Professional Documents
Culture Documents
reeep
This document allows for a printed version of the entire presentation slides of the RETScreen
International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course. This modular case study-based course has
been created for use by recognised educational centres and training organisations around the
globe, as well as for use by professionals and college/university students in a self-study distance learning format. Each module can be presented as a separate seminar or workshop for
professionals, or as a section of a college/university course. All the modules combined can be
presented either as a one- to two-week-long intensive course for professionals or as a one- to
two-semester-long course for college/university students. The training course material (e.g.
presentation slides, instructors voice and notes, engineering e-textbook, project case studies,
etc.) can be downloaded free-of-charge from the RETScreen Website: www.retscreen.net.
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
INTRODUCTION TO CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT ANALYSIS MODULE
Overview of Course
Status of Clean Energy Technologies
Clean Energy Project Analysis with RETScreen Software
Greenhouse Gas Emission Analysis with RETScreen Software
Financial and Risk Analysis with RETScreen Software
Summary of Introductory Module
Reproduction
This document may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit uses without special permission, provided
acknowledgement of the source is made. Natural Resources Canada would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this document as a source. However, some of the materials and elements found in this document are subject to copyrights held by other organisations.
In such cases, some restrictions on the reproduction of materials or graphical elements may apply; it may be necessary to seek permission
from the author or copyright holder prior to reproduction. To obtain information concerning copyright ownership and restrictions on reproduction, please contact RETScreen Customer Support.
Disclaimer
This publication is distributed for informational purposes only and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Government of Canada nor
constitute an endorsement of any commercial product or person. Neither Canada, nor its ministers, officers, employees and agents make
any warranty in respect to this publication nor assume any liability arising out of this publication.
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001-2006
Cette publication est disponible en franais sous le titre Cours danalyse de projets dnergies propres.
RETScreen International
energy applications
Course Outline
Introduction to Clean Energy Project Analysis
Wind Energy Project Analysis
Small Hydro Project Analysis
Photovoltaic Project Analysis
Combined Heat & Power Project Analysis
Biomass Heating Project Analysis
Solar Air Heating Project Analysis
Solar Water Heating Project Analysis
Passive Solar Heating Project Analysis
GroundGround-Source Heat Pump Project Analysis
Refrigeration Project Analysis
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Course Materials
Training Material
Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
Presentation slides
e-Learning tool
Voice
Speakers notes
Internet Forums
Windfarm
Objective
Increase awareness about renewable energy technologies
(RETs)
RETs) and energy efficiency measures
Markets
Typical applications
Definitions
Energy Efficiency
Clean Energy
Technologies
Renewable Energy
Energy Demand
100%
75%
50%
25%
0%
Conventional
Efficient
Efficient &
Renewable
Climate change
40
Local pollution
30
Economic
20
Life-cycle costs
10
Social
1980
Employment generation
1990
2000
Years
Source: National Laboratory Directors
for the U.S. Department of Energy (1997)
Environmentally cleaner
purchase cost
Total cost
purchase cost
+ annual fuel and O&M costs
+ major overhaul costs
+ decommissioning costs
+ financing costs
+ etc.
Wind Energy
Technology & Applications
Need good winds
(>4 m/s @ 10 m)
Coastal areas, rounded ridges, open plains
Applications:
Central-Grid
Isolated-Grid
Off-Grid
8,000
7,000
6,000
6,000
4,000
Germany:
Spain:
United States:
Denmark:
3,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
2,000
1,000
1,000
2003
2002
2001
2000
1997
1999
1998
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1988
1990
1989
1987
1986
1985
0
1984
0
1983
MW
5,000
14,600 MW
6,400 MW
6,400 MW
3,100 MW
Source: Danish Wind Turbine Manufacturers Association, BTM Consult, World Wind Energy Association, Renewable Energy World
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Small Hydro
Technology & Applications
Project types:
Reservoir
Run-of-river
Applications:
Central-grid
Isolated-grid
Off-grid
Francis Turbine
China:
Europe:
Canada:
10,000 MW developed
further 4,500 MW econ. feasible
2,000 MW developed
further 1,600 MW econ. feasible
Small Hydro Power Plant
Photovoltaic (PV)
Technology & Applications
Household PV System
PV Water Pumping
Grid-tied Building Integrated PV
Photovoltaic Market
Annual Photovoltaic Installations Worldwide
800
700
800
700
MWp
600
600
500
500
400
400
300
300
200
200
100
100
2003
2002
2000
2001
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1986
0
1987
Source: PV News
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Various Fuels
Various Equipment
Single buildings
Commercial and industrial
Multiple buildings
District energy systems
(e.g. communities)
Industrial processes
Wood residue
Landfill gas (LFG)
Biogas
Agricultural bi-products
Bagasse
Purpose-grown crops
Etc
Fossil fuels
Geothermal Geyser
Natural gas
Diesel
Etc.
Geothermal energy
Hydrogen
Photo Credit: Joel Renner, DOE/ NREL PIX
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Compressors
Absorption chillers
Free cooling
Power generation
Gas turbine
Gas turbine combined cycle
Steam turbine
Reciprocating engine
Fuel cell
Etc.
Gas Turbine
Photo Credit: Rolls-Royce plc
Heating equipment
Boilers
Waste heat recovery
Cooling Equipment
Photo Credit: Urban Ziegler, NRCan
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Capacity Comments
Canada
12 GW
USA
67 GW
China
32 GW
Russia
65 GW
Germany
11 GW
UK
4.9 GW
Brazil
2.8 GW
India
4.1 GW
South Africa
0.5 GW
World
Renewable Energy
Heating & Cooling Technologies
Biomass Heating
Technology & Applications
Controlled combustion of wood,
Wood Chipping
Heating Plant
Developing countries:
Cooking, heating
Not always sustainable
Africa: 50% of TPES
India: 39% of TPES
China: 19% of TPES
Industrialised countries:
Combustion Chamber
Photo: Ken Sheinkopf/ Solstice CREST
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
19
88
19
90
19
92
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
Source: Ingwald Obernberger citing the Chamber of Agriculture and Forestry, Lower Austria
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Industrial Buildings
collectors worldwide
Europe:
Residential Buildings
Winter
through equatorequator-facing
high performance windows
building structure
Commercial Buildings
Residential Buildings
Cost competitive
Horizontal Ground-Loop
World:
Canada:
10
Other Commercial
Clean Energy Technologies
Emerging
Clean Energy Technologies
SolarSolar-thermal power
OceanOcean-thermal power
Tidal power
Conclusions
CostCost-effective opportunities
exist
PV Phone
Photo Credit: Price, Chuck
11
Questions?
