apsc 400: team - queen's university · 2015-02-27 · ii executive summary physical plant...

APSC 400: TEAM

Alternate Energy Feasibility Study for Campus Use

Presented to: Physical Plant Services

Presented on: April 15, 2008

Presented by: David Harlley

Jennifer Marchant

i

Acknowledgements

The APSC 400 Physical Plant Services TEAM would like to thank the following individuals who

have contributed to this year long project. Their help was greatly appreciated.

Mr. Eric Neuman – Client contact, Queen‟s University Physical Plant Services

Mr. Nathan Splinter – Client contact, Queen‟s University Physical Plant Services

Mrs. Gillian Dagg-Foster – TEAM Advisor

Mr. Barrie Jackson – TEAM Project Instructor

Mr. David Mody – TEAM Project Instructor

Mr. Bill Ault – Ault Energy

Mr. Ken Bright – UOIT

Dr. Kunal Karan – Associate Professor, Queen‟s University

Mr. Kevin Loughborough – Enwave Energy Corporation

Mr. Ron Mantay – Carmanah Technologies Corp.

Mr. Rob Miller – Project Engineer, Canadian Hydro Developers Inc.

Mr. Frederic Pouyot – Solar Energy Society of Canada Inc.

ii

Executive Summary

Physical Plant Services at Queen‟s University wanted the feasibility assessed of seven alternative

energy technologies that could be implemented on campus to offset the growing cost of energy.

The underlying factor was the economics of the individual technology however the practicality

of it on campus also had to be taken into account. The TEAM group was assigned seven

technologies to be assessed: Deep Lake Water Cooling, Fuel Cells, Geothermal, Lake Water

Heating and Cooling, Solar Panels, Solar Photovoltaic, and Wind Turbines. This report contains

background information on how the technologies operate, how they would be implemented on

campus, and the economics of installing and running them. The seven technologies were then

ranked, based on a comparative system. This focused on the capital, operational and periodic

costs, the net present value, life expectancy and payback period of the project, the ease of

implementation on campus, and the commercial availability of the products.

The rankings are as follows: (1) geothermal, (2) wind turbines, (3) solar panels, (4) fuel cells, (5)

solar photovoltaic, (6) lake water heating and cooling, (7) deep lake water cooling. The

immediate recommendations to Physical Plant Services are to investigate the possibility of

geothermal systems, wind turbines, and solar panels. Future recommendations involve exploring

the prospect of implementing fuel cells and solar photovoltaic systems.

It is recommended to Physical Plant Services that geothermal systems be investigated for use on

campus to aid in Queen‟s heating and cooling needs; studies need to be conducted to determine

how deep the wells need to be. It was found that the geothermal system was relatively easy to

implement, once all the equipment was purchased. The associated capital costs for a 7 MW

system were approximately $5 million. With government funding, in the form of tax breaks, and

the little maintenance required, the payback period for the system was under 7 years. The

systems life span ranges from 25 to 75 years.

iii

It is also recommended that Physical Plant Services examine the possibility of wind turbines for

campus electricity generation since the economics involved are very positive. The capital cost for

a 1.65 MW turbine is approximately $4.8 million and the maintenance costs involved are small.

The payback period is just over 7 years because of government funding and the turbines have a

25 year life span. This technology could not be implemented on campus because of the size of

the turbine however sites off campus should be examined to conduct feasibility study‟s to

determine if wind power is suitable.

Physical Plant Services should also investigate the option of using solar panels for heating water

on campus because of the technologies availability and ease of instillation. It is recommended

that each building be assessed on a case by case basis to determine if installing a system is

economically feasible. The capital cost was approximately $45,000 for a system that heats 3,370

liters of water per day. The payback period was just under 15 years and the system has a life span

of 25 years. It is also recommended that solar panels should be investigated for heating the

Queen‟s pool once it is built.

Fuel cells and solar photovoltaic systems are technologies that should be investigated in the

future. Presently they are too expensive however with government funding and ongoing

improvements in the field they have the potential to become viable power and heat generators for

campus. Feasibility studies would need to be conducted to assess the economics of the

technologies, but this is something to look into in the future.

iv

Table of Contents PAGE

Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................... i

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ ii

Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... iv

List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. viii

List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x

1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Objectives ........................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Queen‟s University and Physical Plant Services ............................................................ 1

1.3 Energy Sources ............................................................................................................... 1

1.4 Financial Analysis ........................................................................................................... 2

1.5 Government Funding ...................................................................................................... 5

2.0 Alternate Energies ............................................................................................................... 6

2.1 Deep Lake Water Cooling .............................................................................................. 6

2.1.1 Background on Technology .................................................................................... 6

2.1.2 Case Study .............................................................................................................. 6

2.1.3 Economic Study for DLWC in Queen‟s University ............................................... 8

2.1.4 Government Funding .............................................................................................. 9

2.1.5 Environmental Benefits ........................................................................................ 10

2.2 Fuel Cells ...................................................................................................................... 10

2.2.1 Background on Technology .................................................................................. 10

2.2.2 Feasibility/Economic Study .................................................................................. 14

2.2.3 Government Funding ............................................................................................ 16


2.3 Geothermal Heating and Cooling ................................................................................. 17

2.3.1 Background on Technology .................................................................................. 17

v

2.3.2 Feasibility/Economic Study .................................................................................. 18



2.3.5 Lake Water Heating and Cooling ......................................................................... 20

2.4 Solar Panels ................................................................................................................... 22

2.4.1 Solar Energy.......................................................................................................... 22

2.4.2 Solar Panel Technology ........................................................................................ 23

2.4.3 Energy for Heating Water ..................................................................................... 24

2.4.4 Use on Campus ..................................................................................................... 25

2.4.5 Feasibility .............................................................................................................. 26


2.4.7 Environmental Aspects ......................................................................................... 29

2.4.8 Economics ............................................................................................................. 29

2.5 Solar Voltaic Panels ...................................................................................................... 33

2.5.1 Solar Energy.......................................................................................................... 33

2.5.2 Photovoltaic Cells ................................................................................................. 34

2.5.3 Use on Campus ..................................................................................................... 35

2.5.4 Feasibility .............................................................................................................. 36



2.5.7 Economics ............................................................................................................. 37

2.6 Wind Turbines .............................................................................................................. 41

2.6.1 Wind ...................................................................................................................... 41

2.6.2 Wind Turbine Technology Summary ................................................................... 41

2.6.2.1 Wind Turbine Components ............................................................................... 41

2.6.2.2 Wind Turbine Types ......................................................................................... 43

2.6.3 Wind to Electricity ................................................................................................ 45

2.6.4 Electricity to the Grid............................................................................................ 46

vi

2.6.5 Sizing and Logistics .............................................................................................. 46

2.6.6 Industry ................................................................................................................. 47

2.6.7 Use on Campus ..................................................................................................... 48

2.6.8 Feasibility .............................................................................................................. 49

2.6.9 Small Wind ........................................................................................................... 50



2.6.12 Economics ............................................................................................................. 54

2.6.12.1 Single Wind Turbine – 1 x 1.65 MW ........................................................... 54

2.6.12.2 Multiple Wind Turbines – 20 x 1.65 MW .................................................... 58

2.6.12.3 Single Small Wind Turbine – 1 x 50 kW ...................................................... 61

2.6.12.4 Multiple Small Wind Turbines – 20 x 50 kW............................................... 63

3.0 Rankings ........................................................................................................................... 65

4.0 Conclusion and Recommendations ................................................................................... 71

5.0 References ......................................................................................................................... 74

6.0 Appendices ........................................................................................................................ 81

6.1 Geothermal – In Depth Technology70

........................................................................... 81

6.2 Fuel Cell Processes ....................................................................................................... 84

6.3 Fuel Cell Types – Advantages and Disadvantages ....................................................... 85

6.4 Solar Panels – In Depth Technology ............................................................................ 89

6.5 Solar PV – In Depth Technology .................................................................................. 91

6.6 Wind Turbines – In Depth Technology ........................................................................ 94

6.4.1 Foundation ............................................................................................................ 94

6.4.2 Tower .................................................................................................................... 94

6.4.3 Rotor and Rotor Blades ......................................................................................... 95

6.4.4 Pitch System.......................................................................................................... 95

6.4.5 Yaw System .......................................................................................................... 96

6.4.6 Generator and Controller ...................................................................................... 96

6.4.7 Nacelle .................................................................................................................. 97

vii

6.4.8 Monitoring Devices .............................................................................................. 97

6.5 Pure Cell 200 Fact Sheet ............................................................................................... 98

6.6 DFC1500MA Fact Sheet............................................................................................. 100

6.7 RETScreen for Solar System on University Club....................................................... 104

6.8 Immosolar IS-PRO 2000 Tinox Fact Sheet ................................................................ 110

6.9 RETScreen for Solar System on the Lasalle Building ................................................ 113

6.10 Canadian Solar Inc. CS6A - 180 Fact Sheet ............................................................... 120

6.11 RETScreen for Solar PV System ................................................................................ 122

6.12 RETScreen for Single 1.65 MW Wind Turbine ......................................................... 129

6.13 RETScreen for Multiple (20) 1.65 MW Wind Turbines............................................. 136

6.14 Vestas V82 Fact Sheet ................................................................................................ 143

6.15 Entegrity Wind Systems - EW15 Fact Sheet .............................................................. 147

6.16 RETScreen for Single Small Wind Turbine (50kW) .................................................. 148

6.17 RETScreen for Multiple (20) Small Wind Turbines (50kW) ..................................... 154

viii

List of Figures PAGE

Figure 1 - Diagram of DLWC process. ........................................................................................... 6

Figure 2 – PEMFC Fuel Cell. ....................................................................................................... 12

Figure 3 - Basic process diagram of solar thermal heating system............................................... 24

Figure 4 - Scale of Reference. ....................................................................................................... 26

Figure 5 - Average mean daily global solar radiation and variability of solar radiation. Incident

on a horizontal surface. See Figure 4 for scale of reference. ....................................................... 27

Figure 6 - Annual mean daily global solar radiation. Incident on inclined surface of 90o and 60

o

with a south orientation. See Figure 4 for scale of reference. ....................................................... 28

Figure 7 - Cumulative cash flow graph for solar system for the University Club. ....................... 32

Figure 8 - Cumulative cash flow graph for PV system. ................................................................ 40

Figure 9 - View of a typical horizontal wind turbine. ................................................................... 42

Figure 10 - Close up view of a horizontal wind turbine. .............................................................. 43

Figure 11 - A vertical axis wind turbine. ...................................................................................... 44

Figure 12 - A windward horizontal axis wind turbine. ................................................................. 45

Figure 13 - Relative size of wind turbines. ................................................................................... 47

Figure 14 - Small wind turbine types. ........................................................................................... 51

Figure 15 - Graph of different energy sources and the amount of CO2 per terajoule of electricity

produced by each. ......................................................................................................................... 53

Figure 16 - Cumulative cash flow graph for singular wind turbine (1.65 MW). .......................... 57

Figure 17 - Cumulative cash flow graph for multiple (20) wind turbines (1.65 MW). ................ 60

Figure 18 - Components of a typical ground-source heat pump. .................................................. 83

Figure 19 - Glazed flat plate collector.70

....................................................................................... 89

Figure 20 - Evacuated tube collector.70

......................................................................................... 90

Figure 21 – A solar panel made up of solar cells (single crystal silicon).74

................................. 91

Figure 22 – Single crystal silicon cells.76

...................................................................................... 92

Figure 23 – Polycrystalline cells.77

............................................................................................... 92

ix

Figure 24 - Method of making ribbon silicon.78

........................................................................... 93

Figure 25 – Amorphous silicon array.79

........................................................................................ 93

x

List of Tables PAGE

Table 1 - Comparison of two DLWC projects. ............................................................................... 8

Table 2 - Comparison summary of the five major fuel cell types. ............................................... 13

Table 3 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for the solar system for the University Club. . 31

Table 4 - Summary of financial feasibility of solar system for the University Club. ................... 32

Table 5 - Summary of financial feasibility of solar system for the Lasalle building. ................... 33

Table 6 - PV (100 kW) electricity output and campus electricity consumption. ......................... 35

Table 7 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for the PV system. .......................................... 39

Table 8 - Summary of financial feasibility of PV system. ............................................................ 40

Table 9 - Turbine (1.5 MW) electricity output and campus electricity consumption. .................. 49

Table 10 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for the single 1.65 MW turbine. ................... 56

Table 11 - Summary of financial feasibility of a single 1.65 MW turbine. .................................. 57

Table 12 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for 20 x 1.65 MW turbines. .......................... 59

Table 13 - Summary of financial feasibility of 20 x 1.65 MW turbines. ...................................... 60

Table 14 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for singular 50kW turbine. ........................... 62

Table 15 - Summary of financial feasibility of single 50 kW turbine. ......................................... 63

Table 16 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for multiple (20) 50kW turbines. .................. 64

Table 17 - Summary of financial feasibility of multiple (20) 50 kW turbines. ............................ 65

Table 18 - Rankings of the seven technologies. ........................................................................... 70

1

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Project Objectives

The primary purpose of the project undertaken by the Technology, Engineering and Management

(TEAM) group was to research seven alternative energy technologies, outlined by Queen‟s

University Physical Plant Services (PPS), which could be implemented on the Queen‟s

University campus. This report will evaluate and compare the alternative sources of power to

determine which are economical and feasible for use on campus. A ranking system was also

devised so the seven technologies could be compared and graded against one another.

1.2 Queen’s University and Physical Plant Services

Physical Plant Services (PPS) is responsible for the construction, operation, and maintenance

needs of Queen‟s University. In 1999, PPS‟s annual expenditure was over four million dollars

for electricity alone.1 By 2005, the total energy bill was in excess of ten million dollars.

2 As of

March 13, 2008 oil prices have reached $111 (USD) a barrel, quite a contrast to the $66.03

(USD) a barrel it was just one year ago.3 With the sharp increase in fuel prices and the many

expansions occurring on campus, the university‟s utility bill will continue to rise. PPS wants to

investigate alternative energy technologies to determine whether they could be implemented on

campus to aid in reducing the rising costs.

1.3 Energy Sources

This report includes discussions of seven alternative energy technologies. These include:

Deep Lake Water Cooling

2

Fuel Cells

Geothermal Heating and Cooling

Lake Water Heating and Cooling (included in geothermal section.)

Solar Panels

Solar Voltaic Panels, and

Wind Turbine Power

The two main factors considered in the evaluation were the economics involved and an

investigation of the viability of the technology for use on campus. Environmental factors played

a minor role, but the primary goal was to produce electricity/power at a competitive rate. This

report focuses on how each technology works, the feasibility of the technology, the

environmental impacts, examples of similar projects, as well as an economic analysis. The

economics of each technology was the underlying factor in ranking the technologies; focusing on

capital, operational, and maintenance costs. The availability of government funding and the life

span of the product were also taken into account. The report concludes with recommendations on

which technologies could be implemented on campus to lower the cost of electricity/power,

based on the comparison of all seven technologies.

1.4 Financial Analysis

The Government of Canada has made available RETScreen, a worldwide software program that

is used to evaluate the energy production and savings, life-cycle costs, emission reductions,

financial viability and risk for various types of energy efficient and renewable energy

technologies (RETs). The software also includes product, cost and climate databases, and a

detailed online user manual. RETScreen International is managed under the leadership and

ongoing financial support of Natural Resources Canada's (NRCan) CANMET Energy

3

Technology Centre - Varennes (CETC-Varennes). For this report RETScreen will be used to

perform the economic analysis. Below is a description of how it works and what is needed.

