installation of a photovoltaic system:
4.1.
.1. Cost and profitability:
The outputs of the solar panels vary according to many factors’ which are:
4.1.1. Influence of the angle of incidence:
incidence
The angle of incidence, it is the angle formed by the rays of the Sun and the plan of the panel.
4.1.2. Influence of the orientation:
orientation
The Sun rises to the East and lie down in the West. Then the orientation would have made according
to the situation and or more the rays of the Sun come.
4.1.3. Influence of the angle of inclination:
inclination
The angle of inclination is the angle formed by the plan of the ground and the plan of the panel.
4
5. Electricity Generation from Wind Energy:
5.1. Introduction: [3]
There is now general acceptance that the burning of fossil fuels is having a significant influence on
the global climate. Effective mitigation of climate change will require deep reductions in
greenhouse gas emissions. The electricity system is viewed as being easier to transfer to lowcarbon energy sources than more challenging sectors of the economy such as surface and air
transport and domestic heating. Hence the use of cost-effective and reliable low-carbon electricity
generation sources, in addition to demand-side measures, is becoming an important objective of
energy policy in many countries.
Over the past few years, wind energy has shown the fastest rate of growth of any form of
electricity generation with its development stimulated by concerns of national policy makers over
climate change, energy diversity and security of supply.
5.2. Wind Farms:
Numerous wind farm projects are being constructed around the globe with both offshore and
onshore developments in Europe and primarily large onshore developments in North America.
Usually, sites are preselected based on general information of wind speeds provided by a wind
atlas, which is then validated with local measurements. The local wind resource is monitored for 1
year, or more, before the project is approved and the wind turbines installed.
Onshore turbine installations are frequently in upland terrain to exploit the higher wind speeds.
However, wind farm permitting and sitting onshore can be difficult as high wind-speed sites are
often of high visual amenity value and environmentally sensitive.
Offshore development, particularly of larger wind farms, generally takes place more than 5 km
from land to reduce environmental impact. The advantages of offshore wind farms include
reduced visual intrusion and acoustic noise impact and also lower wind turbulence with higher
average wind speeds.
6. Wind generator:
It is very difficult to calculate the price of a wind turbine without considering the actual situation.
The cost is split between the material, labor, and civil construction and commissioning of the
entire system. It can be very variable depending on the implantation site (topographical
difficulties, distance between wind turbines and ground installation ...). The material here
includes, wind turbines, masts, converters and the necessary cable connections. We see then, for
the cost of installation and the total cost of the wind system according to the installed peak power.
5
7. Wind farm installation:
For the wind farm installation it is necessary to see many factors: (future work)
The first stage consists in making sure that the site of establishment considered is appropriate for a
project of Wind Park.
It must in particular:
To be sufficiently been windy. In the ideal, the winds must be regular and sufficiently forts,
without too much turbulence, throughout the year. Studies of the winds on the site are essential;
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
To be easy to connect to the electrical supply high or Medium Average network;
To be easy access;
Not to be subjected to certain constraints (aeronautical, radars, etc.)
To take into account the natural inheritance and in particular the avifauna, to avoid the
zones protected not to take seat in architectural or landscape sectors significant
(remarkable sites emblematic, landscapes, registered or classified sites, etc.)
To be of a sufficient size to accommodate the project.
The wind mills must be located at a distance from the dwellings determined by the
acoustic shutter of the impact study which takes into account the regulation «Noise and
Vicinity ".
The distance between wind mills must be 400 m approximately.
Their influence on the ground (surface overhung by the blades) is approximately 8000 m2.
A wind park of 10 machines covers approximately 10 ha.
7.1. Advantages of the wind power:
It preserves the hydrous resources;
It is compatible with other uses of the grounds and can be used as stimulus with the
development of the rural economy;
It does not produce toxic or radioactive waste;
It creates additional incomes for the farmers whose grounds are rented;
It constitutes a tourist attraction for the local communities;
It is entirely renewable, highly reliable and very efficient;
It becomes increasingly economic to produce as economies of scale are carried out and that
the price of electricity increases.
8. The storage:
This cost includes the electrochemical batteries, cables required for connections, the cabinet or
safe containment and commissioning of all.
6
9. The inverter:
inverter
We consider here only the cost of purchasing and installing the inverter.
The means of energy storage is expensive so the (SONELGAZ) takes it instantly.
(Proposition)
10.
10. Outline of the Work:
The work is organized as follows. A Bibliographical study an introduction and Outline of the
Work. In Chapter 1, a background of renewable energy is presented. The main focus in Chapter 2
is a sustainable development, Climate change and the emission of CO2, Study of a standard
network in Chapter 3. The objective of Chapter 4 is to study a local network specially study of an
electrical supply network which is Algerienne Des Eaux / Bechar, namely minimizing operating
costs and emission level. In Chapter 5 a Study of different solutions are proposed; policy and
economic which is Revision of the power placed at the disposal (PPD
PPD),
PPD Stops in the peak hour’s
and the integration of renewable sources like installation of a photovoltaic system and/or Wind
farm and finally; in Chapter 6 deals with solving and discussion of results of the same problem as
in Chapter 4 using the software on line Photovoltaic Geographical Information System (PVGIS)
and another for calculate the emission of CO2 from actioncarbone.org (a program of the
foundation / GOODPLANET) as an electrical supply network. Finally, conclusions and future
considerations are summarized in Chapter 7.
7
Bibliographical study
Environmental
Optimization of the
Energy in an
Electrical Network.
Bibliographical study:
study:
I- Introduction:
“Anyone who has kids must be . . . concerned about the climate future we’re leaving behind for
them. The choices that we make today on the “what to do” about climate change will have long
lifetimes . . . Our actions are changing the climate on a global scale. It’s happening now. We can’t
pretend it’s not there.”
Climate change is nothing new. About 18 000 years ago, Earth was experiencing the last of many
ice ages, from which it only emerged about 10 000 years ago. More recently, between the years
1430–1850 portions of the Earth passed through a little ice age. The role of greenhouse gases,
especially water vapor and carbon dioxide (CO2), in warming the Earth is also ancient, and indeed
has long served life on Earth well. (Fig
Fig.
Fig.1) shows a representation of this phenomenon. Radiation
from the sun reaches and warms the Earth’s surface. In turn, Earth emits radiant heat (infrared
radiation) back toward space, part of which is captured by heat trapping water vapor and
greenhouse gases. Without the “greenhouse effect” to trap this warmth, the Earth could be colder
by 95ºF (35ºC), and not support life as we know it. However, the last century has brought greater
warming beyond that which can be accounted for by natural causes, and warming is occurring at a
faster rate.
In an 1896 publication, Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius noted that, “We are evaporating our
coal mines into the air.” He stated a novel thought: Earth’s climate would warm as we continued
to burn coal, which would increase the level of atmospheric CO2. An American, P. C.
Chamberlain came to similar conclusions also in the 1890s. They believed this because they knew
that CO2 absorbs and traps the infrared radiation emitted from the Earth. So, increasing levels of
atmospheric CO2 would lead to increasing temperatures. Living in a very cold climate Arrhenius
relished the possibility, and believed it might prevent the onset of another ice age. [4]
Fig.1
Fig.1: The greenhouse effect. Credit: IPCC, 2007.
8
IIII- Conservation of Energy:
Energy:
Energy can be utilized but not consumed. It is a law of nature that energy is conserved. We
degrade or randomize energy, just as we randomize mineral resources when we process ores into
metal and then discard the product as we do, for example, with used aluminum cans. All energy
we use goes into heat and is eventually radiated out into space.
The consumable is not energy; it is the fact that energy has not yet been randomized. The degree
of randomization of energy is measured by the entropy of the energy. [5]
IIIIII- The energy resources of the planet:
planet:
Before you begin, it is advisable to define the terminology. The primary energy is energy directly
converted into heat, and electricity from power plants through thermo-mechanical cycles (yields
30-50%) is classified as secondary. In contrast, Hydropower is called primary electricity. The
renewable energy (RE) are, in our scale time, those who are exempted by the continuously nature,
they are derived from sunlight, Earth’s core and the gravitational interactions moon and sun with
the ocean. Non-renewable energy (NRE)
NRE) are derived from fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas ...)
themselves from the action of sun for tens of millions of years, this is a fossilized biomass. The
uranium used nuclear fission can also be considered as renewable because its reserves are limited.
As for the fusion energy, if we master a day, it can be considered inexhaustible our scale. Perhaps
one of its dangers: Excessive energy dissipation at the surface of the land could lead to changes
catastrophic. Note that the man consumes today, an energy corresponding to 1 / 8000 th of solar
energy that reaches the surface of the earth.
III.1. Solar radiation:
the energy received at the surface (total 720.1015 kW.h) varies by m² of 1100 kW.h to 2300 kW.h
/ year, or a power average (distributed over the year, taking into account alternating light-dark
and cloudy periods) of 120 to 260 W / m² and a peak power of over 1 kW / m². Much hits the
ocean and gives what is commonly called thermal energy sea is about 80 1012 kW.h (in areas
Tropical: 20 ° C temperature difference between water surface and 1000 m depth).
---The
The set of hydrologic cycle converts 360 1015 KW.h. The evaporation of water (mainly Oceans)
leads to precipitation channeled then by rivers and streams and also winds. The waves are
produced by wind also a source of usable energy. The technically exploitable hydropower worth,
estimated between 15 and 25 1012 KW.h.
---Wind
Wind energy also been exploited long (sail propulsion, windmills, pumps water), represents a
huge resource, 32 1015 kW.h, whose share of usable land is estimated at 50 1012 kW.h / year. Much
lies offshore "In fact winds much stronger off and, especially, more regularly.
---The
The wave energy is estimated to be available 8 1012 kW.h including 90 109 kW.h per year
technically usable (power about 50 kW m wave front seems refundable).
---Biomass
Biomass:
Biomass This is the product of photosynthesis. The share renewable annually (20%) of biomass
energy represents an approximately 800 to 900 1012 KW.h. Is currently 3% food, 0.6% for the
timber industry and paper and 1.8% for combustion (heating and cooking). We estimate that the
share reached easily exploitable 60 1012 KW.h.
9
--- Geothermal The earth's molten core releases energy Annual approximately 300 1012 kW.h
(heat flow ranging from 0.05 to 1 W / m², which is very low compared to solar radiation).
Reserves exploitable are about 40 109 high kW.h energy (150 to 350 ° C, used for production
electricity) and 300 109 kW.h low energy (50 to 90 ° C for heating).
--- The gravitational interactions EarthEarth-MoonMoon-Sun:
Sun the tides are the product of these interactions.
The annual tidal energy is about 25.1012kW.h. A small part is used in areas of high tide with a
constriction is estimated at 270 to 500,109 kW.h (plant Rance produces: 0,54 109 kW.h).
Table 1: estimating quantities of renewable energy and share exploitable.
Annual resources
overall estimate
Solar
biomass
hydrologic cycle
Geothermal
Tides
700*1015
4.5*1015
360*1015
300*1012
25*1012
kw.h
Products
share exploitable
--qq 10*1012
60*1012
hydro
Wind
wave
H temp
Estuary
20*1012
50*1012
90*109
40*109
500*109
III.2. NonNon-renewable energy:
These fossil fuels: oil, coal and natural gas, for the most known, there is also, in much greater
quantity but less easily exploitable oil shale. Since 1970, we have doubled our consumption of oil.
The Oil accounted for 45% of energy consumed while this proportion fell to 38% today and seems
to stabilize in the coming years. These energies have the advantage of low cost but the
disadvantage
of
being
clean.
However,
it
is
possible to reduce emissions (filtering in smokestacks, catalytic converters ...) but the price is
increased.
Table 2:
2:
fossil energy
exploitable reserves
total estimated reserves
pace 90s
oil
1.8 to 2*1015
Coal
8*1015
Natural Gas
1.2*1015
shale
2*1015
4*1015
40 years
220 years
60 years
??years
Table 2 gives an idea of reservations known but beware, the time periods indicated are very
hypothetical and based on known reserves exploitable as well as the current rate of consumption.
Intensive oil exploration reveals, on average each year, the equivalent of what that was consumed
... Nevertheless, we have a very limited period of exploitation of renewable energies that is
difficult to assess objectively. It is thus very likely that we have exhausted the fossil fuels during
the
twenty-first
century.
Coal
reserves
are
still very important (especially in India and China) and operation will probably find a strong
growth over the next century. It will then need to seriously clean combustion.
---Nuclear:
Nuclear:
Uranium-235 used in the fission reactions Nuclear power is an inexhaustible ore. Reserves are
estimated at 580.1012 KW.h. Uranium 238, converted into fissile material in breeder reactors is
10
much more abundant, it would, if breeder reactors were operating at an industrial scale, a reserve
of 80.1015 kW.h or 10 times the reserves known coal. Major drawback of the fission wastes, that
are expensive to reprocess and after reprocessing to retain a share of them a high radioactivity to
long life. Their storage poses the problem of sustainability and memory sites.
The merger is expected to free ourselves from the problem of waste as it is supposed to be clean.
Deuterium and tritium are abundant enough: a liter of Water Sea contains, in deuterium, which
provide an MW.h. The tritium must be manufactured, for example from lithium which would
provide the land resources 200.1015 kW.h and those oceans kW.h 1021 (the million years at current
rates). But all this is still fiction.
IV. What is a ton of CO2?
At the Copenhagen summit, a huge cube of side 8.2 m (equivalent to a three-story building) was
installed on a lake in the Danish capital. It represents the volume occupied by one tone of CO2, the
normal atmospheric pressure. It is also the amount of CO2 as the average person in an
industrialized country emits each month. Every day 80 million tones of CO2 are emitted
worldwide. In one year, an American rejects 22.9 tons of CO2, a European 10.6 tons, a sub-Saharan
Africa 4.5 tones and India 1.8 tones of CO2.
Fig.2.
Fig.2. View a ton of CO2.
Another view is offered to us by CO2 logic:
A ball of the Atomium could contain 5 tons of pure CO2. Emissions of CO2 equivalent
each year by Belgian content of more than two balls of the Atomium. On the scale of
Belgium, the equivalent content of 30 million balls of the Atomium is issued annually.
Imagine 30 million balls of the Atomium in the sky...
11
IV.1. What is a ton of CO2?
Using the following correspondences, we can easily calculate the CO2 emissions caused by our
daily activities.
1 m³ of gas: 2 kg CO2
1 liter of gasoline: 2.39 kg CO2
1 liter of diesel: 2.64 kg CO2
10 kWh of electricity in Belgium: 3 kg of CO2
1 liter LPG: 1.67 kg CO2
• 1000 kg CO2 = Roll 8400 km of diesel (4.5 litres/100km) or gasoline (5 litres/100km).
• 1000 kg CO2 = Use 500 cubic feet of gas (enough to heat an apartment of 50 m² moderately
isolated) or 380 gallons of oil
• 1000 kg CO2 = 3300 kWh of electricity (average consumption of a household of three people
using electricity for appliances and lighting).
• 1000 kg CO2 (per passenger) = one round trip Brussels-Lisbon by plane (3400 km)
• 700 kg CO2 = annual consumption of a boiler electric (80l/jour)
• 480 kg CO2 = annual savings by opting for a solar water heater (if a boiler fuel)
• 370 kg CO2 = annual savings by opting for a solar water heater (in a gas boiler)
• 100 kg CO2 = a computer in standby mode over a year
• 15-35 CO2e = 1kg beef (other protective plastic rings gas emissions are also emitted during the
production of beef: CH4, NO2 ...) we reduce CO2 equivalents for a total value.
IV.2. Smart Grid:
Smart grid is a type of electrical grid which attempts to predict and intelligently respond to the
behavior and actions of all electric power users connected to it - suppliers, consumers and those
that do both – in order to efficiently deliver reliable, economic, and sustainable electricity
services.
In Europe, the smart grid is conceived of as employing innovative products and services together
with intelligent monitoring, control, communication, and self-healing technologies in order to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Better facilitate the connection and operation of generators of all sizes and technologies;
Allow consumers to play a part in optimizing the operation of the system;
Provide consumers with greater information and options for choice of supply;
Significantly reduce the environmental impact of the whole electricity supply system;
Maintain or even improve the existing high levels of system reliability, quality and
security of supply;
Maintain and improve the existing services efficiently
In the United States, the Smart Grid concept is defined as the modernization of the nation's
electricity transmission and distribution system to maintain a reliable and secure electricity
infrastructure that can meet future demand growth and to achieve each of the following, which
together characterize a Smart Grid:
12
1. Increased use of digital information and controls technology to improve reliability,
security, and efficiency of the electric grid.
2. Dynamic optimization of grid operations and resources, with full cyber-security.
3. Deployment and integration of distributed resources and generation, including
renewable resources.
4. Development and incorporation of demand response, demand-side resources, and
energy-efficiency resources.
5. Deployment of `smart' technologies (real-time, automated, interactive
technologies that optimize the physical operation of appliances and consumer
devices) for metering, communications concerning grid operations and status, and
distribution automation.
6. Integration of `smart' appliances and consumer devices.
7. Deployment and integration of advanced electricity storage and peak-shaving
technologies, including plug-in electric and hybrid electric vehicles, and thermalstorage air conditioning.
8. Provision to consumers of timely information and control options.
9. Development of standards for communication and interoperability of appliances
and equipment connected to the electric grid, including the infrastructure serving
the grid.
10. Identification and lowering of unreasonable or unnecessary barriers to adoption of
smart grid technologies, practices, and services.
The smart grid implies a fundamental re-engineering the electric services industry, but focuses on
the technical infrastructure.
IV.2.1. Goals of the Smart Grid:
Grid:
Smart energy demand is a broad concept. It includes any energy-user actions to:
• Enhancement of reliability.
• Reduce peak demand,
• Shift usage to off-peak hours,
• Lower total energy consumption,
• Actively manage electric vehicle charging,
• Actively manage other usage to respond to solar, wind, and other renewable resources,
and.
• Buy more efficient appliances and equipment over time based on a better. Understanding
of how energy is used by each appliance or item of equipment.
IV.2.2. What a smart grid is:
is:
The function of an electrical grid is not a single entity but an aggregate of multiple networks and
multiple power generation companies with multiple operators employing varying levels of
communication and coordination, most of which is manually controlled. Smart grids increase the
connectivity, automation and coordination between these suppliers, consumers and networks that
perform either long distance transmission or local distribution tasks.
13
•
•
Transmissions networks move electricity in bulk over medium to long distances, are
actively managed, and generally operate from 345kV to 800kV over AC and DC lines.
Local networks traditionally moved power in one direction, "distributing" the bulk power
to consumers and businesses via lines operating at 132kV and lower.
Smart Energy Demand mechanisms and tactics include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Smart meters,
Dynamic pricing,
Smart thermostats and smart appliances,
Automated control of equipment,
Real-time and next day energy information feedback to electricity users,
Usage by appliance data, and
Scheduling and control of loads such as electric vehicle chargers, home area networks
(HANs), and others.
IV.2.3. Smart grid functions:
functions:
Before examining particular technologies, a proposal can be understood in terms of what it is
being required to do. The governments and utilities funding development of grid modernization
have defined the functions required for smart grids. According to the United States Department of
Energy's Modern Grid Initiative report, a modern smart grid must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Be able to heal itself.
Motivate consumers to actively participate in operations of the grid.
Resist attack.
Provide higher quality power that will save money wasted from outages.
Accommodate all generation and storage options.
Enable electricity markets to flourish.
Run more efficiently.
Enable higher penetration of intermittent power generation sources.
IV.2.4. Optimize assets:
A smart grid can optimize capital assets while minimizing operations and maintenance costs.
Optimized power flows reduce waste and maximize use of lowest-cost generation resources.
Harmonizing local distribution with interregional energy flows and transmission traffic improves
use of existing grid assets and reduces grid congestion and bottlenecks, which can ultimately
produce consumer savings.
14
Renewable Energy
Environmental
Optimization of the
Energy in an
Electrical Network.
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
I. Renewable Energy:
I.1.
I.1. What is ‘Renewable Energy’?
Renewable Energy (RE) has been defined, somewhat strictly, as ‘energy flows that occur naturally
and repeatedly in the environment and can be harnessed for human benefit’. A looser and,
arguably, more widely used description might be ‘energy produced from a renewable and/or
sustainable fuel source’. The Characteristics of what qualify, for each individual country, as
‘renewable’, ‘sustainable’, or ‘alternative’ Fuels (that is, alternative to traditional fossil fuels) under
such definitions tend to vary, with certain exceptions being made for sources such as municipal
and some industrial wastes.
The most widely recognized forms of RE are, undoubtedly, wind power and hydro power which,
despite the major advances achieved in technology and output rating over the past decade, have a
history that goes back centuries. There are, however, various others RE technologies both in use
and under development which can, as will be explored later, represent solutions that can be both
environmentally and economically viable. [ 6]
I.2. Why Renewable Energy?
The continuing appetite of the United States of America for fossil fuels, to which has now been
added the increasing demand from the rapidly growing economies of, notably, India and the
People’s Republic of China, means that the energy source status quo requires significant, and
urgent, re-assessment.
Current and proposed new pipeline construction projects, designed to deliver increased volumes of
both oil and gas supplies to the new emerging economic powers in the East, will put increasing
strain on the West’s accessibility to traditionally low-cost fossil fuel resources. Lying between a
hoped for future within the European Union (EU) and an historic and continuing dependence on
fossil fuel supplies from Russian and other (CIS)
CIS) territories (Commonwealth of Independent
States), the countries of Central, Eastern and Southern Europe have increasingly urgent reason to
promote the development and exploitation of their indigenous RE resources.
In addition, the continuing security issues in the Middle East, and the Russian Federation’s
demonstration of its energy supply ‘muscle’ in the December 2005–January 2006 period have been
reminders, if any were still required, of the need to seek the improvement of energy supply
security through, inter alia, diversification of sources – both geographic and type. The world’s and,
in particular, the industrialized Management of micro grids countries of the West’s, reliance upon
fossil fuels has been the subject of serious concern and debate for a number of years, as has, more
recently, the impact on the environment of increasing consumption of these fuels. According to
the United Nations, the industrialized countries of North America and Western Europe, along
with a few other states, such as Japan, are responsible for the vast bulk of past and current GHG
emissions. As a consequence, the majority of the world’s countries have entered into a variety of
undertakings to reduce the rate of climate change – the most important of these being the Kyoto
Protocol – by means, inter alia, of energy efficiency improvements and GHG reductions. Some
governments (with the notable exception of the world’s leading consumer and producer of
emissions, together with a small number of others) have, as a result of membership of the United
15
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),
(UNFCCC) ratification of the Kyoto Protocol
and the obligations entered into under other conventions, begun to introduce a number of
legislative incentives and penalties designed to increase the use of alternative energy resources. A
number of countries, such as the United Kingdom, have imposed taxes or ‘levies’ on carbon
emissions. Enhanced, or ‘green’, tariffs have been introduced by many governments to provide a
spur to the production and use of RE, and guarantee access to the grid by RE-generating
plants.
RE
Systems have been, and are being, developed in many countries to require waste management
companies and landfill operators to manage the escape of greenhouse gases, such as methane, from
landfill sites.
The EU has introduced an Emission Trading System (EU ETS) to create a market for GHG
reduction units, whilst the Joint Implementation and Clean Development Mechanism established
by the Kyoto Protocol offer potential financial leveraging benefits for qualifying RE projects as an
indirect incentive for implementation of emissions-reducing technologies. An additional, if
arguably indirect, driver for a move towards greater RE generation has been the increasing
realization by governments that advances in Technology now means that their indigenous
resources can be harvested with much greater efficiency and lower cost than before. Much of
Central, Eastern and Northern European countries have significant DH (District Heating)
infrastructures, to which cogeneration plants fuelled by biomass or waste feed-stocks can be
connected with minimal disruption. Few plants have the added advantage of being able to address
a waste problem at the same time, providing an enhanced benefit. [ 6]
I.3. How is Renewable Energy defined?
Generally, wind Governments, on the other hand, are driven more by the need to meet their
international RE obligations and, increasingly, by the desire to achieve greater balance in their
energy supply security positions. It will be seen, however, that the greatest (and, arguably, most
easily implemented) RE project development opportunities across the whole region lie principally
in the Biomass/ Biofuel/Energy from Waste sectors, with some markets also benefiting from
substantial availability of small hydro resources. Whilst in some cases technologically viable, the
current status of technology in the solar power sector does not yet appear to be commercially
viable within the region, although recent developments in both conversion efficiencies and cost
reductions gives some encouragement to the view that solar power generation projects may
eventually become economically competitive in the medium term.
The development of wind projects may be feasible in some specific instances (eg Croatia)
although, due to the intermittent nature of power delivery from such schemes, wind
developments may be better suited as part of an alternative application – for example, the
production of water in desalination plants, or in the Generation of hydrogen for hydrogen cells –
rather than in direct power generation for the grid.
Few projects – in particular if developed on an integrated, holistic basis – have, we believe, a
particularly Interesting place in the RE mix, as perspective of an RE project developer or investor,
it is clear that the ‘best’ or most attractive projects will be those from which the greatest returns
can be made over the shortest period. This, however, has tended to be on the back of heavily
subsidized tariff structures, which often favor a particular resource generally, wind. Governments,
16
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
on the other hand, are driven more by the need to meet their international RE obligations and,
increasingly, by the desire to achieve greater balance in their energy supply security positions. [ 6]
A. Biomass Energy:
Fig.I
Fig.I.1:
.1: Milestones in gasification development.
a) Historical Background:
The earliest known investigation into gasification was carried out by Thomas Shirley, who in 1659
experimented with “carbureted hydrogen” (now called methane). Figure I.1 shows some of the
important milestones in the progression of gasification.
The pyrolysis of biomass to produce charcoal was perhaps the first large scale application of a
gasification-related process. When wood, owing to its overuse, became scarce toward the
beginning of the eighteenth century, coke was produced from coal through pyrolysis, but the use
of by-product gas from pyrolysis received little attention. Early developments were inspired
primarily by the need for town gas for street lighting. The salient features of town gas from coal
were demonstrated to the British Royal Society in 1733, but the scientists of the time saw no use
for it. In 1798, William Murdoch used coal-gas (Also known as town gas) to light the main
building of the Soho Foundry and in 1802 he presented a public display of gas lighting, astonishing
the local population. Friedrich Winzer of Germany patented coal-gas lighting in 1804.
By 1823 numerous towns and cities throughout Britain were gas-lit. At the time, the cost of gas
light was 75% less than that for oil lamps or candles and this helped accelerate its development
17
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
and deployment. By 1859,
1859 gas lighting had spread throughout Britain. It came to the United States
probably in 1816,
1816 with Baltimore the first city to use it.
The history of gasification may be divided into four periods, as described in the following:
1850–
1850–1940: During this early stage, the gas made from coal was used mainly for lighting homes
and streets and for heating. Lighting helped along the Industrial Revolution by extending working
hours in factories, especially on short winter days. The invention of the electric bulb circa 1900
reduced the need for gas for lighting, but its use for heating and cooking continued. With the
discovery of natural gas, the need for gasification of coal or biomass decreased.
1940–
1940–1975: The period 1940–
1940–1975
1975 saw gasification enter two fields of application as synthetic
fuels: internal combustion and chemical synthesis into oil and other process chemicals. In the
Second World War, Allied bombing of Nazi oil refineries and oil supply routes greatly diminished
the crude oil supply that fueled Germany’s massive war machinery. This forced Germany to
synthesize oil from coal-gas using the Fischer-Tropsch (see
see Eq. I.1 (2n + 1) H2 + n CO (catalyst
(catalyst)
catalyst) →
CnH2n+2+nH2O.)
O.) and Bergius processes (n C + (n + 1)
1) H2 → CnH2n+2).
n+2) Chemicals and aviation fuels
were also produced from coal.
A large number of cars and trucks in Europe operated on coal or biomass gasified in onboard
gasifies. During this period over a million small gasifies were built primarily for transportation (see
Fig.I
Fig.I.2). The end of the Second World War and the availability of abundant oil from the Middle
East eliminated the need for gasification for transportation and chemical production. [7]
Fig.
Fig. I.2:
.2: Bus with an onboard gasifier during the Second World War.