Questions?
Introduction - Status of Clean Energy Technologies Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen.net
12
Objectives
Energy Project
Implementation Process
Pre-feasibility
Pre
Pre-feasibility
Analysis
Analysis
Feasibility
Feasibility
Analysis
Analysis
Significant barrier
Clean Energy projects
not being routinely
considered upup-front!
Development
Development
&&Engineering
Engineering
Construction
Construction&&
Commissioning
Commissioning
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Questions
$100 to $1,000,000!
Pre-feasibility
Pre
Pre-feasibility
Analysis
Analysis
Feasibility
Feasibility
Analysis
Analysis
Preliminary
feasibility studies
Equipment performance
(e.g. wind turbine power curve)
Base case
case credits
(e.g. diesel generators for remote sites)
Financing
DecisionDecision-maker
kers definition of costcost-effective
(e.g. payback period, IRR, NPV, Energy production costs)
Standardized procedures
Efficiency (%)
comparison with
monitored and
manufacturer
manufacturers data
data
100%
RETScreen
60%
40%
Hydro Turbine Efficiency Curves:
RETScreen vs. Manufacturer
20%
0%
160
HOMER
RETScreen
140
0%
120
PV Power (kWh)
Manufacturer
80%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Percent of Rated Flow
100%
100
80
and/or by
60
40
20
0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
comparison with
hourly simulation tools.
Month
white
yellow
blue
grey
RETScreen Software
Financial Analysis Method
Comparison:
Example:
Solarwall
Solarwall cladding with
vs.
solar air heating plus the
conventional natural gas
fired air heater
Software Demo
Scenario #1
(Merchant Plant)
Scenario # 2
(Green Power Plant)
Project location:
Calgary, AB
Pincher Creek, AB
RE production credit:
$0/kWh
$0.025/kWh
Debt term:
10 years
Return on investment:
15 years
Wind speed:
Wind turbine cost:
GHG credit (coal plant):
Positive cash flow:
4.4 m/s
25,123 tCO2/yr
$1,200/kW
$0/ton
42.7 years
- 7.1%
Software Demo
Scenario 1
Scenario #1
(Merchant Plant)
Calgary, AB
4.4 m/s
$1,200/kW
25,123 tCO /yr
2
$0/kWh
$0/ton
10 years
42.7 years
- 7.1%
Software Demo
Software Demo
Software Demo
RE Production Credit
Scenario # 1c
$0.025/kWh
10.1 years
17.7%
Software Demo
10
Software Demo
Debt Term
Scenario # 2
15 years
5.2 years
22.8%
Questions?
Clean Energy Project Analysis with RETScreen Software Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen.net
11
Version 3.0
Product Data
Weather Data
Cost Data
Unit Options
Currency Options
CDM / JI Project Analysis
Sensitivity Analysis
Features
Energy Model
Equipment Data
Cost Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Analysis
Financial Summary
Worksheets
NRCan/CETC - Varennes
Partners
Clean Energy
Decision Support Centre
www.retscreen.net
Metric
Site Conditions
Project name
Project location
Wind data source
Nearest location for weather data
Annual average wind speed
Height of wind measurement
Wind shear exponent
Wind speed at 10 m
Average atmospheric pressure
Annual average temperature
m/s
m
m/s
kPa
C
Estimate
Scenario #1
Calgary, AB
Wind speed
Calgary Int'l. A, AB
4.4
10.0
0.15
4.4
88.9
4
System Characteristics
Grid type
Wind turbine rated power
Number of turbines
Wind plant capacity
Hub height
Wind speed at hub height
Array losses
Airfoil soiling and/or icing losses
Other downtime losses
Miscellaneous losses
kW
kW
m
m/s
%
%
%
%
Estimate
Central-grid
1,000
20
20,000
45.0
5.5
3%
2%
2%
3%
kW
MW
MWh
MWh
kWh/m
%
MWh
GJ
Estimate
Per Turbine
1,000
1.000
1,545
0.88
1.04
1,414
0.90
556
15%
1,278
4,600
Notes/Range
See Online Manual
3.0 to 100.0 m
0.10 to 0.40
60.0 to 103.0 kPa
-20 to 30 C
Notes/Range
Complete Equipment Data sheet
6.0 to 100.0 m
0% to 20%
1% to 10%
2% to 7%
2% to 6%
Estimate
Total
20,000
20.000
30,902
0.88
1.04
28,282
0.90
556
15%
25,556
92,003
Notes/Range
0.59 to 1.02
0.98 to 1.15
0.75 to 1.00
150 to 1,500 kWh/m
20% to 40%
NRCan/CETC - Varennes
Estimate
1,000
45.0
54
2,300
Bonus Energy
AN BONUS 1 MW
User-defined
Wind speed
(m/s)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
kW
m
m
m
Notes/Range
See Product Database
6.0 to 100.0 m
7 to 80 m
35 to 5,027 m
Site specific
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Power (kW)
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
0
10
12
14
16
Wind speed (m/s)
18
20
22
Energy (MWh/yr)
Power
1,200
24
Return to
Energy Model sheet
Version 3.0
NRCan/CETC - Varennes
Search Marketplace
Custom
Currency:
Second currency:
Unit Cost
Unit
Quantity
p-d
met tower
p-d
p-d
p-d
project
p-d
p-d
p-trip
6.0
6
8.0
18.0
18.0
$
$
$
$
$
800
22,000
800
800
800
8.0
6.0
4
$
$
$
800
800
3,000
p-d
p-d
project
p-d
project
p-d
p-d
p-yr
p-trip
p-d
p-d
p-d
p-d
p-d
p-yr
20.0
250.0
1
50.0
$
$
$
$
1,200
800
30,000
600
100.0
100.0
1.25
18
$
$
$
$
1,500
1,200
130,000
3,000
175.0
100.0
150.0
90.0
110.0
0.85
$
$
$
$
$
$
800
800
800
800
800
130,000
Sub-total:
Energy Equipment
Wind turbine(s)
Spare parts
Transportation
Sub-total:
Balance of Plant
Wind turbine(s) foundation(s)
Wind turbine(s) erection
Road construction
Transmission line
Substation
Control and O&M building(s)
Transportation
Sub-total:
Miscellaneous
Training
Commissioning
Contingencies