Individual financial analysis can be found in the specific alternate energy sections. The complete

RETScreen sheets can be found in the appropriate appendices sections.

RETScreen uses Microsoft Excel to perform its calculations. There are five primary tabs that

need to be filled in to ensure that the program calculates correctly. The first is Energy Model and

this encompasses naming the project and specifying the project‟s location. The system

characteristics and corresponding data (wind or solar conditions) also need to be entered for the

location chosen. The next tab is Equipment Data/Resource and this is where the specifics of the

technology are entered. RETScreen has a detailed online database that has detailed makes and

models of various products. RETScreen then calculates the production data required.

The next tab is Cost Analysis and this is where the user specifies the costs associated with the

various stages of the project. It should be noted that the specific cost is highly dependent on the

particular circumstances of the project. The initial costs are made up of the following:

Feasibility studies include a detailed site investigation, resource assessment (wind or

solar for example), environmental assessment, and preliminary design.

Development costs include permits and approvals, land rights, land surveys, project

financing, legal and accounting fees, project development management and travel costs.

Engineering costs includes mechanical, electrical, and civil design elements.

Energy equipment costs include the base cost of the technology and the transport costs

associated with getting the equipment to the installation site. The transportation costs

will vary depending on the mode of transport available and the location of the project

site.

The balance of plant costs include the costs associated with implementing the

technologies. Other miscellaneous costs are also included to allow for contingencies.

4

The annual costs are composed of operational and maintenance (O&M) costs. There is also a

built in contingency to account for unforeseen annual expenses. O&M costs vary dramatically

with the scale of the project. The periodic costs represent the costs associated with the operation

of the system over the project life and must be incurred at regular intervals to ensure the system

remains in a working condition. These costs can be inputted by the user and the interval, in years,

must also be specified.

RETScreen also offers a greenhouse gas analysis, however the main focus of this report is the

financial feasibility of the technologies, so this option was not used. The environmental sections

highlight the positives of the alternative energies.

The next tab is the Financial Analysis and this is where the financial summary is displayed. The

avoided cost of energy needs to be entered, and this refers to the average unit cost of energy for

the base case electricity system, which was $0.0972/kW. The RE production credit is also

entered. This is the amount that can be credited to the project in exchange for the production

credit generated by the renewable energy delivered by the system, such as tax credits. The rate of

inflation can also be entered to the renewable energy production credit. The debt ratio is inputted

which reflects the financial leverage created for the project. The debt interest rate and debt term,

which should not exceed the life time of the project, are also entered. The energy cost escalation

rate is the independent inflation rate associated with the cost of energy. Due to the sharp increase

in energy costs over the past few years, a 5% rate was used. The inflation rate used was 2%4, and

this is the projected annual average rate of inflation over the life of the project. The discount rate

is entered and this is the rate used to discount future cash flows in order to obtain their present

value. The project life, in years, must also be entered.

Once all this information has been added, the yearly cash flow and financial feasibility is

displayed. This includes the internal rate of return (IRR), or the return on investment (ROI), the

net present value (NPV), and year to positive cash flow. The IRR represents the true interest

yield provided by the project equity over its life and is calculated by finding the discount rate

5

that causes the net present value of the project to be equal to zero. If the IRR of the project is

equal to or greater than the required rate of return then the project will likely be considered

financially acceptable. If it is less than the required rate of return, the project is typically rejected.

The NPV of the project is the value of all future cash flows, discounted at the discount rate, in

today's currency. NPV is thus calculated at a time 0 corresponding to the junction of the end of

year 0 and the beginning of year 1. Positive NPV values are an indicator of a potentially feasible

project.

1.5 Government Funding

The Government of Canada has launched ecoEnergy, a program that invests money in renewable

energy systems (heat and power). This program is available to institutions so Physical Plant

Services would qualify. Various incentives are available, and the program runs from April 1,

2007 to March 31, 2011. That is to say that the project must be constructed during the next four

years to be eligible. The incentives available for each alternative energy will be discussed in the

appropriate sections below.

Another option available for alternative technologies that produce electrical power is a Power

Purchase Agreement (PPA). This is a contract between a developer (Physical Plant Services) and

the Ontario Power Authority (OPA). It states that the OPA will purchase electricity produced by

a particular technology from Physical Plant Services at a fixed price for a certain time period,

generally 20 years. In order to be eligible, developers must satisfy the requirements of the

Standard Offer Program (SOP). The Ministry of Energy offers Standard Offer Contracts (SOC)

for small projects. Again more detail will be given below for the technologies to which this

option applies.

6

2.0 Alternate Energies

2.1 Deep Lake Water Cooling

2.1.1 Background on Technology5

Deep lake water cooling is a technology that uses cold water (40C) from a lake source to cool

buildings. It is possible because of the fact that water‟s density is highest at (40C). As a result of

this, if a lake is deep enough, a constant layer of water at this temperature forms at the bottom,

providing a constant source of cool water, year round. Depths of 83 metres are normally enough

for this layer called the “hypolimnion” to form. Over the fall and spring, this layer is renewed as

the water surface is cooled and warmed. Surface water that hits the critical temperature of 40C

sinks to the bottom to join this layer. Figure 1 illustrates the above in a simple diagram.

Figure 1 - Diagram of DLWC process.6

2.1.2 Case Study7

Enwave, a Toronto based district energy corporation completed one of the largest district energy

systems in North America, fed almost entirely by a DLWC system. This system has been in

place for over 4 years now, and provides 75,000 tons of refrigeration. This represents enough

capacity to air condition 100 office towers, or 3.2million square metres of office space.

7

The Toronto side of Lake Ontario reaches the required 83 metre depth at about 5km off shore. 3

pipes about a ¾ km apart reach from shore to span this 5km distance, feeding the cold water into

the City's John Street Pumping Station. There, heat exchangers facilitate the energy transfer

between the icy cold lake water and the Enwave closed chilled water supply loop. The water

drawn from the lake continues on its regular route through the John Street Pumping Station for

normal distribution into the City water supply.

Enwave uses only the coldness from the lake water, not the actual water, to provide the

alternative to conventional air-conditioning. The following are Quick Facts about the Enwave

system, drawn from their website at:

http://www.enwave.com/dlwc.php.

Economic benefits are in red font while environmental ones are in green. Other benefits remain

in black font.

Reduces electricity use by up to 90% compared with conventional air-conditioning.

Eliminates 79,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide annually – the equivalent of 15,800 fewer

cars on the streets of Toronto.

Cuts 45,000 kg of polluting CFC refrigerants.

Saves more than 61 MW of electricity annually – the equivalent power demand of 6,800

homes.

Eliminates the need to install cumbersome, expensive equipment and to dispose of it at

the end of its useful life.

Eliminates 145 tonnes of Nitrogen Oxide.

Eliminates 318 tonnes of Sulphur Oxide.

Provides fresh, potable lake water to taps across Toronto.

http://www.enwave.com/dlwc.php

8

2.1.3 Economic Study for DLWC in Queen’s University

An investigation of the capital costs involved in implementing DLWC at Queen‟s resulted in

findings that indicate that economically, DLWC does not look very promising for Queen‟s.

The main reason for this is the scale at which Queen‟s would be implementing DLWC. The scale

would be much smaller than the Toronto project discussed above. Using the Toronto project as a

reference, we see that at a ninth the size of the Toronto project, Queen‟s cannot take advantage

of the economies of scale that were available to Enwave because of the sheer size of the Toronto

project. Table 1 compares the two projects.

Table 1 - Comparison of two DLWC projects.

Power

Required(Tons)

Pipe

Diameter(mm)

Pipe

length(m)

Enwave Toronto 45000 1600 5000

Queen's 5000 500 >10000

The most significant savings that would be made on a Queen‟s system as compared to the larger

system in Toronto would be on the price of the pipes, which would drop because of the smaller

diameter. We estimate a price drop of about $10 million dollars. Enwave asked that their total

initial costs not be published but the reader can be assured that the calculations have been done

and the cost drop is nowhere near proportional to the power requirement drop (Queen‟s power

requirement is about a ninth of the Toronto power requirement). The additional document

accompanying this report outlines the economic calculations; however it can not be published.

This is only the tip of the iceberg however. The pipes required for Queen‟s would have to be

longer as the distance to the required 83 meter depth is more than 10 km. This would increase the

cost considerably. In addition to this, Queen‟s uses largely localized chilled water plants rather

than district plants. There would be a significant added cost to building a centralized plant large

enough to serve all or most of the campus. In addition a lot of these chillers have not reached

9

their predicted life, and disposing of them too early would represent a financial loss to the

university.

Payback Period Calculations

Payback period calculations are not presented here as that would require publishing confidential

figures. Calculations were performed to reflect the best case scenario and yielded a payback

period of about 81 years, one that is far too large to justify such an investment. Although these

are simplified calculations they are geared towards presenting the best case scenario, and are not

even discounted for interest rates on loans etc.

One way to make this project economically viable for Queen‟s would be for Queen‟s to find

enough local partners to bring up the power requirement, so that economies of scale can be

exploited. Even so it would require quite a few fairly large partners to justify this.

DLWC worked for the city of Toronto because it happened to have a lot of the requirements in

place. A lake that hits 83 meter depths after 5km; a centralized cooling plant; a very high cooling

requirement, owing to the sheer density of businesses in the area. DLWC has very real economic

benefits. It has the potential for massive savings on electricity used in air-conditioning, and at a

45000 ton load, Enwave quotes their total electric power savings at 61MW per year. These

figures are impressive but are only possible because of the size of the Enwave system in Toronto.

The size of the project means payback is much faster than it would be at Queen‟s and capital

costs and interest accrued can be paid off at a fairly high rate.

2.1.4 Government Funding

At present, there are no government incentives available for implementing DLWC systems.

10

2.1.5 Environmental Benefits

DLWC is largely clean energy. The only electricity requirements involved are those to run

pumps for the water. The main benefit to the environment would be the reduction in the

electricity demand. This then filters through to reduce production levels of by-products of

electricity production such as Sulphur Oxide, Nitrogen Oxide and Carbon dioxide. Again, the

amount by which we can reduce production levels of these is directly related to the scale of the

system put in place at Queen‟s. The larger the system, the more cuts will be made to the level of

production of these pollutants. Queen‟s cooling systems do not produce CFCs so DLWC cannot

impact these production levels.

2.2 Fuel Cells


Fuel cells can be thought of as a factory that takes a fuel and changes it to electricity. A factory is

a good analogy because a fuel cell will continue to produce electricity as long as fuel is available.

This is the main difference between a fuel cell and a battery. A fuel cell is not depleted or

consumed when it produces electricity as a battery is. Fuel cells are similar to a combustion

engine in the sense that a fuel is consumed and energy is produced. Where they differ is that

combustion engines in order to create electricity first change the energy gained from fuels to

mechanical energy before changing it into electrical energy. This intermediate stage results in a

decrease in the efficiency of combustion engines as there are more losses along the way. Fuel

cells avoid this by a straight conversion from energy stored in fuels to electrical energy, and so

often show higher efficiencies than combustion engines. In the economic sense, this is their great

strength. This also translates to environmental benefits as less fuel must be consumed per unit of

energy.

11

The five kinds of Fuel Cells are:

1. Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cell (PAFC)

2. Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cell (PEMFC)

3. Alkaline Fuel Cell (AFC)

4. Molten Carbonate Fuel Cell (MCFC)

5. Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC)

In any fuel cell, the hydrogen combustion reaction is split into two electrochemical half

reactions. The spatial separation of these reactions, allows an electric current to be drawn from

the reaction, as electrons flow through a connecting wire. This aspect of a fuel cell is completely

the same as a conventional battery.

This spatial separation is achieved by the use of an electrolyte, which separates the reactants,

while allowing ion flow across it. Figure 2 below shows a simple Polymer Electrolyte Membrane

Fuel Cell or PEMFC, and outlines the basic processes of a fuel cell.

12

Figure 2 – PEMFC Fuel Cell.9

To produce electricity in the amounts needed for practical applications, fuel cells are arranged in

stacks. Although the science behind fuel cells is simple enough, the actual implementation of this

science to the production of an efficient fuel cell that is practical for use in stationary or mobile

applications is difficult and for years expensive research has been undergone to produce

commercially viable fuel cells. This research continues today. The main steps involved in

producing electricity through a fuel cell are:

1. Reactant delivery(transport) into the fuel cell

2. Electrochemical reaction

13

3. Ionic conduction through the electrolyte and electron conduction through the external

circuit

4. Product removal from the fuel cell

These steps are described in more detail in the Fuel Cell Processes Appendix.

Table 2 lists the five kinds of fuel cells that have been developed to date with electrical

efficiencies, power densities and power ranges. In the Fuel Cell Types – Advantages and

Disadvantages Appendix there is a summary of these fuel cell types, outlining advantages and

disadvantages. The disadvantages presented also represent problems that the technology has

faced in becoming commercially viable. These issues have been solved to different degrees, and

these fuel cells are constantly improving. Some of the information presented will nonetheless

help to eliminate some of the options available and narrow our investigation down.

Table 2 - Comparison summary of the five major fuel cell types.

Fuel Cell

Type

Electrical

Efficiency(%)

Power

Density(mW/cm2)

Power

Range(kW)

PAFC 40 150-300 50-1000

PEMFC 40-50 300-1000 0.001-1000

AFC 50 150-400 1-100

MCFC 45-55 100-300 100-100000

SOFC 50-60 250-350 10-100000

Of the five fuel cells, SOFC‟s, PAFC‟s and MCFC‟s were chosen for further investigation, for

the following reasons. The AFC produces approximately 100kW of power, which is much too

small for Queen‟s University‟s requirements, and the PEMFC has been developed mainly for

portable applications because of its high power density and low operating temperatures. In

addition to this PEMFCs run on pure hydrogen, which for large stationary applications is very

expensive.

14

2.2.2 Feasibility/Economic Study

Upon further investigation into the fuel cells market, it became apparent that PAFCs and MCFCs

are the only kinds being produced commercially at the scale that the university requires. PPS are

interested in fuel cells for large stationary applications of about 0.5 MW and up. The weight of

the fuel cells market is still heavily on the side of research and development and is only now

beginning to make a bit of a push in the commercial direction. A sustained push could see fuel

cell unit numbers rise steadily and indeed this has been the trend for last 5 years. However, price

remains the largest barrier to its commercialization.

Two companies appear to be “leading the charge” as far as commercializing fuel cells. UTC

Power (United Technologies Company Power, the fact sheet can be found in the Pure Cell 200

Fact Sheet Appendix), who are producers of PAFC units with a 200kW capacity, and Fuel Cell

Energy (the fact sheet can be found in the DFC1500MA Fact Sheet Appendix) who produce

three sizes of MCFC at 300kW, 1.2 MW and 2.4MW. Both of these companies have produced

and sold quite a few units worldwide. Fuel Cell Energy boasts 60 stationary power plants

worldwide with 180 million kilowatt hours of electric power produced for customers. UTC

claims 260 installations and 1 billion kilowatt hrs of commercial fuel cell operation. Although

the UTC unit only produces 200kW of power, several units can be purchased as is the case in

their plant in Alaska, where 5 units were installed.

