alternative energy evaluation may06-16 team members: steve chebuharee anhtuan dinhee ryan...

Alternative Energy EvaluationMay06-16

Team Members:Steve Chebuhar EE

Anhtuan DinhEE

Ryan FerneauCprE

Justin JorgensenEE

Client:Professor Ralph

Patterson IIIDr. John W. Lamont

Faculty Advisor:Tom Baird

Date: April 6, 2006

Presentation Outline

• Introductory material• Project activity description• Resources and schedules• Closing material

Acknowledgment

The team would like to thank:

Tom Baird Dr. Lamont Prof. Patterson

Problem Statement

• Analyze alternative energy solutions– No utility– Utility as backup– Alternative energy sources as backup

• Economic analysis• Load analysis

Solution Approach

• Research alternative energy sources– Solar, wind, fuel cells, biomass, micro hydro,

and micro turbines• Research geographical area, area

regulations, and interconnection with utility• Create website to post the solutions

Operating Environment

• Data is organized and presented on a website that can be viewed using Windows XP and Internet Explorer

Intended User

• Farmer or rural resident

• Supplement or eliminate electric utility

Intended Use

• Provide information for a rural resident interested in alternative energy

Assumptions

• The user must have basic computer skills• The user must have knowledge of power

needs• The user must have knowledge of system

requirements• Six sources where considered

– Wind, solar, fuel cells, micro hydro, micro turbines, and biomass

Limitations

• Exact cost of each alternative source • Installation cost• Maintenance cost• Fuel Cost

End Product and Other Deliverables

• Website• Informative spreadsheets with the final

results• Final Report

Present Accomplishments

Research 100% completeDesign 100% completeWebsite 100% completeTesting 100% complete

Approaches Considered

• Interactive program with user inputs which gives recommendation output

• Informational website (the approach used)

Project Activities

• Research• Design• Implementation• Testing

Research

• Sources– Economic analysis– Viability for user– Energy storage

• Sources divided into two categories– Those which require no fuel– Those which require fuel

Wind Power

• Advantages– Low cost– Many turbine sizes available– No fuel required

• Disadvantages– Unreliable as primary source– Requires tower construction

Solar

• Advantages– Small size– No fuel– Good for low power applications

• Disadvantages– Expensive– Unreliable as primary source

Micro Hydro

• Advantages– Requires no fuel– Low maintenance

• Disadvantages– Unreliable as primary source– Many government regulations– Not environmentally friendly

Micro Turbines

• Advantages– Small size– Affordable for large power needs (>30 kW)– Can use multiple fuels

• Disadvantages– Expensive for small power needs– Fluctuation of fuel cost

Biomass

• Advantages– Can often be substituted as diesel fuel– Generator is low cost– Can meet many different power needs

• Disadvantages– Fluctuation of fuel costs– Noise– Takes up a lot of space

Fuel Cells

• Advantages– Useful for energy storage– No combustion required

• Disadvantages– Expensive– Requires fuel source to generate hydrogen– Involves many different components

No Utility Case

• Main source would most likely be wind• Backup source would be Diesel/biomass

generator or micro turbines

Inverter &Controller

Main Source AC Load 120 VAC

12, 24, or 48 VDC

Generator Controller

Secondary Source

Batteries 120 VAC

12, 24, or 48 VDC

Utility as Backup Case

• Main source is most likely wind• Requires safety equipment to interconnect

with utility company

Inverter &Controller

Main Source AC Load 120 VAC

12, 24, or 48 VDC

Electric Utility 120 VAC

Utility as Primary Source

• Diesel generator is most cost effective• Micro turbines and batteries also a

possibility• User would have to manually switch over

in the event of power loss

Informative Website

• Provide information about each source• Explain how to calculate monthly energy

usage (kWh)• Present spreadsheets with cost analysis• Provide links for additional information

Data Organized into Spreadsheets

Sample Webpage

Testing

• Design was tested by making comparison with systems currently in use

• Wind was most cost effective alternative source

• Diesel generator was most common form of backup

Other Activities

• Team attended an 8 hour long alternative energy workshop at the University of Minnesota

• Focused on many types of alternative energy (solar, wind, fuel cells)

Personnel Effort

Personnel Efforts of Team Members

Steve Chebuhar26%

Anhtuan Dinh25%

Justin Jorgensen25%

Ryan Ferneau24%

Resources

Item Without Labor With LaborPoster $23 $23

Team Member at $11/hrSteve Chebuhar $1870

Anhtuan Dinh $1848Justin Jorgensen $1793

Ryan Ferneau $1661Total $23 $7195

Schedule

Project Evaluation

• All required deliverables were completed• All tasks completed on schedule• Project was a success

Commercialization

• No plans to commercialize this product• Not likely to be high enough demand• Possibility exists to sell advertising space

on website if popular enough

Recommendations for Additional Work

• Installation and maintenance costs• Reevaluate project within a few years due

to rapidly developing technology• Obtain funding to implement a system

Lessons Learned

• What went well– Research was effectively divided among

group members– Flexibility of scheduling meetings

• What did not go well– Lack of understanding of project definition

Technical Knowledge Gained

• User energy needs• Cost of equipment• Components required to create system• Web design

Non-technical Knowledge Gained

• Communications skills• Time management• Risk management

Risk Management

• Anticipated risks– Loss of team member– Difficulty finding sufficient data to complete

research– Unsuccessful approach

• Management of risks– Share information between group members– Frequently evaluate project approach

Risk Management

• Unanticipated risks– Lack of understanding of project definition– Loss of faculty advisor

• Management of risks– Extra effort at later stages of project to make

up for previous lost time– Additional effort on the part of remaining

faculty advisor

Closing Summary

• Informational website created• Present information in spreadsheet form• Power output and cost evaluation of each

source• Links for additional information

Questions ?