The advent of plentiful natural gas in the 1950s dampened the development of coal or biomass
gasification, but syngas production from natural gas and naphtha by steam reforming increased,
especially to meet the growing demand for fertilizer.
1975–
1975–2000: The third phase in the history of gasification began after the Yom Kippur War, which
triggered the 1973 oil embargo. On October 15, 1973, members of the Organization of Arab
Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) banned oil exports to the United States and other western
countries, which were at that time heavily reliant on oil from the Middle East. This shocked the
western economy and gave a strong impetus to the development of alternative technologies like
18
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
gasification in order to reduce dependence on imported oil. Besides providing gas for heating,
gasification found major commercial use in chemical feedstock production, which traditionally
came from petroleum.
The subsequent drop in oil price, however, dampened this push for gasification, but some
governments, recognizing the need for a cleaner environment, gave support to large-scale
development of Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) power plants.
PostPost-2000: Global warming and political instability in some oil-producing countries gave a fresh
momentum to gasification. The threat of climate change stressed the need for moving away from
carbon-rich fossil fuels. Gasification came out as a natural choice for conversion of renewable
carbon-neutral biomass into gas.
The quest for energy independence and the rapid increase in crude oil prices prompted some
countries to recognize the need for development of IGCC plants. The attractiveness of gasification
for extraction of valuable feedstock from refinery residue was rediscovered, leading to the
development of some major gasification plants in oil refineries. In fact, chemical feedstock
preparation took a larger share of the gasification market than energy production.
b) Biomass and Its Products:
Products:
Biomass is formed from living species like plants and animals that is, anything that is now alive or
was a short time ago. It is formed as soon as a seed. Sprouts or an organism is born. Unlike fossil
fuel, biomass does not take millions of years to develop. Plants use sunlight through
photosynthesis to metabolize atmospheric carbon dioxide and grow. Animals grow by taking in
food from biomass. Fossil fuels do not reproduce whereas biomass does, and, for that reason, is
considered renewable. This is one of its major attractions as a source of energy or chemicals.
Every year, a vast amount of biomass grows through photosynthesis by absorbing CO2 from the
atmosphere. When it burns it releases carbon dioxide that the plants had absorbed from the
atmosphere only recently (a few years to a few hours). Thus, any burning of biomass does not add
to the Earth’s carbon dioxide inventory. For this reason biomass is considered a “carbon neutral”
fuel.
Farm products Corn, sugar cane, sugar beet, wheat, etc.
Rape seed, soybean, palm sunflower seed, Jatropha, etc.
Ligno-cellulosic
Materials
Straw or cereal plants, husk, wood,
Scrap, slash, etc.
Tab.I
Tab.I.1:
.1: Sources of Biomass.
19
Produces ethanol
Produces biodiesel
Can produce ethanol,
Bio-liquid, and gas
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
Of the vast amount of biomass, only 5% (13.5 billion metric tons) can be potentially mobilized to
produce energy. This quantity is still large enough to provide about 26% of the world’s energy
consumption, which is equivalent to 6 billion tons of oil.
Biomass covers a wide spectrum from tiny grass to massive trees, from small insects to large animal
wastes, and the products derived from these. The principal types of harvested biomass are
cellulosic (non cereal) and starch and sugar (cereal).
All parts of a harvested crop like corn plant are biomass, but its fruit (corn) is a starch while the
rest of it is ligno-cellulose. The crop (corn) can produce ethanol through fermentation, but the
ligno-cellulosic part of the corn plant requires a more involved process through gasification or
hydrolysis.
Table I.1 lists the two types of harvested biomass in food and nonfood categories, and indicates the
potential conversion products from them. The division is important because the production of
transport fuel (ethanol) from cereal, which is relatively easy and more established, is already being
pursued commercially on a large scale. The use of such food stock for energy production, however,
may not be sustainable as it diverts cereal from the traditional grain market to the energy market,
with economic, social, and political consequences.
Efforts are thus being made to produce more ethanol from nonfood resources like ligno-cellulosic
materials such that the world’s food supply is not strained by its energy hunger.
c) Products of Biomass:
Three types of primary fuel are produced from biomass:
- Liquid (ethanol, biodiesel, methanol, vegetable oil, and pyrolysis oil)
- Gaseous (biogas (CH
CH4, CO2), producer gas (CO,
CO, H2, CH4, CO2, H2), syngas (CO,
CO, H2),
substitute natural gas (CH
CH4))
- Solid (charcoal, torrefied biomass)
From these come four major categories of product:
- Chemicals such as methanol, fertilizer, and synthetic fiber
- Energy such as heat
- Electricity
- Transportation fuel such as gasoline and diesel
The use of ethanol and biodiesel as transport fuels reduces the emission of CO2 per unit of energy
production. It also lessens dependence on fossil fuel.
Thus, biomass-based energy not only is renewable but is also clean from a Green House Gas
(GHG) emission standpoint, and so it can take the center stage on the global energy scene. This
move is not new. Civilization began its energy use by burning biomass. Fossil fuels came much
later, around 1600 a.d. Before the twentieth century, wood (a biomass) was the primary source of
the world’s energy supply. Its large-scale use during the early Industrial Revolution caused so
much deforestation in England that it affected industrial growth. As a result, from 1620 to 1720
20
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
iron production decreased from 180,000 to 80,000 tons per year. This situation was rectified by the
discovery of coal, which began displacing wood for energy as well as for metallurgy.
d) Chemicals:
Most chemicals produced from petroleum or natural gas can be produced from biomass. The two
principal platforms for chemical production are sugar based and syngas based. The former involves
sugars like glucose, fructose, xylose, arabinose, lactose, sucrose, and starch.
The syngas platform synthesizes the hydrogen and carbon monoxide constituent of syngas into
chemical building blocks. Intermediate building blocks for different chemicals are numerous in
this route. They include hydrogen, methanol, glycerol (C
C3), fumaric acid (C
C4), xylitol (C
C5), glucaric
acid (C
C6), and gallic acid (Ar
Ar),
to
name
a
few.
These
intermediates
are
synthesized
to
produce
large
Ar
numbers of chemicals for industries involving transportation, textiles, food, the environment,
communications, health, housing, and recreation.
e) Energy:
Biomass was probably the first on-demand source of energy that humans exploited. However, less
than 22% of our primary energy demand is currently met by biomass or biomass-derived fuels.
The position of biomass as a primary source of energy varies widely depending on the
geographical and socioeconomic conditions. For example, it constitutes 90% of the primary energy
source in Nepal but only 0.1% in the Middle East. Cooking, although highly
Fig.I
Fig.I.3:
.3: Cooking stove using fire logs.
21
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
Fig.I
Fig.I.4:
.4: A biomass fired bubbling fluidized bed in Canada.
Inefficient, is one of the most extensive uses of biomass in less-developed countries. Fig.I
Fig.I.3 shows
a cooking stove still employed by millions in the rural areas using twigs or logs as fuel. A more
efficient modern commercial use of biomass is in the production of steam for process heat and
electricity generation like the facility shown in Fig.I
Fig.I.4.
Heat and electricity are two forms of primary energy derived from biomass. The use of biomass for
efficient energy production is presently on the rise in developed countries because of its carbonneutral feature while its use for cooking is declining because of a shortage of biomass in lessdeveloped countries.
f) Transport Fuel:
Fuel:
Diesel and gasoline from crude petro-oil are widely used in modern transportation industries.
Biomass can help substitute these petro-derived transport fuels. Ethanol, produced generally from
sugarcane and corn, is used in gasoline (spark-ignition) engines, while biodiesel, produced from
vegetable oils such as rape seed, is used in diesel (compression-ignition) engines.
Pyrolysis, fermentation, and mechanical extraction are three major ways to produce transport fuel
from biomass. Of these, commercially the most widely used method is fermentation, where sugar
(sugarcane, etc.) or starch (corn, etc.) produces ethanol. It involves a relatively simple process
where yeast helps ferment sugar or starch into ethanol and carbon dioxide. The production and
refining of marketable ethanol takes a large amount of energy.
Extraction of vegetable oil from seeds, like rape seed, through mechanical means has been
practiced for thousands of years. Presently, oils like canola oil are refined with alcohol
(transesterification) to produce methyl ester or biodiesel.
Pyrolysis involves heating biomass in the absence of air to produce gas, char, and liquid. The
liquid is a precursor of bio-oil, which may be hydro, treated to produce “green diesel” or “green
gasoline.” At this time, ethanol and biodiesel dominate the world’s biofuels market. Gasification
and anaerobic digestion can produce methane gas from biomass.
22
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
The methane gas can then be used directly in some spark-ignition engines for transportation, or
converted into gasoline through methanol.
g) Biomass Conversion:
Conversion:
The bulky and inconvenient form of biomass is a major barrier to a rapid shift from fossil to
biomass fuels. Unlike gas or liquid, biomass cannot be handled, stored, or transported easily,
especially in its use for transportation. This provides a major motivation for the conversion of solid
biomass into liquid and gaseous fuels, which can be achieved through one of two major paths
(Fig.I
(Fig.I.5).
.5).
(1) Biochemical (fermentation) and;
(2) Thermo chemical (pyrolysis, gasification).
Biochemical conversion is perhaps the most ancient means of biomass gasification. India and
China produced methane gas for local energy needs by anaerobic microbial digestion of animal
wastes. In modern times, most of the ethanol for automotive fuels is produced from corn using
fermentation. Thermo chemical conversion of biomass into gases came much later. Large-scale use
of small biomass gasifiers began during the Second World War, when more than a million units
were in use. Fig.I
Fig.I.5 shows that the two broad routes of conversion are subdivided into several
categories. A brief description of these follows.
Fig.I
Fig.I.5:
.5: Two paths, biological and chemical, for conversion of biomass into fuel, gases, or chemicals.
23
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
h) Biochemical Conversion:
Conversion:
In biochemical conversion, biomass molecules are broken down into smaller molecules by bacteria
or enzymes. This process is much slower than thermo chemical conversion, but does not require
much external energy. The three principal routes for biochemical conversion are:
•
•
•
Digestion (anaerobic and aerobic)
Fermentation
Enzymatic or acid hydrolysis
The main products of anaerobic digestion are methane and carbon dioxide in addition to a solid
residue. Bacteria access oxygen from the biomass itself instead of from ambient air. Aerobic
digestion, or composting, is also a biochemical breakdown of biomass, except that it takes place in
the presence of oxygen. It uses different types of microorganisms that access oxygen from the air,
producing carbon dioxide, heat, and a solid digestate.
In fermentation, part of the biomass is converted into sugars using acid or enzymes. The sugar is
then converted into ethanol or other chemicals with the help of yeasts. The lignin is not
converted and is left either for combustion or for thermo chemical conversion into chemicals.
Unlike in anaerobic digestion, the product of fermentation is liquid Fermentation of starch and
sugar-based feedstock (i.e., corn and sugarcane) into ethanol is fully commercial, but this is not the
case with cellulosic biomass because of the expense and difficulty in breaking down (hydrolyzing)
the materials into fermentable sugars. Ligno-cellulosic feedstock, like wood, requires hydrolysis
pretreatment (acid, enzymatic, or hydrothermal) to break down the cellulose and hemicelluloses
into simple sugars needed by the yeast and bacteria for the fermentation process. Acid hydrolysis
technology is more mature than enzymatic hydrolysis technology, though the latter could have a
significant cost advantage. Fig.I
Fig.I.6 shows the schemes for fermentation (of sugar) and acid
hydrolysis (of cellulose) routes.
i) Thermo chemical Conversion:
Conversion:
In thermo chemical conversion, the entire biomass is converted into gases, which are then
synthesized into the desired chemicals or used directly (Fig.I
(Fig.I.7). The Fischer-Tropsch synthesis of
syngas into liquid transport fuels is an example of thermo chemical conversion. Production of
thermal energy is the main driver for this conversion route that has four broad pathways:
•
•
•
•
- Combustion
- Pyrolysis
- Gasification
- Liquefaction
Tab.I
Tab.I.2 compares these four thermo chemical paths for biomass conversion. It also shows the
typical range of their reaction temperatures.
Combustion involves high-temperature conversion of biomass in excess air into carbon dioxide
and steam. Gasification, on the other hand, involves a chemical reaction in an oxygen-deficient
environment. Pyrolysis takes place at a relatively low temperature in the total absence of oxygen.
In liquefaction, the large feedstock molecules are decomposed into liquids having smaller
24
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
molecules. This occurs in the presence of a catalyst and at a still lower temperature. Tab.I
Tab.I.3
presents a comparison of the thermo chemical and biochemical routes for biomass conversion. It
shows that the biochemical route for ethanol production is more commercially developed than the
thermo chemical route, but the former requires sugar or starch for feedstock; it cannot use lignocellulosic stuff. As a result, a larger fraction of the available biomass is not converted into ethanol.
For example, in a corn plant only the kernel is used for production. The Stover, stalk, roots, and
leaves, which are ligno-cellulosic, are left as wastes.
Even though the enzymatic or biochemical route is more developed, this is a batch process and
takes an order of magnitude longer to complete than the thermo chemical process. In the thermo
chemical route, the biomass is first converted into syngas, which is then converted into ethanol
through synthesis or some other means.
Fig.I
Fig.I.6:
.6: Two biochemical routes for production of ethanol from (noncellulosic) sugar (a) and (cellulosic)
biomass (b).
25
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
j) Combustion:
Combustion:
Combustion represents perhaps the oldest utilization of biomass, given that civilization began with
the discovery of fire. The burning of forest wood taught humans how to cook and how to be
warm. Chemically, combustion is an
Fig.I
Fig.I.7:
.7: Thermo chemical routes for production of energy, gas, and ethanol.
Comparison of four major Thermo chemical conversion processes
Temperature
pressure
Process
(C°)
(MPa)
Catalyst
Drying
Liquefaction
250-330
5-20
Essential
Not required
Pyrolysis
380-530
0.1-0.5
Not required
Necessary
Combustion
700-1400
>0.1
Not required
Not Essential
May help
Gasification
500-1300
>0.1
Not Essential
Necessary
Tab.I
Tab.I.2:
.2: Comparisons of four major thermo chemical conversions processes.
Most biomass is burned for cooking and heating, however, it can also be converted into electricity
and liquid fuel. Under sustainable forest conditions in both temperate and tropical ecosystems,
approximately 3 dry metric tons (t/ha) per year of woody biomass can be harvested sustainable.
26
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
Although this amount of woody biomass has a gross energy yield of 13.5 million kcal/ha, it
requires an energy expense of approximately 33 L of diesel fuel per ha, plus the embodied energy
for cutting and collecting wood for transport to an electric power plant. Thus, the energy input
per output ratio for a woody biomass system is calculated to be 1:22.
The cost of producing 1 kWh of electricity from woody biomass is about $0.06, which is
competitive with other electricity production systems that average 0.07 $ in the U.S.
Approximately 3 kWh of thermal energy is expended to produce 1 kWh of electricity, an energy
input/output ratio of 1:7. Per capita consumption of woody biomass for heat in the United States
amounts to 625 kg per year. In developing nations, use of diverse biomass resources (wood, crop
residues, and dung) average about 630 kg per capita. Developing countries use only about 500 L of
oil equivalents of fossil energy per capita compared with nearly 8,000 L of oil equivalents of fossil
energy used per capita in the United States. Woody biomass could supply the United States with
about 5 quads (1.5 * 1012 kWh thermal) of its total gross energy supply by the year 2050, provided
there was adequate forest land available. A city of 100,000 people using the biomass from a
sustainable forest (3 t/ha per year) for electricity would require approximately 200,000 ha of forest
area, based on an average electrical demand of slightly more than 1 billion kWh (860 kcal = 1
kWh). Environmental impacts of burning biomass are less harmful than those associated with coal,
but more harmful than those associated with natural gas. Biomass combustion releases more than
200 different chemical pollutants, including 14 carcinogens and 4 co-carcinogens, into the
atmosphere. Globally, but especially in developing nations where people cook with fuel wood
over open fires, approximately 4 billion people suffer from continuous exposure to smoke. In the
United States, wood smoke kills 30,000 people each year. However, the pollutants from electric
plants that use wood and other biomass can be controlled. [ 8]
k) Biogas:
Wet biomass materials can be converted effectively into usable energy using anaerobic microbes.
In the United States, livestock dung is normally gravity fed or intermittently pumped through a
plug-flow digester, which is a long, lined, insulated pit in the earth. Bacteria break down volatile
solids in the manure and convert them into methane gas (65%) and CO2 (35%). A flexible liner
stretches over the pit and collects the biogas, inflating like a balloon. The biogas may be used to
heat the digester, to heat farm buildings, or to produce electricity. A large facility capable of
processing the dung from 500 cows costs nearly 300,000 $.
The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that more than 2000 digesters could be
economically installed in the United States. The amount of biogas produced is determined by the
temperature of the system, the microbes present, the volatile solids content of the feedstock, and
the retention time. A plug Management of micro grids flow digester with an average manure
retention time of about 16 days under winter conditions (17.4◦C) produced 452,000 kcal/day and
used 262,000 kcal/day to heat the digester to 35◦C. Using the same digester during summer
conditions (25◦C) but reducing the retention time to 10.4 days, the yield in biogas was 524,000
kcal/day and it used 157,000 kcal/day for heating the digester. The energy input per output ratios
for these winter and summer conditions for the digester were 1:1.7 and 1:3.3, respectively.
The energy output of biogas digesters is similar today. In developing countries such as India,
biogas digesters typically treat the dung from 15 to 30 cattle from a single family or a small village.
The resulting energy produced for cooking saves forests and preserves the nutrients in the dung.
27
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
The capital cost for an Indian biogas unit ranges from 500 $ to 900 $. The price value of a kWh
biogas in India is about 0.06 $. The total cost of producing about 10 million kcal of biogas is
estimated to be 321 $, assuming the cost of labor to be $7/h; hence, the biogas has a value of $356.
Manure processed for biogas has fewer odors and retains its fertilizer value. [ 9]
B / - Wind Power
For many centuries, wind power has provided energy to pump water and to run mills and other
machines. Today, turbines with a capacity of at least 500 kW produce most of the commercially
wind generated electricity. Operating at an ideal location, one of these turbines running at 30%
efficiency can yield an energy output of 1.3 million kWh per year. An initial investment of
approximately 500,000 $ for a 500kW capacity turbine operating at 30% efficiency will yield an
input/output ratio of 1:4 over 30 years of operation. During the 30-year life of the system, the
annual operating costs amount to about 50,000 $. The estimated cost of electricity generated is
0.07 $ per kWh. Some report costs ranging from 0.03 $ to 0.05 $ per kWh.
In the United States, 2502 megawatts (MW) of installed wind generators produce about 6.6 billion
kWh of electrical energy per year. The American Wind Energy Association estimates that the
United States could support a capacity of 30,000MW by the year 2010, producing 75 billion kWh
per year at a capacity of 30%, or approximately 2% of the annual US electrical consumption. If all
economically feasible land sites are developed, the full potential of wind power is estimated to be
about 675 billion kWh. Off shore sites could provide an additional 102 billion kWh, making the
total estimated potential of wind power 777 billion kWh, or 23% of current electrical use.
Widespread development of wind power is limited by the availability of sites with sufficient wind
(at least 20 kilometers per hour [km/h]) and the number of wind machines that the site can
accommodate. An average area for one 50kW turbine is 1.3 ha to allow sufficient spacing to
produce maximum power. Approximately 9,500 ha of land are needed to supply 1 billion kWh per
year. Because the turbines themselves only occupy approximately 2% of the area, most of the land
can be used for vegetables, nursery stock, and cattle. However, it may be impractical to produce
corn or other grains because of the heavy equipment used in this type of farming. An investigation
of the environmental impacts of wind energy production reveals a few hazards. Locating the wind
turbines in or Management of micro grids near the flyways of migrating birds and wildlife refuges
may result in birds flying into the supporting towers and rotating blades. For this reason, it is
suggested that wind farms be located at least 300 meters (m) from nature reserves to reduce their
risk to birds. The estimated 13,000 wind turbines installed in the United States kill an estimated
2,600 birds per year. Choosing a proper site and improving repellant technology with strobe lights
or paint patterns might further reduce the number of birds killed. Bat fatalities are another serious
concern. It is projected that by 2020 annual bat fatalities caused by wind turbines will range from
33,000 to 62,000 individuals annually. Most bat fatalities are from species that migrate long
distances and are tree roosting. Eastern U.S wind turbines installed along forested ridge tops have
the highest rate of bat kills, ranging from 15.3 to 41.1 bats per MW of installed capacity per year.
Monitoring for bat and bird fatalities and research for the reduction of these should be included in
all wind energy planning. The rotating magnets in the turbine electrical generator produce a low
level of electromagnetic interference that can affect television and radio signals within 2–3 km of
large installations. Fortunately, with the widespread use of cable networks or line-of-sight
microwave satellite transmission, both television and radio are unaffected by this interference.
The noise caused by rotating blades is another unavoidable side effect of wind turbine operation.
28
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
Beyond 2.1 km, however, the largest turbines are inaudible even downwind. At a distance of 400
m, the noise level is estimated to be about 60 decibel, corresponding roughly to the noise level of a
home air-conditioning unit. Bat fatalities are another serious concern. [11]
B / 11- Types of turbine:
There are two main categories of wind mills according to the geometrical provision of the tree on
which is mounted propeller:
a. Wind turbines with horizontal axis;
b. Wind turbines with vertical axis.
- Wind turbines with horizontal axis
- Wind turbines with vertical axis.
Fig.
Fig.I.7:
I.7: Types of turbine.
B / 22- How Wind Power Works:
Wind is created when sunlight heats air, causing temperature and pressure differentials, which, in
turn, cause air to flow one way or the other. For centuries, people have been capturing some of
this energy with windmills-towers with blades turned by the wind to produce a force useful for
grinding grain or pumping water. More recently, engineers have figured out how to connect really
big blades to generators to produce electricity. A typical utility - scale turbine is 150 feet high with
a rotor diameter (the span of the blades) of 120 feet, while a top - of - the - line model might be
three times that size. The world ’ s biggest turbine, the Enercon E - 126, is 453 feet tall and has a
rotor blade width of 413 feet. It produces more than 7 megawatts, enough electricity to power
2,100 U.S. homes. Not bad for a single windmill. Some turbines operate at a constant speed and
produce the most power when the wind blows steadily within a given range. Others are designed
to operate with variable wind. Each design has a unique “power curve” that governs the
relationship of its output to various wind speeds. Because the wind is intermittent even in the best
spots, a typical wind turbine will have a load factor of only 30 to 40 percent, meaning that it will
generate power for around one - third of a given day. But its fuel source is free, which offsets the
downtime.
29
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
Because load factor is crucial to a turbine’s profitability, matching the turbine and the site is the
key to building a profitable wind farm. As a result, site selection has become a science, with
industry experts the wind equivalent of petroleum engineers measuring historical wind patterns
and analyzing topography for a sense of how much wind a turbine in a certain spot can expect. A
good turbine site also requires soil stable enough to hold these massive structures and access for
the earth - moving equipment, trucks, and cranes necessary to deliver and set them up. It should
be close enough to the grid to make connection affordable. And it must be free of neighbors who
object to giant towers spoiling their view.
Juggling all of these considerations produces a long list of offsetting costs and benefits: Offshore
sites are fl at and frequently have steady, strong wind, but they’re far from the grid and hard to set
up and maintain.
Isolated plains have cheap land and frequently good wind but are also far from the grid. Areas near
population centers offer good grid access but expensive land and frequently touchy neighbors. But
where wind works, it works beautifully. Large turbines can be installed for about 2 $per watt, or 2
$ million per megawatt, which enables a well - sited turbine to generate power for 0.04 $to 0.06 $
per kWh, a price that is competitive with natural gas and coal. And that’s before governments
start penalizing the latter two for their carbon emissions. Then wind’s cost advantage becomes
very real and very big. Here are some of its other advantages:
- Wind turbines leave most of the area they cover open for other uses. Cattle and sheep,
for instance, can happily graze on a wind farm.
- They’re safe. Because the blades are far aboveground, they don’t threaten people. Wind
power organizations like to claim that their turbines have never injured a member of the
general public.
- They’re reliable. Early turbines broke down frequently, but today’s models have an
expected working life of 20 to 25 years and require very little maintenance.
- The price of wind never changes. Coal, oil, and natural gas prices surged in 2007, while
the wind, as always, and were free. [10]
In addition to the growing economic attractiveness of wind energy, there are major ecological
arguments for its use:
1. Wind-power plants emit absolutely no CO2, by far the major pollutant when fuels (other
than hydrogen or biomass) are burned.
2. The operation of wind turbines leaves behind no dangerous residues as do nuclear plants.
3. Decommissioning costs of wind turbines are much smaller than those of many other types
of power plants, especially compared with those of nuclear generators.
4. Land occupied by wind farms can find other simultaneous uses such as in agriculture. [5]
30
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
C / - Photovoltaic Systems:
Photovoltaic cells have the potential to provide a significant portion of future U.S. and world
electrical energy. Photovoltaic cells produce electricity when sunlight excites electrons in the
cells. The most promising photovoltaic cells in terms of cost, mass production, and relatively high
efficiency are those manufactured using silicon. Because the size of the unit is flexible and
adaptable, photovoltaic cells can be used in homes, industries, and utilities. However, photovoltaic
cells need improvements to make them economically competitive before their use can become
widespread. Test cells have reached efficiencies of about 25%, but the durability of photovoltaic
cells must be lengthened and current production costs reduced several times to make their use
economically feasible.
Production of electricity from photovoltaic cells currently costs about 0.25 $ per kWh. Using mass
produced photovoltaic cells with about 18% efficiency, 1 billion kWh per year of electricity could
be produced on approximately 2,800 ha of land, and this is sufficient electrical energy to supply
100,000 people. Locating the photovoltaic cells on the roofs of homes, industries, and other
buildings would reduce the need for additional land by an estimated 20% and reduce transmission
costs. However, because storage systems such as batteries cannot store energy for extended
periods, photovoltaic require conventional backup systems. The energy input for making the
structural materials of a photovoltaic system capable of delivering 1 billion kWh during a life of 30
years is calculated to be approximately 143 million kWh. Thus, the energy input per output ratio
for the modules is about 1:7.
The major environmental problem associated with photovoltaic systems is the use of toxic
chemicals, such as cadmium sulfide and gallium arsenide, in their manufacture. Because these
chemicals are highly toxic and persist in the environment for centuries, disposal and recycling of
the materials in inoperative cells could become a major problem. [ 8]
C / 11- Examples of Communities Using Solar/PV:
There are many examples of these types of home developments:
o
Premier Homes, in Sacramento, California, in conjunction with the utility district,
built 95 homes designed to save 60% on utility bills.
o
Solar Village, Prospect New Town, Longmont, Colorado, is a mixed use green built
village of condos, lofts, flats, a yoga studio, ice cream parlor, and a high-end
restaurant. It includes solar assisted radiant floor heating, efficient lighting and
appliances, passive solar design, and energy efficient building materials. It claims
electric and gas bills that average 20 $ per month because of these efficient and
renewable features.
o
Chula Vista, California Research Initiative. The goal of this research initiative is to
develop a model process and designs for energy-efficient community development
from initial planning to final build-out for three new communities. Each design
will seek to maximize opportunities for the integration of renewable energy;
distributed generation; demand response technologies; energy efficiency in
31
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional structures; and in supporting
municipal infrastructure and services. Additionally, the designs will feature smart
growth land use planning and green building design elements that will maximize
the performance of these technologies while reducing the urban heat island effect
and emissions of greenhouse gases and regulated pollutants.
o
Army Hawaii Family Housing (AHFH) at Schofield Barracks, Oahu, Hawaii. Actus
Lend Lease developer, in partnership with the Army, is installing enough
photovoltaic panels on the homes to generate 7 MW of electricity, in addition to
solar hot water and other aspects of energy efficiency. The photovoltaic panels will
offset approximately 30% of the communities’ electrical needs. When completed
the 2.3 $ billion Army Hawaii Family Housing community will include 5,388 new
homes and the renovation of 2,506 existing homes in seven sites around Oahu.
This was initiated by the “Military Housing Privatization Initiative” (MHPI) in an
effort to provide a better quality of life for service members and their families.