Both the UTC unit and the Fuel Cell Energy units produce high grade waste heat that can be used

in cogeneration applications (heating water and space, or producing steam to power turbines). In

this case, efficiencies soar from 40% for only power to around 80-90% for cogeneration. They

have a high reliability once installed and the Fuel Cell Energy units run on multiple fuels.

Despite considerably higher efficiencies, these fuel cells only make economic sense if federal or

provincial government incentives are present. There are a number of reasons for this. To

examine these reasons the UTC power fuel cell unit is considered. The budgetary initial cost

15

obtained from UTC power was $3500/kW. So for a 1 MW system which could well suit the

university‟s purposes the initial cost would be $3.5 million. Installation costs included would set

the figure to about $4.2million. While this figure isn‟t prohibitive to the initial investment, the

annual cost of natural gas is. At $8.50 per GJ, an energy rate of 9 GJ/kWh and the fuel cells

working at 95% of the year, the cost of fuel is around $636,000 per year. This figure IS

prohibitive and payback period calculations yielded very high numbers. In a purely power

application, fuel cells can more or less be ruled out.

The cogeneration case is of more interest because as explained before, efficiencies rise to

between 80% and 90%. It is the only way fuel cells are even a possibility bar some very large

government subsidies, but this will need to be considered on a case by case, building by building

basis, because a building has to have a large enough heat requirement to take advantage of the

high grade waste heat produced by the fuel cells.

It should be mentioned however that company representatives of UTC power made it clear that

no units had been sold in areas where no incentives were available. The signs are then that even

with cogeneration fuel cells do not make economic sense at the moment. Nonetheless an

investigation into the economics given cogeneration would definitely be worthwhile and if it

does not go as far as to justify an investment in fuel cells it would at least give a clear idea of

what level of incentive would be needed to make this a viable option. There is a pending subsidy

which offers 4.32cent/kWh on power and or heat produced with clean fuels like natural gas.

However the fuel cell fuel cost in a purely power application stands at $76.5/kWh. As is evident

this subsidy would do next to nothing to making this a more economical option.

Fuel Cells still hold hope for the future as a viable economic investment. As the drive toward

commercialization continues, companies are working to drive down costs and increase fuel cells

life spans. In addition, pressure on the Canadian government to put in place financial support for

commercial fuel cell usage could yet yield results. At the moment government support is still

almost completely devoted to research and development and demonstration. Finally, if and when

16

carbon taxes are implemented, fuel cells could become one solution to reduce carbon emissions

and avoid these taxes for small plant owners like Queen‟s. It is important to note that as is

popular conception, these are not developments that are expected to happen in ten or fifteen

years. Rather the indications are that fuel cells are on the cusp of becoming commercially viable,

and it would definitely be worthwhile to return annually to the topic of fuel cells as an energy

alternative for Queen‟s. They are already making serious ground in Europe, parts of South

America, South Africa and even the USA where government incentives do exist.


The government is on the verge of introducing subsidies for heat and electricity produced using

clean energy sources. This would include natural gas that would be used in the PAFC or MCFC

units discussed in the preceding section. The incentive takes the form of money paid to

participating institution for every kWh of electricity produced using these clean sources.

Currently the incentive is over a 20 year period and pays 4.32 cents/kWh. Further information on

the specifics of this funding is available at the Ontario Power Authority website at this page:

http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/Page.asp?PageID=122&ContentID=5857&SiteNodeID=245&

BL_ExpandID


The benefits of fuel cells to the environment and moving towards a “greener” Earth are clear,

and are as follows:

- Significant reduction in production of Carbon Dioxide due to high efficiencies (can reach

50% without cogeneration).

- Avoid the production of Nitrogen Oxide, Sulphur Oxide and particulate pollutants.

http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/Page.asp?PageID=122&ContentID=5857&SiteNodeID=245&BL_ExpandID

http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/Page.asp?PageID=122&ContentID=5857&SiteNodeID=245&BL_ExpandID

17

- Very Quiet, and so not only reduce noise pollution but can be used close enough to

buildings, so that high grade waste heat can be used in other applications. This can bring

efficiencies close to 90%.

2.3 Geothermal Heating and Cooling


Geothermal Heating and Cooling involves in simple terms, taking heat from the ground during

the colder months of the year, to be used in heating buildings and returning the heat from warm

buildings to the ground during the hotter months, thereby cooling the buildings. There are two

kinds of systems, passive systems and active systems. Passive systems do not require the

assistance of a heat pump while active systems do. This report focuses on active systems, as the

scale being discussed warrants their use. Earth Energy System‟s (EESs) have two parts, a circuit

of underground piping outside the building and a heat pump inside.

The outdoor piping system can be one of two kinds, an open loop system or a closed loop

system. In an open loop system, groundwater (water from an underground water body) is drawn

up directly to the heat exchanger where it has its heat extracted. The cooler water is then ejected

to either a water body above ground, like a stream or pond, or back to the underground water

body through a different well.

A closed loop system involves the use of a continuous loop of piping buried underground. An

antifreeze solution, which has been pre-chilled by the heat pump‟s refrigeration system to several

degrees cooler than the soil outside, circulates through the piping, absorbing heat from the

surrounding soil. A refrigerant can also be used instead of antifreeze, in which case the system is

called a direct expansion (DX) earth-energy system. Additional information on geothermal

technology can be found in the section Geothermal – In Depth Technology in the appendix.

18

Note that for the purposes of this report, the word “refrigerant” will apply to refrigerants in

general, excluding water and antifreeze. Although these are also refrigerants they do not undergo

direct expansion in the heating cycle, and for this reason are treated as different in this report.

2.3.2 Feasibility/Economic Study

To determine whether or not a geothermal system is feasible for Queen‟s the ground would have

to be tested for several things. Among these are the groundwater flux, the depth of the

overburden and the conductivity of the ground. Based on this a model can be drawn up for how

much energy could be extracted from the ground reasonably per a given area, how deep drilling

would need to be, how many holes would be needed and other considerations.

Without this testing and this modeling, it is impossible to have a fair estimate of how much a

geothermal system would cost Queen‟s or to produce a life cycle cost analysis or a payback

period. What seemed more reasonable given this was to do a case study on a system that is

already in place.

Case Study

The University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT) has a 2000ton (7000kW) system in

place, that has been running for about 4 years now. Its specifications are as follows:

- 2000 tons of heating power produced

- 2 banks of 350 ton heat pumps, with 50 ton increments

- 28 circuits of tubing so that in case of leakage of one tube, the rest can continue to

circulate heat

- 60m x 110m drilling field

19

- 370 holes at depths of 200m

- 3 drilling rigs were used and drilling time per hole ranged from 11-22 hrs

Below is a quotation from the University, describing the test well findings:

“A 200 m deep test well was installed in the central courtyard of the university campus to

confirm the groundwater conditions and the site geology. The overburden comprised 44 m of

glacial till, silt and silty fine sand deposits. No significant aquifers were found. The bedrock

formations beneath the overburden included 14m of shale and 142 m of massive limestone.

Groundwater seepage from the shale was saline, with a chloride content of 15,000 mg/L. The

shale also contained low levels of natural gas. Video logging of the limestone showed no visible

fractures and groundwater recovery in the test well was less than 10 cm per month. The

extremely slow water recovery rate demonstrated that there was negligible groundwater flux in

the limestone foundation.” -Energy Efficiency Initiatives at Durham College and UOIT, 2006-

10-25

Total Cost of drilling, piping and tubing came up to about $3.8 million. Mechanical and other

costs brought the total cost of the entire project up to about $4.6 million. Simple payback

calculations performed by the university returned a 7-year payback period. Whether the payback

was calculated assuming savings on electric heat or gas heat is unknown.

Certain things need to be taken into account when using the UOIT as a reference. First, this

system was built 4 years ago, so inflation should be taken into account. Also, the geothermal

system was put into place in the original building of the university, so the cost of changing

current heating or cooling systems that have not reached their useful or economic life were

avoided. That would probably represent the biggest argument against implementing this system.

However, if capital costs are in the range indicated by the UOIT example, geothermal is well

worth investigating. At approximately $650,000/MW in capital costs there aren‟t very many

cheaper alternatives. Maintenance is fairly low, and tubing life is from 25-75 years.

20


A 50% accelerated CCA is provided under Class 43.2 of Schedule II to the Income Tax

Regulations for specified energy generation equipment. This class was recently extended to

include Ground Source heat pump systems used in applications other than industrial processes or

greenhouses, for the first time. Class 43.2 will now include applications such as space and water

heating in industrial, commercial and residential buildings used for an income-earning purpose.

This tax break should be an incentive for increased investment in geothermal heat energy. For

more information see:

http://www.geo-

exchange.ca/en/canada_rsquo_s_budget_2008_proposes_to_include_gro_nw110.php


Geothermal energy is one of the cleanest. The only power requirements are those of the heat

pumps, which would represent a small fraction of the power produced by the system, about 15%.

The result means significant cuts in electricity usage, as well as CO2 emissions, NOx and SOx

emissions and particulate pollutants. Also, there is no adverse effect on the landscape as back

filling is performed. One important consideration is that it is important to make sure an energy

balance is struck that ensures that the amount of heat taken out of the ground equals the amount

of heat returned; anything else would result in the earth heating up or cooling.

2.3.5 Lake Water Heating and Cooling

Background on technology

Lake water heating and cooling runs on the same principles as geo-thermal heating and cooling,

with the real difference being that the heat is drawn or dumped from a water body such as a lake.

Open loop or closed loop systems can be used in this case as well, but closed loop systems are

http://www.geo-exchange.ca/en/canada_rsquo_s_budget_2008_proposes_to_include_gro_nw110.php

http://www.geo-exchange.ca/en/canada_rsquo_s_budget_2008_proposes_to_include_gro_nw110.php

21

preferred because lakes will tend to have impurities so drawing water straight from the lake may

result in problems with clogged pumps and heat exchangers. In a closed loop system the tubes

are laid on the bottom of the lake.

Feasibility/Economic Study

There do not appear to be any cases in which lake water heating and cooling has been used on

the scale required by Queen‟s (greater than 1MW). This is probably due to the fact that the

temperature differential between the air and lake is usually not high enough for heat pumps to be

used at high efficiencies. However it must be noted that capital costs would be lower for lake

water heating and cooling as compared to geothermal heating and cooling because of the lack of

need for excavation. Whether or not this reduction in capital costs justifies the lower efficiencies

is the question. Current trends in the usage of this technology in the large scale suggest that they

do not. As similar scale examples have been difficult to find, an economic study is not possible

at this time.

Government Funding

At present there are no government incentives available.

Environmental benefits

Like Geothermal Energy, the only power required to run lake water heating and cooling is that

required by the heat pumps. The amount of electrical energy required to run these will depend

on the efficiencies of these heat pumps, especially given the fact that the lake is not as good a

heat sink or source as the earth is. High efficiencies would result in significant cuts in electricity

usage, as well as CO2 emissions, NOx and SOx emissions and particulate pollutants. It is of

paramount importance to ensure that heat is not added or removed in quantities large enough to

disturb the temperature balance of the lake, and the marine life that depends on this balance.

22

2.4 Solar Panels

2.4.1 Solar Energy

A nuclear reaction in the sun generates radiant energy and as the sun shines on the Earth, its

energy travels in the form of electromagnetic radiation. As it passes through the atmosphere

some of the energy is absorbed, but the rest is concentrated at the Earth‟s surface. The sun

provides a virtually unlimited supply of solar energy which can be used as a renewable energy

source. This solar energy can be converted into different energies (thermal or electric) by various

solar energy technologies. The solar energy available, which is dependant upon the sun‟s

location in the sky and the cloud conditions, can be harnessed in three ways, as described

below.11

The first two types of solar energy, passive or active, can be grouped under the category Solar

Thermal energy. This energy uses technology to convert sunlight into energy in the form of heat.

The technologies available vary, and the type chosen depends upon the nature of the end use of

the heat energy.

Passive solar, which functions as a stationary system, uses sunlight for heat energy without the

use of collectors. It is passive in nature because nothing is used to distribute the generated energy

to where it is used. Exploiting passive solar energy usually involves windows, walls, floors, or

roofs which make use of sunlight for daylight, space heating, or space cooling. Passive heating

designs collect and store thermal energy from direct sunlight. Passive cooling minimizes the

effects of solar radiation through shading or generating air flow with convection ventilation. The

advantages of using passive solar techniques are the simplicity of the technology and the

relatively low cost.

Active solar converts the sun‟s radiation into heat energy using specially placed solar collectors.

These collectors generally consist of a panel or container that has either air or a liquid passing

through it to collect the heat energy.

23

The third type of solar energy can be harnessed by photovoltaic (PV) solar systems and this will

be described in the Solar Voltaic Panels section below. The amount of solar energy available

depends on the orientation and angle the panels are mounted at as well as the obstructions and

size of the solar array.12

2.4.2 Solar Panel Technology

This report will focus on using active solar energy to produce thermal energy. Passive solar is

not analyzed in the report because of the way it is implemented; mainly through installing

specialized windows. In Canada there are two categories of active solar water heaters available;

year-round and seasonal. Year-round systems are designed to operate reliably in all weather

conditions through the entire year. Seasonal solar water heaters will only operate when

temperatures are above freezing and must be shut down if the temperature drops below zero.

Both systems are designed to be durable and little maintenance is required. For Queen‟s use,

year-round systems will be considered.

There are many possible designs for a solar water heater however in general they consist of three

main components. The first is a solar collector (the different types can be seen in the section

Solar Panels – In Depth Technology in the appendix) which converts solar radiation into useable

heat. The second component is either a heat exchanger or a pump module, and these transfer the

heat from the solar collector into the portable water. The heat is transferred, by circulating water,

antifreeze, or sometimes air, to the final component, a storage tank, which is used to house the

solar heated water.13

The components all work together so that when there is enough sunlight, a heat transfer fluid is

pumped through the collector and as it travels, the sun heats it. The heated fluid is then circulated

to a heat exchanger which transfers the energy into an insulated storage tank. The pump is

powered by electricity from an electrical outlet or a small PV module attached to the collector.

24

When the hot water is needed, cold water from the main water supply enters the bottom of the

storage tank. The solar heated water at the top of the tank flows into the conventional water

heater and then to the desired location. See Figure 3 below for a basic flow diagram of the

process. If the water at the top of the storage tank is sufficiently hot enough, no additional

heating is required. However if the solar heated water is only warm, the conventional water

heater heats the water to the desired temperature.14

Figure 3 - Basic process diagram of solar thermal heating system.15

2.4.3 Energy for Heating Water

The specific heat is a physical property that measures the energy required to raise the

temperature of a particular substance. The specific heat of water is 4.2 J/oC.g

16, where 4.2 joules

of energy is required to raise the temperature of one gram of water by one degree centigrade. In

order to determine the energy requirements the volume of heated water required and the given

time period must be known. The temperature rise must also be identified; the desired temperature

of the water minus the temperature of the initial, cold water. To convert the measured energy into

25

kilowatt hours (kWh), divide the amount in mega-joules (MJ) by 3.6 to obtain the amount of

energy that must be put into the water, in kWh. Water heating systems are not 100% efficient

because there are heat losses. In order to determine the size of the collector, the equation below

is used.

efficiencyCollector meter squareper energy Solar

demandedEnergy required areaCollector

2.4.4 Use on Campus

Water heating is a common use of solar thermal energy and it is feasible for implementation on

campus, whether it is heating the water in the Queen‟s pool, heating the water used in the

Physical Education Centre (P.E.C.), or heating the water used in other campus buildings. For

solar water heating to take effect, the collectors must be mounted on a southerly-facing slope or

roof, and they must also be connected to a storage tank. Therefore collectors could be placed on

top of most buildings on campus if required.