Interest during construction
Sub-total:
Initial Costs - Total
Annual Costs (Credits)
O&M
Land lease
Property taxes
Insurance premium
Transmission line maintenance
Parts and labour
GHG monitoring and verification
Community benefits
Travel and accommodation
General and administrative
Contingencies
Annual Costs - Total
Periodic Costs (Credits)
Drive train
Blades
End of project life
Version 3.0
kW
%
turbine
turbine
turbine
km
km
project
building
project
p-d
p-d
%
6.0%
20,000
1.0%
20
20
20
3.00
8.50
1
1
1
40.0
50.0
5%
12 month(s)
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
1,200
24,000,000
33,000
78,000
52,000
50,000
70,000
2,055,000
125,000
68,000
800
800
32,141,200
33,748,260
Unit
Quantity
project
project
project
%
kWh
project
p-trip
%
1
1
1
3.0%
25,556,461
$
$
$
$
$
57,000
23,000
46,000
2,650,000
0.008
1
12
6%
$
$
$
15,000
3,000
460,952
10%
488,609
Cost
Cost
Period
10 yr
15 yr
Credit
$
Denmark
Amount
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
4,800
132,000
6,400
14,400
14,400
6,400
4,800
12,000
195,200
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
24,000
200,000
30,000
30,000
150,000
120,000
162,500
54,000
770,500
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
140,000
80,000
120,000
72,000
88,000
110,500
610,500
$
$
$
$
$
24,000,000
240,000
660,000
24,900,000
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
1,560,000
1,040,000
150,000
595,000
2,055,000
125,000
68,000
5,593,000
$
$
$
$
$
$
32,000
40,000
1,607,060
1,012,448
2,691,508
34,760,708
7.7%
100.0%
Amount
Relative Costs
Unit Cost
$
$
Unit Cost
1,000,000
1,000,000
$
Cost references:
DKK
Rate: $/DKK
Relative Costs Quantity Range
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
57,000
23,000
46,000
79,500
204,452
15,000
36,000
27,657
48,861
537,470
$
$
$
$
Amount
1,000,000
1,000,000
-
None
0.17900
Unit Cost Range
Quantity Range
Interval Range
-
0.6%
2.2%
1.8%
71.6%
16.1%
100.0%
RETScreen Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission Reduction Analysis - Wind Energy Project
Use GHG analysis sheet?
Potential CDM project?
Yes
No
Type of analysis:
Use simplified baseline methods?
Standard
No
Background Information
Project Information
Project name
Project location
Scenario #1
Calgary, AB
Project capacity
Grid type
20.0 MW
Central-grid
(IPCC 1996)
(IPCC 1996)
Coal
Electricity mix
Fuel mix
(%)
100.0%
100%
CO2 emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
94.6
293.8
CH4 emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
0.0020
N2O emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
0.0030
0.0062
0.0093
No
Fuel conversion
efficiency
(%)
35.0%
T&D
losses
(%)
8.0%
8.0%
GHG emission
factor
(tCO2/MWh)
1.069
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.069
-20.0%
Electricity system
Wind
(%)
CO2 emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
CH4 emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
N2O emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
Fuel conversion
efficiency
(%)
T&D
losses
(%)
GHG emission
factor
(tCO2/MWh)
100.0%
0.0
0.0000
0.0000
100.0%
8.0%
0.000
Base case
GHG emission
factor
(tCO2/MWh)
1.069
Proposed case
GHG emission
factor
(tCO2/MWh)
0.000
End-use
annual energy
delivered
(MWh)
23,512
Gross annual
GHG emission
reduction
(tCO2)
25,123
GHG credits
transaction
fee
(%)
0.0%
Net annual
GHG emission
reduction
(tCO2)
25,123
Fuel mix
Electricity system
(yr)
1 to 4
United Nations Environment Programme & Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2000 - 2004.
Version 3.0
Financial Feasibility
%
%
yr
yr
$
$
-
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
0.6%
2.2%
1.8%
71.6%
16.1%
7.7%
100.0%
$/kWh
$/kWh
yr
%
$/tCO2
yr
%
$/kWh
$/kW-yr
%
%
%
yr
MWh
MWh
kW
Incentives/Grants
Initial Costs
Feasibility study
Development
Engineering
Energy equipment
Balance of plant
Miscellaneous
Initial Costs - Total
Financial Parameters
Project name
Project location
Renewable energy delivered
Excess RE available
Firm RE capacity
Grid type
-7.1%
-7.1%
56.7
more than 25
(27,163,120)
(2,765,375)
(1.60)
1,000,000
1,000,000
-
195,200
770,500
610,500
24,900,000
5,593,000
2,691,508
34,760,708
0.0450
25
2.5%
25
2.5%
120
3.0%
2.5%
9.0%
25
Scenario #1
Calgary, AB
25,556
Central-grid
70.0%
8.5%
10
Central-grid
25,123
25,123
628,067
628,067
$
$
$
$
$
1,150,041
1,150,041
537,470
3,708,460
4,245,929
yes/no
$/kWh
yes/no
$/tCO2
$
$
$/yr
-
No
0.0722
No
Not calculated
10,428,212
24,332,495
3,708,460
(0.11)
Schedule yr # 10,20
Schedule yr # 15
Schedule yr # 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
Schedule yr # 25
$
$
$
$
yes/no
No
%
35.0%
yes/no
Yes
Declining balance
%
95.0%
%
30.0%
yr
15
yes/no
No
yr
5
%
%
yr
kW
MWh
tCO2/yr
tCO2/yr
tCO2
tCO2
Debt ratio
Debt interest rate
Debt term
Peak load
Grid energy demand
Net GHG reduction
Net GHG reduction - yr 5 + beyond
Net GHG emission reduction - 25 yrs
Net GHG emission reduction - 25 yrs
After-tax
$
(10,428,212)
(3,074,824)
(3,053,061)
(3,030,575)
(3,007,345)
(2,983,345)
(2,958,551)
(2,932,937)
(2,906,477)
(2,879,143)
(4,130,992)
886,719
916,846
947,966
980,109
(434,988)
1,047,601
1,083,018
1,119,598
1,157,377
(442,222)
1,236,690
1,278,305
1,321,280