According to the office of the Under Secretary of Defense, soldier retention is 15%
higher for those stationed on installations with superior housing and community
life.
D / - Geothermal Systems:
Geothermal energy uses natural heat present in Earth’s interior. Examples are geysers and hot
springs, like those at Yellowstone National Park in the United States. Geothermal energy sources
are divided into three categories: hydrothermal, geo-pressured-geothermal, and hot dry rock. The
hydrothermal system is the simplest and most commonly used for electricity generation. The
boiling liquid underground is produced using wells, high internal pressure drives, or pumps. In the
United States, nearly 3,000 MW of installed electric generation comes from hydrothermal
resources, and this is projected to increase by 4,500MW. Most of the geothermal sites for electrical
generation are located in California, Nevada, and Utah. Electrical generation costs for geothermal
plants in the West range from 0.06 $ to 0.30 $/kWh, suggesting that this technology offers
potential to produce electricity economically. The US Department of Energy and the Energy
Information Administration project that geothermal electric generation may grow three- to
fourfold during the next 20–40 years.
However, other investigations are not as optimistic and, in fact, suggest that geothermal energy
systems are not renewable because the sources tend to decline over 40–100 years. Existing drilling
opportunities for geothermal resources are limited to a few sites in the United States and world.
Potential environmental problems of geothermal energy include water shortages, air pollution,
waste effluent disposal, subsidence, and noise. The wastes produced in the sludge include toxic
metals such as arsenic, boron, lead, mercury, radon, and vanadium. Water shortages are an
important limitation in some regions. Geothermal systems produce hydrogen sulfide, a potential
air pollutant; however, this could be processed and removed for use in industry. Overall, these
environmental costs of geothermal energy appear to be minimal relative to those of fossil fuel
systems. [11]
32
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
D / 11- How Geothermal Works:
Let’s start with the somewhat disturbing theory that the earth is a big nuclear reactor. At its core,
the decay of naturally occurring isotopes under immense pressure produces temperatures of
around 7,000 degrees Fahrenheit. This heat radiates outward through a semi molten mantel,
eventually diminishing enough to allow a solid crust to form. From our vantage point here on the
surface, the further down you go, the hotter it gets. Start drilling on a cold winter day in Siberia,
and by the time the drill bit travels a few miles, it’s hot enough to boil water. This heat mostly
stays down there where it belongs. But every once in a while, a crack forms in the crust, and
rainwater seeps down until it meets superheated rock, at which point it vaporizes and rises
through a different set of cracks to the surface. The result is a geyser like Yellowstone’s Old
Faithful or the type of hot spring around which resorts are built. But sometimes hot water doesn’t
make it all the way to the surface and gets trapped by a layer of impermeable rock, where it
becomes a “geothermal reservoir.” Drill into it and steam and/or hot water capable of running a
turbine is released. Such reservoirs are being discovered all over the world, but like I said, they’re
most common in tectonically active places like Iceland and along the Pacific Rim’s “Ring of Fire.”
An Italian prince named Piero Ginori Conti is generally credited with building the first
geothermal power plant in Italy in 1913. The first geothermal plant in the United States was built
in 1962 at Geysers Field in northern California, which is still the world’s largest producing
geothermal field. The original technology is still in use, though the future belongs to some newer
variants. Here’s an overview of the main forms of geothermal power. [11]
D / 2 - Advantages of Geothermal:
Here’s a concise listing of geothermal many benefits:
•
- It’s very clean. Binary cycle plants produce virtually no pollution.
•
- Its available 24/7. Unlike wind and solar, which are intermittent, a geothermal plant can
run continuously, generating baseline power, making it direct competition for coal.
•
- Because most of the action is underground, geothermal plants have small physical and
environmental footprints. This makes them relatively easy to guide through the permitting
process. There are geothermal plants operating successfully in cornfields, tropical forests,
and, as you just read, tourist resorts. They could theoretically be sited in the middle of
cities, with no adverse pollution or other consequences.
•
- The ability to site a geothermal plant close to end users cuts transmission costs, further
improving its economics.
•
- The technology is well understood and easy to mass produce, so a geothermal plant can
be installed more quickly than, say, a wind farm, where turbines are on a waiting list.
•
- It’s relatively inexpensive. At $ 3 to $ 4 per rated watt, geothermal is comparable to wind
and coal and considerably cheaper than solar. And because it has a higher load factor (it
runs continuously while solar is down when the sun sets), a geothermal power plant
produces far more electricity than a similarly rated PV system.
33
CHAPTER I
•
RENEWABLE ENERGY
- It’s very low maintenance. With low - temperature binary plants, “There are no
pressurized steam loops to worry about, so they can be unmanned.” [11]
E / - Nuclear Energy: [5]
Chemical fuels, such as oil or methane, release energy when the atoms in their molecules are
rearranged into lower energy configurations. The energies involved are those of molecular binding
and are of the order of tens of MJ/kg. When the components of an atom are arranged into lower
energy configurations, then the energy released is orders of magnitude larger (hundreds of TJ/kg)
because of the much larger intra-atomic binding energies. The internal structure of atoms can be
changed in different ways:
i. An atomic nucleus can be bombarded with a neutron, absorbing it. A
different atom emerges.
ii. An atom can spontaneously change by emitting either electrons (beta-rays)
or helium nuclei (alpha-rays). Such radioactive decay releases energy,
which can be harvested as, for instance, it is done in Radioisotope Thermal
Generators (RTGs).
iii. Atoms with large atomic numbers can be made to break up into smaller
atoms with the release of energy. This is called nuclear fission and requires
that the atomic number, Z, be larger than 26.
iv. Atoms with low atomic numbers can be assembled into a heavier one,
releasing energy. This is called nuclear fusion and requires that the final
product have an atomic number smaller than 26.
Currently, only two techniques are used to produce energy from nuclear sources: the RTG
mentioned above and nuclear fission reactors.
But, nuclear energy has developed a bad reputation, especially after the Chernobyl accident in
1986. Nevertheless, it is a source of substantial amounts of energy in many countries. According to
the Energy Information Administration, EIA,
EIA since 1998, the number of nuclear plants in the
United States has remained unaltered at 104. Nevertheless, there has been a 2% per year secular
increase in the generation of nuclear electricity owing mostly to an improvement of the plant
utilization factor from 78.2% in 1998 to over 94% in 2007. It appears that after 2008, a number of
new reactors may be purchased. In 2007, the United States led the world in installed capacity-104
GW-followed by France (63 GW) and Japan (47.6 GW).
The utilization factor of nuclear plants that year was excellent. In the United States, it was over
94%, in France, 77.5%, and in Japan, 68.9%.
Of the total electricity generated, nuclear plants in the United States (2008) contributed a
relatively modest 19.9%, while in France, heavily reliant on this form of energy, the contribution
was 76.1%. In Japan, it was 34.6%. In 2000, Germany decided to phase out its 19 nuclear power
plants. Each one was assigned a 32-year life after which they would be deactivated. Many plants
have already operated more than half of their allotted lifetime.
34
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
The cost of nuclear electricity is high, about double that from fossil fuel. In the United States
(1996), it was 7 cents/kWh, whereas that of a state of the art natural gas plant was 3 cents/kWh.
Advanced reactor designs may bring these costs down considerably while ensuring greater safety.
This promised reduced cost combined with the ecological advantage of no greenhouse gas
emission a growing concern may lead to a renewed popularity for nuclear generators.
The major objection to fission-type reactors is not so much the danger of the operation of the
power plants (the Chernobyl accident was perfectly avoidable), but rather the problem of
disposing of large amounts of long lived radioactive by-products. If the need for such disposal can
be avoided, then there is good reason to reconsider fission generators as an important contributor
to the energy supply system, especially if they are not restricted to the use of the rare 236U fuel the
way present-day reactors are.
Specifications of new-generation nuclear fission reactors might include (not necessarily in order of
priority), the following items:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Safety of operation (including resistance to terrorist attacks)
Affordability
Reliability
Absence of weaponizable sub products
Absence of long-lived waste products
Ability to transmute long-lived radioactive waste products from old reactors into shortlived radioactive products.
The U.S. Department of Energy is funding research (2004) in technologies that might realize most
of these specifications. One of these is the heavyheavy-metal fast breeder reactor technology. It appears
that this type of reactor may be able not only to produce waste with relatively short half-lives (100
years contrasted with 100,000 years of the current waste), but in addition may be able to use
current-type waste as fuel. Furthermore, because heavy-metal reactors operate at high
temperatures (yet at low pressures), the thermolytic production of hydrogen or use in fuel celldriven automobiles looms as a good possibility.
The waste disposal problem is absent in fusion devices. Unfortunately, it has been impossible to
demonstrate a working prototype of a fusion machine, even after several decades of concerted
research.
To do even a superficial analysis of the technical aspects of nuclear reactions, we need to know the
masses of the atoms involved (see Table I.3).
The listed values for the masses of the nucleons (the proton and the alpha in the table) are nearly
the values of the masses of the corresponding atoms minus the mass the electron(s). On the other
hand, there is a large difference between the mass of a nucleon and the sum of the masses of the
component protons and neutrons. Indeed, for the case of the alpha, the sum of the two protons
and the two neutrons (4.03188278 daltons) exceeds the mass of the alpha (4.001506175 daltons) by
0.030376606 daltons about 28MeV of mass. This is, of course, the large nuclear binding energy
necessary to overcome the great electrostatic repulsion between the protons.
35
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
E / 1 - Fission:
There are at least four fissile elements of practical importance: 233U, 235U, 239Pu, and 241Pu. Of these,
only 235U is found in nature in usable.
Tab.I
Tab.I.3: Masses of Some Particles Important to Nuclear Energy
Particle
Symbol
Mass(daltons†)
Mass (kg)
Mass(daltons )
electron
e
0.00054579903
9.1093897 * 10−31
muon ·
μ
1.883566 * 10−28
0.1134381
proton
1.672648 * 10−27
p
1.007276467
neutron
n
1.008664909
1.6749286 *10−27
H
1.673533967 * 10−27
1.007825032
D
3.344496942 * 10−27
2.014101778
T
5.008271031 * 10−27
3.016049278
He
5.008237888 * 10−27
3.016029319
He
6.646483555 * 10−27
4.002603254
alpha
α
4.001506175
6.644661810 * 10−27
Li
8.323524107 * 10−27
5.01254
Li
9.988353127 * 10−27
6.015122794
Li
1.165035751 * 10−26
7.01600455
B
1.662688428 * 10−26
10.012937
B
1.82814 * 10−26
11.009305
The dalton is not yet the official name for the atomic mass unit.
Tab.I
Tab.I.4 Uranium Isotopes:
Isotope
238U
235U
234U
Abundance (%)
99.283
0.711
0.005
Lifetime (years)
4.5 * 109
7.1 *108
2.5 * 105
Quantities; 233U, 239Pu, and 241Pu must be created by transmutation of “fertile” materials,
respectively, 232Th, 238U and 240Pu. The 240Pu element must itself be created artificially from 239Pu.
Uranium isotopes cover the range from 227 to 240 daltons, but natural uranium contains only a
small percentage of the fissile material:
It is estimated that the Western world has reserves of uranium oxide (U3O8) amounting to some 6 *
109 kg, but only 34 * 106 kg are fissile, corresponding to an available energy of 2600 EJ. Compare
this with the 40,000 EJ of available coal energy.
Nuclear fission reaction occurs when a fissile material interacts with neutrons. Consider 235U:
+ 10 n→
.
(I.1)
The resulting 236U decays with the emission of alpha particles (lifetime 7.5 seconds). More
importantly, the uranium also suffers spontaneous fission; that is, under the proper circumstances,
absorbs a neutron, and the resulting atom splits into smaller nuclei simultaneously releasing,
on average, 2.5 neutrons and about 3 *10−11 joules of energy:
36
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
+
Per kilogram of
TJ/kg.
→ 2 .5
+ fission products + 3 * 10−11 J.
(I.2)
U, the energy released is 3 * 10−11 J atom * 6 *1026 atoms kmol 235 kg Kmol = 77
However, the situation is somewhat more complicated than suggested by the equation above
because more energy and additional neutrons are produced by the radioactive decay of the fission
products. These additional neutrons are called delayed neutrons.
neutrons Compare this with chemical
reactions that involve energies of the order of a few tens of MJ/kg.
When Otto Hahn, demonstrated uranium fission in 1939, it became immediately obvious that a
sustained “chain” reaction might be achievable all that was needed was to cause one of the emitted
neutrons to split a new uranium atom. Using natural uranium, this proves difficult because of the
small percentage of the fissile 235U. The emitted neutrons have a much greater probability of being
absorbed by the abundant 238U-the reaction simple dies out. The solution is to “enrich” the
uranium by increasing the percentage of 235U. This is a complicated and expensive process because
one cannot use chemistry to separate the two isotopes since they are chemically identical. Any
separation method must take advantage of the minute mass difference of the two isotopes. If the
enrichment is carried out far enough, you can build a nuclear bomb. Reactors in the United States
use uranium typically enriched to 3.7%; this is insufficient to sustain a chain reaction. An
additional trick must be used.
Neutrons resulting from a 235U fission are high-energy particles (some 1 MeV), and their
absorption cross section is about the same for both uranium isotopes. However, slow thermal
neutrons (say at 0.05 eV) happen to be absorbed much more readily by the fissile uranium than by
the more stable isotope. Thus, some of the emitted neutrons have to be slowed down by making
them move through a low atomic mass substance called a moderator.
moderator
Graphite or water will do. If water is used as a coolant and heat extraction medium, then it
contributes to the moderation process. Fast neutrons may be absorbed by impurities in the fuel or
in the moderator. Of course,
is a major “impurity” in the fuel; it absorbs
37
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
Fig.I.8:
Fig.I.8: This photo shows scientist Melissa Douglas and part of the Z machine, an inertial-electrostatic
confinement fusion apparatus at Sandia National Laboratories. In the device, giant capacitors discharge
through a grid of tungsten wires finer than human hairs, vaporizing them. The tungsten ions implode
inward at a million miles an hour. Braking strongly in the grip of a “Z-pinch,” they emit powerful x-rays
that compress a deuterium pellet, causing collisions between the deuterium atoms that lead to fusion events.
F/ Micro Grids:
Introduction:
Modern power network owners have to respond to a number of challenges such as significant load
changes and growth in the geographical distribution of the customers. On the other hand, the
environmental policy and economic requirements from the market are constantly growing. The
presence of these problems has led to an increased interest in the local renewable energy
generation at the distribution level. The Micro grid (MG) concept assumes a cluster of loads and
micro sources operating as a single controllable system that provides both power and heat to its
local area. Not much is known about Micro grid behavior as a whole system. Some models exist
which describe the components of the Micro grid. Currently models of a Diesel Engine, a Fuel
Cell, a Micro turbine, a Wind turbine, a Photovoltaic cell, and Battery storage have been
developed. In this work, a generalized formulation is introduced to determine the optimal
operating strategy, the goal to minimize the operating costs as well as the reduction of the
emission costs and level for a Micro Grid. To solve such a management problem it is first
formulated as a nonlinear constrained cost optimization problem. Since the management problem
poses a number of simultaneous objectives and constraints a Multi objective optimization problem
is formulated by considering the emission level reduction. A daily income from sold power and
cost to be paid to the utility of the purchased power is added to the problem. The model takes also
into consideration the reduction of emissions caused by NOX, SO2 and CO2. The optimization is
aimed to minimize the operating costs of the system, while constraints are adjusted to meet the
customer demand and the safety of the system.
38
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
F / 1 - Definition of Micro Grids:
Micro-Grids are small electrical distribution systems that connect multiple customers to multiple
distributed sources of generation and storage. Micro-grids are typically characterized by
multipurpose electrical power services to communities with populations ranging up to 500
households with overall energy demands ranging up to several thousand kWh per day and are
connected via low voltage networks. These hybrid systems have the potential to provide reliable
power supply to remote communities where connection to transmission supply is uneconomic. A
number of demonstration projects have been undertaken in the Greek islands with this type of
system.
*** The Micro grid (MG
MG)
MG concept assumes a cluster of loads and micro sources operating as a single
controllable system that provides both power and heat to its local area. This concept provides a
new paradigm for defining the operation of distributed generation. The MG study architecture is
shown in Fig.I.9
Fig.I.9.
I.9. It consists of a group of radial feeders, which could be part of a distribution
system. There is a single point of connection to the utility called point of common coupling (PCC
PCC).
PCC
Feeders 1 and 2 have sensitive loads which should be supplied during the events. The feeders also
have the micro sources consisting of a photovoltaic (PV
PV),
WT),
FC),
PV a wind turbine (WT
WT and fuel cell (FC)
FC)
a micro turbine (MT
MT),
DG),
MT a diesel generator (DG
DG and battery storage. The third feeder has only
traditional loads. The static switch (SD
SD)
is
used
to island feeders 1 and 2 from the utility when
SD
events happen. The fuel input is needed only for the DG, FC,
FC and MT as the fuel for the WT and
PV comes from nature. To serve the load demand, electrical power can be produced either directly
by PV, WT, DG, MT,
MT or FC.
FC The diesel oil is a fuel input to a DG,
DG whereas natural gas is a fuel
input to fuel processor to produce hydrogen for the FC.
FC The gas is also the input to the MT. The
use of DG,
DG or FC or MT with other fuel types can be modeled by changing the system parameters
to reflect the change in the fuel consumption characteristics.
Each component of the MG system is separately modeled based on its characteristics and
constraints. The characteristics of some equipment like wind turbines and diesel generators are
available from the appropriate manufacturers. Each of the local generation unit has a local
controller (LC
LC).
LC This is responsible for local control that corresponds to a conventional controller
(ex. Automatic Voltage Regulator (AVR
AVR)
AVR or Governor) having a network communication function
to exchange information between other LCs and the upper central controller to achieve an
advanced control. The central controller also plays an important role as a load dispatch control
center in bulk power systems, which is in charge of distributed generator operations installed in
MG.
MG [ 12]
39
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
Fig. I. 9: Micro Grid Architecture.
Furthermore, the central controller is the main interface between the upper grid and the Micro
grid. The central controller has the main responsibility for the optimization of the Micro grid
operation, or alternatively, it coordinates the actions of the local controllers to produce the
optimal outcome.
MG technologies are playing an increasingly important role in the world’s energy portfolio. They
can be used to meet base load power, peaking power, backup power, remote power, power quality,
and cooling and heating needs. Customers usually own small scale, on-site power generators, but
they may be owned and operated by a third party. If the distributed generator does not provide
100% of the customer’s energy needs at all times, it can be used in conjunction with a distributed
energy storage device or a connection with the local grid for backup power. The MG resources
support and strengthen the central-station model of electricity generation, transmission, and
distribution. The diagram depicted in Fig.I.9
Fig.I.9 shows how the grid looks after the addition of
distributed resources. Although the central generating plant continues to provide most of the
power to the grid, the distributed resources meet the peak demands of local distribution feeder
lines or major customers. Computerized control systems, typically operating over telephone lines,
40
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
make it possible to operate the distributed generators as dispatch able resources that generate
electricity as needed. Fig.I.10
Fig.I.10 shows a demonstration system, which has been running successfully
on the Greek island of Kytnos since April 2001. [12]
Fig. I.10
I.10:
10: Example of MG on Kytnos Island (PV MORE and MODE projects.).
F / 2 - Reasons for Micro grids:
grids:
The conventional arrangement of a modern large power system offers a number of advantages.
Large generating units can be made efficient and operated with only a relatively small number of
personnel. The interconnected high voltage transmission network allows the generator reserve
requirement to be minimized, the most efficient generating plant to be dispatched at any time, and
bulk power to be transported large distances with limited electrical losses. The distribution
network can be designed for unidirectional flows of power and sized to accommodate customer
loads only. However, over the last few years a number of influences have combined to lead to the
increased interest in MG schemes and. The policy drivers encouraging MGs are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Reduction in gaseous emissions (mainly CO2).
Energy efficiency or rational use of energy.
Deregulation or competition policy.
Diversification of energy sources.
National and global power requirements.
Other reasons listed but with additional emphasis on commercial considerations such as:
- Availability of modular generating plants.
- Ease of finding sites for smaller generators.
- Short construction times and lower capital costs of smaller plants.
- Generating may be sited closer to load, which may reduce transmission costs.[ 12]
41
CHAPTER I
RENEWABLE ENERGY
F / 3 - Management of Micro grid
Significant research is currently carried out regarding the operation and control of Micro grids. A
novel management system is proposed, considering the following objectives: [12]
1.
2.
3.
4.
Optimal use of local distributed resources;
Feeding of local loads;
Reducing the operating cost;
Minimizing the emission level.
42
Sustainable Development
Environmental
Optimization of the
Energy in an
Electrical Network.
CHAPTER II
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
II. 1 Sustainable development in ecological economics
The notions of ‘sustainable development’ and ‘sustainability’ are interpreted in various ways. This
has become most clear perhaps in the field of ecological economics, where different disciplines
have offered particular perspectives on these notions. Ecological Economics (EE
EE)
EE was founded at
the end of the 1980s. It integrates elements of economics and ecology, as well as of
thermodynamics, ethics, and a number of other natural and social sciences to provide for an
integrated and biophysical perspective on environment–economy interactions. EE expresses the
view that the economy is a subsystem of a larger local and global ecosystem that limits physical
growth of the economy. At the same time, it is critical of the dominant paradigm of
(environmental and resource) economics, characterized by rational agents and equilibrium
thinking. Instead, EE is characterized by the use of physical (material, energy, chemical,
biological) indicators and comprehensive, multidisciplinary systems analysis. Both features are
consistent with the fact that sustainable development, generally seen as an important dimension of
performance of the overall systems level, occupies a central position in the study of EE.
All intellectual founders and antecedents of EE have written extensively about sustainable
development, even if not using this particular terminology.[13]
II.2 What is Sustainable Development?
Sustainable development has been defined in many ways, but the most frequently quoted
definition is from Our Common Future, also known as the Brundtland Report
"Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It contains within it two
key concepts:
•
The concept of needs,
needs in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which
overriding priority should be given; and
•
The idea of limitations
limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the
environment's ability to meet present and future needs."
All definitions of sustainable development require that we see the world as a system a system that
connects space; and a system that connects time.
When you think of the world as a system over space, you grow to understand that air pollution
from North America affects air quality in Asia, and that pesticides sprayed in Argentina could
harm fish stocks off the coast of Australia.
And when you think of the world as a system over time, you start to realize that the decisions our
grandparents made about how to farm the land continue to affect agricultural practice today; and
the economic policies we endorse today will have an impact on urban poverty when our children
are adults.
43
CHAPTER II
We also understand that quality of life is a system, too. It's good to be physically healthy, but what
if you are poor and don't have access to education? It's good to have a secure income, but what if
the air in your part of the world is unclean? And it's good to have freedom of religious expression,
but what if you can't feed your family?
The concept of sustainable development is rooted is this sort of systems thinking. It helps us
understand ourselves and our world. The problems we face are complex and serious and we can't
address them in the same way we created them. But we can address them.
It's that basic optimism that motivates IISD's staff, associates and board to innovate for a healthy
and meaningful future for this planet and its inhabitants.
II.3 Definitions
The concept has included notions of weak sustainability, strong sustainability and deep ecology.
Sustainable development does not focus solely on environmental issues.
In 1987, the United Nations released the Brundtland Report,
Report which defines sustainable
development as 'development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs.'
The United Nations 2005 World Summit Outcome Document refers to the "interdependent and
mutually reinforcing pillars" of sustainable development as economic development, social
development, and environmental protection.
Indigenous peoples have argued, through various international forums such as the United Nations
Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and the Convention on Biological Diversity, that there are
four pillars of sustainable development, the fourth being cultural. The Universal Declaration on
Cultural Diversity further elaborates the concept by stating that "...cultural diversity is as
necessary for humankind as biodiversity is for nature”; it becomes “one of the roots of
development understood not simply in terms of economic growth, but also as a means to achieve a
more satisfactory intellectual, emotional, moral and spiritual existence". In this vision, cultural
diversity is the fourth policy area of sustainable development.
44
CHAPTER II
FIG. II.1: A representation of sustainability showing how both economy and society are constrained by
Environmental limits.
FIG. II.2: Scheme of sustainable development: at the confluence of three constituent parts.
Sustainable Development (SD
SD)
CSR)
SD) and, more broadly, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR
CSR cannot be
ignored in current research on management science and management theory. In the field of
strategic management, concerns regarding SD are even more acute due to its integration into the
general design of overall company policy. Indeed, the development
development of such a strategy is
incomplete if social and environmental responsibility is not taken into account as a crucial
element of a company’s decision-making
decision making process. Therefore, owing to the impact of strategy on
the economic performance of the firm, the
the process of designing and enforcing SD/CSR strategies
has become a major focus of empirical investigation and theoretical reflection.[14]
reflection [14]
45
CHAPTER II
II.4 Climate Change:
II.4.1 Introduction:
Climate change has been considered a fact for over a decade, following the proof of rising CO2
levels, rising Earth’s temperatures, melting of glaciers, etc.
The consequences can be observed in many regions in daily life, by events such as more frequent
or stronger flooding of rivers, increased storms and snowfall, cloudbursts, as well as drought, and
desertification. The reason for climate change, natural or anthropogenic, has been under
discussion for a long time.
There is no doubt that mankind contributes to climate change through activities connected with
emissions of climatically relevant gases. For example, use of fossil fuels with high emissions of
carbon dioxide and other climate gases, especially in transportation and traffic, industrial
production and application of substances (which are climate gases of extreme high warming
potentials), agricultural activities (such as animal husbandry and rice cultivation) leading to
emissions of methane or nitrous oxide, and methane emissions from landfills caused by ineffective
waste management, etc.
To control the situation, reduction measures of climate gases and other relevant actions, are
urgently necessary on all levels. This is understood by the public and by policy makers. Climate
related activities thus are high ranking on the political agenda.
They are implemented into the political programmers’ on UN level, internationally and single
countries, but also on communal levels by climate initiatives of cities or NGOs.
NGOs Examples are the
so-called Kyoto Protocol reducing climate gas emissions in industrialized countries, bans of
halogenated hydrocarbons, shifting of energy sources from fossil to renewable and international
CO2-emission trading. It is but obvious, that the efforts must be strengthened, to reduce the risks
of a dangerous interference with the climate system. [15]
II.4.2 Observed Climate Variability and Change:
One of the most obvious characteristics of climate is its variability, especially in areas with strong
gradients of climate zones, e.g. in the semi-arid tropics and in higher mid-latitudes. The mean
temperature of one of the coldest days in July and one of the warmest in December in Hamburg
do not differ. The rain in parts of the Northern Sahel from one year to the next may differ by more
than a factor 3. Therefore climate – as the synthesis of weather – is not only characterized by
averages of parameter values but also by their frequency distributions (fig.
fig.II
fig.II.
II. 3).
Although strong deviations from the average value are rare, they get most of the attention because
they represent weather extremes to which our infrastructures are often not well adapted. As
Figure II.3 also clarifies, new extremes on the side to which the distribution is shifted must
accompany climate change. The only exception would be the case with a strongly narrowing
frequency distribution (what has not been observed). Do we already observe manifestations of
climate change?
46
CHAPTER II
Yes, there are numerous ones, besides the obvious mean global near surface air temperature
increase over the recent 150 years (fig.
fig.II.4
fig.II.4).
II.4 These are (only examples):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Accelerated mean retreat of mountain glaciers worldwide,
Strong decrease of multi-year sea ice in the Arctic Ocean (-7 percent per decade since
1979 when satellite observations began),
Reduced snow cover over North America, less pronounced over Eurasia,
More rain per event in nearly all areas with slightly decreasing, constant or increasing
total precipitation,
Reduced daily temperature amplitude which can be caused by higher water vapor
content, increased cloudiness and higher atmospheric turbidity,
Mean global sea level rise, about 1.5 to 2.0 mm/a in the 20th century, recently increased
to ~3 mm/a, as observed by satellite altimeter measurements since 1991,
Increased yearly precipitation in most high latitude areas, decreased yearly precipitation
in the semi-arid subtropics,
Decreased temperatures in the stratosphere and mesosphere,
Increased vegetation period length (about 2 weeks) in the Northern Hemisphere higher
latitudes,
Changed optical properties of clouds caused by air pollution.