When compared to other solar technologies, solar water heating devices have high efficiencies.

The performance will depend upon the site of deployment, but flat-plate and evacuated-tube

collectors can be expected to have efficiencies above 60% during normal operating conditions.

The most efficient and economical system for commercial solar water heating would be a liquid-

based glazed flat-plate collector panel, with glycol being the antifreeze liquid used.17

Using solar systems to heat a swimming pool requires that the collectors be placed on a south,

west, or east facing roof. The number of panels needed is dependent on the direction of the roof

and the size of the pool. The collectors must not be shaded by trees or other buildings. It is easier

to install year round systems during construction rather than retrofitting an existing building.

Currently the Queen‟s Center is under construction, and includes a planned new swimming pool;

this represents an excellent opportunity to consider installation of a solar water heating system.

26

It should be noted that this pool is 80% larger, by volume, than the existing pool; therefore the

cost of heating will greatly increase.18

2.4.5 Feasibility

Solar thermal energy can be used to offset traditional energy needs; up to 60% of domestic water

heating needs, and up to 90% of pool heating needs.19

Before a solar system can be installed, a

site assessment must occur to determine if the system is worthwhile. Tests need to be conducted

to establish how many collectors are required. The size of the load, the efficiency of the unit, the

amount of solar radiation at the site, and the amount of storage available all need to be known

before a solar system can be chosen. Most of Ontario is considered to possess good solar thermal

potential, and according to Figure 5 and Figure 6 below, Kingston would have adequate solar

radiation for solar panels to be effective.20

Figure 4 - Scale of Reference.

27

Figure 5 - Average mean daily global solar radiation and variability of solar radiation. Incident on a

horizontal surface. See Figure 4 for scale of reference.

28

Figure 6 - Annual mean daily global solar radiation. Incident on inclined surface of 90o and 60

o with a south

orientation. See Figure 4 for scale of reference.

Solar energy can be used to heat indoor swimming pools, and either glazed or unglazed solar

collectors can be used. For year round use of the pool, glazed collectors will provide a greater

percentage of the annual heat required whereas unglazed collectors have shorter payback

periods. For more information on heating swimming pools visit Enerpool, which models the

performance of a solar collector used for heating a swimming pool:

http://canren.gc.ca/tech_appl/index.asp?CaId=5&PgID=484#enerpool


ecoEnergy for renewable heat is available for solar panel systems and offers the financial

incentive of a 25% rebate for the purchase and installation of renewable solar heating systems.

There are conditions that need to be met in order to qualify. The level of incentive is 25% of

eligible project costs however the maximum incentive is $80,000 per installation and the

http://canren.gc.ca/tech_appl/index.asp?CaId=5&PgID=484#enerpool

29

corporate maximum incentive for multiple installations is $2 million. Active solar water and air

heating systems that are installed in Canada qualify for the incentive although eligible systems

must use only collectors accepted by the program. A full list of these can be found at:

http://www.ecoaction.gc.ca/ecoenergy-ecoenergie/heat-chauffage/collectors-capteurs-eng.cfm

More information can be found at their website and to apply an online application form must be

completed:

http://www.ecoaction.gc.ca/ecoenergy-ecoenergie/heat-chauffage/index-eng.cfm

2.4.7 Environmental Aspects

Solar thermal is a clean reliable source of energy. A solar water heater reduces the amount of

fuel needed to heat water because it captures the sun‟s renewable energy. Many solar water

heaters use a small PV module to power the heat exchanger or pump which is required to

circulate the fluid through the collectors, eliminating the use of other electric sources. Once the

panels have been installed, they pose no health or safety risk to humans or wildlife. Solar-

thermal technologies generate zero air emissions, though some emissions are created during the

manufacturing stages of the technology.

2.4.8 Economics

The economic feasibility of installing solar hot water heaters on campus will be assessed using

RETScreen. This technology is unable to fulfill 100% of the campus‟s needs, but it can be

installed on individual buildings to heat that buildings water. One example is the University

Club, a restaurant on campus that consumed 3,905 m3 of water from April 2006 to April 2007.

21

It was estimated that 50% of the water usage would need to be heated, which works out to be

5,263.4 L/d. The full RETScreen analysis can be found in the RETScreen for Solar System on

University Club Appendix. In order to complete a thorough cost analysis it was decided to use a

solar product in the RETScreen database. Immosolar‟s IS-PRO 2000 Tinox glazed solar water

http://www.ecoaction.gc.ca/ecoenergy-ecoenergie/heat-chauffage/collectors-capteurs-eng.cfm

http://www.ecoaction.gc.ca/ecoenergy-ecoenergie/heat-chauffage/index-eng.cfm

30

heating collector was used. The fact sheet can be found in the Immosolar IS-PRO 2000 Tinox

Fact Sheet Appendix.

First, the Energy Model tab was opened. Kingston was chosen as the nearest location for weather

data. The program then calculated the required weather inputs. The Solar Heating and Resource

Load tab was then opened and the slope of the collector was set to 25o because this enabled the

average solar radiation to be at a maximum. The application type was service hot water, and the

system configuration was set to have storage. The hot water use was entered (L/d) and the

desired water temperature was set to the recommended 60oC. The energy demand was calculated

by RETScreen to be 32,910 kWh for the year. The Energy Model tab was revisited. The heating

fuel type was selected to be electricity and the water heating system efficiency was set to 88%;

the recommended amount for a system run by electricity with a storage tank. As mentioned

above the collector used was the glazed IS-PRO 2000 Tinox. RETScreen inputted the required

collector data. The number of collectors needed was recommended; so 47 collectors were used.

The general value for the ratio of storage capacity to collector area is 75 L/m2, so this was

entered. Antifreeze protection was included for the heat exchange, having 80% effectiveness,

because of the climate in Kingston. The renewable energy delivered by the system was

calculated to be 21,190 kWh per year, so this system would fulfill 64% of the building‟s hot

water needs.

The Cost Analysis tab was opened and the type of analysis performed was pre-feasibility. The

currency was set to Canadian dollars. Below in Table 3 the costs imputed in RETScreen can be

seen. The cost of solar collectors range from $180/m2 to $310/m

2 and the lower end of this price

range comes into play when purchasing a large volume of panels. For this study, the solar

collectors cost $200/m2. When inspecting the attached RETScreen analysis, the additional costs

were justified using the RETScreen database cost knowledge. Contingencies have also been

applied to the calculations to ensure that all costs are taken into account. The O&M costs are

minimal, allowing for the water/glycol mixture to be replaced, and the periodic costs account for

equipment that might need to be replaced after 10 years over the project‟s 25 year life span.

31

Table 3 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for the solar system for the University Club.

Cost ($)

Feasibility Study 5,000

Development 4,000

Engineering 2,500

Solar Collectors 18,424

Transportation 3,000

Other Equipment 3,842

Balance of System (total) 4,227

Misc. Contingencies 4,363

Total Initial Costs 45,357

Total Annual (O&M)Costs 55

Valves and Fittings (10 yr) 500

The financial parameters used to complete the analysis, in the Financial Summary tab, are as

follows. The incentives/grants were calculated to be $11,339.25, which was 25% of the total

initial costs. The debt ratio was set at 70% with an interest rate of 7% over a 15 year term. This

period of time was less than the 25 year life span of the project. Below in Table 4 is the summary

of the calculated financial results. The NPV is positive, which means that over the 25 year period

the project will be profitable. The payback period is just under 15 years (14.9) and the

cumulative cash flow graph can be seen in Figure 7 below.

32

Table 4 - Summary of financial feasibility of solar system for the University Club.

Financial Feasibility

Pre-tax IRR and ROI % 13.3% Calculate GHG reduction cost? yes/no No

After-tax IRR and ROI % 13.3% GHG emission reduction cost CAD/tCO2 Not calculated

Simple Payback Yr

14.9 Project equity CAD 13,607

Year-to-positive cash flow Yr 15.6 Project debt CAD 31,750

Net Present Value - NPV CAD

1,320 Debt payments CAD/yr 3,486

Annual Life Cycle Savings CAD

168 Debt service coverage - 0.69

Benefit-Cost (B-C) ratio -

1.10 RE production cost ¢/kWh in construction

Figure 7 - Cumulative cash flow graph for solar system for the University Club.

33

Another example of using solar thermal heating on campus is on the Lasalle Building, which

consumed 3,515 m3 of water from April 2006 to April 2007.

22 It was estimated that 20% of the

water usage would need to be heated, which works out to be 1918.71 L/d. The full RETScreen

analysis can be found in the RETScreen for Solar System on the Lasalle Building Appendix. The

same analysis was performed as the example above. The energy demand was calculated by

RETScreen to be 12,000 kWh for the year. The number of collectors needed was recommended;

so 17 collectors were used. The renewable energy delivered by the system was calculated to be

7,680 kWh per year, so this system would fulfill 64% of the buildings hot water needs. The

incentives/grants were calculated to be $7,278, which was 25% of the total initial costs. Below in

Table 5 is the summary of the calculated financial results. The NPV is negative, which means

that over the 25 year period the project will not be profitable. The payback period is 22.7 years.

Table 5 - Summary of financial feasibility of solar system for the Lasalle building.


Pre-tax IRR and ROI % 4.2% Calculate GHG reduction cost?

After-tax IRR and ROI % 4.2% GHG emission reduction cost CAD/tCO2 Not calculated

Simple Payback yr 22.7 Project equity CAD 7,661

Year-to-positive cash flow

yr 21.2 Project debt CAD 17,875

Net Present Value - NPV

CAD

(4,239) Debt payments CAD/yr 1,963


(540) Debt service coverage - 0.37

Benefit-Cost (B-C) ratio

- 0.45 RE production cost ¢/kWh in construction

2.5 Solar Voltaic Panels

2.5.1 Solar Energy

As described in the previous section on Solar Energy there are three ways that solar energy can

be harnessed. The process of converting small particles of light (photons) into electricity

(voltage) is called the photovoltaic (PV) effect. Electrons in certain types of crystals are freed by

solar energy and can be provoked to travel through an electrical circuit, which can power

electronic devices. PV cells are semiconductor devices which are usually made of silicon. They

34

contain no liquids, corrosive chemicals, or moving parts. As long as light shines on the cells,

they will convert sunlight directly into electricity. PV modules generate direct current (DC) and

come in many different sizes which generate different voltages. The efficiency of solar PV

increases in colder temperatures, making it well suited for Kingston. It should be noted that the

cells are not used for heating water or other heating requirements due to the efficiency of the

cells. Solar panels are better suited for these applications, since they convert approximately 60%

of the sun‟s energy into heat whereas PV cells only convert 12% to 15% of the sun‟s energy into

electricity. This is because only sunlight of certain energies works effectively to create

electricity, since much of the sunlight is reflected or absorbed by the material that makes up the

cell.23

2.5.2 Photovoltaic Cells

There are three main categories of PV systems: autonomous, hybrid, and grid connected. The

type used is dependent on the specific needs, location, and budget. Autonomous systems do not

depend on other power sources and require batteries for storage. Hybrid systems receive a

portion of their power from outside sources and they also require batteries for storage. Grid

connected systems allow the reduction of electricity consumed from the grid and in some cases

feed excess electricity produced back into the grid. Batteries are not required since the system is

hooked up to the electricity grid.24

A grid connected PV system normally has the following components: solar panels, inverters, and

mounts. The different varieties of solar panels are described in the Solar PV – In Depth

Technology Appendix. Invertors are important because they convert direct current, which PV

cells produce, to alternating current. Solar panel mounts attach the solar system to a roof, wall, or

the ground.

35

2.5.3 Use on Campus

PV cells have the potential to be implemented on campus to generate electricity. Flat-plate

stationary arrays that are grid connected would be used, and could either be made of single

crystal silicon or polycrystal silicon.

The campus electricity use in 2005 - 2006 was 93,545,435 kWh.25

A Carmanah Technology 100

kW PV system will generate about 110,000 kWh per year.26

Table 6 lists the number of PV

systems needed to produce certain percentages of the campus‟s electricity. One 100 kW PV

system will only produce 0.12% of the campus‟s electricity needs. 851 systems are required to

produce 100% of the electricity consumption. The sizing of systems follows the general rule: 1

kW per 100 square feet (9.3 square meters). Therefore a 100 kW system will require 10,000

square feet (929 square meters) and 851 PV systems will need 8,510,000 square feet (790,604

square meters). To put this in perspective the 20 kW PV system that was installed on campus (on

Goodwin Hall) in 2003 had an array area of 181.7 square meters (1937.5 square feet).27

Due to

the required size of PV systems, it is unlikely that many systems would be able to be installed on

campus; from a space perspective.

Table 6 - PV (100 kW) electricity output and campus electricity consumption.

Number of PV

Systems

(100 kW)

Electricity

Produced

(kWh per year)

Percent of Campus

Consumption

(%)

1 110000 0.12

2 220000 0.24

3 330000 0.35

4 440000 0.47

5 550000 0.59

6 660000 0.71

7 770000 0.82

8 880000 0.94

9 990000 1.06

10 1100000 1.18

851 93610000 100.07

36

2.5.4 Feasibility

Compared to other electricity producing technologies solar PV is expensive. The price of cells

has greatly decreased since they first came on the market, and they are constantly decreasing due

to improvements in the technologies available and the ongoing research. When comparing the

electricity output to other technologies, the PV system appears quite small. For example a 100

kW PV system produces about 110,000 kWh per year whereas a 1.5 MW wind turbine can

produce 5,125,000 kWh per year. Before a system can be installed, feasibility studies must be

completed to decide if the PV system is practical. The solar rating, the average solar energy

available at a specific location, must be measured and the ideal tilt angle must be determined.

Solar PV systems are safe, clean, and reliable. Their operation is quiet and they require virtually

no maintenance. The panels can also be mounted on roofs or walls, so existing space can be

utilized and the panels will not require additional space. Another benefit is net metering, which

allows the electric meter to go backwards when the panels are producing more electricity than

the campus uses.


ecoEnergy for renewable power is available for solar PV systems and offers one cent per

kilowatt-hour for up to ten years. There are conditions that need to be met. The project must have

a total rated capacity of 1 megawatt or greater, where rated capacity is the sum of the nameplate

capacity of all the electrical generators involved in the system. The maximum capacity factor is

20%. More information can be found at their website and to apply an online application form

must be completed:

http://www.ecoaction.gc.ca/ecoenergy-ecoenergie/apps/power-electricite/app-01a-form-eng.cfm


37

Solar PV systems also qualify for a PPA. The SOP for solar PV energy projects pays the

developer 42 cents/kWh. There are rules and regulations and they can be found here:

http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/SOP/Page.asp?PageID=122&ContentID=4045


Photovoltaic power systems generate no air pollution while operating. The primary

environmental issue surrounding PV cells is the manufacturing process, since energy, generally

from fossil fuels, is needed to produce the solar components. Large scale solar power farms

require vast amounts of land; approximately one square kilometer is needed for every 20 – 60

megawatts (MW) generated. When building on this land, evaluations must be completed to take

into account the native wildlife.28

2.5.7 Economics

The economic feasibility of installing a 99 kW PV solar system on campus was assessed using

RETScreen. The full RETScreen analysis can be found in the RETScreen for Solar PV System

Appendix. In order to complete a thorough cost analysis it was decided to use a solar product in

the RETScreen database. Carmanah Technologies does not have its products listed on

RETScreen, so Canadian Solar Inc. was used. According to RETScreen, the annual energy

delivered by the system would be approximately 118, 654 kWh per year. As mentioned above,

this would be sufficient for a small building on campus, but could not be used to power campus.


data. The program then calculated the required weather inputs. The product database was used to

input the specifications of the system. The supplier was Canadian Solar and the model was the

CS6A-180P (see the fact sheet in the Canadian Solar Inc. CS6A - 180 Fact Sheet Appendix). The

module type was poly-Si and the module rating was 180 W, so 550 panels were needed to make

up a 99 kW PV system.