1,365,661
1,411,491
-
Version 3.0
(45,000,000)
(40,000,000)
(35,000,000)
(30,000,000)
(25,000,000)
(20,000,000)
(15,000,000)
(10,000,000)
(5,000,000)
0
2
10
11
13
Years
12
14
15
34,760,708
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
25
NRCan/CETC - Varennes
20
Version 3.0
Product Data
Weather Data
Cost Data
Unit Options
Currency Options
CDM / JI Project Analysis
Sensitivity Analysis
Features
Energy Model
Equipment Data
Cost Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Analysis
Financial Summary
Worksheets
NRCan/CETC - Varennes
Partners
Clean Energy
Decision Support Centre
www.retscreen.net
Metric
Site Conditions
Project name
Project location
Wind data source
Nearest location for weather data
Annual average wind speed
Height of wind measurement
Wind shear exponent
Wind speed at 10 m
Average atmospheric pressure
Annual average temperature
m/s
m
m/s
kPa
C
Estimate
Scenario #2
Pincher Creek, AB
Wind speed
Lethbridge A, AB
7.0
10.0
0.15
7.0
90.7
6
System Characteristics
Grid type
Wind turbine rated power
Number of turbines
Wind plant capacity
Hub height
Wind speed at hub height
Array losses
Airfoil soiling and/or icing losses
Other downtime losses
Miscellaneous losses
kW
kW
m
m/s
%
%
%
%
Estimate
Central-grid
1,000
20
20,000
45.0
8.8
3%
2%
2%
3%
kW
MW
MWh
MWh
kWh/m
%
MWh
GJ
Estimate
Per Turbine
1,000
1.000
3,855
0.90
1.03
3,573
0.90
1,404
37%
3,229
11,625
Notes/Range
See Online Manual
3.0 to 100.0 m
0.10 to 0.40
60.0 to 103.0 kPa
-20 to 30 C
Notes/Range
Complete Equipment Data sheet
6.0 to 100.0 m
0% to 20%
1% to 10%
2% to 7%
2% to 6%
Estimate
Total
20,000
20.000
77,097
0.90
1.03
71,469
0.90
1,404
37%
64,583
232,497
Notes/Range
0.59 to 1.02
0.98 to 1.15
0.75 to 1.00
150 to 1,500 kWh/m
20% to 40%
NRCan/CETC - Varennes
Estimate
1,000
45.0
54
2,300
Bonus Energy
AN BONUS 1 MW
User-defined
Wind speed
(m/s)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
kW
m
m
m
Notes/Range
See Product Database
6.0 to 100.0 m
7 to 80 m
35 to 5,027 m
Site specific
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Power (kW)
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
0
10
12
14
16
Wind speed (m/s)
18
20
22
Energy (MWh/yr)
Power
1,200
24
Return to
Energy Model sheet
Version 3.0
NRCan/CETC - Varennes
Search Marketplace
Custom
Currency:
Second currency:
Unit Cost
Unit
Quantity
p-d
met tower
p-d
p-d
p-d
project
p-d
p-d
p-trip
6.0
6
8.0
18.0
18.0
$
$
$
$
$
800
22,000
800
800
800
8.0
6.0
4
$
$
$
800
800
3,000
p-d
p-d
project
p-d
project
p-d
p-d
p-yr
p-trip
p-d
p-d
p-d
p-d
p-d
p-yr
20.0
250.0
1
50.0
$
$
$
$
1,200
800
30,000
600
100.0
100.0
1.25
18
$
$
$
$
1,500
1,200
130,000
3,000
175.0
100.0
150.0
90.0
110.0
0.85
$
$
$
$
$
$
800
800
800
800
800
130,000
Sub-total:
Energy Equipment
Wind turbine(s)
Spare parts
Transportation
Sub-total:
Balance of Plant
Wind turbine(s) foundation(s)
Wind turbine(s) erection
Road construction
Transmission line
Substation
Control and O&M building(s)
Transportation
Sub-total:
Miscellaneous
Training
Commissioning
Contingencies
Interest during construction
Sub-total:
Initial Costs - Total
Annual Costs (Credits)
O&M
Land lease
Property taxes
Insurance premium
Transmission line maintenance
Parts and labour
GHG monitoring and verification
Community benefits
Travel and accommodation
General and administrative
Contingencies
Annual Costs - Total
Periodic Costs (Credits)
Drive train
Blades
End of project life
Version 3.0
kW
%
turbine
turbine
turbine
km
km
project
building
project
p-d
p-d
%
6.0%
20,000
1.0%
20
20
20
3.00
8.50
1
1
1
40.0
50.0
5%
12 month(s)
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
1,000
20,000,000
33,000
78,000
52,000
50,000
70,000
2,055,000
125,000
68,000
800
800
28,101,200
29,506,260
Unit
Quantity
project
project
project
%
kWh
project
p-trip
%
1
1
1
3.0%
64,582,523
$
$
$
$
$
57,000
23,000
46,000
2,650,000
0.008
1
12
6%
$
$
$
15,000
3,000
773,160
10%
819,550
Cost
Cost
Period
10 yr
15 yr
Credit
$
Denmark
Amount
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
4,800
132,000
6,400
14,400
14,400
6,400
4,800
12,000
195,200
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
24,000
200,000
30,000
30,000
150,000
120,000
162,500
54,000
770,500
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
140,000
80,000
120,000
72,000
88,000
110,500
610,500
$
$
$
$
$
20,000,000
200,000
660,000
20,860,000
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
1,560,000
1,040,000
150,000
595,000
2,055,000
125,000
68,000
5,593,000
$
$
$
$
$
$
32,000
40,000
1,405,060
885,188
2,362,248
30,391,448
7.8%
100.0%
Amount
Relative Costs
Unit Cost
$
$
Unit Cost
1,000,000
1,000,000
$
Cost references:
DKK
Rate: $/DKK
Relative Costs Quantity Range
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
57,000
23,000
46,000
79,500
516,660
15,000
36,000
46,390
81,955
901,505
$
$
$
$
Amount
1,000,000
1,000,000
-
None
0.17900
Unit Cost Range
Quantity Range
Interval Range
-
0.6%
2.5%
2.0%
68.6%
18.4%
100.0%
RETScreen Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission Reduction Analysis - Wind Energy Project
Use GHG analysis sheet?
Potential CDM project?
Yes
No
Type of analysis:
Use simplified baseline methods?