In the present rapid climate change era single evaluations of very long time series are therefore
partly misleading as the recent decades might have shown a changed frequency distribution of a
climate parameter, e.g. rain amounts per event. Therefore subsections of long time series have to
be evaluated separately. [15]
Fig.II.3
Fig.II.3:
II.3: Schematic frequency distribution of climate parameters both for present climate and changed
climate. Also a broadened distribution for a changed climate is shown (Grassl, 2002).
47
CHAPTER II
Fig.II.4:
Fig.II.4: Global mean near surface air temperature since 1856 (Meteorological Office of the United
Kingdom).
II.4.3 Carbon in the Atmosphere:
How much carbon is there in the atmosphere?
The surface area of Earth is 510 * 1012 m2, while the scale height of the atmosphere is around 8800
m. Consequently,
The volume of air (all of it compressed to 1 atmosphere pressure) is:
510 * 1012 * 8800 = 4.5 * 1018 m3.
Present-day atmospheric CO2 concentration is 13.5 × 10−6 kmol/m3.
The atmosphere contains 13.5* 10−6 * 4.5* 1018 = 61*
61* 1012 kmol of CO2 and,
Therefore, 61*
61* 1012 kmol of carbon. Since the atomic mass of carbon is 12 daltons,
The mass of carbon in the atmosphere is 0.73 * 1015 kg. Compare with the 0.825 * 1015 kg of the
table.
A simpler way to achieve about the same result is to consider that the atmospheric pressure at sea
level is 1 kg/cm2 or 104 kg/m2.
Consequently, the total mass of the atmosphere is 510*
510* 1012 ×104 = 510*
510* 1016.
−
6
Of this, 360*
360* 10 is carbon dioxide and 12/44 is carbon.
The carbon content of the atmosphere is 510 * 1016 * 365 * 10−6 * 12/
12/44 = 0.
0.51 * 1015 kg, a result
comparable with the previous one.[16]
II.4.4 Climate change and climate protection, indicators:
The first thing to state is that climate change is primarily caused by CO2 emissions arising in the
conversion and consumption of energy. Of course, other important aspects such as the destruction
of rain forests or the emission of methane due to agriculture must also be included.
Today it is recognized almost everywhere in science and politics that the world total emissions of
CO2 must be reduced as fast as possible. There are difficulties for the emerging and developing
countries resulting from the agreements (such as that of Kyoto) that intend to implement
reductions in per-capita CO2 emissions relative to the present (or a past) point in time. For obvious
reasons, such reductions are unacceptable for these countries. Their accusation, that the present
48
CHAPTER II
situation results from the behavior of the industrialized nations, and that the emerging and
developing countries must have the same opportunities to develop, has to be accepted as justified.
Consequently the per-capita CO2 emission value is not a suitable general target for short- and
medium-term efforts because it does not take account of countries' differing development states. It
makes sense as a long-term goal and 1 t CO2 per capita and year is certainly worth having as a
long-term target.
A better grip on the problem results if the benchmark or guideline value is not the CO2 emissions
per capita, but a value relative to an indicator that is a good representation of the development
state of the country. The only quantity that is collected world-wide and meets this requirement to
some extent is the Gross Domestic Product (GDP
GDP),
GDP at purchasing-power parity, despite the
shortcomings associated with this quantity as an indicator of prosperity.
Finding and establishing a better one would be a task for the Guild of Economists. In 2007, the
CO2 emissions value expressed in g CO2/$ purchasing-power parity GDP was 435 g CO2/year/year-2007
$. This indicator can be determined as the product of two factors: the energy intensity of the GDP
and the CO2 intensity of the energy. The first one characterizes the efficiency of the use of energy,
and the second one the CO2 sustainability of the energy employed. These factors are of equal
significance and fundamental for climate protection. [17]
The crisis in the world of finance and economics is significantly reducing the scope for an
ambitious environment policy aimed at containing global warming, but it also opens up some
opportunities. In many countries the Gross Domestic Product will decrease, at least for a time.
This will result in a temporarily reduced demand for energy, despite price reductions that
unfortunately cause false incentives.
Thereby, some time is gained in which to consider sensible energy-policy actions and to put them
into practice systematically. There is no alternative to climate protection. Particularly in this
crisis, it is important for the world to become more aware that the costs of prevention by means of
active climate protection will be very much lower than the world-wide damage that could result
from global warming. This damage can only partially be avoided by employing solely, and often
selfishly, adaptation strategies. It is important to have clearly stated goals and to promote
cooperation, especially among the industrialized and emerging nations, but also including the
developing countries. Indicators that are reasonable and, above all, accepted, are a prerequisite for
negotiations. It is to be hoped that the United Nations Climate Change conference, in Copenhagen
in 2009, will create a better understanding of these questions in the industrialized countries and
the countries of the third world.
II.4.5 Objectives and indicators:
indicators:
The climate goals can be formulated relatively easily. Climate studies show that by 2030, the
world-wide emission of CO2 by the energy economy must be stabilized at 2004 levels and halved
by 2050. This would enable a limitation of the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere to at most 400
ppm and the mean temperature rise of the planet to about 2°C. [17]
49
CHAPTER II
II.4.6 GHG emission overview:
overview:
Direct GHG emissions from fossil energy related activities are mainly caused by the direct
greenhouse gases CO2, CH4 and N2O. The majority come from fossil fuel combustion with CO2 as
the primary gas emitted in an amount of about 27,100 Mio t CO2-eq.
eq per year on a global scale, of
which 39.1, 23.2 and 37.6 percent are from coal, oil and gas, respectively. The total amount of CO2
which was emitted during the last 150 years is estimated to be about 1,100,000 Mio t!
The contribution of the national economies is very diverse in total, structure, and in per capita
numbers, which is documented by the following selected data:
• The United States contribute by about 22 percent to the global energy related CO2 emissions.
Energy related activities accounted for over 85 percent of the country’s total emissions (in 2005),
where CO2 emissions account for nearly 82 percent compared to only 4 percent of non-CO
CO2emissions. 98, 38,
38 and 11 percent of the nation’s CO2, CH4 and N2O emissions, respectively, is
included in this number. U.S. power plant GHG emissions total 2,650 Mio t CO2-eq.
• Africa's fossil-fuel CO2 emissions are low in both absolute and per capita terms. They were below
900 Mio ton of CO2-eq.
eq in 2002. Per capita emissions are only about 5 percent of the comparable
value for North America. Fuels account for 15.6 percent. The emissions are mostly due to the
activities of only a few countries, amongst them South Africa which accounts for 40 percent of the
continental total.
Another 44 percent share is from Egypt, Algeria, Nigeria, Libya, and Morocco, combined. Power
in South Africa largely depends on coal burning.
• In Asia from 1971 to 1995 an eightfold increase in coal burning for electricity generation in the
industrializing countries occurred. The trend continues, and India and China will be responsible
for 75 percent of the increased global coal consumption. By 2025, nearly 60 percent of all coal will
be burned in Asia-Pacific. As a consequence, the region’s CO2 emissions are predicted to double.
In Thailand the total consumption of fossil fuels is about 232 Mio t CO2-eq. annually (in 2002).
The consumption more than doubles every 10 years.
In addition to emissions which are directly related to the use of fuels, greenhouse gases are
released by energy related activities such as mining and production, transmission, storage, and
distribution. These emissions mostly originate from fugitive methane from natural gas and
petroleum systems, and coal mining. During these processes, CO2 as a direct greenhouse gas, as
well as the indirect greenhouse gases such as CO, NOx, NMVOCs, and SO2 are emitted, but in
smaller quantities. Emissions can be allocated to end use sectors, such as transportation, industry,
residential and commercial.
• For nuclear power stations, indirect GHG emissions are estimated by 8 to 120 g CO2-eq./kWhel.
The number depends on concrete conditions.
A global mean value is below 40 CO2-eq./kWhel which is in the range of renewable sources. For
German nuclear power stations a mean value of 32 g CO2-eq./kWh is estimated compared to
Russia and USA with 65 and 62 g CO2-eq./kWh, respectively.
This is more than the emissions of a highly efficient modern local power station for electricity
production from natural gas using waste heat for district heating which is emitting 49 g CO2eq./kWh.
50
CHAPTER II
• For photovoltaic cells indirect GHG emissions of about 100 to 350 g CO2-eq./kWh were
established due to the very high production. Moreover real costs of CO2 avoidance have to be
considered. In case of photovoltaic’s costs are estimated at about EUR 1,000 per ton of CO2 avoided
as compared with EUR 40 to 45 for power stations and 20 to 30 for waste to energy plants.
• Geothermal energy is also not CO2 neutral, since small quantities of CO2 are normally released
from the geological formations tapped for this energy form.
• For hydropower stations emissions from the water reservoir must be taken into account. In the
reservoir, the organic matter is decomposed under anaerobic conditions, which results in methane
production. The productivity depends on local climate conditions; it is much higher in warmer
regions, but in general it is considered a serious problem.[15]
51
CHAPTER II
II.4.7 CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FUEL COMBUSTION :[18]
Table II.1: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
% change 90-08
World * 14096.3 15 692.7 18 071.3 18 644.0 20 964.8 21 793.7 23 496.5 27 129.1 28 024.0 28 945.3 29 381.4 0.1%
Algeria 8.7
14.0
28.4
43.2
51.7
55.6
62.4
78.5
81.7
85.7
88.1
70.5%
United States 4 291.3 4 360.8 4 661.6 4 545.7 4 868.7 5 138.7 5 698.1 5 771.7 5 684.9 5 762.7 5 595.9 14.9%
Asia
434.1 533.7
720.4
921.0
1 280.8 1 694.9 2 137.5 2 604.5 2 738.5 2 893.8 3 022.8 136.0%
Africa
265.7 332.1
408.3 477.1
545.6
598.2
686.3
823.4
841.3
873.2
889.9
63.1%
Middle East 129.1 192.3
343.7
490.4
592.5 803.8 979.9 1 245.0 1 319.2 1 399.6 1 492.3 151.8%
* Total world includes non-OECD
OECD total, OECD total as well as international marine bunkers and
international aviation bunkers.
Table II.2: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach - Coal/peat:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
% change 90-08
World * 5 199.2 5 607.2 6 568.6 7 377.2 8 310.3 8 538.5 8 822.6 11 012.6 11 695.2 12 224.8 12 595.3
51.6%
United States 1 078.7 1 196.4 1 400.7 1 625.5 1 797.4 1 896.4 2 125.1 2 123.7 2 093.3 2 118.1 2 085.7 16.0%
Algeria
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.0
1.3
1.4
0.7
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.2
-6.2%
Africa
160.7
190.0
193.7
208.4
235.5
254.2
276.8
301.1
302.1
309.8
304.3 29.2%
Middle East
0.8
3.9
3.6
10.1
11.0
19.3
28.7
34.3
34.5
36.5
33.8 207.4%
Asia
231.9
276.2
343.6 481.6
621.6
756.0 956.2
1 247.9
1 354.9 1 455.1 1 548.5 149.1%
Table II.3: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach – Oil:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
% change 90-08
World * 6 837.8
7 800.3 8 730.2 8 097.5 8 806.3 9 076.7 9 883.2 10 689.9 10 764.2 10 899.9 10 821.0 22.9%
United States 2 023.0 2 108.4 2 181.2 1 976.0 2 041.8 2 053.5 2 280.8 2 432.8 2 388.6 2 362.7 2 227.3
9.1%
Algeria 5.9
9.1
14.8
20.5
23.0
21.8
24.1
30.6
31.7
34.3
36.1
57.2%
Africa
99.7
133.2 188.4 222.5 247.7 264.8
300.1
367.5
373.1
390.8
407.8
64.6%
272.2 376.8 418.8 533.0 614.6
733.9
771.1
797.6
850.2
103.0%
Asia 192.0
241.2
348.2
383.0
548.1
746.7
914.5
971.2
981.5
1 017.1 1 026.8
87.3%
52
CHAPTER II
Table II.4: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach – Gas:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
% change 90-08
World *
2 058.3 2 281.2 2 767.3 3 161.3 3 808.1 4 105.7 4 696.8 5 334.8 5 465.1 5 715.0 5 861.5
53.9%
United States 1 189.5 1 056.1 1 079.7 944.2 1 011.3 1 160.2 1 254.9 1 189.7 1 174.7 1 253.0 1 257.5
24.3%
Algeria
2.4
4.6
13.4
21.7
27.4
32.4
37.6
46.9
48.9
50.2
50.8
85.2%
Africa
5.2
9.0
26.3
46.2
62.4
79.2
109.4
154.8
166.1 172.6
177.8
185.0%
Middle East 25.8
38.1
67.9 103.6 162.7
251.6
336.7
476.7
513.6 565.5
608.2
273.8%
Asia
10.2
16.3
28.7
56.4
111.1
192.1
265.7
383.2
399.9 419.3 445.3 300.7%
Table II.5: CO2 emissions: Reference Approach:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
% change 90-08
World * 14 617.9 16 160.3 18 666.0 19 310.9 21 523.4 22 107.7 23 744.1 27 614.7 28 479.8 29 327.7
United States 4 275.1 4 382.7 4 763.0 4 609.9 4 860.4 5 118.5 5 676.2 5 843.9 5 764.3 5 850.8
Algeria
9.8
15.0
29.0
46.4
55.3
60.0
66.8
79.9
86.4
91.9
Africa
245.5 303.0
405.0 545.7
601.4
687.0
753.2
903.5
927.9 969.3
Middle East 131.0
182.7 351.7 490.0 569.9
811.2
976.3 1 264.9 1 336.1 1 421.0
Asia
439.3 539.3 740.0
949.6 1 313.1 1 774.4 2 166.4 2 693.4 2 803.6 2 960.5
29 938.6 39.1%
5 684.1 16.9%
92.4
67.2%
995.6
65.5%
1 511.6 165.2%
3 083.9 134.9%
Table II.6: CO2 emissions from international marine bunkers:
1971
1975
1980
1985
World
344.47 328.58 343.93
United States 23.34 33.54 89.20
Algeria
0.61
0.77
1.29
Africa
21.76
15.95
16.48
Middle East 56.17 38.79 30.42
Asia
14.39
15.42 20.61
1990
1995
291.73 354.77
55.26 90.68
1.16
1.36
13.70
16.49
44.02 28.93
20.58 44.66
2000
2005
2006
408.72 468.61 522.28
90.51 88.90
81.76
1.17
0.77
1.17
24.79
23.69 20.39
44.39
40.64 49.08
49.99
69.41 70.88
2007
2008
% change 90-08
556.62 589.09 578.20
88.16 95.96
71.87
1.07
1.09
1.01
18.30
18.94
17.82
52.93
59.95
64.49
83.03
92.40
108.66
63.0%
-20.7%
-25.8%
8.0%
122.9%
143.3%
Table II.7
II.7: CO2 emissions from international aviation bunkers:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
World
168.94 173.44 201.28 224.03 258.22 287.81 354.42 421.57 436.25 446.59
United States 15.35
15.60
19.83 20.61 38.79 45.96 57.11 68.21 68.54
70.41
Algeria
0.29
0.66
0.93
1.31
1.09
0.96
1.17
1.16 1.14
1.12
Africa
4.93
6.90
10.62
11.22
11.40 13.29
17.12 17.17 17.78
19.25
Middle East 11.63 14.76 14.98
16.50
27.03 26.70
27.87 31.68 32.85
33.82
Asia
16.00
14.33
14.93 16.77
24.79
35.53
51.22 64.35 68.99
72.91
53
% change 90-08
454.85
70.58
1.25
20.37
35.36
71.61
76.1%
81.9%
14.8%
78.7%
30.8%
188.9%
CHAPTER II
Table II.8
II.8: CO2 emissions by sector in 2008 *:
Total CO2
emissions
from fuel
combustion
Other
energy
Industries
Electricity
and heat
production
World *** 29 381.4
11 987.9
United States 5 595.9
2 403.4
Algeria
88.1
24.0
Africa
889.9
384.4
Middle East 1 492.3
529.9
Asia
3 022.8
1 384.5
1 491.9
268.3
10.5
45.6
126.6
161.4
Manufacturing
industries and
construction
5 943.6
633.1
11.9
140.4
332.3
737.8
Transport
6 604.7
1 691.6
19.7
211.6
326.6
447.7
of
which:
road
Other
sectors
4 848.4
1 455.9
17.7
197.4
324.2
418.5
of which:
residential
3 353.4
599.5
21.9
107.9
176.9
291.5
1 05.1
332.7
21.9
72.4
127.3
140.2
*** World includes international bunkers in the transport sector.
Table II.9
II.9: CO2 emissions with electricity and heat allocated to consuming sectors * in 2008:
Total CO2
emissions
from fuel
combustion
World ***
29 381.4
United States 5 595.9
Algeria
88.1
Africa
889.9
Middle East
1 492.3
Asia
3 022.8
Other
energy
industries
Manufacturing
industries and
construction
Transport
2 051.6
336.8
11.0
55.5
142.2
168.5
10 743.2
1 220.0
19.5
308.3
432.8
1 361.6
6 760.3
1 696.2
20.0
215.6
326.8
460.8
of
which:
road
Other
sectors
4 848.4
1 455.9
17.7
197.4
324.2
418.5
of which:
residential
9 826.4
2 343.0
37.6
310.7
590.4
1 032.0
5 215.5
1 160.0
37.6
190.0
345.3
486.7
*** World includes international bunkers in the transport sector.
Table II.10
II.10:
10: Total primary energy supply:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
% change 90-08
World * 231 678 259 340 302 664 324 584 367 478 386 902 419 708 478 570 491 160 504 221 513 611
United States 66 464 69 231 75 558 74 278 80 177 86 550 95 180 97 086 96 156 97 827 95 615
Algeria
145
231
469
743
929
1 009
1 131
1 351
1 451
1 541
1 552
Africa
8 048 9 318
11 489
14 257 16 224
18 542 21 032 24 810
25 441 26 617 27 442
Middle East 2 068
2 843 5 358 7 531 9 175
13 029
15 847 20 821
22 044 23 386 24 855
Asia
13 363 15 490 19 430 23 509 30 167 37 607
44 487 53 061
54 802 57 277 59 050
39.8%
19.3%
67.0%
69.1%
170.9%
95.7%
54
CHAPTER II
Table II.11
II.11: Total primary energy supply:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
% change 90-08
World * 5 533.5 6 194.2 7 229.0 7 752.6 8 777.1 9 241.0 10 024.5 11 430.4 11 731.2 12 043.1 12 267.4 39.8%
United States 1 587.5 1 653.5 1 804.7 1 774.1 1 915.0 2 067.2 2 273.3 2 318.9 2 296.6 2 336.5 2 283.7
19.3%
Algeria
3.5
5.5
11.2
17.7
22.2
24.1
27.0
32.3
34.7
36.8
37.1
67.0%
Africa
192.2 222.6
274. 4 340.5
387.5
442.9 502.3 592.6
607.7
635.7 655.4
69.1%
Middle East 49.4
67.9
128.0 179.9
219.2
311.2 378.5 497.3
526.5
558.6 593.7 170.9%
Asia
319.2 370.0 464.1 561.5
720.5
898.2 1 062.5 1 267.3 1 308.9 1 368.0 1 410.4 95.7%
Table II.12
II.12: GDP using exchange rates:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
% change 90-08
World 12 936.2 14 985.8 18 137.9 20 539.7 24 228.8 27 190.7 32 150.1 36 849.3 38 300.7 39 783.7 40 481.5 67.1%
United States 3 867.1 4 291.0 5 142.1 6 028.6 7 064.0 8 002.0 9 898.8 11 150.4 11 448.5 11 693.2 11 742.3 66.2%
Algeria
17.5
26.1
35.3
44.6
46.4
47.0
54.8
69.6
71.0
73.1
75.3
62.4%
Africa
264.7 299.1 376.9
414.8
462.8
498.4
596.5 743.3
786.5
832.5
876.2
89.3%
Middle East 256.6 370.5 479.0 432.5
446.5
528.5
648.3 801.9 844.6
893.3
945.0
111.6%
Asia
324.2 391.0 525.6 671.5
930.1
1 262.2 1 560.4 2 014.7 2 156.3 2 311.6 2 417.3 159.9%
Table II.13
II.13: GDP using purchasing power parities:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
% change 90-08
World 17 540.3 20 644.2 25 098.3 28 668.5 33 357.0 37 830.0 45 761.1 55 438.1 58 465.7 61 747.9 63 865.8 91.5%
United States 3 867.1 4 291.0 5 142.1 6 028.6 7 064.0 8 002.0 9 898.8 11 150.4 11 448.5 11 693.2 11 742.3
66.2%
Algeria
51.8 77.4 104.5
132.2
137.3
139.1
162.3
206.0
210.2
216.5 222.9
62.4%
Africa
775.2 882.6 1 074.8
1 190.0 1 340.6 1 431.5 1 710.2 2 122.0 2 244.6 2 373.7 2 499.1
86.4%
Middle East 446.2 651.8 780.8
746.7 769.5
910.7 1 107.8 1 382.5 1 456.0 1 543.8 1 629.7
111.8%
Asia 1 270.7 1 493.2 1 916.8 2 429.0
3 279.4 4 353.3 5 393.1 7 162.3 7 709.6 8 297.2 8 760.1
167.1%
Table II.14
II.14: Population:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
World 3 759.2 4 065.3 4 438.5 4 834.3 5 265.2
United States 207.7 216.0 227.7 238.5 250.2
Algeria 14.2
16.0
18.8
22.1
25.3
Africa
371.8
413.9 476.7 550.3
633.6
Middle East 67.5
77.1 92.3
111.8
131.6
Asia 1 057.8 1 163.8 1 305.6 1 453.4
1 613.4
2000
5 680.4
266.6
28.3
721.4
147.9
1 776.9
55
2005
2006
2007
2008
% change 90-08
6 074.0 6 458.6 6 534.5 6 610.5 6 687.9
27.0%
282.4
296.0
298.8 301.7
304.5
21.7%
30.5
32.9
33.4
33.9
34.4
35.9%
817.2
918.8 940.4 961.9
984.3
55.3%
165.9 185.7
190.0 194.2 198.5
50.9%
1 934.7 2 093.1 2 123.3 2 153.0 2 183.0 35.3%
CHAPTER II
Table II.15
II.15: CO2 emissions / TPES:
1971
1975
World *
60.8
60.5
United States 64.6 63.0
Algeria
59.6
60.7
Africa
33.0
35.6
Asia
32.5
34.5
1980
1985
59.7
61.7
60.6
35.5
64.1
37.1
1990
1995
2000
57.4
57.1
56.3
61.2
60.7
59.4
58.1
55.6 55.1
33.5
33.6
32.3
65.1
64.6
61.7
39.2
42.5 45.1
2005
56.0
59.9
55.2
32.6
61.8
48.0
2006
56.7
59.4
58.2
33.2
59.8
49.1
2007
57.1
59.1
56.3
33.1
59.8
50.0
2008
57.4
58.9
55.6
32.8
59.8
50.5
% change 90-08
57.2
58.5
56.8
32.4
60.0
51.2
0.3%
-3.6%
2.1%
-3.6%
-7.0%
20.6%
* The ratio for the world has been calculated to include international marine bunkers and
Table II.16
II.16: CO2 emissions / GDP using exchange rates:
1971
1975
World *
1.09
1.05
United States 1.11 1.02
Algeria
0.49
0.54
Africa
1.00
1.11
Asia
1.34
1.36
1980
1985
1.00
0.91
0.81
1.08
0.72
1.37
1990
0.91
0.75
0.97
1.15
1.13
1.37
1995
0.87
0.69
1.11
1.18
1.33
1.38
2000
0.80
0.64
1.18
1.20
1.52
1.34
2005
0.73
0.58
1.14
1.15
1.51
1.37
2006
0.74
0.52
1.13
1.11
1.55
1.29
2007
0.73
0.50
1.15
1.07
1.56
1.27
2008
0.73
0.49
1.17
1.05
1.57
1.25
% change 90-08
0.73
0.48
1.17
1.02
1.58
1.25
-16.1%
-30.8%
5.0%
-13.8%
19.0%
-9.2%
Table II.17
II.17: CO2 Emissions / GDP using purchasing power parities:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
World *
0.80
0.76
0.72
0.65
United States 1.11
1.02
0.91
0.75
Algeria
0.17 0.18
0.27
0.33
Africa
0.34 0.38
0.38 0.40
Middle East
0.29
0.30 0.44 0.66
Asia
0.34
0.36 0.38
0.38
1995
0.63
0.69
0.38
0.41
0.77
0.39
2000
0.58
0.64
0.40
0.42
0.88
0.39
2005
0.51
0.58
0.38
0.40
0.88
0.40
2006
0.49
0.52
0.38
0.39
0.90
0.36
2007
0.48
0.50
0.39
0.37
0.91
0.36
2008
% change 90-08
0.47
0.46
0.49
0.48
0.40
0.40
0.37
0.36
0.91
0.92
0.35
0.35
56
-26.8%
-30.8%
5.0%
-12.5%
18.9%
-11.6%
CHAPTER II
Table II.18
II.18: CO2 emissions / population:
1971
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2006
2007
2008
% change 90-08
World *
3.75 3.86
4.07
3.86 3.98
3.84
3.87
4.20
4.29
4.38 4.39
United States 20.66 20.19 20.47 19.06 19.46 19.28 20.18 19.50
19.02
19.10 18.38
Algeria
0.61 0.88
1.51
1.96
2.04
1.97
2.05
2.39
2.45
2.53
2.56
Africa
0.71
0.80
0.86
0.87
0.86
0.83
0.84
0.90
0.89
0.91
0.90
3.72
4.39
4.50
5.44
5.91
6.70
6.94
7.21
7.52
Asia
0.41
0.46
0.55
0.63
0.79
0.95
1.10
1.24
1.29
1.34
1.38
10.3%
-5.6%
25.4%
5.0%
66.9%
74.4%
Table II.19: CO2 emissions per kWh from electricity and heat generation *
1990
World
..
Algeria
..
Africa
..
Middle East ..
Asia
..
1995
470
633
682
726
709
2000
2001
485
491
620
621
658
616
704
704
733
736
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
486
495
632
632
618
633
690
686
722
709
500
632
644
706
727
500
606
631
696
725
501
621
626
677
725
507
597
623
679
734
2008
502
596
619
687
751
Average 06-08
504
605
623
681
737
* CO2 emissions from fossil fuels consumed for electricity, combined heat and power and main
activity heat plants divided by the output of electricity and heat generated from fossil fuels,
nuclear, hydro (excl. pumped storage), geothermal, solar and biomass. Both main activity
producers and auto producers have been included in the calculation of the emissions. Due to
missing data for heat in 1990, the ratio for some countries and regions is not available.
Table II.20: CO2 emissions per kWh from electricity and heat generation using coal/peat *
Grammes CO2 / kilowatt hour
1990
World
..
Algeria
..
Africa
..
Middle East ..
Asia
..
1995
882
952
823
1 130
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
877
896
880
889
910
908
911
902
898
966
894
888
906
932
907
887
895
895
827
829
836
838
830
830
865
867
864
1 117 1 118 1 081
1 090 1 127 1 145 1 141
1 164 1 194
Average 06-08
904
892
865
1 166
* CO2 emissions from coal consumed for electricity, combined heat and power and main activity
heat plants divided by output of electricity and heat generated from coal. Both main activity
57
CHAPTER II
Table II.21: CO2 emissions per kWh from electricity and heat generation using oil *
1990
World
Algeria
Africa
Middle East
Asia
..
..
..
..
..
1995
2000
587
1 178
883
811
787
662
863
886
793
824
2001
2002
2003
651
840
906
781
813
651
968
900
756
795
2004
2005
2006
651
869
844
783
806
665
948
871
794
791
647
961
854
803
770
660
864
901
748
817
2007
651
916
784
787
776
2008
651
914
802
785
788
Average 06-08
650
930
813
792
778
* CO2 emissions from oil consumed for electricity, combined heat and power and main activity
heat plants divided by output of electricity and heat generated from oil. Both main activity
Table II.22: CO2 emissions per kWh from electricity and heat generation using gas *
World
Algeria
Africa
Middle East
Asia
1990
1995
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
..