38



seen. The cost of PV modules range from $5,500/kW to $8,000/kW and the lower end of this

price range comes into play when purchasing a large volume of panels (greater than 20 kW). In

this case the PV module cost $5,750/kW, and the additional equipment required for the project

was estimated to cost $3,000/kW. The reasoning for this is that a 100 kW system costs

approximately $900,000, or $9,000/kW of system, therefore if the PV module costs almost

$6,000, the additional equipment will make up the difference. Contingencies have also been

applied to the calculations to ensure that all costs are taken into account. The O&M costs were

taken to be 2% of the total initial cost, per year and the refurbishment costs were assumed to be

approximately 10% of the initial energy equipment costs.29

The main item that would need to be

replaced is the inverter, and this would have to be done every 10 years over the projects 25 year

life span.

39

Table 7 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for the PV system.

Cost ($)


Development 20,000

Engineering 70,000

PV Module(s) 569,250


Other Equipment 297,000

Balance of Plant (total) 359,631


Total Initial Costs 1,513,899

Total Annual (O&M)Costs 12,188

Inverter (10 yr) 100,000

The financial parameters used to complete the analysis are as follows. The RE production credit

was $0.42/kWh, which corresponds to the SOP of forty two cents per kilowatt-hour for up to

twenty years, which was the RE production credit duration. The debt ratio was set at 70% with

an interest rate of 7% over a 15 year term. This period of time was less than the 25 year life span

of the project. Below in Table 8 is the summary of the calculated financial results. The NPV is

negative, which means that over the 25 year period the project will not be profitable. The

payback period is just under 31 years (30.7) and the cumulative cash flow graph can be seen in

Figure 8 below.

40

Table 8 - Summary of financial feasibility of PV system.


Pre-tax IRR and ROI % -9.8%

After-tax IRR and ROI % -9.8%

Simple Payback yr 30.7 Year-to-positive cash flow yr more than 25 Project equity CAD

454,170

Net Present Value – NPV CAD

(828,065) Project debt CAD

1,059,729


(105,578) Debt payments CAD/yr

116,353


(0.82) Debt service coverage -

(0.46)

Figure 8 - Cumulative cash flow graph for PV system.

41

2.6 Wind Turbines

2.6.1 Wind

Throughout history, wind has been used to aid society, whether it is in pumping water, grinding

grain, or generating electricity. Wind is a free resource and in Kingston, Ontario, there is an

abundance of it. It was not until the early 1970s, when the cost of oil and gas rose, that wind was

viewed as a viable source of renewable energy for commercial electricity production.30

Wind, like all forms of energy, is powered by the sun. The Earth‟s surface is heated to different

temperatures by the sun and this in turn warms the air above it, making it less dense. This occurs

at varying times and in many locations. As the light air rises, a low pressure zone is created near

the ground, and air from surrounding cooler areas descends to balance the pressure. This air

movement creates wind. There are two different types of wind that affect the Earth‟s atmosphere;

global winds and surface winds.31

Global winds are produced on a global scale due to the temperature differences between the

polar caps and equator, aided by the rotation of the Earth. Surface winds are local winds which

are generally measured at altitudes below one hundred meters, and are therefore affected by

obstacles, such as mountains and valleys, as well as the local thermal conditions. Due to

elevation, topography, surface roughness, and location, some areas experience more wind than

others. The faster the wind, the more energy can be produced, to a certain degree. Therefore it is

important to use the right wind turbine in the right location.32

2.6.2 Wind Turbine Technology Summary

2.6.2.1 Wind Turbine Components

The modern versions of windmills have been termed wind turbines. Over the past two decades

much research has been completed in the field of wind technology and wind turbines are now

42

capable of large scale electricity generation. A wind turbine is made up of the following

components (see Figure 9 and Figure 10): the foundation, tower, blades, rotor, pitch system,

break, yaw system, generator, controller, and a nacelle. A transformer is also needed. The basic

operation begins when the wind passes over the rotor blades, causing them to turn. The shaft of

the rotor may lead to a gearbox, which can increase the speed, or it may go directly into the

generator and create electricity. For additional information on the technology behind wind

turbines see section Wind Turbines – In Depth Technology in the appendix.33

This report does

not describe the turbines used in offshore energy production.

Figure 9 - View of a typical horizontal wind turbine.34

43

Figure 10 - Close up view of a horizontal wind turbine.35

2.6.2.2 Wind Turbine Types

There are two primary designs for wind turbines and they differ in the way their rotors spin;

either about a horizontal or vertical axis. In Ontario, three-blade rotors spinning about a

horizontal axis upwind of the tower are the preferred wind turbine choice.

Vertical axis turbines look like an eggbeater. Two or three rotor blades are attached at the top

and close to the bottom of the tower and protrude out in the middle, and this can be seen in

Figure 11 below. The gearbox and generator are housed in a protective structure at the base of

the tower. Typically vertical turbines are not as tall as horizontal turbines, thus they do not

44

capture the greater wind speeds available at higher altitudes. As stated above, these turbines are

not popular in Canada, and horizontal axes are the turbine of choice.36

Figure 11 - A vertical axis wind turbine.37

Horizontal axis turbines look like modern windmills, as shown in Figure 12. They have two or,

more commonly, three rotor blades attached like a propeller to the front of the tower at the top.

There are two sub-types of horizontal axis turbines, those with rotors rotating in front of the

tower (windward) and those rotating behind the tower (leeward) in relation to the direction of the

wind. The windward model is most common for large scale commercial use. The tower and

nacelle do not become obstructions and this increases the efficiency of the turbine. In the leeward

model, the wind must flow around the nacelle to get to the rotor, which acts as a rudder,

eradicating the need for a yaw drive or motor. This type of turbine has a slightly lower efficiency

rating and is more suited for smaller turbines.38

45

Figure 12 - A windward horizontal axis wind turbine.39

2.6.3 Wind to Electricity

In order for wind to be converted to electricity, some conversions must be considered. The

amount of energy and power that wind transmits increases by a factor of two and three

respectively as the wind speed increases. The power that can be produced from wind is

calculated in terms of swept area. For a horizontal axis turbine this is the area through which the

rotor blades pass. If the diameter of the rotor blades doubles, the power increases by a factor of

four. If the wind speed also doubles, the power is increased by a factor of eight. Current wind

turbines convert up to 50% of wind energy into electricity. However wind turbines do not always

run at nominal output due to wind not being constant. So the quantity of energy generated is

below the theoretical possible amount. The capacity factor compares the actual production over a

given period of time to the amount of power the turbine would have produced if it had run at full

capacity for the same amount of time. The time period is usually 8,760 hours, one year. The

capacity factor can range from 18 % to 30 % depending on the location of the turbine.40

46

2.6.4 Electricity to the Grid

How the electricity gets to the grid is dependent on the generator used. Large scale turbines, on

the megawatt scale, use grid-connected asynchronous generators. These run at a similar speed to

the grid and are directly connected to it. Rectifiers convert electricity to direct current and

inverters convert direct current to alternating current. Both of these devices are not required if the

generator on the turbine is asynchronous. However turbines that have synchronous generators

need both a rectifier and an inverter.41

2.6.5 Sizing and Logistics

Wind turbine sizes vary drastically. They can range from small 10 kilowatt models which can

provide power to a cottage, to large 1 to 5 megawatt models that power cities. Wind turbines

begin rotating in winds of 14 km/h (4 m/s) and will generate electricity between winds of 16

km/h to 90 km/h (4.5 m/s to 25 m/s); however maximum power is normally achieved with a

wind speed of about 55 km/h (15 m/s). Winds in excess of 90 km/h (25 m/s) will trigger the

turbine‟s automated shut down.42

Again, the size of the rotor blades varies. Small turbine rotors are usually less than 1 meter in

diameter and are no higher than 25 meters. Medium sized turbines range from 3 meters to 15

meters in diameter and have a height range of 25 meters to 80 meters. Commercial scale turbines

range from 50 meters to 100 meters in diameter and have a height range of 80 meters to 150

meters. Figure 13 shows a visualization of the relative size of wind turbines. In general, the

diameter is approximately twice the blade length.43

47

Figure 13 - Relative size of wind turbines.44

As an example of the size proportions of the turbine components, specifications are provided for

a 1.8 MW turbine.45

The nacelle is the size of a small motor home and weighs 63,000 kg. The

blades are 39 meters long, each, and weigh a collective 35,000 kg. The tower is 65 meters tall. It

weighs 132,000 kg. The foundation was dug 9 to 10 meters deep and 4 meters wide. The swept

area of the blades covers 5,024 meters squared, which is about the size of 3 NHL hockey rinks

combined. The whole turbine weighs 230,000 kg. A 5 MW turbine has blades that are 63 meters

long that have a swept area of 12,560 meters squared and its tower is 110 meters tall.

Consideration must be given to how the turbines are spaced due to their size. In order to avoid

turbulence, turbines must have at least 4 rotor diameters apart when placed side by side, and at

least 6 rotor diameters apart when positioned in front of one another.46

2.6.6 Industry

Currently there are five main companies who dominate the wind turbine industry, with Germany,

Denmark, and Spain leading the way. Denmark‟s Vestas Wind System is the world‟s largest

wind turbine manufacturer, which has a 34% market share. Spain‟s Gamesa has an 18% market

48

share and is the only fully integrated wind power service provider in the world. Enercon, GE

Energy, and Siemens are all fairly new to the wind turbine industry, but they are becoming large

producers.47

There are many companies based in Canada and even Ontario that produce wind

turbines; however they are generally on a much smaller scale and are mainly small wind

turbines.

2.6.7 Use on Campus

Queen‟s electrical consumption for 2005 – 2006 was 93,545,435 kWh.48

Wolfe Island is getting

a 198 MW wind farm built this spring so Kingston definitely has suitable wind resources for the

development of wind power projects.49

Horizontal axis wind turbines could be implemented on

campus to generate electricity for campus consumption. An average 1.5 MW wind turbine in

Kingston will generate 5,125,000 kWh of electricity per year.50

Based on this figure, nineteen 1.5

MW turbines would generate enough electricity for the campus. Table 9 shows the breakdown of

electricity produced by the turbines and what percentage of campus electricity that represents.

However, as mentioned above in the section Sizing and Logistics, a 1.5 MW turbine stands just

under 100 meters tall with its rotor blades taken into consideration.

49

Table 9 - Turbine (1.5 MW) electricity output and campus electricity consumption.

Number of

Turbines

(1.5 MW)

Electricity

Produced

(kWh per year)

Percent of

Campus

Consumption

(%)

1 5,125,000 5.5

2 10,250,000 11.0

3 15,375,000 16.4

4 20,500,000 21.9

5 25,625,000 27.4

6 30,750,000 32.9

7 35,875,000 38.4

8 41,000,000 43.8

9 46,125,000 49.3

10 51,250,000 54.8

11 56,375,000 60.3

12 61,500,000 65.7

13 66,625,000 71.2

14 71,750,000 76.7

15 76,875,000 82.2

16 82,000,000 87.7

17 87,125,000 93.1

18 92,250,000 98.6

19 97,375,000 104.1

2.6.8 Feasibility

To develop a wind project, a good wind site is required. Before installation can begin many

studies must be completed to assess all the risks involved and to determine if the project is

viable. First, studies must be performed to determine the wind speeds and directions. This is

achieved by installing a meteorological mast which supports wind vanes and wind speed sensors.

When measuring the wind‟s characteristics, the tests should be carried out at the same height the

turbine would be. The instruments should be installed with a heating device to ensure they do not

ice up (in the winter) and give faulty data. To verify the suitability of an area‟s wind conditions,

data should be collected for several years. An environmental assessment is also required if the

site‟s wind is deemed suitable, and this will include reports on; bird and wildlife populations,

50

hydrology, agriculture, public consultation, noise, and visual aspects. These issues are discussed

further in the section Environmental Aspects below. However a wind turbine project producing

less than 2 MW power does not require a provincial environmental assessment. It is also advised

to involve the community in the plans. Before construction can begin, zoning and building

permits are required. Once the turbines are built they can be connected to the electricity grid.51

The size of the turbines must be considered in relation to the space on campus. For 10% of

Queen‟s electricity needs to be met, two 1.5 MW turbines would be needed. Due to the limited

free space available on campus and the safety consideration to take into account, it is highly

unlikely that even one turbine this size could be built. Other options can be considered, including

producing electricity on a much smaller scale, as described below.

2.6.9 Small Wind

Small scale wind generation provides local, on-site power because the turbines are placed at the

same site where the electricity will be used. They generally produce between 300 W to 300 kW.

Additional generated energy can be sent to the local electricity grid. Small wind turbines differ

from large wind turbines. The technology involved is quite different and small wind installations

have to adhere to different by-laws and wind studies. Small wind turbines generally consist of a

rotor, generator, gearbox, nacelle, tail vane, and the tower.52

The rotor is comprised of the shaft and the blades, which are made from either fiberglass, metal,

reinforced plastic, or wood. As the wind flows over the blades the rotor converts the kinetic

energy into rotational motion. The amount of energy generated by the system is determined by

the diameter of the circle formed by the rotor blades. The generator converts the rotational

motion to electricity. Depending on the application of the turbine the generator can either

produce direct current or alternating current. If the turbine‟s rating is above 10 kW it will have a

gearbox, and this matches the rotor speed to the speed of the generator. The generator and

gearbox are housed in a removable casing, the nacelle. The tail vane acts as the turbines yaw

51

system. This system aligns the turbine (the rotor) to face the wind so that the blades can capture

the wind. The tower holds up the turbine and is designed to stand up to extreme conditions. For

turbines rated above 50 kW, non-tilt up, self-supporting towers are usually implemented. These

towers are very strong and usually cylindrical in shape.53

Just as with large turbines, there are two general types of small wind turbines; horizontal and

vertical, as shown in Figure 14. With horizontal axis wind turbines (HAWT) the shaft is parallel

to the ground and are mechanically simple. Vertical axis wind turbines (VAWT) have a shaft that

is perpendicular to the ground. Compared to HAWTs, VAWTs require a larger instillation area

to ensure that the turbine has been securely mounted. The majority of small wind turbines are

HAWTs.54

Figure 14 - Small wind turbine types.55

Small wind turbines offer many benefits. Aside from giving the user energy independence, small

wind benefits the environment. Modern turbines are extremely safe and have a long life span;

however ice can accumulate on the blades in freezing conditions. Noise is not an issue assuming

52

the turbine has been properly installed. Before the turbines can be installed, by-laws should be

checked to determine if height restrictions apply.

For use on campus, turbines with power ratings from 30 kW to 300 kW would be valid since

these are commonly used to provide electricity to businesses and farms. Generally a 3-bladed

horizontal axis turbine, with a generator, would be used and it would be able to be connected to

the grid. The turbines have a general life span of over 20 years. If required, all major components

of the turbine can be replaced and this allows the systems life span to be extended dramatically.