Standard
No
Background Information
Project Information
Project name
Project location
Scenario #2
Pincher Creek, AB
Project capacity
Grid type
20.0 MW
Central-grid
(IPCC 1996)
(IPCC 1996)
Coal
Electricity mix
Fuel mix
(%)
100.0%
100%
CO2 emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
94.6
293.8
CH4 emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
0.0020
N2O emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
0.0030
0.0062
0.0093
No
Fuel conversion
efficiency
(%)
35.0%
T&D
losses
(%)
8.0%
8.0%
GHG emission
factor
(tCO2/MWh)
1.069
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.069
-20.0%
Electricity system
Wind
Fuel mix
(%)
CO2 emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
CH4 emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
N2O emission
factor
(kg/GJ)
Fuel conversion
efficiency
(%)
T&D
losses
(%)
GHG emission
factor
(tCO2/MWh)
100.0%
0.0
0.0000
0.0000
100.0%
8.0%
0.000
Base case
GHG emission
factor
(tCO2/MWh)
1.069
Proposed case
GHG emission
factor
(tCO2/MWh)
0.000
End-use
annual energy
delivered
(MWh)
59,416
Gross annual
GHG emission
reduction
(tCO2)
63,486
GHG credits
transaction
fee
(%)
0.0%
Net annual
GHG emission
reduction
(tCO2)
63,486
Electricity system
(yr)
1 to 4
United Nations Environment Programme & Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2000 - 2004.
Version 3.0
Financial Feasibility
%
%
yr
yr
$
$
-
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
0.6%
2.5%
2.0%
68.6%
18.4%
7.8%
100.0%
$/kWh
$/kWh
yr
%
$/tCO2
yr
%
$/kWh
$/kW-yr
%
%
%
yr
22.8%
22.8%
7.7
5.2
19,534,240
1,988,708
3.14
1,000,000
1,000,000
-
195,200
770,500
610,500
20,860,000
5,593,000
2,362,248
30,391,448
0.0450
0.025
25
2.5%
5.0
25
2.5%
120
3.0%
2.5%
9.0%
25
Scenario #2
Pincher Creek, AB
MWh
64,583
MWh
kW
Central-grid
Incentives/Grants
Initial Costs
Feasibility study
Development
Engineering
Energy equipment
Balance of plant
Miscellaneous
Initial Costs - Total
Financial Parameters
Project name
Project location
Renewable energy delivered
Excess RE available
Firm RE capacity
Grid type
70.0%
8.5%
15
Central-grid
63,486
63,486
1,587,158
1,587,158
$
$
$
$
$
2,906,214
1,614,563
317,432
4,838,208
901,505
2,561,827
3,463,331
yes/no
$/kWh
yes/no
$/tCO2
$
$
$/yr
-
No
0.0722
No
Not calculated
9,117,434
21,274,013
2,561,827
1.58
Schedule yr # 10,20
Schedule yr # 15
Schedule yr # 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0
Schedule yr # 25
$
$
$
$
yes/no
No
%
35.0%
yes/no
Yes
Declining balance
%
95.0%
%
30.0%
yr
15
yes/no
No
yr
5
%
%
yr
kW
MWh
tCO2/yr
tCO2/yr
tCO2
tCO2
Debt ratio
Debt interest rate
Debt term
Peak load
Grid energy demand
Net GHG reduction
Net GHG reduction - yr 5 + beyond
Net GHG emission reduction - 25 yrs
Net GHG emission reduction - 25 yrs
After-tax
$
(9,117,434)
1,487,826
1,604,034
1,723,596
1,846,610
1,973,176
2,103,397
2,237,378
2,375,230
2,517,064
1,382,911
2,813,145
2,967,633
3,126,588
3,290,137
2,010,118
6,193,388
6,371,540
6,554,847
6,743,456
5,298,906
7,137,205
7,342,668
7,554,077
7,771,608
7,995,436
-
Version 3.0
(20,000,000)
20,000,000
40,000,000
60,000,000
80,000,000
100,000,000
11
13
Years
12
14
15
30,391,448
10
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
25
NRCan/CETC - Varennes
20
Objectives
calculating reductions in
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
Proposed case
GHG emission
factor
(t CO2 /MWh)
EndEnd-use
annual energy
delivered
(MWh)
Standardised methodology
developed by NRCan with
the United Nations
Environment Programme
(UNEP), the UNEP RIS
RIS
Centre on Energy, Climate
and Sustainable
Development (URC), and
the World Bank
Banks Prototype
Carbon Fund (PCF)
Validated by a team of
experts from Government
and Industry
Type of Analysis
Standard analysis: RETScreen automatically uses
IPCC and industry standard values for:
Defining Baseline
Different baselines for GHG emission calculations:
Others
Electricity projects 15 MW
Conclusions
RETScreen calculates the annual GHG emission
reduction for a clean energy project compared
to a base case system
Questions?
Greenhouse Gas Emission Analysis with RETScreen Software Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
Photo Credit:
Environment Canada
www.retscreen.net
Objectives
Introduce the RETScreen methodology for assessing the
financial viability of a potential clean energy project
Cost (k$)
15
Genset Overhaul
Fuel
Battery Replacement
Initial Cost
10
5
0
0
10
15
Year
20
25
15
Cost (k$)
Battery Replacement
10
Initial cost
5
0
0
10
15
Year
20
25
RETScreen
calculates indicators
that look at
revenues and
expenses over the
life of the project!
Cashflow Calculations:
What does RETScreen do?
Cash Inflows
Cash Outflows
Equity Investment
Annual Debt Payments
O&M Payments
Periodic Costs
50,000,000
Cumulative Cashflow
40,000,000
30,000,000
20,000,000
Annual Cashflows
40
10,000,000
20
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(10,000,000)
thousands of $
Fuel Savings
O&M Savings
Periodic Savings
Incentives
Production Credits
GHG Credits
Time (yr)
0
0
10
(20,000,000)
Years
-20
Indicators
-40
-60
-80
-100
Year
Discount rate: rate used to convert future cash flows to the present
present
Avoided cost of energy:
For heating and cooling projects: the price of fuel in the base-case scenario
For electricity projects selling to the grid: the price paid for a unit of clean electricity
sold (for developers) or marginal costs (for utilities)
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Internal Rate of
Net Present Value
Return (IRR & ROI)
(NPV)
Meaning
# of years to recoup
additional costs from
annual savings
Example
17 % IRR
Criteria
Positive indicates
profitable project
Good measure
User must specify
Comment Misleading
Ignores financing &
longlong-term cashflows
Use when cashflow
is tight
discount rate
cashflow goes
positivepositive-negativenegativepositive
Comparison of Indicators:
Simple Payback
Internal Rate of
Return (IRR & ROI)
PV vs
genset*
9 years
$4,800
22%
Decision
Genset
PV
PV
* Discount rate of 12%; 50% debt financed over 15 years at 7% interest rate
RETScreen
provides a range of
indicators and a
cumulative cash
flow graph for the
project
Sensitivity Analysis
Shows how the profitability of project changes
For example:
Does the IRR exceed the 15% IRR threshold desired by the user?