..
..
..
..
365
621
544
680
539
387
614
525
637
503
388
616
508
651
515
389
625
527
654
511
385
632
529
660
476
386
631
533
675
480
388
609
525
659
483
381
618
526
621
482
386
594
525
630
471
2008
391
594
528
626
476
Average 06-08
386
602
526
626
476
* CO2 emissions from gas consumed for electricity, combined heat and power and main activity
heat plants divided by output of electricity and heat generated from gas. Both main activity
Table II.23
II.23:
23: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach - Coal/peat/ Oil and gas: I n Algeria
YEAR
1971
Coal/Peat
0,40
Oil
5,90
Gas
2,40
1975
0,30
9,10
4,60
1980
0,20
14,80
13,40
1985
1,00
20,50
21,70
1990
1,30
23,00
27,40
1995
1,40
21,80
32,40
2000
0,70
24,10
37,60
2005
1,00
30,60
46,90
2006
1,00
31,70
48,90
2007
1,20
34,30
50,20
2008
1,20
36,10
50,80
-6,20%
57,20%
85,20%
% change 9090-08
58
CHAPTER II
Milion tonnes of CO2
CO2 emissions by fuel in Algeria
100,00
90,00
80,00
70,00
60,00
50,00
40,00
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
Oil
Gas
Coal/Peat
Years
FIG.II.5:
FIG.
II.5: CO2 emissions by fuel in Algeria
Table II.24
II.24:
24: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach - Coal/peat/ Oil and gas: In Africa
YEAR
1971
Coal/Peat
160,70
Oil
99,70
Gas
5,20
1975
190,00
133,20
9,00
1980
193,70
188,40
26,30
1985
208,40
222,50
46,20
1990
235,50
247,70
62,40
1995
254,20
264,80
79,20
2000
276,80
300,10
109,40
2005
301,10
367,50
154,80
2006
302,10
373,10
166,10
2007
309,80
390,80
172,60
2008
304,30
407,80
177,80
% change 9090-08
29,20%
64,60% 185,00%
CO2 emissions by fuel in Africa
1 000,00
900,00
800,00
700,00
600,00
500,00
400,00
300,00
200,00
100,00
0,00
Oil
Gas
Coal/Peat
Years
FIG.II.
FIG.
II.6
II.6: CO2 emissions by fuel in Africa
59
CHAPTER II
Table II.2
II.25: CO2 emissions: Sectoral Approach - Coal/peat/ Oil and gas: In the World
YEAR
1971
Coal/Peat
Oil
Gas
5 199,20 6 837,80 2 058,30
1975
5 607,20
7 800,30 2 281,20
1980
6 568,60
8 730,20 2 767,30
1985
7 377,20
8 097,50 3 161,30
1990
8 310,30
8 806,30 3 808,10
1995
8 538,50
9 076,70 4 105,70
2000
8 822,60
9 883,20 4 696,80
2005
11 012,60 10 689,90 5 334,80
2006
11 695,20 10 764,20 5 465,10
2007
12 224,80 10 899,90 5 715,00
2008
12 595,30 10 821,00 5 861,50
% change 9090-08
51,60%
22,90%
53,90%
CO2 emissions by fuel in the World
35 000,00
30 000,00
25 000,00
20 000,00
15 000,00
Oil
10 000,00
Gas
5 000,00
Coal/Peat
0,00
Years
Fig.II.7:
Fig.II.7: CO2 emissions by fuel in the World
II.5.Discussion:
II.5.Discussion:
In 2008, 43% of CO2 emissions from fuel combustion were produced from coal, 37% from oil and
20% from gas. Growth of these fuels in 2008 was quite different, reflecting varying trends that are
expected to continue in the future.
Between 2007 and 2008, CO2 emissions from the combustion of coal increased by 3% and
represented 12.6 Gt CO2. Currently, coal is filling much of the growing energy demand of
developing countries.
CO2 emissions from oil remained constant in 2008, decreasing 0.7% during the year. The
decreasing share of oil in Total Primary Energy Supply (TPES
TPES)
TPES) as a result of the growth of coal and
the penetration of gas limited the increase of CO2 emissions from oil, which produced 10.8 Gt CO2
in 2008. The emissions from oil will grow to 13.6 Gt CO2 in 2030.
60
CHAPTER II
Emissions of CO2 from gas in 2008 represented 5.8 Gt CO2, 2.6% higher than in the previous year.
Again, the emissions from gas will continue to grow, rising to 8.0 Gt CO2 in 2030.
Generation of electricity and heat was by far the largest producer of CO2 emissions and was
responsible for 41% of the world CO2 emissions in 2008. Between 2007 and 2008, total CO2
emissions from the generation of electricity and heat were stable.
CO2 emissions from gas grew by 3% and from coal remained constant while emissions from oil
decreased by 4%. The future development of the emissions intensity of this sector depends
strongly on the fuels used to generate the electricity and on the share of non-emitting sources,
such as renewable and nuclear.
By 2030, the demand for electricity will be almost twice as high as current demand, driven by
rapid growth in population and income in developing countries, by the continuing increase in the
number of electrical devices used in homes and commercial buildings, and by the growth in
electrically driven industrial processes.
Transport, the second-largest sector, represented 22% of global CO2 emissions in 2008. CO2
emissions in this sector also remained stable between 2007 and 2008.
II.6.Conclusion:
II.6.Conclusion:
The sustainable development debate is based on the assumption that societies need to manage
three types of capital (economic, social, and natural), which may be non-substitutable and whose
consumption might be irreversible.
61
STUDY OF STANDARD NETWORK
Environmental
Optimization of the
Energy in an
Electrical Network.
CHAPTER III
III.1. Reliability of Supply:
High reliability of supply is of fundamental importance as any major interruption of supply causes,
at the very least, major inconvenience to the consumer, can lead to life-threatening situations and,
for the industrial consumer, may pose severe technical and production problems. Invariably in
such situations the electrical supply utility also incurs a large loss in financial revenue. High
reliability of supply can be ensured by:
High quality of installed elements;
The provision of reserve generation;
Employing large interconnected power systems capable of supplying each consumer via
alternative routes;
A high level of system security.
III.2. Supplying Electrical Energy of Good Quality:
Electrical energy of good quality is provided by:
regulated and defined voltage levels with low fluctuations;
a regulated and defined value of frequency with low fluctuations;
Low harmonic content.
Two basic methods can be used to ensure a high quality of electrical supply. Firstly the proper use
of automatic voltage and frequency control methods and, secondly, by employing large,
interconnected, power systems which, by their very nature, are less susceptible to load variations
and other disturbances.
III.3. Economic Generation and Transmission:
The majority of electricity is generated by first converting the thermal energy stored in the fossil
fuel into mechanical energy and then converting this mechanical energy into electrical energy for
transmission through the power system to the consumer. Unfortunately the efficiency of this
overall process is relatively low, particularly the first-stage conversion of thermal energy into
mechanical energy. It is therefore vital that operation of the overall system is optimized by
minimizing the generation and the transmission costs. Once again some saving can be achieved by
connecting, and operating, a number of smaller systems as one larger, interconnected, system.[19]
III.4. Environmental Issues:
Modern society demands careful planning of generation and transmission to ensure as little effect
as possible on the natural environment while meeting society’s expectations for a secure electrical
supply. Consequently air and water pollution produced by power generation plants are limited to
prescribed quantities while the pathways for transmission lines are planned so as to cause minimal
disturbance to the environment. In addition, new plans for power stations and transmission lines
are subject to close public scrutiny.
62
CHAPTER III
Environmental issues are now playing an ever-increasing important role on the political agenda.
Power generation has always been a major source of air pollution and much effort has been
devoted to developing cleaner generation technologies. However, the relatively recent concerns
about global warming and sustainability have started to change the way power systems operate
and expand. It is estimated that power generation contributes about one-third of the global CO2
emissions so that many countries in the world have set a target for renewable generation to
contribute 20% or more of their total energy production by about 2020.
Another consequence of the environmental pressure is that power utilities must continually seek
ways of making better use of their existing system. Obtaining planning permission for new
transmission lines and generation sites has become more difficult and stringent.
It is within this political and operational framework that an electrical power utility generates,
transmits and distributes electrical energy to its consumers.[19].
III.5. Structure of the Electrical Power System:
The basic structure of a contemporary electrical power system is illustrated schematically in
Fig.III
III.1
Fig.
III.1 and shows the power system to be divided into three parts: generation, transmission and
distribution. Historically the power supply industry tended to be vertically integrated with each
utility responsible for generation and transmission and, in many cases, also distribution in its own
service (or control) area. The main justification for this was economies of scale and scope.
It was also thought that in order to optimize the overall power system planning and operation, a
utility should be able to have full control of both transmission and generation, and sometimes also
distribution. This situation has changed since the 1990s. In order to improve the overall efficiency
of the industry, many countries have decided to introduce a liberalized competitive market for the
industry. That has required unbundling,
unbundling that is splitting, the vertically integrated utilities. In a
typical liberalized model, the generation sector is divided into a number of private companies each
owning individual power stations and competing with each other. The transmission tends to be
operated by one Monopoly Company, referred to as the system operator,
operator which is independent of
the generation and regulated by an industry regulator. The distribution is also often split into
separate distribution companies (wires businesses) which own and manage the distribution
network in a given area, while retail, that is buying power on the wholesale markets and selling it
to final customers, is handled by a number of competing supply companies.
companies Customers are free to
choose their suppliers, although in many countries that is restricted to industrial and commercial,
but not domestic, customers.
That reorganization of the industry has created many challenges to the way power systems are
being planned and operated. [19]
63
CHAPTER III
Fig.III
Fig.III.1
III.1:
.1: Structure of an electrical power system.
Different parts of the power system operate at different voltages. Generally voltages can be
considered to be low voltages if they are below the 1 kV marks, while medium voltages,
voltages used in
distribution systems, are typically between 1 and 100 kV. The high voltages used in sub
transmission networks are between 100 and 300 kV and the extraextra-high voltages used in
transmission networks are above 300 kV. This classification is loose and by no means strict.
III.5.1 Generation:
Traditionally power system operation has been based around a relatively small number of large
power plants connected to the transmission system. Those plants are usually thermal or hydro
plants in which electricity is produced by converting the mechanical energy appearing on the
output shaft of an engine, or more usually a turbine, into electrical energy. The main thermal
energy resources used commercially are coal, natural gas, nuclear fuel and oil.
64
CHAPTER III
The conversion of mechanical to electrical energy in traditional thermal or hydro plants is almost
universally achieved by the use of a synchronous generator. The synchronous generator feeds its
electrical power into the transmission system via a step-up transformer (F
Fig.III
ig.III.1
III.1)
.1 in order to
increase the voltage from the generation level (10–20 kV) to the transmission level (hundreds of
kilovolts).
As mentioned earlier, concerns about global warming and sustainability have recently spurned
interest in renewable generation. Generally there are three main ways the industry can reduce its
CO2 emissions:[19]
a) By moving from the traditional coal/gas/oil-based generation to renewable generation
(wind, solar, marine);
b) By moving towards increased nuclear generation which is largely CO2-free;
c) By removing CO2 from exhaust gases of traditional thermal generation using for example
carbon capture and storage technology.
However, it is important to appreciate that the last two options retain the traditional structure of
the power system, as that based around a relatively few large generating units, and would
therefore not require major changes to the way power systems are designed and operated. The first
option, however, would require a major shift to the current practices as generation would be
increasingly based around a large number of small renewable plants. This is because renewable
energy has a low energy density so that renewable power stations tend to be small with capacities
of individual plants being between hundreds of kilowatts and a few megawatts. Such small plants
are often connected at the distribution, rather than transmission, network due to the lower cost of
connection. Such plants are referred to as distributed, or embedded,
embedded generation. Wind plants
usually use induction generators, fixed speed or double fed, in order to transform wind energy into
electricity, although sometimes inverter-fed synchronous generators may be used. Solar plants can
be either thermal or photovoltaic (PV
PV)
PV with an inverter feeding a synchronous generator.
III.5.2 Transmission:
One significant advantage of electrical energy is that large traditional plants can be constructed
near the primary fossil fuel energy resource or water reservoirs and the electrical energy produced
can be transmitted over long distances to the load centers. Since the energy lost in a transmission
line is proportional to the current squared, transmission lines operate at high or very high
voltages. The electrical network connects all the power stations into one system, and transmits
and distributes power to the load centres in an optimal way. Usually the transmission network has
a mesh structure in order to provide many possible routes for electrical power to flow from
individual generators to individual consumers thereby improving the flexibility and reliability of
the system.
One cannot overemphasize the importance of transmission for overall power system integrity. The
transmission network makes the power system a highly interacting, complicated mechanism, in
which an action of any individual component (a power plant or a load) influences all the other
components in the system. This is the main reason why transmission remains a monopoly
business, even under the liberalized market structure, and is managed by a single system operator.
65
CHAPTER III
The system operator is responsible for maintaining power system security and for optimizing
power system operation.
As the electrical energy gets closer to the load centre, it is directed from the transmission network
into a sub transmission network. When a power system expands with the addition of new, highvoltage transmission lines some of the older, lower voltage lines may become part of the sub
transmission network. There is no strict division of the network into transmission and sub
transmission networks and smaller power generation plants may feed directly into the sub
transmission network while bulk power consumers may be fed directly from the transmission or
sub transmission network (Fig.
Fig.III
Fig.III.1
III.1).
.1
III.5.3 Distribution:
Most of the electrical energy is transferred from the transmission, or sub transmission, network to
distribution high-voltage and medium-voltage networks in order to bring it directly to the
consumer. The distribution network is generally connected in a radial structure as opposed to the
mesh structure used in the transmission system. Large consumers may be supplied from a weakly
coupled, meshed, distribution network or, alternatively, they may be supplied from two radial
feeders with a possibility of automatic switching between feeders in case of a power cut. Some
industrial consumers may have their own on-site generation as a reserve or as a by-product of a
technological process (e.g. steam generation). Ultimately power is transformed to a low voltage
and distributed directly to consumers.
Traditionally, distribution networks have been passive, that is there was little generation
connected to them. Recently the rapid growth in distributed and renewable generation has
changed that picture.
Power flows in distribution networks may no longer be unidirectional, that is from the point of
connection with the transmission network down to customers. In many cases the flows may
reverse direction when the wind is strong and wind generation high, with distribution networks
even becoming net exporters of power. That situation has created many technical problems with
respect to settings of protection systems, voltage drops, and congestion management and so on.
Typically about 8–10% of the electrical energy appearing at the generator terminals will be lost on
its way to the consumers in the transmission and distribution level.
III.5.4 Demand:
The demand for electrical power is never constant and changes continuously throughout the day
and night. The changes in demand of individual consumers may be fast and frequent, but as one
moves up the power system structure (Fig.III
(Fig.III.1)
III.1) from individual consumers, through the
distribution network, to the transmission level, the changes in demand become smaller and
smoother as individual demands are aggregated. Consequently the total power demand at the
transmission level changes in a more or less predictable way that depends on the season, weather
conditions, and way of life of a particular society and so on. Fast global power demand changes on
the generation level are usually small and are referred to as load fluctuations. [19]
66
CHAPTER III
A network has as a function to transport the power (or energy) since a source of production
towards a center of consumption called load or receiver. The load is characterized by its voltage,
its current, its impedance and its power-factor. Any electric system functioning under alternating
voltage consumes energy in two forms, active energy and reactive energy, since the voltage and
the current are seldom in phase. In sinusoidal mode, at the industrial frequency (50 Hz),
φ:Dephasing between v and I ;( counted positively if the current is late on the voltage).
Apparent power, provided by the source of production:
S
U. I
III. 1
Impose dimensions of the generator and distribution or grid system. Only the active power,
received by the load, is transformed into energy mechanical, thermal, luminous, etc. It is the
useful output which a forward by the load and which is:
P
U. I. cos φ
S cos φ
III. 2
S sinφ
III. 3
The reactive power, not used, is:
Q
U. I . sin φ
III.6. Critical Infrastructures:
The electric system functions under two principal types of constraints: constraint of supply of
energy and constraints of operations. The first type imposes that all the consumers must be fed,
while the second request that the variables of the system such as the frequency, the profile of
voltage and the currents forwarded on the lines must always remain in the authorized limits..
The system is known as in normal circumstances
circumstances if the constraints of supply of energy and the
constraints of operation are satisfied.
The system is known as in emergency state if the constraints of operation of the system are not
satisfied.
This situation can be caused by one or of the great disturbances which take along the variables of
the system apart from their limits. If the actions of intervention of the manager of the network
realized by the tools of control of the network or by the unballasting of the consumers are
effective to bring back the variables of the system within the limits, the network is safeguarded
and passed to the state of alert.
alert If these corrective actions are not successful, the system is likely to
collapse and pass in extreme state.
state
The system is known as in state of alert if the constraint of supply of energy is not entirely
respected (part of the loads is not fed).
The system is in extreme state if the two constraints are not satisfied. Several, even all the loads
are not fed, i.e., it was of an interruption of service or a generalized power failure (partial blackout
or total).
67
CHAPTER III
The critical situations of the electric system indeed result from the changes of the normal state
with worms three other states of operation. These changes take the origin of the major incidents,
which can be caused by natural, technical causes and/or human, and involve finally the
generalized rupture of service of energy in consumers. As the consequences of the absence of
electricity are always dramatic for the life societal, as well for the economy as for safety, the study
on the critical infrastructures plays a very significant role for any electric system.
The aim of the study of the critical infrastructures consists in, initially, apprehending the
mechanism of formation of the major incidents to identify the decisive causes which lead to the
loss of the system. It is then thereafter that the development of the strategies and the procedures
of defense and resumption of service will be installation. [20]
III.7
III.7. Grid system IEEE New England 39 nodes:
nodes: [20]
The standard grid system IEEE New England 39 nodes; was connected to two distribution
networks of the French type resulting from the simplified real networks: one is composed of 54
nodes, other 300 nodes, via a network of distribution.
The grid system IEEE New England 39 represents a simplification of the grid system of the area
New England (north-eastern of the United States). The topology of the network given on the
figure:
Fig. III.2:
III.2: Grid system IEEE New ENgland 39 nodes.
68
CHAPTER III
We suppose to have 10 generators: 5 nuclear of 1080 MW, 2 thermals of 1000 MW and 3
hydraulics of 615 MW. The total power in control system in normal circumstances is of almost
6181 MW and 1038 MVAR which are able to satisfy an overall consumption of 6142 MW and
1655 MVAR. The detailed state of production and consumption in the network is recapitulated in
table;
Tab. III. 1:
1: State of production and consumption of the grid system:
consumption
Node
B30
B31
B32
B33
B34
B35
B36
B37
B38
B39
B3
B4
B7
B8
B18
B15
B16
B20
B21
B23
B24
B25
B26
B27
B28
B29
type
hydraulics
Nuclear
Nuclear
Nuclear
Hydraulics
Nuclear
Hydraulics
Thermal
Thermal
Nuclear
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Loads
Total
production
production
name
GEN10
GEN2
GEN3
GEN4
GEN5
GEN6
GEN7
GEN8
GEN9
GEN1
B3
B4
B7
B8
B18
B15
B16
B20
B21
B23
B24
B25
B26
B27
B28
B29
P(MW)
Q (MVAR)
9.2
4.6
1104
322
500
233.8
522
158
320
329
680
274
247.5
308.6
224
139
281
206
283.5
6 141.6
250
2.4
184
84
176
30
153
32.3
103
115
84.6
-92.2
197.2
17
75.5
27.6
26.9
1 655.3
69
P(MW)
250
660.78
650
632
508
650
560
540
830
1000
Q (MVAR)
91.92
157.83
140
42.38
218.23
152.83
31.70
-19.13
-67.71
116.36
6 280.78
1038.01
Inertia H
(MWs/MVA)
3.5
2.525
2.9833
2.3833
2.166
2.9
2.2
2.025
2.875
2
CHAPTER III
Tab. III. 2:
2: Characteristics of the generators:
Parameters
Apparent power (Mva)
Nominal voltage (kV)
Nominal output of the alternator (MW)
Nominal output of the turbine (MW)
Inertia (MWs/MVA)
Resistance of the stator winding
Reactance of the stator winding
Axe d
Synchronous reactance
Transitory reactance
Sub transitory reactance
Transitory time-constant to vacuum
Sub transitory time-constant to vacuum
Axe q
Synchronous reactance
Transitory reactance
Sub transitory reactance
Transitory time-constant
Sub transitory time-constant to vacuum
Thermal
Thermal
1150
20
1100
1000
6.3
0.004
0.219
Nuclear
1080
20
1080
1080
6
0.004 pu
0.22 pu
Hydraulics
615
20
615
615
5.15
0.0001 pu
0.2396 pu
2.57
0.422
0.3
7.695
0.061
2.43 pu
0.393 pu
0.286 pu
10.1 s
0.044 s
0.8979 pu
0.2995
7.4 s
-
2.57
0.662
0.301
0.643
0.095
1.7 pu
0.815 pu
0.307pu
0.736 s
0.27 s
0.646 pu
-
Time of starting of the generators:
Tab. III.3: Time criticizes restarting of the thermal and nuclear generators:
range of power
fuel
minimal
generation
hot (restart)
synchronization
Minimal load
cold (restart)
synchronization
minimal load
full load
20
MW
Gas
110
MW
Gas
235
MW
Coal
275
MW
oil
550
MW
Coal
500
MW
Coal
600
MW
Coal
800
MW
Coal
936
MW
Nuclear
5 MW
0.1 h
25
MW
1.5 h
50
MW
6h
30
MW
1.5 h
180
MW
4h
150
MW
0.9 h
200
MW
4h
420
MW
4 h
400
MW
48 h
0h
0.1 h
0.1 h
6h
1h
7h
0.7 h
7h
1h
5h
0.5 h
12 h
0.5h
12 h
1.5 h
16 h
4.5 h
48 h
0h
0.1 h
0.5 h
1.5 h
1h
2h
1.7 h
1h
1h
1.5h
2h
2h
2h
2h
3h
1.5 h
4.5 h
10 h
70
CHAPTER III
Characteristics of the transformers
Step-up transformers of the power stations 20kV/400kV: Sn = 1300 Mva; Values reduced in the
base S bases = 100 Mva and U bases = 400 kV are R = 0.000185 been able; X = 0.00789 been able.
Characteristics of the lines:
The lines are indicated by the name of the starting node and the name of the node of arrival. The
values are presented in p.u on the basis of S base = 100 MW, U base= 400 kV.
Tab.III.4.
Tab.III.4. Characteristics of the lines of the grid system
Line
From
B1
B1
B2
B2
B3
B3
B4
B4
B5
B5
B6
B6
B7
B8
B10
B10
B13
B14
B15
B16
B16
B16
B16
B17
B17
B19
B21
B22
B23
B25
B26
B26
B26
B28
B39
To
B2
B39
B3
B25
B4
B18
B5
B14
B6
B8
B7
B11
B8
B9
B11
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
B19
B21
B24
B18
B27
B20
B22
B23
B24
B26
B27
B28
B29
B29
B9
R
PU
0.0030
0.0019
0.0011
0.0006
0.0016
0.0010
0.0009
0.0010
0.0002
0.0008
0.0007
0.0006
0.0003
0.0027
0.0003
0.0003
0.0007
0.0016
0.0007
0.0007
0.0014
0.0010
0.0004
0.0006
0.0013
0.0013
0.0010
0.0007
0.0026
0.0024
0.0011
0.0035
0.0046
0.0011
0.0019
X
PU
0.0411
0.025
0.0151
0.0086
0.0213
0.0133
0.0128
0.0129
0.0026
0.0112
0.0092
0.0082
0.0046
0.0363
0.0043
0.0043
0.0101
0.0217
0.0094
0.0089
0.0195
0.0135
0.0059
0.0082
0.0173
0.0173
0.014
0.0096
0.035
0.0323
0.0147
0.0474
0.0625
0.0151
0.025
C/2
PU
0.8325
0.5064
0.3059
0.1742
0.4314
0.2694
0.2593
0.2613
0.0527
0.2269
0.1863
0.1661
0.0932
0.7353
0.0871
0.0871
0.2046
0.4395
0.1904
0.1803
0.3950
0.2734
0.1195
0.1661
0.3504
0.3504
0.2836
0.1944
0.7089
0.6542
0.2978
0.9601
1.2659
0.3059
0.5064
71
CHAPTER III
III.8
III.8. Calculation CO2 emissions:
CO2 emissions by the software:
From 6 141 600 KWh we have 522 036 kg C02 Eq. (290,02 times what the land can support per
person per year for stop the increase in greenhouse).
The compensation of this quantity is: 10 440,72 € (1 493 022,96 DA)
III.9
III.9. Integration of distributed generation:
generation [20]
Since the first appearance in Britain in 1990, the trend towards deregulation is becoming
increasingly common worldwide, especially in developed countries. Moreover, the concern given
to the environmental aspect and sustainable development has encouraged producers to develop
distributed generation of electricity based on renewable energies and solutions for energyefficient.
These developments are the two key factors that promote the introduction of many producers of
small to medium sized networks with electrical voltage levels lower than in recent years.
This new phenomenon can be positive and negative at a time. On the one hand, the integration of
DG is presented as a factor for strengthening the means of production of the system. On the other
hand, they also bring negative impacts to system-wide including the weakening in critical
situations.
III.9
III.9.1. Insertion of production decentralized like factor of reinforcement of means of
production of the electric system:
Integration of distributed generation as a factor for strengthening the means of production of
electrical system new energy producers traditionally, the strengthening of the power generation is
by the insertion of new production units in central transmission grid.
In recent years, the trend of liberalization of the electricity market has favored the emergence of
many producers in the power systems of lower voltage levels.
We call these new producers by several names such as distributed generation, distributed power
generation or dispersed energy generation, etc.. To define the sources of electrical energy
production alternatives that are centrally located near the point’s consumption and disposed of
installed
capacity
ranging
from
less
than
a
kW
to
50
MW.
Technologies for distributed generation
Conventional sources and renewable sources.
are
72
currently
divided
into
two
groups:
CHAPTER III
III.9
III.9.1. 1/ Potential contributions of distributed generation:
Strictly related to the aspects of economy, ecology and dynamics of these new producers, the
benefits of the integration of DG in the electrical system are to remember, including:
• The environmental aspect:
aspect production based on renewable energies is less polluting than those
based on fossil fuels and nuclear. For this reason, currently, the environmental aspect is an
advantage of DG small and medium power, taking into account ecological reasons and the
requirement of the Kyoto protocol on gas emissions to the effect of emissions.
However, the emergence of large capacity wind farms in the future can become a source of
pollution in terms of noise and changing landscapes due to the large space they occupy. In
addition, to cope with fluctuations in wind generation, the system must increase excessively
spinning reserve, and therefore indirectly increase emissions from the need to maintain
conventional units in service.
The mixed use of wind turbines and complementary with other types of DG;
DG; as well as
conventional sources should provide the solution for this.
The time of construction of facilities:
facilities For centralized production facilities must be from 7 to 10
years or more in the case of construction of large hydro or nuclear. However, the project to install
distributed
generation
can
be
quite
short
(to
less
than
6
months).
• The cost of installation and maintenance:
maintenance For large centralized production, apart from the
significant costs associated with construction proper installation, it also takes the additional costs
of infrastructure specially built for the work required (roads, dedicated lines, etc.).. However, the
cost of a proposed distributed generation can be accessible to small businesses, which promotes
diversity
in
electricity
generation
and
active
competition.
• The quick response to changes in local consumption:
consumption The decentralized production of
conventional type can be placed wherever there is a need for energy. Their applications in
cogeneration can satisfy both the demand for electricity and heat, they can reduce losses, and
possibly
to
delay
investment
to
build
the
network
infrastructure.
• The primary energy prices:
prices Here, decentralized production based on renewable energy take
advantage before the production-based fossil fuels. Especially if you consider the price of fossil
fuels in the current context where there is a threat of depletion of such relentless energy and an
increase
in
oil
prices
in
recent
years.
• The operational aspect:
aspect as decentralized productions are often small and medium capacity, they
are much more dynamic and fast to switch on power to the grid.