Costs do range, but basic systems start at about $2,200 per kW.56


ecoEnergy for renewable power is available for wind turbine installations and offers the financial

incentive of one cent per kilowatt-hour for up to ten years. There are conditions that need to be

met in order to qualify. The project must have a total rated capacity of 1 megawatt or greater,

where rated capacity is the sum of the nameplate capacity of all the electrical generators involved

in the system. The maximum capacity factor is 35%. More information can be found at their

website and to apply an online application form must be completed:


Wind turbine installations also qualify for a PPA. The SOP for wind energy pays the developer

11.04 cents/kWh. There are rules and regulations and they can be found here:



From an environmental perspective, wind energy is clean and renewable since it generates no air

emissions and is powered solely by wind. The lifecycle environmental cost of wind turbines is

very low in comparison to other methods of producing electricity, and the cost is predominantly



53

associated with the production and installation of the turbines. Figure 15 illustrates the amount of

carbon dioxide (CO2) produced per terajoule of electricity can be seen for nuclear, coal, oil, gas,

hydro, photovoltaic, and wind power. As can be seen, wind energy produces the least amount.

Figure 15 - Graph of different energy sources and the amount of CO2 per terajoule of electricity produced by

each.57

Before construction can begin, a thorough environmental assessment must be performed. The

proposed site will be monitored, generally over a one to two year period, for wildlife activity.

The main concern is for the bird and bat populations in the area, and how their flight patterns and

habits will be affected.58

Some studies suggest that wind turbines could pose a threat to local bird

and bat populations. Wind turbines could impact the natural habitat of birds, and there is also the

risk that they will collide with the turbine. However a study reviewing the impact of wind farms

on birds in the United States determined that in general, only two birds per turbine per year die

from collisions with the turbines. In comparison, millions of deaths per year occur as a result of

birds crashing into buildings and windows.59

There is also a concern for bat populations,

however the full effect of wind turbines on the species is not known to date. Studies are being

carried out by the United States, Canada, and the wind turbine companies to determine the

effects.

54

Noise is another issue with wind turbines. In residential, rural, and industrial areas there are laws

that state the legal limit for noise pollution. When planning to erect a wind turbine, maps of

isophones must be created, since these indicate the specific noise levels, to ensure that the levels

adhere to the law.60

The noise (sound power level) that a wind turbine produces varies with the

wind speed, and thus at what rate the turbines are spinning at. However the majority of modern

turbines have been engineered to be virtually silent. According to the American Wind Energy

Association, “you can stand directly beneath a turbine and have a normal conversation without

raising your voice.”61

The harder the wind blows, the faster the turbine operates, and therefore

the more noise it produces. Yet most of the sound generated by the blades will be masked by the

sound of the wind itself.62

2.6.12 Economics

A few scenarios will be analyzed. First the economic feasibility of installing a 1.65 MW wind

turbine (Vestas - V82 see Vestas V82 Fact Sheet in the appendix) on campus will be assessed. It

is usually more cost effective on a per turbine basis to build a multi-turbine facility than to build

a single turbine because the development and operation costs of a single wind turbine are similar

to a multi turbine facility. Therefore the possibility of installing 20 turbines will also be

analyzed, with both projects life span assumed to be 25 years. The actual lifetime of a wind

turbine depends both on the quality of the turbine and the local climatic conditions, and generally

they will outlast their warranty rate. Due to the size demands of a 1.65 MW turbine its

practicality on campus is doubtful; therefore the possibility of installing small wind turbines will

be analyzed. Two options will be considered. One installation of a 50 kW turbine (Entegrity

Wind Systems - EW15 see Entegrity Wind Systems - EW15 Fact Sheet in the appendix) will be

analyzed, and then the possibility of installing 20 turbines all around campus.

2.6.12.1 Single Wind Turbine – 1 x 1.65 MW

The annual energy delivered by the turbine would be approximately 3,775,000 kWh per year63

,

based on the average wind speed in Kingston being 4.3 m/s.64

The percentage of Queen‟s

55

electricity consumption that this turbine annually fulfills is 4%. This is assuming the electricity

consumption remains the same as 2005 – 2006. RETScreen was used to calculate the economics

of the project. The full RETScreen analysis can be found in the RETScreen for Single 1.65 MW

Wind Turbine Appendix.


data. The program then calculated the required weather inputs. The Equipment data tab was then

filled in using the product database. The wind turbine rate power range (kW) was 1000 to 2499.

The supplier was Vestas, however the model V821.65 MW was not available. The V66-1.65

MW was chosen with a 78 m hub height, which corresponds to the V82 model. The Energy

Model tab was now revisited. The grid type chosen was central-grid and the number of turbines

was set to 1. Since there is only one turbine, the array losses were set to 0%. The airfoil soiling

and/or icing losses were set to 2% because the V82 operates in ambient temperatures ranging

from -30 to +40 Celsius degrees.65

Other downtime losses were estimated to be 2% due to

scheduled maintenance and wind turbine failures. The miscellaneous losses were estimated to be

3% due to starts and stops, off-yaw operation, high wind and cut-outs from wind gusts.



seen. The wind turbine cost $1,500/kW. The O&M costs were taken to be 2% of the total initial

cost, per year. Studies shows that maintenance cost are generally low at the beginning of a

turbines life span, however as the turbine gets older, the maintenance costs increase. Newer

models have relatively lower repair and maintenance costs than older generations. It is estimated

that maintenance costs are about 1.5 to 2 percent per year of the original turbine cost.66

The

turbine refurbishment costs were taken to be 20% of the price of the turbine. Some wind turbine

components are more subject to wear and tear than others, such as the rotor blades and drive

train. The general cost of this is in the order of magnitude of 15 – 20 percent of the price of the

turbine.67

56

Table 10 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for the single 1.65 MW turbine.

Cost ($)


Development 400,000

Engineering 400,000

Wind Turbine 2,475,000


Balance of Plant 1,000,000


Interest 36,072


O&M 100,000

Contingencies 10,000

Total Annual Costs 110,000

Drive train (10 years) 500,000

Blades (15 years) 500,000

The financial parameters used to complete the analysis are as follows. The RE production credit

was $0.1104/kWh, which corresponds to the SOP of 11.04 cents per kilowatt-hour for up to

twenty years, which was the RE production credit duration. The debt ratio was set at 70% with

an interest rate of 7% over a 15 year term. This period of time was less than the 25 year life span

of the project. Below in Table 11 is the summary of the calculated financial results. The NPV is

positive, which means that over the 25 year period the project will be profitable. The payback

period is just over 7 years (7.1) and the cumulative cash flow graph can be seen in Figure 16

below.

57

Table 11 - Summary of financial feasibility of a single 1.65 MW turbine.


Pre-tax IRR and ROI % 29.9%

After-tax IRR and ROI % 29.9%

Simple Payback yr 7.1 Year-to-positive cash flow yr 3.8 Project equity CAD

1,453,717


2,861,885 Project debt CAD

3,392,006


364,890 Debt payments CAD/yr

372,424

Benefit-Cost (B-C) ratio - 2.97 Debt service coverage - 1.92

Figure 16 - Cumulative cash flow graph for singular wind turbine (1.65 MW).

58

2.6.12.2 Multiple Wind Turbines – 20 x 1.65 MW

The annual energy delivered by these turbines would be approximately 68,820,000 kWh per year

which accounts for 73% of Queen‟s electricity consumption, assuming the electricity

consumption remains the same as 2005 – 2006. RETScreen was used to calculate the economics

of the project. The full RETScreen analysis can be found in the RETScreen for Multiple (20)

1.65 MW Wind Turbines Appendix. A similar methodology was followed, however certain

parameters were altered. The number of turbines was set to 20 and due to this increase the array

losses and airfoil soiling were set to 5%. Other downtime and miscellaneous losses were

estimated to be 3%. Again the cost analysis performed was similar; however the magnitude of

the turbines had to be considered. Table 12 outlines the costs associated with the project.

59

Table 12 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for 20 x 1.65 MW turbines.

Cost ($)


Development 500,000

Engineering 600,000



Balance of Plant 10,000,000

Misc. Contingencies 4,305,000

Interest 493,538


O&M 1,320,000


Total Annual Costs 1,452,000

Drive train (10 years) 10,000,000

Blades (15 years) 10,000,000

The financial parameters used to complete the analysis were identical to the single turbine

project and a summary of the calculated financial results can be seen in Table 13. The NPV is

extremely positive, which means that over the 25 year period the project will be profitable. The

payback period is just over 5 years (5.1) and the cumulative cash flow graph can be seen in

Figure 17 below.

60

Table 13 - Summary of financial feasibility of 20 x 1.65 MW turbines.


Pre-tax IRR and ROI % 48.0%

After-tax IRR and ROI % 48.0%

Simple Payback yr 5.1 Year-to-positive cash flow yr 2.3 Project equity CAD

19,889,561


74,721,562 Project debt CAD

46,408,976


9,526,997 Debt payments CAD/yr

5,095,456

Benefit-Cost (B-C) ratio - 4.76 Debt service coverage - 2.67

Figure 17 - Cumulative cash flow graph for multiple (20) wind turbines (1.65 MW).

61

2.6.12.3 Single Small Wind Turbine – 1 x 50 kW

The economic feasibility of installing small wind will now be analyzed. The cost of buying and

installing a small wind energy system typically ranges from about $3,000-5,000 per kilowatt for

a grid-connected installation.68

Since small wind is not going to power the entire campus, the

economics of small wind on a single building will be analyzed. The Industrial Relations Centre‟s

(115 Barrack Street Kingston ON, K7L 3N6) electrical consumption for 2005 – 2006 was

146,148 kWh.69

The annual energy delivered by this 50kW (with a 25 meter hub height) turbine

would be approximately 85,000 kWh per year and this 58% of the Industrial Relations Centre‟s

electricity needs. The method used above for the RETScreen analysis was similar and the full

RETScreen analysis can be found in the RETScreen for Single Small Wind Turbine (50kW)

Appendix. Table 14 below highlights the costs associated with the project. Since the turbine is

vastly smaller than the ones described above the impacts it has are on a much smaller scale. The

feasibility study, development and engineering costs are all significantly smaller. The turbine

cost $4,000/kW and the transport costs associated with moving the turbine to the desired location

are dramatically lower.

62

Table 14 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for singular 50kW turbine.

Cost ($)


Development 40,000

Engineering 30,000

Wind Turbine 200,000


Balance of Plant 75,000


Interest 3,009

Total Initial Costs 404,259

O&M 10,100

Contingencies 1,010




The project‟s life span was set to 20 years, even though with regular maintenance the turbine can

outlive its warranty. The financial analysis completed was similar to the large wind turbines

above. Below in Table 15 a summary of the findings can be seen. The NPV is negative, and due

to the results below it is not advisable to install this turbine.

63

Table 15 - Summary of financial feasibility of single 50 kW turbine.


Pre-tax IRR and ROI % negative

After-tax IRR and ROI % negative

Simple Payback yr 58.3 Year-to-positive cash flow yr more than 20 Project equity CAD

121,278


(305,884) Project debt CAD

282,982


(40,951) Debt payments CAD/yr 31,070


(1.52) Debt service coverage -

(3.52)

2.6.12.4 Multiple Small Wind Turbines – 20 x 50 kW

The economic feasibility of installing 20 small wind turbines around campus will now be

analyzed. The annual energy delivered by these turbines would be approximately 6,151,000 kWh

per year and this is 6.6% of the universities electricity needs. The method used above for the

RETScreen analysis was similar and the full RETScreen analysis can be found in the

RETScreen for Multiple (20) Small Wind Turbines (50kW) Appendix. Table 16 below

highlights the costs associated with the project. Since these wind turbines would be scattered all

around campus (on buildings rooftops) different areas need to be studied and worked on, thus

some of the costs are more expensive when compared to a single small wind turbine installation.

64

Table 16 - Breakdown of inputted estimated costs for multiple (20) 50kW turbines.

Cost ($)


Development 150,000

Engineering 450,000



Balance of Plant 900,000


Interest 52,764


O&M 150,000





The project‟s life span was set to 20 years, even though with regular maintenance the turbine can

outlive its warranty. The financial analysis completed was identical to the analysis for the single

50kW turbine. Below in Table 17 a summary of the findings can be seen. The NPV is negative,

and due to the results below it is not advisable to install these turbines.

65

Table 17 - Summary of financial feasibility of multiple (20) 50 kW turbines.

3.0 Rankings

In order to compare the seven technologies described above a ranking system has been devised.

The main factor is the economics of the projects, however logistics must also be considered. The

following ten questions will be used to determine the feasibility of the projects:

How easy is it to implement/construct on campus or does it have to be off campus?

- DLWC implementation would be fairly difficult and costly as it would require the

campus cooling system to be centralized, and the existing localized systems to be

dismantled.

- Fuel Cells implementation would be rather straightforward and most systems allow either

a direct connection to the facility or connection to grid.

- Geothermal and LWC implementation will depend on the depth of wells required, and

nature of the overburden. May not need to be off campus; however tests need to be done

for this to be verified.

- Solar Panels and PV systems can be implemented once all the required studies have been

performed. They would be attached to the roof. When purchasing a system, all the

required equipment is included in the system.

- Wind turbines (MW size) would not be feasible for installation on campus due to their

size. However if off campus sites can be found, setting up a wind turbine is relatively

simple. All the planning has been approved, which can take a while, but once this is done

66

it takes between 3 days to a few weeks to erect the turbines, depending on the wind

conditions.

How long is the delivery?

- The delivery of DLWC components should not take too long as parts are fairly

unspecialized.

- The delivery time of Fuel Cells is fairly low.

- The construction time for geothermal and LWC systems will depend on depths of wells

required and number of rigs hired. With 3 rigs and 200m depths, the construction time

could be as low as 5 months. Delivery of components should occur while drilling is being

done.

- The delivery time for solar panels and PV systems is unknown; however large orders will

take time.

- Small orders of wind turbines take between 2 – 3 years.

Are there projects of similar scale?

- There are no projects of similar scale for DLWC and LWC.

- There are projects of similar scale for fuel cells, geothermal, solar panels, PV systems,

and wind turbines.

Are the products commercially available?

- The products are commercially available for all the technologies.

What is the capital cost of the project?

- DLWC: above $40 million.

- Fuel cells: approximately $4 million for a 1MW system.

- Geothermal: below $5 million, dependant on the test performed on the ground.

67

- Solar panel: the total initial cost for installing a 62 kWth solar system on the University

Club is approximately $45,000.

- PV system: the total initial cost for installing a 99 kW PV system is approximately $1.5

million.

- Wind turbine: the total initial cost for installing one 1.65 MW turbine is approximately

$4.8 million.

What are the operating/maintenance/periodic costs involved?

- DLWC, geothermal and LWC: Maintenance of pumps and pipes, as well as heat

exchangers should not be overly costly.

- Fuel cells: the annual O&M costs are around $800,000 (this is mainly the cost of fuel).

- Solar panels: the annual O&M costs are minimal, at about $55. There are periodic costs

involved: the valves and fittings should be replaced every 10 years at a cost of $500.

- PV systems: the annual O&M costs are $12,118. There are periodic costs involved: the

inverter should be replaced every 10 years at a cost of $100,000.

- Wind turbines: the annual O&M costs are $110,000. There are periodic costs involved:

the drive train should be replaced every 10 years at a cost of $500,000 and the blades

should be replaced every 15 years at a cost of $500,000.