Yes, it is 15.2%
Combinations of initial costs and avoided cost of energy below threshold are shaded
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Risk Analysis
User is uncertain of many parameters:
Risk Analysis:
Monte Carlo Simulation
RETScreen calculates the frequency distribution of the financial
Risk Analysis:
Influence of Parameters
Tornado chart
chart reveals:
How changes in parameters affect after-tax IRR, NPV, or year-to-positive cash flow
Conclusions
RETScreen accounts for cashflows due to initial costs, energy
Questions?
Financial and Risk Analysis with RETScreen Software Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen.net
Summary of Introductory
Module
Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
Conclusions
Clean energy technologies have matured, many costcost-effective
applications exist and markets are growing rapidly
Initial planning stage is where clean energy technologies must be
be
properly considered by planners,
planners, decisiondecision-makers and industry
Questions?
Summary of Introductory Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen.net
Utility-Scale Turbine
Objectives
Review basics of
Central-grids
Isolated-grids
Water pumping
but also
Reduced exposure to
energy price volatility
Rotor
Gearbox
Tower
Foundation
Controls
Generator
Types
Horizontal axis
Most common
Controls or design
turn rotor into wind
Vertical axis
Less common
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Battery charging
Water pumping
IsolatedIsolated-Grid
CentralCentral-Grid
Environmental
assessment
Regulatory approval
Design
Construction
Roads
Transmission line
Substations
Substation, California, USA
Photo Credit: Warren Gretz/NREL Pix
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Wind Resource
High average wind speeds are essential
Good resource
Coastal areas
1,200
Passes
1,000
Open terrain
Power (kW)
Typically windier in
800
600
400
200
0
0
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Wind speed (m/s)
$1,500/kW installed
O&M: $0.01/kWh
Feasibility Study
Development
Engineering
Single turbines
& isolatedisolated-grid
Turbines
Balance of plant
Higher costs
(more project specific)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Portion of Installed Costs
Environmental acceptability
RETScreen
Wind Energy Calculation
See e-Textbook
Clean Energy Project Analysis:
RETScreen Engineering and Cases
Wind Energy Project Analysis Chapter
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
RETScreen
Energy
(MWh)
MWh)
Monitored
Energy
(MWh)
MWh)
Difference
1998
(3 turbines)
250
271
-8%
19991999-2000
1,057
1,170
-10%
Conclusions
Wind turbines provide electricity on and off grid worldworldwide
Questions?
Questions?
Wind Energy Project Analysis Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen
.net
www.retscreen.net
Objectives
Review basics of
Central-grids
Isolated-grids
but also
Reliability
Head (m)
Flow (m3/s)
Small
Small Hydro Projects
Small
Small is not universally defined
Size of project related not just to electrical capacity but also to
whether low or high head
Micro
Mini
Typical
Power
RETScreen
Flow
RETScreen
Runner Diameter
< 100 kW
< 0.3 m
100 to 1,000 kW
Small
1 to 50 MW
0.4 to 12.8
m3/s
0.3 to 0.8 m
> 0.8 m
Central-grid
Isolated-grid or off-grid
Run-of-river
No water storage
Reservoir
Water passage
Power house
Components: Turbine
ScaledScaled-down versions of largelarge-hydro turbines
Pelton Turbine
Francis Turbine
Impulse: Pelton,
Pelton, Turgo,
Turgo, crossflow
Components:
Electrical and Other Equipment
Generator
Induction
Synchronous
Other equipment
Transformer
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
% Developed
Africa
1,150
2,280
China
1,920
3,830
North America
970
55
South America
3,190
11
Central America
Europe
350
1,070
45
Australasia
200
19
Source: Renewable Energy: Sources for Fuels and Electricity, 1993, Island Press.
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
50.0
Measurements of flow
over time
Flow (m/s)
curve based on
Flow-Duration Curve
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent Time Flow Equalled or Exceeded (% )
Pre-feasibility study
Feasibility study
Small Hydro
Environmental Considerations
Small hydro development can change
Fish habitat
Site aesthetics
Recreational/navigational uses
flow available
Remote communities
Remote residences
& industry
See e-Textbook
Clean Energy Project Analysis:
RETScreen Engineering and Cases
Small Hydro Project Analysis Chapter
Compared with
manufacturers data for
an installed 7 MW GEC
Alsthom Francis turbine
100%
Efficiency (%)
Turbine efficiency
Manufacturer
80%
RETScreen
60%
40%
Turbine Efficiency Curves:
RETScreen vs. Manufacturer
20%
0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Percent of Rated Flow
100%
Conclusions
Small hydro projects (up to 50 MW) can provide electricity for
central or isolatedisolated-grids and for remote power supplies
RunRun-ofof-river projects:
Questions?
Questions?
Small Hydro Project Analysis Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen
.net
www.retscreen.net
Objectives
Review basics of
Pumped Water
but also
Reliability
Simplicity
Modularity
Image
Silence
Photos Credit: Harin Ullal (NREL PIX)
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Components of PV Systems
Modules
Storage: batteries, tank
Power conditioner
Inverter
Charge controller
Rectifier
DC-DC converter
OnOn-Grid Systems
PV Integration
Distributed
Centralised
GridGrid-Type
Central
Isolated
Not usually
costcost-effective
without subsidies
Source: Photovoltaics in Cold Climates, Ross & Royer, eds.
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
OffOff-Grid Systems
Configuration
Stand-alone
Hybrid
Livestock watering
Solar Resource
1 Wp of PV= 800 to 2,000 Wh per year
Latitude
Cloudiness
Hybrid systems
Photo Credit: Environment Canada
SolarSolar-Load Correlation
Positive
Negative
Seasonal correlation
Irrigation
Cottage
systems
Photo Credit: Sandia Nat. Lab.
(NREL PIX)
Diurnal correlation
Positive,
Source: Photovoltaics in
Cold Climates, Ross &
Royer, eds.
Zero
On-grid house, 1 kW
(38N, California)
Array
Battery
Des.&Install
Genset
Fuel
Operation
Misc
Array
Inverter
Instal
Misc.