73
CHAPTER III
III.9
III.9.2. Integration of distributed generation as a factor of vulnerability of the electrical
system:
The connection of distributed generation networks lower voltage (relative to the transmission
system) provides economic and energy interests, but will be penalized in terms of system
operation.
The DG are mostly connected to the grid will be the first to be affected by this phenomenon.
III.9
III.9.2.1/ Impacts of distributed generation on distribution network:
There are several studies in the literature that have been made to identify and assess the impacts of
distributed generation on the network, then, to propose solutions:
The network operator is concerned about this type of study during the planning stage or
approving a project for connecting the DG. The main impacts to recall are:
Impact on the direction of power flow
Impacts on voltage profile
Impacts on system stability
Impacts in terms of protection
Impact on the observability and controllability of the system
Impact on service continuity
Impact on quality of service
III.9
III.9.2.2/ Impacts of distributed generation on the transport network:
network:
The interest in studying the impacts of the massive integration of distributed generation on the
network transport has recently emerged where certain technologies have reached a certain
maturity. However, this type of study became a real need particularly after major incidents that
occurred during the year in the world (blackout in Italy in September 2003, for example) where
the operating strategy of inadequate DG contributed to decisive causes of the collapse of the total
network.
Uncertainty in the planning phase.
Need to strengthen the network.
Uncertainty in the operating reserve margin.
Sensitivity related to the management of the reactivate.
Sensitivity related to inopportune release of DG.
74
CHAPTER III
III.10
III.10.
10. The plan of defense against major incidents - The recovery plan:
The consequences of the breakdown of service are so heavy that each system, depending on its
characteristics, should develop procedures that include the decisions and actions to be taken
automatically to protect against incidents, or if all means of protection sought cannot save the
system, to restore the normal functioning of the system as quickly as possible. These procedures
cover the following objectives:
•
Detection: the system must have the means to detect the degraded state of the electrical
system.
•
Security: requires appropriate procedures to stop the expansion of the incident and its
spread to the rest of the network if necessary by sacrificing the power of some consumers,
and / or prepare the plan of separating the network into several subs - networks to protect
healthy areas. This is part of the defense.
•
Speed: For areas that are in extreme situations (blackout), it must contain procedures that
automatic or manual actions to be taken for a rapid return to normal. This is the recovery
plan for the system.
75
STUDY OF Local NETWORK
Environmental
Optimization of the
Energy in an
Electrical Network.
CHAPTER IV
STUDY OF LOCAL NETWORK
VI. STUDY OF ALGERIEN
ALGERIENN
ENNE DES EAUX (ADE)
ADE) NETWORK:
IV. 1. Introduction:
Our study is based on a large consumer of energy in our city (Bechar) which is the (Algerienne
Des Eaux); the latter has twenty two subscription contracts with the Company of Distribution of
Electricity and Gas of the West (SONELGAZ
SONELGAZ)
SONELGAZ each of these contracts it is specified by:
IV.2. The Characteristics Of Contracts:
Contracts:
Table IV.1: SUBSCRIPTION CONTRACT:
N° subscription tariff PPD
Contract
Power
N°
counter
transformer
Kw
Active
Reactive
losses
Losses with
losses
Losses with Pressure
Vacuum
Losses
(kvar/h)
(%)
Pressure
Losses
Vacuum(kw/h) (%)
01
0023
42
50
250
6995
0.79
1.60
3.40
4
02
0085
42
320
400
5981
1.3
1.50
8.30
4
03
0088
42
50
63
2503
0.3
2.60
2.10
4
04
0092
42
50
63
5964
0.25
2.50
1
4
05
0108
42
50
100
4700
0.425
2.30
3
4
06
0116
51
50
63
2625
0.30
2.60
2.10
4
07
0126
51
50
100
4701
0.425
2.30
3
4
08
0132
42
50
63
0383
0.30
2.60
2.10
4
09
0155
41
1000
2x800
0226
/
/
/
/
10
0198
41
1500
3x800
0591
/
/
/
/
11
0282
42
50
100
2508
0.425
2.30
3
4
12
0293
42
80
100
1513
0.425
2.30
3
4
13
14
1050
0408
42
42
80
200
400
630
4908
5544
1.30
1.80
1.50
1.50
8.30
11.50
4
4
15
0460
42
50
100
7339
0.425
2.30
3
4
16
0461
42
50
100
7341
0.425
2.30
3
4
17
0518
42
80
100
1894
0.425
2.30
3
4
18
1058
42
80
100
1301
0.425
2.30
3
4
19
1059
42
80
100
1309
0.425
2.30
3
4
20
1060
42
80
100
1302
0.425
2.30
3
4
21
1061
42
80
100
1322
0.425
2.30
3
4
22
1062
42
80
100
1304
0.425
2.30
3
4
Source:
Source Subscription contracts between the Company of Distribution of Electricity and Gas of the
West (SONELGAZ/BECHAR) and (Algerienne Des Eaux – Bechar).
76
CHAPTER IV
STUDY OF LOCAL
L
NETWORK
The Company of Distribution of the Electricity and Gas of the West (SONELGAZ)
SONELGAZ) placed a
power at the disposal of ADE (Algeri
Algerienne Des Eaux) for each contract which is the Power Placed
at the Disposal (PPD
PPD)
PPD) whose the latter one ever needs reached this power it is always necessary
remains in the margin of the Maximum Power Reached (MPR
(MPR)
t Power
MPR) which is lower than the
Placed at the Disposal (PPD
PPD > MPR)
MPR according to the following figure:
IV.3. The Power Placed at the Disposal (PPD
(PPD)
PPD) and the Maximum Power Reached (MPR)
MPR):
4 500
4 000
Power kw
3 500
3 000
2 500
2 000
PPD
1 500
PMR
1 000
500
0
Fig. IV.1:
07
IV.1: Power Placed at the Disposal and the Maximum Power Reached for the year 07.
If the Maximum Power Reached (MPR
(MPR)
PPD)
MPR) exceeds the power placed at the disposal (P
(Algerienne Des Eaux) will be penalized;
IV.4. The electrical supply network (ADE
(ADE)
ADE):
Figure IV.
IV.2: The electrical supply network (ADE).
77
CHAPTER IV
Our study is based on some contracts which are liked them large consumer of (A
ADE):
DE contract
Nb° 155 (Station de Traitement Djorf Torba), contract Nb° 198 (Station de Refoulement Kenadsa)
and the contract Nb° 408 (Station De Traitement Abadla) for a simulation and seeks solutions of
optimizations environmental of energy in the electrical supply network (A
ADE)
DE (obligation to
reduce the emission of CO2). The following tables give us consumption in the various time hourly
stations:
IV.5. Consumption of energy in the electrical supply network (ADE
(ADE)
DE):
Table IV. 2: Consumption of energy in the (off-peak hours, the peaks hour’s, the full hours and
the energy reactivates) for the year 2007: (*)
(*)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
TOTAL
Cons OPH 07
268,483
279,935
309,267
314,450
406,999
363,329
340,195
483,617
409,373
398,372
362,505
378,873
4,315,398
Cons PH 07
135,353
159,478
154,423
175,432
223,405
200,806
180,862
263,506
226,293
219,500
199,839
194,928
2,333,825
Cons FH 07
501,329
646,006
388,331
550,048
665,180
618,259
594,596
794,469
693,312
684,567
591,224
602,435
7,329,756
Cons React 07 TA / IAT 07
654,954
1,862,674.59
725,674
2,844,379.78
667,514
2,462,714.59
770,389
2,915,499.70
876,590
3,486,214.06
815,862
3,299,967.36
752,276
3,021,074.65
1,027,797
4,065,105.09
902,111
3,366,546.62
891,644
3,449,043.43
826,994
3,186,935.67
847,878
3,168,398.26
9,759,683
37,128,553.80
(*)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
TOTAL
Cons OPH 08 Cons PH 08
314,208
159,518
299,557
140,114
339,529
170,246
357,390
190,104
304,660
175,606
359,060
200,687
631,588
204,062
405,408
238,310
389,477
227,428
258,502
141,623
301,968
154,376
326,803
166,893
4,288,150
2,168,967
Cons FH 08
507,848
468,355
552,825
594,213
540,381
611,842
593,135
681,636
670,152
434,458
491,323
536,732
6,682,900
78
Cons React 08
738,058
683,803
769,058
792,983
687,104
792,122
772,981
900,752
886,784
676,544
692,026
760,389
9,152,604
TA / IAT 08
2,752,654.33
2,480,109.69
2,908,177.70
3,116,023.30
2,824,270.79
3,225,189.29
3,250,893.92
4,098,360.03
3,578,436.32
2,476,007.67
2,604,568.50
2,841,613.64
36,156,305.18
CHAPTER IV
(*)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
TOTAL
Cons OPH 09
307,313
394,071
354,948
355,908
400,714
494,438
436,170
490,484
409,957
490,084
416,655
445,933
4,996,675
Cons PH 09
153,005
61,341
89,206
99,542
202,114
265,283
230,507
257,215
222,892
74,618
86,176
73,157
1,815,056
Cons FH 09
571,918
590,382
615,067
617,152
662,625
837,558
728,337
832,317
692,865
776,792
598,018
563,184
8,086,215
Cons React 09 TA / IAT 09
744,204
2,806,758.51
756,859
2,211,838.68
743,185
2,442,977.65
706,048
2,713,025.39
878,297
3,346,767.38
895,717
4,208,485.07
926,048
3,768,529.56
1,041,966
4,109,587.97
865,031
3,577,137.10
942,097
2,752,659.65
764,026
2,444,161.89
759,034
2,423,956.67
10,022,512
36,805,885.52
Table IV. 5: Consumption of energy in the (off-peak hours, the hour’s peaks, the full hours and
(*)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
TOTAL
Cons OPH 10 Cons PH 10
403,692
55,488
465,724
65,534
373,382
124,552
411,707
188,944
460,242
243,968
452,746
243,931
476,731
247,453
488,871
250,336
448,488
234,883
492,436
137,539
410,302
113,646
412,908
60,837
5,297,229
1,967,111
Cons FH 10
501,330
586,647
584,874
678,058
760,712
769,134
750,061
858,843
697,756
770,636
645,624
635,144
8,238,819
Cons React 10
660,439
801,802
740,680
856,384
970,885
969,801
952,299
1,031,675
935,618
941,095
814,578
768,265
10,443,521
TA / IAT 10
2,089,031.45
2,310,995.37
2,666,693.30
3,297,761.85
3,819,410.35
3,868,531.69
3,880,736.79
4,069,127.77
3,762,029.77
3,149,130.70
2,708,379.97
2,343,354.68
37,965,183.69
Table IV.6
V.6: Power placed at the disposal and Maximum power reached for the years 07-08-09-10
(*)
(*)
YEAR
2007
2008
2009
2010
PPD(Kw)
42 720
59 760
49 010
43 780
MPR (Kw)
25 058
25 359
27 137
27 497
79
DIFF(Kw)
17 662
34 401
21 873
16 253
CHAPTER IV
STUDY OF LOCAL
L
NETWORK
70 000
PPD and MPR
60 000
50 000
40 000
30 000
PPD(Kw)
20 000
MPR(Kw)
10 000
0
Years
Fig.IV
07
10
Fig.IV.
IV.3: Power Placed at the Disposal and the Maximum Power Reached for the years 07-08-09-
It is noted that the power placed at the disposal (PPD) in the four quarters is higher maximum
power reached (MPR) almost one doubles what implies than (A
(ADE)
DE) has badly to treat these energy
needs for or there are losses in cost (loads moreover) and the energy problem according to the
ecological point of view (CO2 emission) is very significant (we
(
will see the equivalent of CO2 in
the following chapters).
Table IV.7: The Amount Net Of Tax of the (PPD and MPR) (*)
(*)
YEAR
2007
2008
2009
2010
PPD(ANOT)
1 091 475,00
1 603 080,00
1 257 241,50
1 142 724,00
MPR (ANOT)
2 738 926,76
2 763 324,38
3 019 056,17
3 014 231,62
DIFF (ANOT)
1 647 451,76
1 160 244,38
1 761 814,67
1 871 507,62
Table IV.8: Consumption of Energy (off-peak hours, the peaks hour’s, the full hours and the
energy reactivates) per Quarter for the Year 07 (*)
(*)
Quarter
1° Quarter
2° Quarter
3° Quarter
4° Quarter
Year 2007
Cons OPH 07
857 685
1 084 778
1 233 185
1 139 750
4 315 398
Cons PH 07
449 254
599 643
670 661
614 267
2 333 825
Cons FH 07
1 535 666
1 833 487
2 082 377
1 878 226
7 329 756
Cons React 07
2 048 142
2 462 841
2 682 184
2 566 516
9 759 683
TA / IAT 07
7 169 768,96
9 701 681,12
10 452 726,36
9 804 377,36
37 128 553,80
Table IV.9: Consumption of Energy (off-peak hours, the peaks hour’s, the full hours and the
energy reactivates) per Quarter for the Year 08 (*)
(*)
Quarter
1° Quarter
2° Quarter
3° Quarter
4° Quarter
Year 2008
Cons OPH 08
953 294
1 021 110
1 426 473
887 273
4 288 150
Cons PH 08
469 878
566 397
669 800
462 892
2 168 967
Cons FH 08
1 529 028
1 746 436
1 944 923
1 462 513
6 682 900
80
Cons React 08
2 190 919
2 272 209
2 560 517
2 128 959
9 152 604
TA / IAT 08
8 140 941,72
9 165 483,38
10 927 690,27
7 922 189,81
36 156 305,18
CHAPTER IV
STUDY OF LOCAL
L
NETWORK
Table IV.10: Consumption of Energy in the (off-peak hours, the peakss hour’s, the
full hours and the energy reactivates) per Quarter for the Year 09 (*)
(*)
Quarter
1° Quarter
2° Quarter
3° Quarter
4° Quarter
Year 2009
Cons OPH 09
1 056 332
1 251 060
1 336 611
1 352 672
4 996 675
Cons PH 09
303 552
566 939
710 614
233 951
1 815 056
Cons FH 09
1 777 367
2 117 335
2 253 519
1 937 994
8 086 215
Cons React 09
2 244 248
2 480 062
2 833 045
2 465 157
10 022 512
TA / IAT 09
7 461 574,84
10 268 277,84
11 455 254,63
7 620 778,21
36 805 885,52
Table IV.11: Consumption of Energy in the (off-peak hours, the peakss hour’s, the
full hours and the energy reactivates) per Quarter for the Year 10 (*)
(*)
Quarter
1° Quarter
2° Quarter
3° Quarter
4° Quarter
Year 2010
Cons OPH 10
1 242 798
1 324 695
1 414 090
1 315 646
5 297 229
Cons PH 10
245 574
676 843
732 672
312 022
1 967 111
Cons FH 10
1 672 851
2 207 904
2 306 660
2 051 404
8 238 819
Cons React 10
2 202 921
2 797 070
2 919 592
2 523 938
10 443 521
TA / IAT 10
7 066 720,12
10 985 703,89
11 711 894,33
8 200 865,35
37 965 183,69
Table IV.12: Consumption of Energy in the Off-Peak
Off Peak Hours per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10
07
(*)
Quarter
1° Quarter
2° Quarter
3° Quarter
4° Quarter
Years
Years
Cons OPH 07
857 685
1 084 778
1 233 185
1 139 750
4 315 398
Cons OPH 08
953 294
1 021 110
1 426 473
887 273
4 288 150
Cons OPH 09
1 056 332
1 251 060
1 336 611
1 352 672
4 996 675
Cons OPH 10
1 242 798
1 324 695
1 414 090
1 315 646
5 297 229
1 600 000
Power in Kwh
1 400 000
1 200 000
1 000 000
800 000
Cons OPH 07
600 000
Cons OPH 08
400 000
Cons OPH 09
200 000
Cons OPH 10
0
1°
2°
3°
4°
Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter
Quarter
Off Peak Hours per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10
07
Fig.IV
Fig.IV.
IV.4: Consumption of Energy in the Off-Peak
81
CHAPTER IV
STUDY OF LOCAL
L
NETWORK
Table IV.13: Consumption of Energy in the Full Hours per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10
07
(*)
(*)
Quarter
Cons FH 07
1° Quarter 1 535 666
2° Quarter 1 833 487
3° Quarter 2 082 377
4° Quarter 1 878 226
7 329 756
Years
Cons FH 08
1 529 028
1 746 436
1 944 923
1 462 513
6 682 900
Cons FH 09
1 777 367
2 117 335
2 253 519
1 937 994
8 086 215
Cons FH 10
1 672 851
2 207 904
2 306 660
2 051 404
8 238 819
2 500 000
Power in Kwh
2 000 000
1 500 000
Cons FH 07
1 000 000
Cons FH 08
Cons FH 09
500 000
Cons FH 10
0
1°
2°
3°
4°
Quarter
Fig.I
07
Fig.IV.5
V.5: Consumption of Energy in the Full Hours per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10
Table IV.14: Consumption of energy in the Peaks Hours per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10
07
(*)
(*)
Quarter Cons PH 07
1° Quarter
449 254
2° Quarter
599 643
3° Quarter
670 661
4° Quarter
614 267
2 333 825
Years
Years
Cons PH 08
469 878
566 397
669 800
462 892
2 168 967
82
Cons PH 09
303 552
566 939
710 614
233 951
1 815 056
Cons PH 10
245 574
676 843
732 672
312 022
1 967 111
CHAPTER IV
STUDY OF LOCAL
L
NETWORK
800 000
Power in Kwh
700 000
600 000
500 000
400 000
Cons HP 07
300 000
200 000
Cons HP 08
100 000
Cons HP 09
0
Cons HP 10
Quarter
Fig.IV
07
Fig.IV.
IV.6: Consumption of energy in the peaks Hours per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10
Generally the consumption of energy in the off-peak
off
hours, the peaks hours and the full hours for
the years 2007 -2008-2009
2009 and 2010 is to the maximum in the second and the third quarter (per
month: April, May, June, July, August and September) because the two seasons
seasons spring and the
Summer where we use all the means to satisfy subscribed;
subscribed because the Summer it is the most
difficult period of the year because of the heat of which the use of all the equipment of the
stations of pumping, the stations of treatments and the stations of repressions can involve the
heating of the equipments .
Table.
Table.IV.15: Consumption of Energy Reactivates per Quarter for the Years 07--08-09-10 (*)
Quarter
1° Quarter
2° Quarter
3° Quarter
4° Quarter
Years
Years
Cons React 07
2 048 142
2 462 841
2 682 184
2 566 516
9 759 683
Cons React 08
2 190 919
2 272 209
2 560 517
2 128 959
9 152 604
83
Cons React 09
2 244 248
2 480 062
2 833 045
2 465 157
10 022 512
Cons React 10
2 202 921
2 797 070
2 919 592
2 523 938
10 443 521
CHAPTER IV
STUDY OF LOCAL
L
NETWORK
Consumption of Energy Reactivates per Quarter for the
Years 07-08-09-10
3 500 000
3 000 000
Power Kwh
2 500 000
2 000 000
React 07
1 500 000
React 08
1 000 000
React 09
500 000
React 10
0
1°
2°
3°
4°
Quarter
Fig.IV.
07-08-09-10.
Fig.IV.7: Consumption of Energy Reactivates per Quarter for the Years 07-
Even for the consumption of reactivates energy we note that during the second and the third
quarter consumption is to the maximum from where the latter should be optimized because it too
much is load and even it to create a disturbance on network (SONELGAZ
SONELGAZ).
IV.5. Optimization of reactive power:
power:
IV.5.1. Introduction:
Introduction:
It is defined that for the sinusoidal mode
Q
UI sin
The reactive power represents accumulation in form electromagnetic or electrostatic there is
no expenditure of energy between the receiver and the source however it intervenes on the
instantaneous value of the current.
For the electric machines they represent magnetic energy with the network (maintenance of the
magnetic flux)
To study the problem of optimal reactive power compensation, mathematical programming
provides us with algorithms to solve or for optimizing linear functions under linear constraints,
constraints or
for optimization of nonlinear functions with or without constraints. This problem can be solved
by several techniques,, including:
The monitoring of the voltage in real time.
The minimization of active losses.
Maximization of reactive power reserves by distributing evenly between generators
production.
84
CHAPTER IV
STUDY OF LOCAL
L
NETWORK
The optimization of the volume and location means for compensating reactive power so
that the limits are met voltage.
We can make two main objectives for the optimization of reactive power which the first is based
on safety, when demand is high, and the second on the economy, when the network operates
under certain conditions:
In the reported incidents, the main objective is to correct existing violations of limits with the
minimum of actions.
1. In normal state, generally, the goal is to reduce costs and maintain adequate capacity to
generate reactive power, to deal with possible incidents. To do so, maintaining adequate
margins of generation of reactive power is not a critical issue in times of low load, but it
acquires a crucial importance when the network is operating at full load. The latter must
ensure continuity
ntinuity of service.
But in our case the optimization of energy reactivates it is not our study.
study
07
(*)
Table.
Table.IV.16: Total Amount with All Inclusive of Tax per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10
Quarter
1° Quarter
2° Quarter
3° Quarter
4° Quarter
Years
Years
TA / IAT 07
TA / IAT 08
7 169 768,96 8 140 941,72
9 701 681,12 9 165 483,38
10 452 726,36 10 927 690,27
9 804 377,36 7 922 189,81
37 128 553,80 36 156 305,18
TA / IAT 09
7 461 574,84
10 268 277,84
11 455 254,63
7 620 778,21
36 805 885,52
TA / IAT 10
7 066 720,12
10 985 703,89
11 711 894,33
8 200 865,35
37 965 183,69
14 000 000,00
Total Amount
12 000 000,00
10 000 000,00
8 000 000,00
TA / IAT 07
6 000 000,00
TA / IAT 08
4 000 000,00
TA / IAT 09
2 000 000,00
TA / IAT 10
0,00
1°
2°
3°
4°
Quarter
Fig.IV
07
Fig.IV.
IV.8: Total Amount with All Inclusive of Tax per Quarter for the Years 07-08-09-10.
Automatically for consumption with the peak then the payment of the invoices of the
consumption of energy will be with the peak what implies that there is a bad management!!!
85
CHAPTER IV
STUDY OF LOCAL
L
NETWORK
From where we try to find solutions of environmental optimizations of energy in the electrical
supply network (A
ADE)
DE) (obligation to reduce the emission of CO2 and not only according to the
ecological point of view, but also according to an economic point of view.
IV.6. Calculation CO2 emissions of (Algerienn
Algerienne Des Eaux)
Eaux):
According to Summit of Copenhagen there is 3300 kWh electricity = 1000 kg of CO2 from where
we have:
Table.
Table.IV.17: For a real consumption:
Year
real consumption (kWh)
CO2 emission per kg
CO2 emission per (t)
2007
14 237 956,00
4 314 532,12
≈ 4 315
2008
13 242 953,00
4 013 016,06
≈ 4 013
2009
15 017 788,00
4 550 844,85
≈ 5 000
2010
15 536 615,00
4 708 065,15
≈ 5 000
Total
58 035 312,00
17 586 458,18
≈ 18 000
0%
0%
50%
50%
2007
2008
2009
2010
Fig.IV.9
Fig.IV.9: CO2 emissions of (ADE) per (t) for a real consumption..
Table IV.18: For an overall consumption:
Year
overall consumption (kWh)
CO2 emission per kg
2007
17 258 398,00
5 229 817,58
≈ 5 300
2008
15 899 418,25
4 818 005,53
≈ 5 000
2009
17 584 861,87
5 328 746,02
≈ 5 400
2010
18 052 946,00
5 470 589,70
≈ 5 500
Total
68 795 624,12
20 847 158,82
≈ 20 840
86
CHAPTER IV
STUDY OF LOCAL
L
NETWORK
33%
35%
2007
2008
2009
2010
32%
0%
Fig.IV.10
(A
per (t) for an overall consumption
Fig.IV.10:
10: CO2 emissions of (ADE)
According to Summit of Copenhagen there is 10 kWh of electricity in Belgium = 3 kg of CO2 from
where we have:
Table IV.19: For a real consumption: (*)
(*)
Year
CO2 emission per kg
2007
14 237 956,00
4 271 386,80
≈ 4 300
2008
13 242 953,00
3 972 885,90
≈ 4 000
2009
15 017 788,00
4 505 336,40
≈ 4 500
2010
15 536 615,00
4 660 984,50
≈ 5 000
Total
58 035 312,00
17 410 593,60
≈ 17 800
0%
0%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
100%
Fig.IV.11
consumption
Fig.IV.11: CO2 emissions of (ADE) per (t) for a real consumption.
87
CHAPTER IV
STUDY OF LOCAL
L
NETWORK
Table.
Table.IV.20: For an overall consumption: (*)
(*)
Year
overall consumption (kWh)
CO2 emission per kg
2007
17 258 398,00
5 177 519,40
≈ 5 200
2008
15 899 418,25
4 769 825,48
≈ 5 000
2009
17 584 861,87
5 275 458,56
≈ 5 300
2010
18 052 946,00
5 415 883,80
≈ 5 400
Total
68 795 624,12
20 638 687,24
≈ 20 900
25%
26%
2007
2008
24%
25%
2009
2010
Fig.IV.12
consumption
Fig.IV.12: CO2 emissions of (ADE) per (t) for an overall consumption.
According to the calculation of emission of CO2 and the graphs we note that the emission of
Algerian Water (Algerienne Des Eaux ADE) is rather significant
ificant (more than 4 000 T of CO2) for
each year from where it is necessary when to reduce it and to find solutions.
(*)
(*) Source:
Source: Monthly Invoices periods (2007-2008-2009-2010) SONELGAZ.
IV.7
IV.7. CONCLUSION (SOLUTIONS
(SOLUTIONS)
SOLUTIONS):
(Algerienne Des Eaux) is one of the largest consumers of energy in our Bechar city;
city for example
consumption in year 2007 in total is 14 237 956 kw (14 GW),
W), in 2008 13 242 953 kw (13 GW) and
in 2009 is 15 017 788 kw (15 GW)
G
on the other hand in 2010 is 15 536 615 kw (15
( GW) in the
four years total real consumption is of 58 035 312 kw (58 GW);
W); of another share an overall
consumption of 68 795 624 kw (68 GW)
W) it is rather significant especially for a CO2 emission which
is more than 4 000 of ton for each year.
Indeed, the principal
ipal aiming of this research is to find solutions of environmental optimizations of
energy in the electrical supply network of (A
(ADE)
DE) (obligation to reduce the emission of CO2, we
can distinguish two from the solutions one political and the other economic one;
one;
88
CHAPTER IV
1- Policy:
(Algerienne Des Eaux) with twenty two contracts of subscription; from where several contracts
are in stop and each month it pays more than 10 000,00 DA for nothing (of the loads moreover)
the only solution is to terminate the contracts and when we need it for another time we must
renew it automatically well on with expenses less by report/ratio of a creation of a new contract
since the two companies are of the State, then it should be seen this problem since (Algerienne
Des Eaux) prefers to keep the contract in stop instead of cancelling; because of the expenses of
renewal on the other hand it has loads in more monthly; (more than 120 000 DA each year) (bad
management).
2- Economic:
a) - Revision of the power placed at the disposal (PPD) : several contracts with one (PPD) larger
than the need why? Since (ADE
(ADE)
DE) do not know its energy need simply then all should be seen the
history of the consumption of energy of all their equipment; for choosing well the powers placed
at the disposal.
b) - Stops in the hours peak
peak:
eak: although the peak hours are four hours but they are more expensive
in the time stations then tries some to consume energy in the off-peak hours or except point;
c)-To reduce the consumption of reactivates energy by the use of the capacitor batteries; (ADE
(ADE)
DE)
has capacitor batteries but unfortunately its lifespan is finished without uses (it is catastrophe
always bad management??) .
d) - Solutions to be proposed:
photovoltaic and biomass ... etc.
integration of the renewable resources like wind turbine,
It is true that the installation of a renewable source it is too expensive, but if they followed well
the energy balance of (ADE) much of the loads and the expenses for nothing; then why not these
loads in more we can do something of good; not only according to the economic point of view, but
also according to an ecological point of view to reduce the emitted CO2 rate each year which is
more than 4 000 ton annually;
-
Change total of the equipment since are all out of date
Integration of the Micro grids; witch there reasons are:
Finally I hope that it will come the day!!!!!!!