Is there government funding available?

- There is government funding available for fuel cells, geothermal, LWC, solar panels, PV

systems, and wind turbines.

- There is not government funding available for DLWC.

What is the net present value of the project?

- NPV of DLWC, fuel cells, geothermal, and LWC are unknown.

68

- NPV for installing a solar system on the University Club which produces 64% of the hot

water required is positive and has a value of $1,320.

- NPV for installing a 99 kW PV system is negative and has a value of -$828,065.

- NPV for installing one 1.65 MW turbine is positive and has a value of $2,861,885.

What is the payback period?

- The payback period of DLWC is approximately 80 years.

- The payback period of fuel cells is unknown.

- Payback period for geothermal system is as low as 7 years.

- The simple payback period is 14.9 years for a solar panel system.

- The simple payback period is 30.7 years for a PV system.

- The simple payback period is 7.1 years for a wind turbine.

What is the life expectancy of the project?

- The life span of DLWC and fuel cells is unknown.

- Geothermal has a life span that ranges from 25 – 75 years.

- The life span for solar panels, PV systems, and wind turbines is 25 years plus provided

O&M are performed.

After answering the following questions, each technology was ranked. This was performed on a

scale of 1 to 10, ten being the best and 1 being the worst. Table 18 shows the scoring results for

the ten aspects explained above and each aspect is weighted differently. The costs carry a heavier

weight because the economics of the project is the main determining factor. The rankings are as

follows:

69

1. Geothermal

2. Wind Turbines

3. Solar Panels

4. Fuel Cells

5. PV System

6. LWC

7. DLWC

The reliability of the technology was not taken into account; however this will briefly be

discussed. DLWC and geothermal are very reliable because both systems use pumps to pump the

fluid around, and provided these don‟t fail, the system will run continuously. Fuel cells can be

turned on or off when required, so they have a very good reliability. Solar panels and PV systems

depend solely on the sun. If there is cloud cover, generation might not even occur, so the

reliability of these technologies is fairly low. Wind turbines depend on the wind conditions; the

turbines do run over a range of speeds; however there is the possibility that the wind speed is too

low or high. Therefore the reliability of wind turbines is medium.

70

Table 18 - Rankings of the seven technologies.

DLWC

Fuel

Cells Geothermal LWC

Solar

Panels

PV

System

Wind

Turbine

Ease of

Implementation 1 7 5 5 8 7 1

Delivery Time 7 8 5 5 5 5 3

Similar Scale Projects 1 6 7 1 6 5 10

Commercially

Available 7 8 8 7 8 8 10

Capital Cost 1 3 5 2 6 5 4

O&M Costs 8 8 8 8 9 8 7

Government Funding 1 3 4 4 7 8 6

NPV - - - - 6 3 8

Payback Period 1 1 8 8 5 2 8

Life Expectancy - - 9 9 7 7 8

DLWC is too expensive to install, and Queen‟s just does not have a high enough power need to

justify implementation. LWC, although promising, is not used for large scale projects. It is

generally used for residential cooling purposes. PV systems don‟t produce enough electricity for

the campus to justify the high costs associated with the panels. Even with the high level of

government funding available the system is too expensive. It should be noted that new, cheaper

products are in the research stages, with plans to scale up to production within the next few

years. This new thin film technology will alter the economics of the standard PV systems,

however to date this technology is not available for industrial scale applications. There are many

different types of fuel cells. They are able to produce the scale of electricity that Queen‟s

requires however presently they are too expensive for use at Queen‟s. Available incentives are

too low to offset the high operational costs; if this changes in the future fuel cells may become

viable, but currently they are not. Solar panels for hot water heating could be implemented on

campus however each building would have to be assessed on a case by case basis. They last for

at least 25 years and minimal maintenance is required. The panels are easy to implement, on the

top of a buildings roof, and the government has provided incentives. The cost of the system will

depend on the number of panels required, and this is the main reason why some systems would

be economically feasible. Wind turbines would be able to produce electricity for campus use.

71

They are quite costly to implement but with the government funding available their payback

period is about 7 years. The issue with wind turbines is space and they could not be implemented

on campus. Small wind turbines were not considered after a cost analysis was performed. It was

found that their payback period was great and that they are too expensive for the amount of

electricity that they generate. A geothermal system could be implemented for on campus use.

This is the top ranked technology because of the low payback period, ease of implementation,

and the costs involved.

4.0 Conclusion and Recommendations

The seven technologies have been researched thoroughly to determine which would be feasible

for implementation on campus. They have been ranked based primarily on a cost basis however

the practicality of installing them on campus has been taken into account. The final rankings are

as follows: (1) geothermal, (2) wind turbines, (3) solar panels, (4) fuel cells, (5) PV systems, (6)

LWC, and (7) DLWC.

These findings show that PPS should investigate the feasibility of implementing geothermal

technology on campus to aid in Queen‟s heating and cooling needs. It was found that the system

was relatively easy to implement, once all the equipment was purchased. The capital costs

associated with the project were quite high (approximately $5 million), however due to

government funding, in the form of tax breaks, and the little maintenance required the payback

period would be under 7 years. The systems have a life span that range from 25 to 75 years.

Studies do need to be conducted to determine how deep the wells need to be; and we recommend

that Queen‟s investigates this.

We also recommend that PPS examine the possibility of wind turbines for campus electricity

generation. The economics involved are very positive. The capital cost is approximately $4.8

million (calculated in RETScreen) and the maintenance costs involved are small. The

government offers 11.04cents/kWh for a 20 year period which has lowered the payback period to

72

7.1 years. The turbines have a 25 year life span; however with correct maintenance they should

outlast this. The main issue with this technology is their size. The turbine could not be

implemented on campus because of the safety issue its size would create however Queen‟s

should look into finding a site off campus on which to conduct feasibility study‟s to determine if

wind power is suitable. An additional issue with wind turbines is the delivery time involved since

small orders of turbines can take around 2 to 3 years.

Another immediate recommendation to PPS is the possibility of using solar panels for heating

water. This technology is readily available and easy to install; the panels are attached to a roof.

Each building must be assessed on a case by case basis to determine if it is economically

feasible; and this is what we recommend PPS to do. The economics of this technology ranges

depending on the size of the system however to heat 3,370 L/day of water, the capital costs were

estimated to be $45,000 (using RETScreen). There is virtually no maintenance involved for solar

panels and the periodic costs are low as well. The system will last at least 25 years and the

payback period was just under 15 years. It is also recommended that PPS should investigate solar

panels for heating the Queen‟s pool once it is built.

Fuel cells show promise for the near future, particularly in a cogeneration application. We

recommend that PPS investigate the viability of fuel cells for on campus power and heat

generation in the near future. At the very least such an investigation would indicate how much

financial support would be required from the government to make fuel cells a reasonable

economic investment.

Future recommendation for PPS would be PV systems for electricity generation. Currently the

systems are too expensive, even with the government funding of 42cents/kW however much

research is being done to improve the cells efficiency and lower their costs. New thin film

technology is very promising. It aims to lower the initial costs involved with the system and it is

going into industrial production in 2009. Because of the technologies ease of implementation;

73

installed on roofs or buildings walls, these new products should be investigated to determine if

they are feasible for use on campus.

Currently Queen‟s cooling needs are too low to justify installing a DLWC system, however if

these needs dramatically increase or if Queen‟s can partner with others in a joint venture,

hospitals and other close businesses, then a feasibility study for DLWC should be completed.

Recommendations can‟t be given for LWC due to the temperature of the lake not reaching the

required levels.

Therefore it is recommended that PPS investigate and conduct feasibility studies on a geothermal

system, wind turbine, and solar panels to aid in reducing the growing utility costs. Future

investigations should be completed on fuel cells and PV systems because currently they are too

expensive however over the next year or two prices will drop.

74

5.0 References

1 Physical Plant Services. (2000) “Physical Resources Budgets, 1999/2000.” Reports. Retrieved

from the World Wide Web on January 23, 2008 <http://www.queensu.ca/pps/>

2 Physical Plant Services. (2005) “Physical Resources Budget 2005.” Reports. Retrieved from

the World Wide Web on January 23, 2008 <http://www.queensu.ca/pps/reports/2005budg.pdf

Energy Conservation>

3 Oil Change International. (2007) “Oil Reaches Six Month High Over Gulf Standoff.” Retrieved

from the World Wide Web on March 13, 2008 <http://priceofoil.org/2007/03/30/oil-reaches-six-

month-high-over-gulf-standoff/>

4 Surridge, G. (2008) “Canada‟s Inflation Rate Slows.” Financial Post. Retrieved from the World

Wide Web on March 25, 2008 <http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=383900>

5 Dennis Fotinos. “Deep Lake Water Cooling” Retrieved from the World Wide Web on March 4,

2008 <http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/8949/28458/01270982.pdf>

6 Enwave Energy Corporation. “Deep Lake Water Cooling”. Retrieved from the World Wide

Web on March 4, 2008 <http://www.enwave.com/dlwc.php>

7 City of Toronto. (2007) “Deep Lake Water Cooling and the City.” Environment. Retrieved

from the World Wide Web on March 4, 2008

<http://www.toronto.ca/environment/initiatives/cooling.htm - top>

8 R.P. O‟Hayre, Suk-Won Cha, W. Colella, F. Prinz. (2006) “Fuel Cell Fundamentals.” John

Wiley & Sons Inc, New York.

9 Fuel Economy. (2007) “How They Work.” Image. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on

March 4, 2008 <http://www.toronto.ca/fuel_cells/images/fuel_cell_illustration.gif>

10 Natural Resources Canada. (2005) “Heating and Cooling with a heat Pump”. Office of energy

Efficiency. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on March 4, 2008

<http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/publications/infosource/pub/home/Heating_and_Cooling_with_a_Heat_P

ump_Section4.cfm>

11 Baird, C. & Cann, M. (2005) “Types of Direct Solar Energy.” Environmental Chemistry. 3

rd

Edition. W.H. Freeman and Company. United States: New York.

12 Natural Resources Canada. (2005) “About Solar Energy.” Technologies and Applications.

Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 12, 2008

<http://canren.gc.ca/tech_appl/index.asp?CaId=5&PgId=121>

75

13 The Canadian Solar Industries Association. (2007) “Solar Water Heating Overview.” Solar

Energy. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 12, 2008

<http://www.cansia.ca/overwater.asp>

14 Swartmen, B. (2007) “Solar Heating in Industrial Applications.” The Canadian Solar

Industries Association. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 12, 2008

<http://www.cansia.ca/downloads/factsheets/21.pdf>

15 Independent Energy Systems. (2006) “Typical Layout of a Solar Thermal System.” Solar

Thermal Energy Systems. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 13, 2008

<http://www.solarandwind.ca/uploads/images/SolarThermalDiagram.jpg>

16 Environmental Health and Safety. (2007) “Water” MSDS – J.T. Baker. Retrieved from the

World Wide Web on February 12, 2008

<http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/w0600.htm>

17 Gill, S. (2007) “OSEA CanSIA Solar Thermal Community Action Manual.” Ontario

Sustainable Energy Association. 2nd

Edition. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February

12, 2008 <http://www.ontario-sea.org/pdf/SolarThermalCommunityActionManual.pdf >

18 The Canadian Solar Industries Association. (2007) “Solar Pool Heating Overview.” Solar

Energy. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 13, 2008

<http://www.cansia.ca/pools.asp>

19 The Canadian Solar Industries Association. (2007) “Is Solar For You?” Solar Energy.


<http://www.cansia.ca/aboutsolar.asp>

20 The Atlas of Canada. (2004) “Solar Radiation.” Natural Resources Canada. Retrieved from the

World Wide Web on February 12, 2008

<http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca/site/english/maps/archives/5thedition/environment/climate/mcr4076>

21 Physical Plant Services. (2007) “Queen‟s University Water Usage 2006 - 2007.”

22 Physical Plant Services. (2007) “Queen‟s University Water Usage 2006 - 2007.”

23 Baird, C. & Cann, M. (2005) “Types of Direct Solar Energy.” Environmental Chemistry. 3

rd

Edition. W.H. Freeman and Company. United States: New York.

24 The Canadian Solar Industries Association. (2007) “Photovoltaic Overview.” Solar Energy.


<http://www.cansia.ca/overelectricity.asp>

25 Physical Plant Services. (2005) “Queen‟s University Electrical Consumption.”

26 Mantay, R. (2008) Carmanah Technologies. Email.

76

27 The Canadian Solar Industries Association. (2005) “Building Integrated Photovoltaics for

educational institutions. Queen‟s University, Kingston ON.” Solar Energy. Retrieved from the

World Wide Web on February 13, 2008 http://www.cansia.ca/downloads/bulletins/NB045s.pdf>

28 Brower, M. (2005) “Environmental Impacts of Renewable Energy Technologies.” Union of

Concerned Scientists. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 13, 2008

<http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/renewable_energy_basics/environmental-impacts-of-

renewable-energy-technologies.html>

29 Mantay, R. (2008) Carmanah Technologies Inc. Email

30 Holmes, R. & Edwards, S. (2003) “Wind” Primer on the Technologies of Renewable Energy.

Pollution Probe. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February, 17 2008

<http://www.pollutionprobe.org/Reports/renewableenergyprimer.pdf>

31 British Wind Energy Association. (2007)“What is Wind?” Education. British Wind Energy

Association. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 17, 2008 <

http://www.bwea.com/edu/wind.html>

32 Canadian Wind Energy Association. (2007) “Understanding Wind Energy” Canadian Wind

Energy Association. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 17, 2008

<http://www.canwea.ca/Wind_Energy_101.cfm>

33 German Wind Energy Association. (2007) “Overview of Wind Technology” World Wind


<http://www.world-wind-energy.info/>

34 Kid Wind Projects. (2005) Images. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 17, 2008

<http://www.kidwind.org/images/wind_turbine_drawing.jpg/>

35 World Wind Energy Association. (2005) Images. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on

February 17, 2008 <http://www.wwindea.org/technology/ch01/imgs/1_2_img1.jpg>


Pollution Probe. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 17, 2008


37 Eco Power USA. (2005) Images. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 17, 2008

<http://www.ecopowerusa.com/png/F19B.jpg>




39 European Commission. (2005) Images. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 17,

2008 <http://ec.europa.eu/research/energy/nn/nn_rt/nn_rt_wind/images/wind_en_1370.gif>

http://www.ecopowerusa.com/png/F19B.jpg

77

40 Uyar, T. (2007) “Wind Electricity Generation.” Basics of Power Production. World Wind



41 World Wind Energy Association. (2007) “System for Feeding Electricity to the Grid.”

Electronic Equipment. World Wind Energy Association. Retrieved from the World Wide Web

on February 17, 2008 <http://www.world-wind-energy.info/>




43 Gipe, P, & Murphy, J. (2005) “Ontario Land Owners Guide to Wind Energy.” Ontario

Sustainable Energy Association. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 17, 2008

<http://www.ontario-sea.org/pdf/LandownersGuideToWindEnergy.pdf>




45 Canadian Wind Energy Association. (2006) “Change is in the air.” Wind Technology.


<http://www.canwea.com/images/uploads/File/NRCan_-_Fact_Sheets/2_technology.pdf>

46 World Wind Energy Association. (2007) “Spacing.” Turbine Management. World Wind



47 Canadian Wind Energy Association. (2006) “Change is in the air.” Wind Technology.


<http://www.canwea.com/images/uploads/File/NRCan_-_Fact_Sheets/2_technology.pdf>


49 Miller, R. “Wolfe Island Wind Project.” Canadian Hydro Development Inc. Rob Miller

Lecture. 26 February 2008. Queen‟s University.