Cost = $0.35/kWh
Cost = $2.70/kWh
Photovoltaic Project
Considerations
Social aspects
Value of intangibles
Distance to grid
Cost of site visits
Image
Environmental benefits
Managing expectations
O&M costs
Maintained locally
Simple
Reliable
Photo Credit:
Energy
Research
Center of the
Netherlands
Cottage
Home
Simple
Reduced noise
No power lines
Hybrid System
Cottage:
YearYear-round:
hybrid systems
Photo Credit: Vadim Belotserkovsky
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Expectations
Managing demand
Social impacts
Village
Rural College
Cost of O&M
Genset and PV
complementary
and even
Transformer cost
Can be relocated
costcost-effective
without subsidies
Justified by:
Image
Environmental benefits
Market stimulus
LongLong-term commitments by
Domestic Water
Load correlation
Reliable
Simple
Photo Credit: Jerry Anderson,
Northwest Rural Public Power District (NREL PIX)
RETScreen Photovoltaic
Project Model
WorldWorld-wide analysis of energy production, lifelife-cycle costs
and greenhouse gas emissions reductions
Off-grid (PV-battery or
PV-genset-battery)
Water pumping
Concentrator systems
RETScreen
PV Energy Calculation
See e-Textbook
Clean Energy Project Analysis:
RETScreen Engineering and Cases
Photovoltaic Project Analysis Chapter
160
HOMER
RETScreen
HOMER
RETScreen
140
200
Genset consumption (L)
PV Power (kWh)
120
100
80
60
150
100
40
50
20
0
0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
Month
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Month
Conclusions
PV for onon-grid & offoff-grid electricity, water pumping
The solar resource is good around the world
Cost-effective off-grid
Questions?
Questions?
Photovoltaic Project Analysis Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen
.net
www.retscreen.net
Power Plant
Photo Credit: Warren Gretz, DOE/NREL PIX
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2005.
Objectives
Buildings
Communities
Industrial processes
but also
Cooling
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2005.
This heat, otherwise lost, can be used for industrial processes, space and
water heating, cooling, etc.
Electricity is
typically more
valuable than
heat
CHP Description
Equipment & Technologies
Power equipment
Gas turbine
Steam turbine
Gas turbine-combined cycle
Reciprocating engine
Fuel cell, etc.
Heating equipment
Gas Turbine
Cooling equipment
Compressor
Absorption chiller
Heat pump, etc.
Cooling Equipment
Photo Credit: Urban Ziegler, NRCan
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2005.
Natural gas
Diesel (#2 oil)
Coal, etc.
Renewable fuels
Wood residue
Biogas
Agricultural byproducts
Purpose-grown crops, etc.
Bagasse
Landfill gas (LFG)
Geothermal Geyser
Geothermal energy
Hydrogen, etc.
Single buildings
Industrial processes
Higher efficiency
Emissions controls
on single plant
Safety
Comfort
Operating convenience
Power generation
equipment
Heating equipment
Cooling equipment
Electrical
interconnection
Access roads
District energy piping
Recurring costs
Fuel
Operation & maintenance
Equipment replacement & repair
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2005.
Must negotiate sale of electricity onto grid if not all consumed on-site
Example: Canada
Single Buildings
Buildings requiring heating, cooling,
and a reliable power supply
Reciprocating Engine
Photo Credit: GE Jenbacher
Multiple Buildings
Example: Brazil
Industrial Processes
Industries with a high, constant
Also applicable to
Landfill Gas
Also includes:
RETScreen CHP
Project Model (cont.)
Heating only
Power only
Cooling only
Combined
cooling, heating & power
RETScreen
See e-Textbook
Clean Energy Project Analysis:
RETScreen Engineering and Cases
Combined Heat and Power Project Analysis Chapter
Run
Inlet Flow,
P, T
Kpph/psia/F
Outlet Flow
P, T
Kpph/psia/F
Extract Flow,
P, T
Kpph/psia/F
Efficiency
GateCycle
Power Output
MW
RETScreen CHP
Power Output
MW
50/1000/750
40/14/210
10/60/293
80%
3,896
3,883
50/1000/545
50/60/293
80%
2,396
2,404
50/450/457
50/60/293
80%
1,805
1,827
50/450/457
50/14.7/212
81%
2,913
2,915
Conclusions
Questions?
Combined Heat and Power Project Analysis Module
www.retscreen.net
Biomass Heating
Project Analysis
Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
Objectives
Review basics of
Buildings
Communities
Industrial processes
but also
Job creation
An opportunity to use
district heating and waste
heat recovery
Peak load
Base load
Higher efficiency
Lower emissions
Safety
Comfort
Operating convenience
Biomass Fuels
Biomass fuels (feedstocks)
eedstocks) include
Environmental Attributes of
Biomass Fuels
If harvested in sustainable manner:
Wood chips
Particulates (soot)
Gaseous pollutants
Trace carcinogens
Bagasse
Photo credit: Warren Gretz/NREL Pix
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Oil
Wood chips
Initial Costs
$21,000
$80,000
Annual O&M
$1,000
$8,000
Annual fuel
$18,000
$1,700
Price
Cost of heat
($/GJ)
Electricity
$0.08/kWh
22.50
Propane
$0.40/L
15.60
Fuel Oil
$0.30/L
8.50
Gas
$0.20/m3
5.80
Mill residue
$10/tonne
$10/tonne
1.70
Tree chips
$40/tonne
$40/tonne
6.70
Wood-Fired Boiler
Example: Canada
Process Heat
Interior of a Combustion
Chamber
RETScreen Biomass
Heating Energy
Energy Calculation
See e-Textbook
Clean Energy Project Analysis:
RETScreen Engineering and Cases
Biomass Heating Project Analysis Chapter
duration curve
District heating
Calculation of load
100
80
RETScreen
DD-IL
60
40
20
0
0
2000
4000
6000
Number of Hours
8000
Conclusions
Biomass heating energy costs can be much lower
than conventional heating costs, even when
considering higher initial capital costs of biomass
systems
Questions?
Questions?