89
CASE STUDY
Environmental
Optimization of the
Energy in an
Electrical Network.
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
V. Case Study:
V.1.
V.1. Introduction:
(Algerienne Des Eaux) is one of the largest consumers of energy in our Bechar city; for example
the consumption in the year 2010 is 15 536 615 kwh (15 GW) and in the four years (2007 2008
2009 2010) studies the total real consumption is of 58 035 312 kwh (58 GWh); of another share an
overall consumption of 68 795 624 kw (68 GWh) it is rather significant especially for a CO2
emission which is more than 4 000 of ton for each year.
Indeed, the principal aiming of this research is to find solutions of environmental optimizations of
energy in the electrical supply network of (A
ADE)
DE (obligation to reduce the CO2 emission).
Tab.V.1
Tab.V.1: Real consumption of (ADE):
Year
real consumption of (AW) (kWh)
2007
14 237 956,00
2008
13 242 953,00
2009
15 017 788,00
2010
15 536 615,00
V.2. The political solution:
The polity’s solutions are cited in Chapter IV (Study of Local Network).
We choose the year of 2010 for study;
In the year 2010 we have (11contratcts are in stop) that’s (ADE) pays more than:
476 638,22 DA (IAT) ≈ 3 333,13 € from 37 965 183,69 DA;
So where is the problem??
The problem is between all Algerian’s companies because we must find a solution which (ADE)
DE)
don’t losses some dinars and (SONELGAZ
SONELGAZ)
SONELGAZ don’t losses power.
90
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
V.3
V.3. The Economic solution is:
a) - Revision of the power placed at the disposal (PPD):
(PPD)
b) - Stops in the peak hours:
hours:
c) -Solutions
Solutions to be proposed: integration of the renewable resources like wind turbine,
photovoltaic, biomass and the solar pumping for wells; (ADE has 16 Wells)!!!! And even solar
lighting ... etc.
It is true that the installation of a renewable source it is too expensive, but if they followed well
the energy balance of (ADE) much of the loads and the expenses for nothing; then why not these
loads in more we can do something of good; not only according to the economic point of view, but
also according to an ecological point of view to reduce the emitted CO2 rate each year which is
more than 4 000 ton annually;
-
Change total of the equipment since are all out of date
Integration of the Micro grids; witch there reasons are:
V.3
V.3.1. Revision of the power placed at the disposal (PPD):
(PPD):
According to the exchange we have 1 € = 143 DA June 2011/ BNA Algeria (Generally 1 € = 100
DA).
Tab.V
Tab.V.2: Revision of the (PPD) in the year 2010:
Months
Months
January
Revision of the PPD
Revision of the PPD from 80 to 50
gain realized
per month
(DA/ET)(*)
(DA/ET)(*)
967,50
observation
revision of the contract Nb.1050(Château Mer Niger)
February
No revisions were made
March
April
May
967,50
10 770,00
revision of the contract Nb.293 (Forage F4 Beni Ounif)
revision of the contract Nb.198 (Station de refoulement Kenadsa)
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
(*) The difference between the price of PPD = 80 kw and the price of PPD = 50 kw.
And the difference between the price of PPD = 1 500 kw and the price of PPD = 1 000 kw.
91
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
Tab.V.
Tab.V.3
V.3: Gain Realized in the year 2010:
gain realized per month
(DA/E
(DA/ET)
967,50
12 (*)
Total gain realized
(DA/E
(DA/ET)
11 610,00
967,50
9 (**)
8 707,50
10 770,00
8 (***)
Total gain realized
per Year 2010
(DA/E
(DA/ET)
86 160,00
Months
Months
106 477,50
(*) the Revision of the PPD made in January (we calculate the 12 Months).
(**) the Revision of the PPD made in April (we calculate the 9 Months).
(***) the Revision of the PPD made in May (we calculate the 8 Months).
ET:
ET Excluding Taxes
In the year 2010 we are made 03 revisions of the PPD so we are realized the total gain of:
(106 477,50 DA = 744,60 €).
V.3.2. Stops in the peak hours:
Tab.V.4: Stops in the Peak hours in the year 2010:
Month
Total
Peak
consumption consumption
(kwh)
(kwh)
Peak
rate
(%)
Realized gain
(DA / ET)(*)
observation
January
1 139 511
55 488
4,87%
403 220,20
Outages during peak hours:
February
1 341 574
65 534
4,88%
476 222,47
9,81%
905 094,47
1 373 018,26
March
1 269 266
124 552
April
1 475 897
188 944 12,80%
May
1 674 362
243 968 14,57%
June
1 682 689
243 931 14,50%
July
1 701 855
247 453 14,54%
August
1 817 267
250 336 13,78%
September
1 627 189
234 883 14,43%
October
1 638 088
137 539
8,40%
999 468,41
November
1 382 218
113 646
8,22%
825 842,75
December
1 303 030
60 837
4,67%
442 090,31
10,90%
5 424 956,87
TOTAL
18 052 946
1 967 111
(*) : multiplying the peak consumption by its unit price.
92
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
We made Outages during the peak hours in the months (January, February, March, April,
October, November and December) (only 07 Months in the year 2010); so we realized the total
gain of: 5 424 956,87 DA = 37 936,7
936,76
,76 €.
So just the revisions of tree PPD we realized the total gain of :(( 106 477,50 DA= 744,60 €) and
outages during the peak hours only 07 Months in the year 2010 we realized the total gain of:
5 424 956,87 DA = 37 936,76 €.
Then it is very interesting with only two solutions have been realized a significant gain, so if we
work with other proposed solutions we will realize a gain very important so we are going to study
an installation of PV system an Wind farm then we conclude some conclusion in the next.
V.3.3. Solutions to be proposed:
Like we are thought in the chapter IV study of local network that’s our study is based on
some contracts which are liked them large consumer of (A
ADE)
DE) which is contract Nb° 155 (Station
de Traitement Djorf Torba ) so ;
Tab.V.5: Consumption of energy in ADE (Station de Traitement Djorf Torba. Kenadsa/Bechar):
Month
OPH. 10
HP. 10
FH. 10
React.
Real.
eal. Cons.
10
Cons. 10
203 222
334 933
262 240
431 303
247 201
403 713
298 745
501 387
343 372
584 737
339 372
573 426
320 174
540 539
365 241
616 287
271 869
453 763
377 519
618 923
241 394
392 009
Tot.
ot. Cons.
10
370 688
477 891
449 057
549 438
635 740
626 085
590 443
673 384
498 750
686 980
437 398
584 218,67
755 907,31
928 602,40
1 241 516,51
1 519 881,14
1 491 788,91
1 420 550,30
15 771 991,23
1 218 528,33
1 274 916,74
810 414,96
566 801,31
733 339,29
900 853,53
1 204 380,22
1 474 393,91
1 447 144,44
1 378 042,99
1 524 940,70
1 182 081,68
1 236 778,44
786 211,71
ET.
ET. 10
TA / IAT 10
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
158 858
194 095
147 102
166 825
184 749
179 759
167 174
192 894
144 105
224 768
145 237
2 893
8 713
41 022
70 956
98 799
96 174
91 609
100 036
78 170
50 555
23 201
173 182
228 495
215 589
263 606
301 189
297 493
281 756
323 357
231 488
343 600
223 571
December
146 281
1 088
212 303
224 011
359 672
403 847
631 960,03
613 056,61
Tot. Cons.
1°Q
2° Q
3° Q
4° Q
2 051 847
500 055
531 333
504 173
516 286
663 216
52 628
265 929
269 815
74 844
3 095 629
617 266
862 288
836 601
779 474
3 494 360
712 663
981 489
957 284
842 924
5 810 692
1 169 949
1 659 550
1 610 589
1 370 604
6 399 701
1 297 636
1 811 263
1 762 577
1 528 225
27 650 276,53
2 268 728,38
4 253 186,56
18 411 069,86
2 717 291,73
13 048 024,83
2 200 994,13
4 125 918,57
4 085 065,37
2 636 046,76
PPD = 1 000 Kw
MPR=
MPR (830: 895) Kw.
93
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
V.3.3.1.
V.3.3.1. Stops in the Peak Hours in the year 2010:
2010:
Tab.V.6: Outages during peak hour’s Station de Traitement Djorf Torba:
Tot. Cons
(kwh)
Peak cons.
(kwh)
Realized gain
(DA / ET)
January
370688
2893
21 022,85
February
477891
8713
63 315,63
March
449057
41022
298 098,67
April
549438
70956
515 623,06
May
635740
98799
June
626085
96174
July
590443
91609
August
673384
100036
September
498750
78170
October
686980
50555
367 373,07
November
437398
23201
168 597,03
December
403847
1088
7 906,28
6 399 701
663 216
1 441 936,59
Month
TOTAL
So we are realized a gain of: 1 441 936,59 DA = 10 083,47 €. With a difference of:
26 208 339,94 DA /ET (183 275,10 €).
Generally total (ET) is above the amount (IAT) because of the amount support of the State.
V.3.3.2
V.3.3.2. The installation of a photovoltaic system:
V.3.3.2.a.
V.3.3.2.a. Estimate the power of photovoltaic panels:
panels: [21]
Using a simplified method to determine the power of solar panels we need (sizing).
Initially we must divide the amount of our daily energy requirement expressed in Watts per Hour
index of sunshine which is our geographical area:
•
For Africa: * 1.3
Then we divide the result by a coefficient corresponding to the season of use of our photovoltaic
panels:
- For the winter: 1
- For spring and autumn: 3
- For the summer: 5
The result gives the total power in Watts peak (Wp) of solar panels we need.
Need to cover a 4 333 Wh/day in the region of Kenadsa (Bechar) during the spring and autumn.
94
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
4 333/1,3 = 3 333 Wp
3 333/3 = 1 111 Wp (because it is based on the season which sunlight is the least).
We always recommend taking a safety margin of 10% to 20% from this value to compensate for
energy losses due to losses in the cables and connections and use a converter.
In this case, then we would recommend to install a power of 1 111 Wp + 10% to 20%,
or 1 220 Wp to 1 330 ≈ 1 300 Wp.
For this installation, it will be possible to choose the configuration panel as follows:
Photovoltaic panels of 130 Wp:
1 300/130 = 10
The price of the panel is: 449,95 €
449,95 € * 10 = 4 499,50 € = 643 428,50 DA.
Fig.V.
Fig.V.1.
V.1. Monocrystalline solar module 130 Wp VICTRON - High efficiency:
95
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
V.3.3.2.b.
V.3.3.2.b. Technical characteristics: [21]
Electrical data:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Rated power (1): 130 Watts Peak.
Power tolerance: + / -3%.
Max. (Vmp): 18 V.
Max. (Imp): 7.23 A.
Circuit voltage (Voc): 21.6 V.
Short circuit current (Isc): 7.94 A.
Features:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Monocrystalline cells.
Aluminum frame.
Operating temperature: -40° C to +80° C.
Maximum surface load: 200kg / m².
Resistance to impact (hail): 23m / s, 7.53g.
Junction box for PV-RH0301.
Connector Type: PV-ST01 / ST01 PV-M / F.
Cable length: 900mm.
Dimensions (in mm): 1220x808x35 (W x L x H).
Weight: 13 kg.
Anchors fixed to the frame.
2 years product warranty.
Performances guarantee 10 years 90 years 80% + 25% of the minimum power.
(1) Standard Test Conditions (STC), defined as follows: power of the radiation of 1000 W/m2 at a
spectral density of 1.5 AM (ASTM E892). Cell temperature of 25°C.
96
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
V.3.3.2.c.
V.3.3.2.c. Solar pump:
pump: [21]
We can also use these panels for solar pump for wells.
Possible uses of this solar pump:
Go underwater with a tank or a well.
Feed fish pond water renewed (oxygenated).
Drinking water supply.
Livestock watering.
Regulating pond management.
Irrigation of a garden or field.
Fig.V.2.
Fig.V.2. LORENTZ PS (200-600-1200-1800) submersible solar pump up to (50-180-240-250) m.
97
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
Solar pump submersible LORENTZ PS200 up to 50 m:
Includes the body and pumping MPPT charge controller.
Pressure: the water rises up to 50 m (total head).
Maximum flow rate: up to 5m3 / h.
Easy installation.
No maintenance.
Operates on a voltage 24V, 36V or 48V.
Runs on batteries or solar photovoltaic panels directly.
Dimensions (body pump): 780 mm (height) 96 mm (diameter).
Warranty: 2 years (against defects in material and labor).
Manufacturer: LORENTZ (Germany)
Fig.V.3.
Fig.V.3. PS200.
PS200.
Solar pump submersible LORENTZ PS600 up to 180 m:
Maximum flow rate: up to 11 m3 / h.
Several versions available for the pump.
Easy installation.
No maintenance.
Operates with a voltage between 48V and 72V.
Manufacturer: LORENTZ (Germany).
Fig.V.4.
Fig.V.4. PS600.
PS600.
Solar pump submersible LORENTZ PS1200 up to 240 m
Several versions available for the pump (see data sheet below cons).
Easy installation.
No maintenance.
Fig.V.5.
Fig.V.5. PS1200.
PS1200.
98
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
Solar pump submersible LORENTZ PS1800 up to 250 m (high flow)
Several versions available for the pump.
Easy installation.
No maintenance.
Fig.V.6.
Fig.V.6. PS1800.
PS1800.
Solar Pump of surface Lorentz PS150 BOOST to 120m:
120m:
Maximum flow rate: up to 0.9 m3 / h.
Several versions available for the pump
Easy installation.
No maintenance.
Works with 12V or 24V voltage.
Fig.V.7.
Fig.V.7. PS150 BOOST.
99
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
V.4.
V.4. Some Solutions for reduction of the CO2 emissions in Algeria and in the world:
world:
1- Reduction of the CO2 emissions: Algerian researchers develop a new fuel: [22]
To fight against the CO2 emissions and the reheating of planet, a hybrid fuel composed of
hydrogen and compressed natural gas (HCNG
HCNG)
HCNG were developed by Algerian researchers of the
national Center of development of renewable energies (CDER
CDER).
CDER
The production of this new hybrid fuel is with experimental phase on certain vehicles, according
(Bouziane Mahmah), charge of studies to the CDER and head of the project of hybrid fuel which
specifies that in the second phase, from the partnerships could be concluded with national
companies to generalize the use of the new fuel on all the vehicles. According to the head of the
project, the vehicles using this fuel will preserve the same performances, with a saving in fuel and
less CO2 discharge.
2- New Energy Algeria (NEA):
Rationale: New Energy Algeria.
Referred to as (NEAL) SPA
Created in 2002, Responsible for promoting and development of ENR, Through the use of all
Sources of Energy renewable such as solar, wind, photovoltaic’s. ...
2.1. Strategic Objectives:
•
•
•
•
•
Development of southern.
Cost reduction.
Technology acquisition.
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Establishment of a technology park in Hassi R'mel.
2.2
2.2. Characteristics / Projects:
Projects:
•
•
•
Clean Development Mechanism.
Eligibility of projects.
Program projects in the Framework for a Public-Private Partnership.
2.3
2.3. Hybrid project Solar/Gas:
•
•
•
•
Project 1: Project Hybrid Solar/Gas - 150/25 MW to HRM: 2006 (signed contract).
Project 2: Project Hybrid Solar/Gas - 400/75 MW Naâma: 2010.
Obs.
Obs.: Development Perspectives in the highlands.
Project 3: Project Hybrid Solar/Gas - 400/75 MW Meghaier: 2012.
Obs.:
Obs. development of the region of Souf. It is intended as a desalination of brackish Oued
Righ canal.
Project 4: Project Hybrid Solar/Gas - 400/75 MW Hassi R’mel: 2015.
Obs.:
Obs. Draft valuation of gas flared Hassi R'mel.
100
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
2.4
2.4. Wind Farm Projects:
•
•
•
•
Project 1: 06 MW wind farm in Tindouf: 2008.
Project 2: 10 MW wind farm in Tindouf: 2010.
Project 3: 10 MW wind farm in Timimoun: 2012.
Project 4: 10 MW wind farm in Bechar: 2015.
3- First Hybrid Solar/Gas In The World (Hassi
(Hassi R'mel
R'mel)
mel) : [23]
The future mixed power station will have to cost 350 million Euros. Operational once it will be
able to reach a production of 160 megawatts. This hybrid power station - built close to the largest
natural gas layer of the African continent will combine a matrix of parabolic mirrors
concentrating the solar power of 25 MW, on a surface of 180.000 m², in conjunction with a power
station with gas turbines of 130 MW, thus reducing the CO2 emissions, compared with traditional
power stations. The exit of the solar matrix will be used in the turbine with flow. The contract of
construction was signed on January, 5, 2007 and the power station will be developed by New
Energy Algeria (NEAL
NEAL);
NEAL a joint venture between Sonatrach /Sonelgaz and SIM. The power station
belongs to an agenda of four hybrid units in Algeria.
It would be «the first on a worldwide scale «combining gas turbines and solar energy. This hybrid
power station registered with the title of the new strategy of the bearing sector resort to other
alternatives of energy production will produce 20% of electricity thanks to the exploitation of
solar energy. Algeria fixed itself like objective to produce at the 20 years (horizons next) the third
of its electricity starting from renewable energies, a very promising project so that the European
achieves its goals of reduction of emissions of CO2 and renewable energy production. The project
is supported by a score of company’s allemandes: (Deutsche Bank, Rwe, Siemens...).
Fig.V.8
Fig.V.8.Hybrid power station of Hassi R' mel.
101
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
3.1. Structure of the Contract:
•
•
•
•
NEAL (20%).
Sonatrach (14%).
COFIDES (15%).
ABENER (51%).
4- Peaceful nuclear power:
Algéro-Korean co-operation: An agreement on the peaceful nuclear power in preparation
The Republic of Korea already installed 22 nuclear engines and 6 others are in the course of
construction, which enables him to draw 40% from its consumption in electricity of atomic
energy.
The co-operation between Algeria and Korea should grow rich soon by an agreement around the
peaceful nuclear power.
Trade between Korea and Algeria passed from 2,6 billion dollars into 2009 to 3,5 billion dollars
into 2010, including 2 billion Algerian exports.
5- DESERTEC Project:
DESERTEC is a concept proposed by the DESERTEC Foundation for making use of solar energy
and wind energy. This concept will be implemented in North Africa and the Middle East by the
consortium Dii GmbH, formed by a group of European companies and the DESERTEC
Foundation. The DESERTEC concept was initiated under the auspices of the Club of Rome and
the German Trans-Mediterranean Renewable Energy Cooperation (TREC). Construction of
DESERTEC's first 500 MW solar farms in Morocco is scheduled to start in 2012.
Description
Description
The DESERTEC concept aims at promoting the generation of electricity in Northern Africa, the
Middle East and Europa using solar power plants, wind parks and the transmission of this
electricity to the consumption centers, promoted by the non-profit DESERTEC Foundation.
Despite its name, DESERTEC's proposal would see most of the power plants located outside of the
Sahara Desert itself, in the more accessible southern and northern steppes and woodlands, as well
as the relatively moist Atlantic coastal desert.
The original and first region for the assessment and application of this concept is the EU-MENA
region (Europe, Middle East, and Northern Africa). The realization of the DESERTEC concept in
this region is pursued by the industrial initiative Dii.
Under the DESERTEC proposal, concentrating solar power systems, photovoltaic systems and
wind parks would be spread over the desert regions in Northern Africa like the Sahara desert.
Produced electricity would be transmitted to European and African countries by a super grid of
102
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
high-voltage direct current cables. It would provide a considerable part of the electricity demand
of the MENA countries and furthermore provide continental Europe with 15% of its electricity
needs. By 2050, investments into solar plants and transmission lines would be total 400 billion €.
The exact plan, including technical and financial requirements, will be designed by 2012.
An international network of scientists, experts and politicians from the field of renewable energies
form the core of the DESERTEC network, coordinated by the non-profit DESERTEC Foundation.
One of the most famous members is Prince Hassan bin Talal of Jordan
History
The DESERTEC concept was originally developed by TREC, which itself was founded 2003 by the
Club of Rome and the National Energy Research Center Jordan, with the scientific work mainly
done by the German Aerospace Center (DLR).
On 13 July 2009, twelve companies from Europe and North Africa and the DESERTEC Foundation
announced their intention to create an industrial initiative to accelerate the implementation of the
DESERTEC Concept in Europe, Middle East and North Africa. On 30 October 2009, the joint
venture was founded in Munich under the name Dii GmbH.
In February 2010, Dii announced that the focus will be to develop demonstration projects and to
ensure renewable energy laws allowing imports of green energy are in place in various countries.
Talks with the Moroccan government had been successful and the Dii confirmed their first
reference project would be on Moroccan soil. In June 2011, Dii signed a memorandum with
understating with the Moroccan Agency for Solar Energy (Masen).
In April 2010, a consortium spoke person made the following official confirmation: "Our reference
projects will not be located in the Western Sahara. When looking for project sites, DESERTEC
Industrial Initiative will also take political, ecological or cultural issues into consideration. This
procedure is in line with the funding policies of international development banks."
In November 2011, plans were finalized to begin the construction of DESERTEC's first 500 MW
solar farms in Morocco. Construction of the solar farm will begin in 2012.
Studies
The DESERTEC Concept is mainly based on three studies conducted by the German Aerospace
Center, which among other topics have analyzed the available resources for renewable energies,
the predicted demand for energy and water in EU-MENA till 2050 and the creation of an
integrated electricity network between Europe and MENA. The studies have been commissioned
the Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety and have been
conducted by the German Aerospace Center between 2004 and 2007. The studies are MED-CSP,
focusing on availability of resources and demand for energy in the Mediterranean area, TRANSCSP, concentrating on the assessment of an interconnection between Europe and MENA and the
assessment of solar energy imports, and AQUA-CSP, which analyzes the demand of water and the
possibility to generate fresh water along with electricity by the thermal solar power plants.
103
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
1- Tax CO2 with Brussels: [24]
A directive includes, from 2012, air transport in the European system of the CO2 quotas. A ceiling
of emission not to be exceeded is fixed for the airline companies and those which would exceed it
must buy quotas of emission. The European Union decided that the CO2 emissions of the planes
will have to be limited into 2012 on the European territory to 97% of their level of 2005 then to
95% of this level over the period 2013-2020.
The directive applies for all the companies carrying out of the flights on departure or arrival of one
of the 27 European Convention countries. In fact all the companies will find obligations to pay
rights to pollute which should pay nearly 5 billion Euros per year. The company Air Algeria for
which Europe accounts for 80% of the activity is directly concerned with a European
measurement very disputed at the international level. The companies which refuse to subject to
this system quotas could be excluded from the airspace.
1- Mobile phones could be charged by the power of speech : [25]
For mobile phone users, a flat battery or lost chargers are among the frustrations of modern life.
Now new research promises a way to recharge phones using nothing but the power of the human
voice.
Electrical engineers have developed a new technique for turning sound into electricity, allowing a
mobile to be powered up while its user holds a conversation.
The technology would also be able to harness background noise and even music to charge a phone
while it is not in use.
However, there could be a downside to the innovation, if it gives people a new reason to shout
into their phones as they attempt to squeeze in every extra bit of power they can.
Dr Sang-Woo Kim, who has been developing the design at the institute of nanotechnology at Sung
kyun kwan University in Seoul, South Korea, said: "A number of approaches for scavenging
energy from environments have been intensively explored.
"The sound that always exists in our everyday life and environments has been overlooked as a
source. This motivated us to realize power generation by turning sound energy from speech, music
or noise into electrical power.
"Sound power can be used for various novel applications including cellular phones that can be
charged during conversations and sound-insulating walls near highways that generate electricity
from the sound of passing vehicles.
"The latter development would have the additional benefit of reducing noise levels near highways
by absorbing the sound energy of vehicles."
The technology uses tiny strands of zinc oxide sandwiched between two electrodes. A sound
absorbing pad on top vibrates when sound waves hit it, causing the tiny zinc oxide wires to
compress and release. This movement generates an electrical current that can then be used to
charge a battery.
104
CHAPTER V
CASE STUDY
A prototype of the technology was able to convert sound of around 100 decibels - the equivalent
of noisy traffic - to generate 50 millivolts of electricity.
"This is not enough to charge a phone properly, but Dr Kim and his colleagues hope that by
altering the material the wires are made from they will be able to produce more energy at lower
sounds levels.
He said: "Our current output performance can be applied to various electronic devices with lowpower consumption such as self-powered sensors and body-implantable tiny devices. We believe
that we can realize more efficient sound-driven nano-generators."
2- Carbon Sequestration Storage:
Carbon sequestration encompasses the processes of capturing and storing CO2 that would
otherwise reside in the atmosphere for long periods of time. DOE is investigating a variety of
carbon sequestration options. Geologic carbon sequestration involves the separation and capture of
CO2 at the point of emissions from stationary sources followed by storage in deep underground
geologic formations. Terrestrial carbon sequestration involves the net removal of CO2 from the
atmosphere by plants during photosynthesis and its fixation in vegetative biomass and in soils..
Fig.V.9
Fig.V.9: CO2 Capture and Storage.
3- Agriculture and the exploitation of the forests:
forests: (Protection of the forests)
The text of the agreement of Copenhagen «admits the importance to reduce the emissions due to the
deforestation and the degradation of the forests, and the need for improving elimination of gas for
purpose of greenhouse by the forests ". It envisages «inciting «measurements to finance the protection
of the forests with funds of the developed countries.
105
DISCUSSION AND VALIDATION
Environmental
Optimization of the
Energy in an
Electrical Network.
CHAPTER VI
VI.1.
VI.1. SYSTEMS AND SYSTEM MODELS:
The word “system” has become very popular in recent years. It is used not only in engineering but
also in science, economics, sociology, and even in politics. In spite of its common use (or perhaps
because of it), the exact meaning of the term is not always fully understood. A system is defined as
a combination of components that act together to perform a certain objective. A little more
philosophically, a system can be understood as a conceptually isolated part of the universe that is
of interest to us. Other parts of the universe that interact with the system comprise the system
environment, or neighboring systems. [28]
VI.2.
VI.2. Optimization:
Optimization is the term of ten used for minimizing or maximizing a function. It is sufficient to
consider the problem of minimization only; maximization of F(x
x) is achieved by simply
minimizing −F(x
x). In engineering, optimization is closely related to design.
The function F(x
x), called the merit function or objective function, is the quantity that we wish to
keep as small as possible, such as cost or weight. The components of x, known as the design
variables, are the quantities that we are free to adjust. Physical dimensions (lengths, areas, angles,
etc.) are common examples of design variables.
Optimization is a large topic. The best we can do in limited space is to introduce a few basic
methods that are good enough for problems that are reasonably well behaved and don’t involve
too many design variables. By omitting the more sophisticated methods, we may actually not miss
all that much.
All optimization algorithms are unreliable to a degree any one of them may work on one problem
and fail on another. As a rule of thumb, by going up in sophistication we gain computational
efficiency, but not necessarily reliability.
The algorithms for minimization are iterative procedures that require starting values of the design
variables x. If F(x
x) has several local minima, the initial choice of x determines which of these will
be computed. There is no guaranteed way of finding the global optimal point. One suggested
procedure is to make several computer runs using different starting points and pick the best result.
More often than not, the design is also subjected to restrictions, or constraints, which may have
the form of equalities or inequalities. As an example, take the minimum weight design of a roof
truss that has to carry a certain loading. Assume that the layout of the members is given, so that
the design variables are the cross-sectional areas of the members. Here the design is dominated by
inequality constraints that consist of prescribed upper limits on the stresses and possibly the
displacements.
The majority of available methods are designed for unconstrained optimization, where no
restrictions are placed on the design variables. In these problems the minima, if they exit, are
stationary points (points where gradient vector of F(x
x) vanishes).
