You are on page 1of 22

Sustainable Heat

Infrastructure

Group 6

Rick Cox
Niels Lejeune
David Out
Bose Rathakrishna
Introduction

Peel & Maas energy neutral by 2030

Can we realize sustainable heat


infrastructure for P&M?

2
Inclusions

3
Inclusions

Area of
interest

4
Exclusions
Exclusions

• 2/3 of the municipality


• Experimental/research phase,
impractical technologies
• System design
– Location planning
– Infrastructure design

5
Methodology
Methodology
1. Heat demand
2. Viable technologies
3. Energy generation profiles
4. Scenarios
5. Simulation
6. MCA

6
Heat Demand Profile
1. Annual gas demand per zip code
2. NEDU profiles
3. KNMI weather data (Arcen)

7
Hourly Heat Demand Profile
60

50

40
[MWh]

30

20

10

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
[hours]

8
Generation
Generationprofiles
Profiles
Wind turbines Solar thermal collectors
10000 600

500

Specific power [W/m2]


8000
Power [MW]

400
6000
300
4000
200
2000
100
0 0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000
Time [hours]
Time [hours]

PV panels Constant power sources [geothermal, biogas, excess heat]


200
Specific power [W/m2]

150

100

50

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
[hours]
Time [hours]

9
Storages
Biogas
Hot Water

Hydrogen (pressurized)

10
Scenario 1

11
Scenario 2

12
Scenario 3

13
14
Storage Behavior

15
Simplified Output Model
• All scenarios meet heat demand!
• How to distinguish performance?

 Storage energy content comparison at t=0 and t=8760 (Annual storage


cycle mismatch)

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3


Total storage capacity 23.1 28.3 29.0 GWh
Annual storage cycle shortage 1.48 0.00 0.23 GWh
Reliance on current electricity
grid 21.9 28.4 21.3 GWh/year

* Detailed system outputs can be found in final report

16
MCA matrix
Evaluation Matrix
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 +/- Dimension
Functional:
o Reliability of supply +++ + + + Qualitative
o Total storage capacity 23.10 28.33 29.00 - GWh
o Annual storage power cycle mismatch 1.48 0.00 0.23 - GWh
o Reliance on current electricity grid 21.87 28.45 21.26 - GWh/year
Economical
o Investment costs 386,261,651 397,791,777 185,911,177 - €
o Maintenance/ Operational costs 3,594,467 3,251,474 2,685,997 - € /year
o Technical/ Economic Lifetime 25.25 24.57 23.43 + years
o Cost of energy 0.618 0.508 0.449 - € /kWh
Social:
o Aesthetics + + ++ + Qualitative
o Dependency on other actors +++ ++ ++ - Qualitative
Environmental
o Noise and light pollution ++ ++ ++++ - Qualitative
o Land use 3 2 1 - Rank

17
MCA weighing factors
Indicators Weighting factors
Municipality P&M Citizens
Functional:
o Reliablity of supply 5.00 3.53
o Total storage capacity 5.00 3.53
o Annual storage power cycle 5.00 3.53
mismatch
o Reliance on current electricity grid 10.00 3.53
Economical:
o Investment costs 15.00 5.58
o Maintenance/ Operational costs 10.00 5.58
o Technical/ Economic Lifetime 5.00 5.58
o Cost of energy 10.00 5.58
Social:
o Aesthetics 10.00 12.91
o Dependency on other actors 10.00 12.91
Environmental
o Noise and light pollution 5.00 18.87
o Land use 10.00 18.87
sum 100 100

18
MCA Results

Scenario ranking
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Rank 2 Rank 3 Rank 1

• Sensitivity & reliability

19
Conclusions

• Several scenarios are proposed using different technologies to meet the heat
demand of the urban areas of Helden, Panningen and Egchel

• All proposed systems are capable of meeting the heat demands

• Huge energy storages are needed to bridge seasonal mismatch

• Scenario 3 (current energy infrastructure) scores best based on the MCA

20
Heating Infrastructure- The Way forward!

Infrastructure planning
for DH network
Switch to Electric
Vehicles, V2G
concept
CHP plants

Switching to
100% RES

Energy Saving and


Mapping Demand: a
responsibility for all

21
Questions?

22