Biomass Heating Project Analysis Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen.net
Objectives
Review basics of
Solar Air Heating (SAH) systems
but also
Weather cladding
Reduced stratification
Solar Collector
Photo Credit: Arctic Energy Alliance
Dampers
Auxiliary heating
3
7
6
5
1
6. Destratification
7. Summer bypass damper
Commercial/Residential
SAH Systems
Two types of systems
No destratification
Economiser cycle
permits using
more fresh air
Destratification:
Destratification: cool
air mixes with
ceiling air and
descends
Crop drying
Requires low temperatures
to avoid crop damage
Lanzhou, China, 36 N
4
2
2
0
10 11
12
10
11
12
10
11
12
Jakarta, Indonesia, 6 S
Moscow, Russia, 55 N
6
10
11
12
Buffalo, USA, 43 N
6
0
1
10
11
12
4
2
1 m2 of collector
Installed costs:
Energy Collected:
1 to 3 GJ/year
Electricity $0.05/kWh
Diesel $0.30/L
Gas $0.17/m3
$0
$20
$0.70/L
$0.45/m3
$0.12/kWh
Annual Savings
for 2 GJ Output
$40
$60
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Cladding credit
Ensure that existing ventilation system accommodates SAH easily
Low or no added
maintenance costs
Photo Credit: NRCan
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Apartment Building,
Ontario, Canada
Example: Indonesia
Ventilation air
Process heat
Heat recovery
Destratification
RETScreen
See e-Textbook
Clean Energy Project Analysis:
RETScreen Engineering and Cases
Solar Air Heating Project Analysis Chapter
TM
RET Screen
[kW h/m 2 /d]
SWift Difference
[kW h/m 2/d]
1.23
1.64
1.39
1.21
1.79
1.28
2%
-8%
9%
1.64
2.20
1.93
-15%
-9%
5%
1.40
2.00
2.03
Conclusions
SAH provides ventilation and process air heating
Locations throughout world have solar energy available when
ventilation air heating is required
Questions?
Questions?
Solar Air Heating Project Analysis Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen.net
Objectives
Review basics of
Solar Water Heating (SWH) systems
Illustrate key considerations for
SWH project analysis
Introduce RETScreen SWH Project Model
but also
Low pressure
Moderate cost
Higher temperature
operation
Can operate at
mains water
pressure
Heavier and more
fragile
Photo Credit: NRCan
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Higher cost
No convection losses
High temperature
Cold climates
Fragile
Installation
can be more
complicated
Snow is less of
a problem
15
Electricity @ $0.15/kWh
Gas @ $0.50/m3
Electricity @ $0.05/kWh
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Gas @ $0.15/m3
25
35
45
RETScreen
See e-Textbook
Clean Energy Project Analysis:
RETScreen Engineering and Cases
Solar Water Heating Project Analysis Chapter
RETScreen
WATSUN
Diff.
24.34
24.79
-1.8%
Load (GJ)
19.64
19.73
-0.5%
8.02
8.01
0.1%
1,874
1,800
4.1%
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Conclusions
Unglazed, glazed and evacuated tube collectors provide hot water for
many uses in any climate
RETScreen calculates:
Service hot water load and swimming pool load
Performance of solar swimming pool and service hot water systems with or without
storage
Questions?
Questions?
Solar Water Heating Project Analysis Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen
.net
www.retscreen.net
Objectives
Review basics of
requirements
but also
Improved comfort
Better daylight
Conventional
Summer
Winter
PSH
Advanced
Windows
Thermal Mass
Shading
Devices
Fill
Spacer
Frame
0.1
Inert
Insul.
Insul.
Wood
0.8
Air
Alumin.
Alumin.
Wood
0.1
Inert
Insul.
Insul.
Wood
0.8
Air
Alumin.
Alumin.
Wood
0.8
Air
Alumin.
Alumin.
Aluminum
0.8
Aluminum
Insulative spacers
Insulated frames,
thermal break
U-value (W/(m2C))
Center
of glass
Whole
window
8 0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Use double gyproc walls, ceilings, ceramic floors, brick fireplace, etc.
2
0
1
10 11
12
Moscow, Russia, 55
55 N
6
4
2
Iqaluit, Canada, 64
64 N
6
0
1
10
11
12
10
11
12
Lanzhou,
Lanzhou, China, 36
36 N
6
4
2
0
0
1
10
11
12
100
200
5 to 35%
300
Gas
$0.25/m3
Oil
$0.35/l
Electricity
$0.06/kWh
Non-vertical windows
Instantaneous effects of shading
User-specified building thermal mass
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
RETScreen
See e-Textbook
Clean Energy Project Analysis:
RETScreen Engineering and Cases
Passive Solar Heating Project Analysis Chapter
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Conclusions
PSH involves building orientation, energy efficient windows, shading,
shading,
and thermal mass to reduce space heating costs
RETScreen calculates:
Questions?
Questions?
Passive Solar Heating Project Analysis Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen
.net
www.retscreen.net
Objectives
Cooling
Hot water
Photo Credit: Solar Design Associates (NREL PIX)
Efficiency
Decreased maintenance
Stable capacity
Earth connection
Ground-coupled
Groundwater
Surface water
2.
3.
Conventional ductwork
Reverses direction
3.5 to 35 kW of
cooling per unit
Rocky ground
Aquifer+Injection
More expensive
Less expensive
Least expensive
Small buildings
Regulations
High efficiency
Temp. varies
Fouling
GSHP Resource:
Ground Temperatures
Ground absorbs about half
of sun
suns incident energy
Ground dampens
temperature variation
Temperature variation
decreases with depth
Negligible below 15 m
Annual
Energy
20 MWh
6.5 MWh
For heating: low electricity costs and high gas & oil
costs
GSHP Installation
Customer
Customers criteria for costcost-effective
Photo Credit: Craig Miller Productions and DOE (NREL PIX)
Minister of Natural Resources Canada 2001 2004.
Environmental or
comfort benefits
RETScreen
See e-Textbook
Clean Energy Project Analysis:
RETScreen Engineering and Cases
Ground Source Heat Pump Project Analysis Chapter
Toronto
Montreal
Charlottetown
Winnipeg
Vancouver
RETScreen
37,202
Monitored
36,686
RETScreen
36,138
Monitored
35,490
RETScreen
37,158
Monitored
36,922
RETScreen
33,243
Monitored
32,926
RETScreen
37,888
Monitored
39,016
1 Year Design
Program
1.4
1.8
0.6
1.0
-3.0
10 Year Design*
Residence 1
Louisiana
Residence 2
Wisconsin
Commercial
Nebraska
Residence 1
Louisiana
Residence 2
Wisconsin
266
124
141
293
129
Difference %
Commercial
Nebraska
148
vs. RETScreen
Descriptive
257
-4%
135
9%
121
-14%
257
-12%
135
5%
121
-18%
vs. RETScreen
Energy Use
236
-11%
127
2%
132
-6%
236
-19%
127
-2%
132
-12%
vs. Actual
344
29%
160
29%
141
0%
344
17%
160
24%
141
-5%
Conclusions
GSHPs provide heating, cooling & hot water
Ground dampens temp. variations & leads to high GSHP efficiencies
efficiencies
GSHP initial costs are higher, but O&M costs are lower
RETScreen estimates:
Questions?
Questions?
Ground-Source Heat Pumps Project Analysis Module
RETScreen International Clean Energy Project Analysis Course
www.retscreen.net
www.retscreen.net