In the more difficult problem of constrained optimization the minima are usually located where
the F(x
x) surface meets the constraints. There are special algorithms for constrained optimization,
106
CHAPTER VI
but they are not easily accessible due to their complexity and specialization. One way to tackle a
problem with constraints is to use an unconstrained optimization algorithm, but modify the merit
function so that any violation of constraints is heavily penalized. [27]
VI.3
VI.3. Results and Discussion:
VI.3.1. Calculation of CO2 emissions (ADE
(ADE)
DE) by the software: [28]
Table VI
VI.1: For a real consumption: (CO2 emissions of (ADE) by the software)
Year real consumption (kWh)
CO2 Eq. emission per kg CO2 Eq. emission per (t)
≈ 9 800
2007
14 237 956,00
9 795 714
≈ 9 000
2008
13 242 953,00
9 111 152
≈ 10 000
2009
15 017 788,00
10 332 238
≈ 10 700
2010
15 536 615,00
10 689 191
≈ 39 500
Total
58 035 312,00
39 928 295
Table.VI.2: For a real consumption: (CO2 emissions (ADE) According to the Summit of
Copenhagen there is 3300 kWh electricity = 1000 kg of CO2)
Year
CO2 emission per kg
≈ 4 315
2007
14 237 956,00
4 314 532,12
≈ 4 013
2008
13 242 953,00
4 013 016,06
≈ 5 000
2009
15 017 788,00
4 550 844,85
≈ 5 000
2010
15 536 615,00
4 708 065,15
≈ 18 300
Total
58 035 312,00
17 586 458,18
We have: 1 Tone of Eq. CO2 = 1 Tone of gas * GWP (Global Warming Potential).
Table.VI.3: Global Warming Potential of gas:
Gas
CO2
CH4
NO2
HF6
GWP(For
1
21
310
140-11 700
100 Years)
PFC
SF6
6 500-9 200
23 900
From Table.VI.1 and Table.VI.2 we find that the emission of CO2 by using the software is greater
than that of the use of data from the Copenhagen summit, since the software calculating the
emission of all gases, against by the first calculation is only for the emission of CO2.
That’s why we see that almost doubled quantities.
VI.3.2. Carbon offsetting (Carbon compensation):
International mobilization, especially around the IPCC scientists, challenged the policies that have
created a first contract, the UNFCCC, and a second that depends on the Kyoto Protocol. It sets
targets for reducing emissions for the six main greenhouse gas emissions by 2012.
107
CHAPTER VI
Table.VI.4: Carbon compensation:
Real Cons.
Gases
Gases
years
kwh
Emission
Compensation
195 914,28 €
2007
14 237 956,00
9 795 714
28 015 742,04 DA
182 223,04 €
2008
13 242 953,00
9 111 152
26 057 894,72 DA
206 644,76 €
2009
15 017 788,00
10 332 238
29 550 200,68 DA
213 783,82 €
2010
15 536 615,00
10 689 191
30 571 086,26 DA
58 035 312,00 €
Total
58 035 312,00
39 928 295
8 299 049 616,00
DA
OBS
5 442,06 times what the land can
support per person per year for
stop the increase in greenhouse.
798 565,90 times what the land
can support per person per year
for stop the increase in
greenhouse..
From the table.VI.4 the emission of gases is quite important and it needs to reduce and offset.
The principle of geographic neutrality is at the heart of the mechanisms established by the Kyoto
Protocol. This text, written in 1997, defines the obligations of the signatory countries to fight
against climate change and the means used, including the implementation of flexible mechanisms.
The purpose is to give a price on carbon and put pressure on major emitters for that term, it is
more profitable to reduce its own emissions than to buy carbon credits.
For these we have 20 € (1 860 DA) per Tone of CO2 Eq.
VI.3.3. Integration of renewable resources:
resources:
The management of energy adapted, through the optimization of the production with the
integration of the renewable resources like a wind mill, panel’s photovoltaic... etc. Allows to
decrease the total over cost binds to the fuel for the production (in any expenses of investment)
and consequently the reduction of CO2 emission (less production = less emission), in our case, this
optimization makes it possible to carry out an economy of:
First we choose the year of 2010 for study;
108
CHAPTER VI
VI.3.3.1.The
VI.3.3.1.The political solution:
solution:
Algerienne Des Eaux pays more than 476 638,22 DA (IAT) ≈ 3 333,13 € from 37 965 183,69 DA;
whose it can’t pays all this amount,
So it’s a gain witch realized if we terminate the contracts and when we need it for another time
we must renew it automatically (find a solution between the two companies).
VI.3.3.1.a/
VI.3.3.1.a/ The Economic solution:
solution:
1.1. Revision of the power placed at the disposal (PPD):
We made only 03 revisions of the PPD so we are realized the total gain of:
(106 477,50 DA (ET) = 744,60 €).
1.2. Stops in the peak hours:
October, November and December) we realized the total gain of:
VI
424 956,87 DA (ET) = 37 936,76 €.
VI.3.3.1.b/
VI.3.3.1.b/ Solutions to be proposed:
According to the proposed solutions; integration of renewable resources such as PV system for
example. So we are going to use the (PVGIS) on line simulator;
Photovoltaic Geographical Information System (PVGIS
PVGIS)
PVGIS provides a map-based inventory of solar
energy resource and assessment of the electricity generation
generation from photovoltaic systems in Europe,
Africa, and South-West Asia. It is a part of the SOLAREC action that contributes to the
implementation of renewable energy in the European Union as a sustainable and long-term
energy supply by undertaking new S&T developments in fields where harmonization is required
and requested by customers.
VI.3
VI.3.4. Simulation
Simulation Results: [29], [30]; [31]
VI.3.4.1.
VI.3.4.1. Free standing for 10% losses:
losses:
PVGIS estimates of solar electricity generation
Location: 31°31'3" North, 2°45'58" West, Elevation: 690 m a.s.l.,
Nominal power of the PV system: 1.1 kW (crystalline silicon)
Estimated losses due to temperature: 14.2% (using local ambient temperature)
Estimated loss due to angular reflectance effects: 2.4%
Other losses (cables, inverter etc.): 10.0%
Combined PV system losses: 24.7%
109
CHAPTER VI
Table.VI.5: Fixed system
Fixed system: inclination=30 deg.,
orientation=orientation=-2 deg. (optimum)
Month
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
4.79
5.22
5.91
6.01
5.64
5.37
5.20
5.00
5.03
4.60
4.35
4.36
5.12
149
146
183
180
175
161
161
155
151
143
130
135
156
1870
5.34
5.94
6.99
7.23
6.95
6.75
6.64
6.36
6.24
5.50
4.98
4.86
6.15
165
166
217
217
215
203
206
197
187
171
149
151
187
2240
Em per
quarter
478
516
467
408
Table.VI.6:
Table.VI.6: Vertical axis tracking system optimal
Vertical axis tracking system optimal
inclination=52°
Month
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
6.13
6.64
7.80
8.13
7.97
7.64
7.16
6.52
6.35
5.71
5.45
5.54
6.75
190
186
242
244
247
229
222
202
191
177
163
172
205
2470
6.91
7.59
9.21
9.69
9.68
9.46
9.00
8.19
7.82
6.84
6.28
6.22
8.07
214
213
286
291
300
284
279
254
235
212
188
193
246
2950
110
Em per
quarter
618
720
615
512
CHAPTER VI
Table.VI.7:
Table.VI.7: Inclined axis tracking system optimal.
Inclined axis tracking system optimal
inclination=32°
Month
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
6.00
6.66
8.00
8.36
8.10
7.65
7.21
6.67
6.51
5.76
5.36
5.36
6.80
186
186
248
251
251
230
224
207
195
179
161
166
207
2480
6.70
7.58
9.47
10.00
9.86
9.48
9.09
8.40
8.04
6.88
6.13
5.96
8.13
208
212
294
300
306
284
282
260
241
213
184
185
247
2970
Em per
quarter
620
732
626
506
Table.VI.8:
Table.VI.8: 2-axis tracking system
2-axis tracking system
Month
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
6.31
6.79
8.01
8.44
8.41
8.12
7.58
6.80
6.51
5.81
5.57
5.70
7.00
195
190
248
253
261
244
235
211
195
180
167
177
213
2560
7.12
7.76
9.48
10.10
10.30
10.20
9.62
8.60
8.04
6.95
6.42
6.41
8.42
221
217
294
304
320
305
298
266
241
216
192
199
256
3070
Em per
quarter
633
758
641
524
Ed: Average daily electricity production from the given system (kWh).
Em: Average monthly electricity production from the given system (kWh).
Hd: Average daily sum of global irradiation per square meter received by the modules of the
given system (kWh/m2).
Hm: Average sum of global irradiation per square meter received by the modules of the given
system (kWh/m2)
111
CHAPTER VI
Fig.VI.1. Monthly energy output from fixed-angle PV system
Fig.VI.2
Fig.VI.2. Monthly in-plane irradiation for fixed angle
112
CHAPTER VI
Fig.VI.3
Fig.VI.3. Outline of horizon with sun path for winter and summer solstice
VI.3.4.2. Building integration for 10% losses:
PVGIS estimates of solar electricity generation:
113
CHAPTER VI
Table.VI.9:
Table.VI.9: Fixed system: inclination
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
4.52
140
5.34
165
4.91
138
5.94
166
5.53
172
6.99
217
5.64
169
7.23
217
5.31
165
6.95
215
5.07
152
6.75
203
4.91
152
6.64
206
4.71
146
6.36
197
4.73
142
6.24
187
4.33
134
5.50
171
4.11
123
4.98
149
4.14
128
4.86
151
4.82
147
6.15
187
1760
2240
Table.VI.10:
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
inclination=53
inclination=53°
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
5.72
177
6.93
215
6.20
174
7.61
213
7.23
224
9.22
286
7.56
227
9.67
290
7.43
230
9.65
299
7.14
214
9.43
283
6.69
208
8.97
278
6.10
189
8.17
253
5.94
178
7.82
234
5.34
166
6.84
212
5.11
153
6.29
189
5.21
161
6.24
193
6.31
192
8.07
245
2300
2950
114
CHAPTER VI
Table.VI.11:
Table.VI.11: Inclined axis tracking system optimal
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
inclination=32°
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
5.60
174
6.70
208
6.21
174
7.58
212
7.40
229
9.47
294
7.77
233
10.00
300
7.54
234
9.86
306
7.16
215
9.48
284
6.75
209
9.09
282
6.23
193
8.40
260
6.07
182
8.04
241
5.39
167
6.88
213
5.03
151
6.13
184
5.04
156
5.96
185
6.35
193
8.13
247
2320
2970
Table.VI.12:
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
Ed
5.86
6.32
7.40
7.83
7.81
7.56
7.07
6.35
6.08
5.42
5.21
5.34
6.52
Em
182
177
230
235
242
227
219
197
182
168
156
165
198
2380
Hd
7.12
7.76
9.48
10.10
10.30
10.20
9.62
8.60
8.04
6.95
6.42
6.41
8.42
Hm
221
217
294
304
320
305
298
266
241
216
192
199
256
3070
system (kWh/m2)
115
CHAPTER VI
Fig.VI.4
Fig.VI.5
116
CHAPTER VI
Fig.VI.6
Fig.VI.6. Outline of horizon with sun path for winter and summer solstice.
VI.3.4.3. Free standing for 20% losses:
generation:
117
CHAPTER VI
Table.VI.13:
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
4.26
132
5.34
165
4.64
130
5.94
166
5.26
163
6.99
217
5.35
160
7.23
217
5.02
156
6.95
215
4.77
143
6.75
203
4.62
143
6.64
206
4.45
138
6.36
197
4.47
134
6.24
187
4.09
127
5.50
171
3.86
116
498
149
3.88
120
4.86
151
4.55
139
6.15
187
1660
2240
Table.VI.1
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
inclination=52
inclination=52°
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
5.45
169
6.91
214
5.91
165
7.59
213
6.94
215
9.21
286
7.23
217
9.69
291
7.09
220
9.68
300
6.79
204
9.46
284
6.36
197
9.00
279
5.80
180
8.19
254
5.65
169
7.82
235
5.08
157
6.84
212
4.84
145
6.28
188
4.93
153
6.22
193
6.00
183
8.07
246
2190
2950
118
CHAPTER VI
Table.VI.15:
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
inclination=32°
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
5.33
165
6.70
208
5.92
166
7.58
212
7.11
220
9.47
294
7.43
223
10.00
300
7.20
223
9.86
306
6.80
204
9.48
284
6.41
199
9.09
282
5.93
184
8.40
260
5.78
174
8.04
241
5.12
159
6.88
213
4.76
143
6.13
184
4.76
148
5.96
185
6.05
184
8.13
247
2210
2970
Table.VI.16:
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
Ed
5.61
6.03
7.12
7.50
7.48
7.22
6.74
6.05
5.79
5.16
4.95
5.07
6.23
Em
174
169
221
225
232
217
209
187
174
160
148
157
189
2270
Hd
7.12
7.76
9.48
10.10
10.30
10.20
9.62
8.60
8.04
6.95
6.42
6.41
8.42
Hm
221
217
294
304
320
305
298
266
241
216
192
199
256
3070
system (kWh/m2)
119
CHAPTER VI
Fig.VI.7
Fig.VI.8
120
CHAPTER VI
Fig.VI.9
VI.3.4.4. Building integration for 20% losses:
121
CHAPTER VI
Table.VI.17:
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
4.02
125
5.34
165
4.37
122
5.94
166
4.92
152
6.99
217
5.01
150
7.23
217
4.72
146
6.95
215
4.50
135
6.75
203
4.36
135
6.64
206
4.19
130
6.36
197
4.21
126
6.24
187
3.85
119
5.50
171
3.65
110
4.98
149
3.68
114
4.86
151
4.29
130
6.15
187
1570
2240
Table.VI.18:
Table.VI.18
Table.VI.18
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
inclination=53
inclination=53°
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
5.09
158
6.93
215
5.51
154
7.61
213
6.43
199
9.22
286
6.72
202
9.67
290
6.60
205
9.65
299
6.34
190
9.43
283
5.95
184
8.97
278
5.42
168
8.17
253
5.28
158
7.82
234
4.75
147
6.84
212
4.54
136
6.29
189
4.63
144
6.24
193
5.61
171
8.07
245
2050
2950
122
CHAPTER VI
Table.VI.19
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
inclination=32°
Ed
Em
Hd
Hm
4.98
154
6.70
208
5.52
155
7.58
212
6.58
204
9.47
294
6.90
207
10
300
6.71
208
9.86
306
6.36
191
9.48
284
6.00
186
9.09
282
5.54
172
8.40
260
5.40
162
8.04
241
4.79
148
6.88
213
4.47
134
6.13
184
4.48
139
5.96
185
5.64
172
8.13
247
2060
2970
Table.VI.20
Month
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year
Total for year
Ed
5.21
5.62
6.58
6.96
6.94
6.72
6.28
5.64
5.40
4.82
4.63
4.74
5.80
Em
162
157
204
209
215
202
195
175
162
149
139
147
176
2120
Hd
7.12
7.76
9.48
10.10
10.30
10.20
9.62
8.60
8.04
6.95
6.42
6.41
8.42
Hm
221
217
294
304
320
305
298
266
241
216
192
199
256
3070
system (kWh/m2)
123
CHAPTER VI
Fig.VI.10
Fig.VI.11
124
CHAPTER VI
Fig.VI.12
VI.3.5
VI.3.5. Interpretation of results:
results:
We will try to simulate the results obtained in Chapter V (Case Study for the installation of a PV
system) are four types (Free standing for 10% losses), (Building integration for 10% losses),
(Free standing for 20% losses) and (Building integration for 20% losses); and after the
simulation and a comparison between the four it was concluded that the simulation (Free
standing for 10% losses) is the best with the results obtained that acceptable as a solution
(integration of a renewable resource).
According to the results of the simulation and the consumption of energy in (Algerienne Des
Eaux); In the graph (VI.1) the average monthly electricity production from the given system (Em )
by month graphs have the same shape for the fixed system, vertical axis tracking system optimal,
inclined axis tracking system optimal and for the 2-axis tracking system. That means that for a
Saharan area as (Djorf Torba) the average sum of global irradiation per square meter received by
the modules of the given system [graph (VI.2)] is in a maximum between March and July.
Appearing in the Tab.V.5 and (Table.VI.5, Table.VI.6, Table.VI.7, Table.VI.8) we see that (ADE)
consumes much more in the first and the second quarter period of the spring and summer (the
graphs have the same shape), which can be produced and consume power only by the PV system
125
CHAPTER VI
in the two quarters (2nd and 3rd / between March and September) and can even occur in the peak
hours and avoid outages.
For the graph VI.3 describe the Outline of horizon with sun path for winter (21 December) and
summer (21 June) solstice which is an astronomical event that happens twice each year when the
Sun reaches its highest position in the sky as seen from the North or South Pole. The day of the
solstice is either the "longest day of the year" or the "shortest day of the year" for any place on
Earth, because the length of time between sunrise and sunset on that day is the yearly maximum
or minimum for that place.
VI.3.6
VI.3.6. Conclusion:
Our problem is the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, from a decrease in consumption by
trying to achieve equality ( produce less = emissions less) that is to say we seek a solution that
replaces fossil fuel production, which is the integration of a renewable resource, and then after the
simulation and the results we had obtained graphs that have the same shape as the graphs of
energy consumption of (ADE), where the period or consumption of (ADE) is the maximum PV
system produces far more than the other periods which means that we can consume during
production by the PV system or during scheduled stops (Stops in the peak hours).
That achieves equality (less production = less emission);
126
Conclusion
Environmental
Optimization of the
Energy in an
Electrical Network.
CHAPTER VII
CONCLUSION
Conclusions and Future Work:
Work:
I- Conclusions:
Conclusions:
In this final chapter, the importance, aims and outcomes of this research are highlighted and
summarized.
L’Algerienne Des Eaux (ADE) is one of the largest energy consumers in our town Bechar, annual
consumption in excess of 50 thousand kilowatts, it is quite important especially for a CO2 emission
which is more than 4 000 tons for each years.
Indeed, the main aim of this research is to find solutions to environmental optimization of energy
in the grid electricity (ADE), the obligation to reduce CO2 emissions. Where there are two out of
the policy solution and the other economic.
1 - Policy:
Is usually a major problem and it affects all Algerian companies because of mismanagement and
financial losses over the losses in energy.
Algerienne D’es Eaux (ADE) has twenty three subscription contracts where several contracts are
off, and every month it pays more than 10 000 DA for nothing (losses in transformers) the only
solution is to stop contracts and when it needs and it can automatically renew the course with less
cost compared to a creation of a new contract since the two companies of the state; then we must
see this problem since the (ADE) prefer to keep the contracts in place to stop to cancel because of
the renewal fee, for against her monthly expenses and more (over 120 000 AD each year),
(mismanagement).
2 - Economic:
a) - Revision of the power placed at the disposal:
disposal:
(PPD), which is larger than necessary; So (ADE) does not know its energy needs, all of which
must be just see all the history of the energy consumption of all equipment to choose the powers
available.
In the year 2010 we are made 03 revisions of the PPD so we are realized the total gain of:
(106 477,50 DA = 744,60 €).
b) - Stops in the peak hours:
hours:
Even though the hours are peak hours but are more expensive in the hourly positions then tries to
consume energy in the off-peak Hours or the Full Hours (gain).
127
CHAPTER VII
CONCLUSION
October, November and December) (only 07 Months in the year 2010); so we realized the total
gain of: 5 424 956,87 DA = 37 936,76
936,76 €.
So just the revisions of tree PPD we realized the total gain of :(( 106 477,50 DA= 744,60 €) and
outages during the peak hours only 07 Months in the year 2010 we realized the total gain of:
5 424 956,87 DA = 37 936,76 €.
c)- Reduce the consumption of reactive power by the use of capacitor banks;
d) - Solutions to be proposed:
proposed The inclusion of distributed generation, distributed and renewable
energy and seems economically attractive.
It is true that the installation of a renewable resource that is too expensive but if you follow good
energy balance of (ADE) many of the charges and fees for anything, and we noticed a lot of losses
in the energy and even financial, hence our study and we realized a gain very important for all
solutions was distinguished.
On the other hand and according to a detailed simulation although we had some good results, for
integration of a renewable resource which is a PV system and we managed to have a great result
for the period (the second and the third quarter);
(ADE) (Station de Traitement Djorf Torba) consumes a lot more than other periods; our PV system
produces much longer which means that our peak consumption going decreased (the graphs have
the same shape).
Also the monthly energy output from fixed-angle PV system for the 2 axis tracking system is more
than the (inclined axis tracking system {32°}, vertical axis tracking system optimal {51°} and fixed
system {30°})
Our problem is the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, from the decrease in consumption by
trying to achieve equality (less production = less emission) in which based on the quality of
energy, control of energy and the energy management and to satisfy demand and maintaining
∑ feasible and controllable, for
equal balance equation ∑
with a total cost
our case study ADE has many problems and among them the massive consumption of active and
reactive power in excess of more than 13 million Kwh; 10 million kvar per year, then we must
seek solutions to optimize it, on the other hand we can also integrate other renewable resources
like wind farm, biomass…etc.
And after all these solutions we wanted to reduce the use of ADE from the reduction of fossil fuel
production and integration of renewable resources that are cleaner to reduce the emission of
greenhouse gases (reduce CO2 emissions), and achieve equality: Less Production = less Emission.
Not only ADE but all companies in the world at first starting with our surroundings.
128
Reference bibliography
References:
[1] Christian Ngô Joseph B. Natowitz. « Our energy future resources, alternatives and the
environment». Library of Congress. 2009.[0470116609]
[2] Olivier GERGAUD. « Modélisation énergétique et optimisation économique d'un système de
production éolien et photovoltaïque couplé au réseau et associé à un accumulateur ». Antenne de
Bretagne de l’École Normale Supérieure de Cachan Campus de Ker Lann – 35170 BRUZ. Soutenue
le 9 décembre 2002.
[ 3] Olimpo Anaya-Lara, ... [et al.]. «Wind energy generation modeling and control. First edition
.2009.[0470714336]
[4] Marquita K. Hill, « Understanding Environmental Pollution». Third edition. Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University and formerly of the University of Maine CAMBRIDGE
UNIVERSITY .2010.
[5] Aldo Vieira Da Rosa, Palo Alto, CA. «Renewable energy processes». Second EditionLibrary of
Congress. 2009. [0123746396]
[6] Chris moor & Kevin smith. «Renewable Energy in South East Europe». British library -2007.
[7] Prabir Basu. « Biomass Gasification and Pyrolysis Practical Design and Theory». Academic
Press is an imprint of Elsevier.2010.
[8] John Twidell & Tony weir. « Renewable energy resources». Taylor & Francis group London &
Francis Group. Second Edition. 2006. .[0419253203]
[9] John Rubino. « Clean Money». Picking winner in the green – thech boom. Canada -2009.
.[97804702835]
[10] Tomas Ackermann- royal institute of technology – Stockholm. « Wide power in power
system». Sweden . Royal institute of technology. 2005.
[11] Dr. David Pimentel. Cornell University. « Biofuels, solar and wind as renewable energy
systems benefits and risks». College of agriculture and life sciences. USA.2008. [9781402086540]
[12] FAISAL A. Mohammed. « Modeling and on line management». Helsinki University of
Technology Control Engineering– Department of Automation and Systems Technology 2008.
[13] Giles Atkinson, Simon Dietz, Eric Neumayer. « Handbook of sustainable development.
Library of Congress». 2007.
John R. McIntyre, Silvester Ivanaj, Vera Ivanaj. « Multinational Enterprises and the
Challenge of Sustainable Development». Library of Congress. 2009.
[14]
[15] Priv.-Doz. Hartmut Graßl . « Climate Change and Technological Options Basic facts,
Evaluation and Practical Solutions ». SpringerWienNewYork.2008. [3211782028]
[16] Paul Breeze . . . [et al.]. « Renewable Energy Focus Handbook». British Library. First edition.
2009. [0123747058]
[17] Valentin Crastan. « Global Energy Economics and Climate Protection Report 2009». Library
of Congress. 2010. [3642118720]
[18] Nobuo Tanaka. « CO2 emissions from fuel combustion». 2010. [9789264084278]
[19] Jan Machowski, Janusz W. Bialek, James R. Bumby. «Power system dynamics Stability and
Control». Second Edition. Library of Congress. 2008. [9780470725580]
Thi Thu Hà PHAM. « Influences de la production décentralisée sur la gestion des
infrastructures critiques des réseaux de puissance». Laboratoire d’Electrotechnique de Grenoble.
26 octobre 2006
[20]
[21] http://www.economies-energies.net
[22] www .made-in-algeria.com /Source : http://www.elwatan.com mise à jour 09/03/2011
[23] Algérie environnement mise à jour 12/02/2010
[24] www.wittgas.com/analyseurs_de_gaz mise à jour : 01/07/2009
[25] Technology News. By Richard Gray, Science Correspondent 10:00AM BST 08 May 2011Mobil
phone
[26] Bohdan T. Kulakowski, John F. Gardner, J. Lowen Shearer. « Dynamic modeling and control
of engineering systems». Third Edition. Cambridge university press. 2007.
[27] Jaan Kiusalaas. «Numerical Methods in Engineering with MATLAB». Third Edition.
Cambridge university press. 2005.
[28] http://www.actioncarbone.org
[29] http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvgis/apps4/pvest.php?map=africa
[30] Robert P. Kenny*, Thomas A. Huld, Susana Iglesias. «Energy rating of PV modules based on
PVGIS irradiance and temperature database». 21st European Photovoltaic Solar Energy
Conference, 4-8 September 2006, Dresden, Germany.2006. Page 2088-2092
[31] .Photovoltaic project analysis chapter. Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 - 2004.
[32] Marquita K. Hill. «Understanding Environmental Pollution». Cambridge University Press.
Third Edition. 2010. [ 978-0-521-51866-6]
[33] Michel Crappe. «Electric Power Systems» . British Library. 2008. [ 978-1-84821-008-0 ]
[34] Michael Grubb. «Generation Electricity - in carbon constrained world-». British Library.
2010. [978-1-85617-655-2].
[35] Kakali Mukhopadhyay. «Air pollution in India and its impact on the health of different
income groups». Nova Science Publishers.2009.[ 978-1-60876-406-8]
[36] Nachida Kasbadji Merzouk. «Evaluation du gisement énergétique éolien contribution a la
détermination du profil vertical de la vitesse du vent en Algérie». Thèse De Doctorat. Université
Abou Bekr Belkaid de Tlemcen- Faculté des sciences- Département de physique -Unité de
recherche matériaux et énergies renouvelables. 2006
[37] Olivier Richardot «Réglage Coordonné de Tension dans les Réseaux de Distribution à l'aide de
la Production Décentralisée». Thèse pour obtenir le grade de Docteur De L'institut National
Polytechnique De Grenoble Spécialité : Génie Electrique. Laboratoire d’Electrotechnique de
Grenoble dans le cadre de l’Ecole Doctorale « Electronique, Electrotechnique, Automatique,
Télécommunications, Signal. Le 10 octobre 2006
[38] Guillaume RAMI. «Contrôle De Tension Auto Adaptatif Pour Des Productions Décentralisées
D’énergies Connectées Au Réseau Electrique De Distribution». T h e s e pour obtenir le grade de
docteur de L’INP Grenoble, Spécialité : « Génie Electrique ». Laboratoire d’Electrotechnique de
Grenoble dans le cadre de l’Ecole Doctorale. Le 09 Novembre 2006
[39] Thi Thu Hà PHAM. «Influences de la production décentralisée sur la gestion des
infrastructures critiques des réseaux de puissance». Thèse pour obtenir le grade de Docteur De
L'institut National Polytechnique De Grenoble Spécialité : Génie Electrique. Laboratoire
d’Electrotechnique de Grenoble dans le cadre de l’Ecole Doctorale « Electronique,
Electrotechnique, Automatique, Télécommunications, Signal. Le 26 Octobre 2006.

Environmental Optimization of the Energy in an Electrical Network.

Transcription

Similar documents

How to Tie a Woggle

lnstallation - ConservationMart.com

Meeting Agenda - Kubiak Research Group

Turkey - EOPOWER

factsheet-engl-Covoare-Ungheni-Water_Purification

Jeanette Fitzsimons Green Party Co

Energy and CO

RÉSoNANSS: a regional contribution to

Real Time Control of Hand Prosthesis Using Surface EMG

CoUNTerMEASURES CoUNTerMEASURES