52 American Wind Energy Association. (2007) Small Wind. Retrieved from the World Wide

Web on February 18, 2008 <http://www.awea.org/smallwind/>

78





55 Small Wind Energy. (2006) Images. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 18,

2008 <http://www.smallwindenergy.ca/en/Overview/HowTheyWork/TurbineTypes.html>



57 Baird, C. & Cann, M. (2005) “Wind Energy.” Environmental Chemistry. 3

rd Edition. W.H.

Freeman and Company. United States: New York.

58 American Wind Energy Association. (2007) “What are the environmental benefits of wind

power?.” Wind Energy and the Environment. American Wind Energy Association. Retrieved


<http://www.awea.org/faq/wwt_environment.html#What%20are%20the%20environmental%20b

enefits%20of%20wind%20power>

59 Canadian Wind Energy Association. (2006) “Birds, Bats and Wind Energy” Canadian Wind

Energy Association. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on March 2, 2008

<http://www.canwea.com/images/uploads/File/NRCan_-_Fact_Sheets/6_wildlife.pdf>

60 World Wind Energy Association. (2004) “Noise Pollution From Wind Turbines.” Planning of

Wind Farms. World Wind Energy Association. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on March

2, 2008 <http://www.world-wind-energy.info/>

61 American Wind Energy Association. (2007) “How Noisy are Wind Farms?” Facts About

Wind Energy and Noise. American Wind Energy Association. Retrieved from the World Wide

Web on March 2, 2008 < http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/WE_Noise.pdf >

62 British Wind Energy Association. (1999) “Noise From Wind Turbines – The Facts.” British

Wind Energy Association. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on March 2, 2008

<http://www.bwea.com/ref/noise.html>

63 Endres, P. (2007) “Energy return on investment (EROI), economic feasibility and carbon

intensity of a hypothetical Lake Ontario wind farm.” The Encyclopedia of the Earth. Retrieved


<http://www.eoearth.org/article/Energy_return_on_investment_(EROI),_economic_feasibility_a

nd_carbon_intensity_of_a_hypothetical_Lake_Ontario_wind_farm>

64 RETScreen Software.

65 Vestas Factsheet. See Vestas V82 Fact Sheet.

79

66 Danish Wind Industry Association. (2003) “Operation and Maintenance Costs for Wind

Turbines.” Retrieved from the World Wide Web on March 13, 2008

<http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/econ/oandm.htm>

67 Danish Wind Industry Association. (2003) “Operation and Maintenance Costs for Wind

Turbines.” Retrieved from the World Wide Web on March 13, 2008

<http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/econ/oandm.htm>

68 American Wind Energy Association. (2007) “Factsheet: The Economics of Small Wind.”

Retrieved from the World Wide Web on March 13, 2008

<http://www.awea.org/smallwind/toolbox2/factsheet_econ_of_smallwind.html >


70 Natural Resources Canada. (2006) “Solar Collectors.” Images. Retrieved from the World Wide

Web on March 13, 2008 < http://www.canren.gc.ca/tech_appl/index.asp?CaId=5&PgId=282>

71 Natural Resources Canada. (2006) “An Introduction to Photovoltaic Systems.” Retrieved from

the World Wide Web on March 13, 2008

<http://www.canren.gc.ca/prod_serv/index.asp?CaId=143&PgId=765>

72 The Canadian Solar Industries Association. (2006) “Solar Pool Heating Overview.” Solar

Energy. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on March 13, 2008

<http://www.cansia.ca/pools.asp>

73 Go Solar Company. (2006) “Types of Solar Electric Systems.” Retrieved from the World Wide

Web on March 13, 2008 <http://www.solarexpert.com/pvtypes.html>

74 Solar Navigator. (2008) “Solar Panels.” Image. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on

March 13, 2008

<http://www.speedace.info/speedace_images/solar_cells_panels_PV_array_monocrystaline.jpg>

75 Polar Panel Inc. (2006) “Component Operation.” Retrieved from the World Wide Web on

March 13, 2008 <http://www.polarpowerinc.com/info/operation20/operation23.htm>

76 Corrosion Doctors. (2007) “Crystalline Photovoltaic Materials.” Image. Retrieved from the

World Wide Web on March 13, 2008 <http://www.corrosion-doctors.org/Solar/photo-thick.htm>

77 Corrosion Doctors. (2007) “Crystalline Photovoltaic Materials.” Image. Retrieved from the

World Wide Web on March 13, 2008 <http://www.corrosion-doctors.org/Solar/images/poly.jpg>

78 The Energy Blog. (2006) “Evergreen Solar Continues to Shine.” Image. Retrieved from the

World Wide Web on March 13, 2008

<http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/evergreen_ribbon_sketch.gif>

79 Technology Commercialization Opportunity. (2006) “Amorphous Silicon Array.” Retrieved


<http://www.zyn.com/flcfw/fwtproj/SILICON.JPG>

80

80 The Canadian Solar Industries Association. (2006) “Photovoltaic Overview.” Solar Energy.

Retrieved from the World Wide Web on March 13, 2008

<http://www.cansia.ca/overelectricity.asp>

81 German Wind Energy Association. (2007) “Overview of Wind Technology” World Wind



81

6.0 Appendices

6.1 Geothermal – In Depth Technology70

The Heating Cycle

In the heating cycle, the ground water, the antifreeze mixture, or refrigerant, is brought back to

the heat pump unit inside the building. It then passes through the refrigerant-filled primary heat

exchanger for ground water or antifreeze mixture systems. In DX (Direct exchange) systems the

refrigerant enters the compressor directly, with no intermediate heat exchanger.

The heat is transferred to the refrigerant, which boils to become a low-temperature vapour. In an

open system, the ground water is then pumped back out and discharged into a pond or down a

well. In a closed-loop system, the anti-freeze mixture or refrigerant is pumped back out to the

underground piping system to be reheated.

The reversing valve sends the refrigerant vapour to the compressor. The vapour is then

compressed which reduces its volume, causing it to heat up.

Finally, the reversing valve sends the now-hot gas to the condenser coil, where it gives up its

heat. Air is blown across the coil, heated, and then forced through the ducting system to heat the

building. Having given up its heat, the refrigerant passes through the expansion device, where its

temperature and pressure are dropped further before it returns to the first heat exchanger or to the

ground in a DX system, to begin the cycle again.

Hot Water

In some EESs, a heat exchanger, sometimes called a "desuperheater", takes heat from the hot

refrigerant after it leaves the compressor. Water from the home's water heater is pumped through

82

a coil ahead of the condenser coil, in order that some of the heat that would have been lost at the

condenser is used in heating water. Excess heat is always available in the cooling mode, and is

also available in the heating mode during mild weather when the heat pump is above the balance

point and not working to full capacity. Some EESs heat water on demand: the whole machine

switches to water heating.

Hot water heating is easy with EESs because the compressor is located inside. Because EESs

have relatively constant heating capacity, they generally have many more hours of surplus

heating capacity than required for space heating.

Cooling Cycle

The cooling cycle is basically the reverse of the heating cycle. The direction of the refrigerant

flow is changed by the reversing valve. The refrigerant picks up heat from the house air and

transfers it directly in DX systems or to the ground water or antifreeze mixture. The heat is then

pumped outside, into a water body or return well (in the case of an open system), or into the

underground piping (in the case of a closed-loop system). Once again, some of this excess heat

can be used to preheat domestic hot water.

Unlike air-source heat pumps, EESs do not require a defrost cycle. Temperatures underground

are much more stable than air temperatures, and the heat pump unit itself is located inside;

therefore, the same problems with frost do not arise.

Parts of the System

As shown in Figure 18, earth-energy systems have three main components: the heat pump unit

itself, the liquid heat exchange medium (open system or closed loop), and the air delivery system

(ductwork).

83

Figure 18 - Components of a typical ground-source heat pump.70

Orientation

There are two ways in which the tubing is installed into the ground; vertically and horizontally.

The answer to the question of which kind is used depends on a number of factors, most

significantly the amount of heat required, land available, cost, and the conductivity of the ground

at different depths. Notes about each type of installation follow.

Vertical:

- Holes 18 m to 120 m (60ft to 400ft) deep

- 82 m to 106 m (270ft to 350ft) of tubing per ton of heat pump capacity

- Smaller diameter holes are possible, which can lower drilling costs

Horizontal:

- Trenches 1 m to 2 m (3ft to 6ft) deep, depending on number of tubes in a trench

- 120 m to 180 m (400ft to 600ft) of tubes required per ton of heat pump capacity

84

6.2 Fuel Cell Processes

Reactant Delivery

Fuel cells producing large currents have a massive fuel appetite. The task of delivering fuel to

the fuel cell and preventing it from “starving” is a seemingly simple task that can actually be

complicated. Flow field plates and porous electrodes are ordinarily used to deliver these fuels or

reactants efficiently to the fuel cell. The flow field plates contain fine channels through which the

fuel is distributed to the surface of the fuel cell. The shape, size and pattern of these flow

channels significantly affect fuel cell performance. Involved in understanding and designing

these flow structures and porous electrode geometries is the understanding of mass transport,

diffusion and fluid mechanics. The materials used in these flows structures are also important.

Electrochemical Reaction

After reactants are delivered to the electrodes, they must react electrochemically with each other.

The speed of these reactions is directly related to how much current can be generated. Thus fuel

cell performance is very dependent on choosing the right catalyst for the reaction and careful

design of the reaction zones. In fact, the kinetics of these electrochemical reactions usually

represents the single largest limitation to fuel cell performance.

Ionic Conduction and Electron Conduction through the External Circuit

Electron conduction is considerably easier, as all that is needed is a good electron conductor to

serve as a channel. Ionic conduction however is more difficult as ions are significantly larger

than electrons. These ions must pass through the electrolyte. This happens in many electrolytes

via a process called ionic “hopping”, which seems to progress as it name suggests. This is a far

less efficient process than electron conduction and can significantly reduce fuel cell

performance. To reduce this resistance effect, electrolytes must be made as thin as possible to

minimize the distance over which ionic conduction occurs. This is easier said than done, as the

electrolyte must still maintain structural integrity so it does not fracture.

85

Product Removal

This involves the removal of the products of the electrochemical reaction (water in the case of

the H2O2 fuel cell and water and CO2 in the case of Hydrocarbon fuel cells). Inadequate product

removal will “strangle” the fuel cell and significantly reduce performance. The same principles

of mass transport, diffusion and fluid mechanics are involved as in reactant transport however, so

the problems of delivery and removal of reactant and product are usually solved together. For

most fuel cells product removal does not present a problem but in the case of PEMFCs

“flooding” by product water can be a major issue.

6.3 Fuel Cell Types – Advantages and Disadvantages

Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cell (PAFC)

In the PAFC, liquid H3PO4 electrolyte (either pure or highly concentrated) is contained in a thin

SiC matrix between two porous graphite electrodes coated with a platinum catalyst. Hydrogen is

used as the fuel and air or oxygen may be used as the oxidant. The platinum catalyst at the anode

will be poisoned by carbon monoxide and sulphur however and for this reason, ideally the PAFC

should be run on pure hydrogen and not reformed or impure feedstocks. It should be noted that

PAFCs exhibit a higher tolerance to poisoning than PEMFCs because they operate at higher

temperature and the higher the temperature the greater the tolerance of the fuel cell.

PAFC Advantages

Mature technology

Excellent reliability/long-term performance

Electrolyte is relatively low-cost

Efficiencies range from 40%-70% in cogeneration applications

PAFC Disadvantages

86

Expensive platinum catalyst

Susceptible to Carbon Monoxide and Sulphur poisoning

Electrolyte is a corrosive liquid that must be replenished during operation

Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cell (PEMFC)

The PEMFC is constructed from a proton-conducting polymer electrolyte membrane, usually a

perfluorinated sulfonic acid polymer. H2 is the fuel of choice, but for low power (less than 1kW)

portable applications, liquid fuels such as methanol and formic acid are also being considered.

PEMFC Advantages

Highest power density of all the fuel cell classes (ie. Most power generated per volume)

Good start-stop capabilities (useful for portable applications)

Low-temperature operation makes it suitable for portable applications

PEMFC Disadvantages

Uses expensive platinum catalyst

Polymer membrane and ancillary components are expensive

Active water management is often required (waste water produced must be removed)

Very poor Carbon monoxide and Sulphur tolerance (as explained in PAFCs above)

Alkaline Fuel Cell (AFC)

The AFC employs an aqueous potassium hydroxide electrolyte. They run off pure hydrogen and

pure oxygen as fuel and oxidant because they cannot tolerate even atmospheric levels of carbon

dioxide. Due to these limitations, the AFC is not economically viable for most terrestrial power

87

applications; however the AFC demonstrates impressively high efficiencies and power densities,

leading to an established application in the aerospace industry.

AFC Advantages

Improved cathode performance

Potential for non-precious metal catalysts (cheaper catalysts)

Low materials costs, extremely low cost electrolyte

AFC Disadvantages

Must use pure H2-O2

KOH electrolyte may need occasional replenishment

Must remove water from anode

Molten Carbonate Fuel Cell (MCFC)

The electrolyte in the MCFC is a molten mixture of alkali carbonates, Li2CO3 and K2CO3,

immobilized in a LiOAlO2 matrix. The MCFC runs on hydrogen, simple hydrocarbons like

methane, and simple alcohols. It is best suited for stationary, continuous power applications due

to stresses created by the freeze-thaw cycle of the electrolyte during start-up/shutdown cycles. In

combined heat and power applications efficiencies could reach close to 90%.

MCFC Advantages

Fuel flexibility ( can use many different fuels)

Non precious metal catalyst (cheaper catalyst)

High quality waste heat for cogeneration applications

MCFC Disadvantages

88

Must implement CO2 recycling (designed into Fuel cell system)

Corrosive, molten electrolyte

Degradation/lifetime issues

Relatively expensive materials

Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC)

This employs a solid ceramic electrolyte. Efficiencies can rise as high as 90% when used in

cogeneration applications.

SOFC Advantages

Fuel flexibility (can use several different fuels)

Non-precious metal catalyst (cheaper catalyst)

High quality waste heat for cogeneration applications

Solid electrolyte

Relatively high power density

SOFC Disadvantages

Significant high temperature presents materials issues

Sealing issues

Relatively expensive components/fabrication

Note that the fuel cell advantages and disadvantages have been taken from Fuel Cell

Fundamentals, O‟Hayre, Suk-Won Cha, Collela, Prinz, 2006, John Wiley & Sons, New York.

89

6.4 Solar Panels – In Depth Technology

There are three basic types of collectors available; seasonal collectors, flat plate collectors, and

evacuated tube collectors, the latter two being the most common.

Seasonal collectors have the simplest design since they primarily circulate water through plastic

pipes to distribute the collected heat. These pipes offer little protection to certain temperature

conditions, and would not be suited for freezing conditions.

Flat plate collectors, shown in Figure 19 below, consist of a shallow rectangular box with a

transparent glass „window‟ covering a flat black plate. The black plate is attached to a series of

parallel tubes or one serpentine tube through which air, water, or other heat transfer fluids pass.

Generally an anti-freeze fluid, propylene glycol for example, is circulated through the insulated

pipes.

Figure 19 - Glazed flat plate collector.70

Evacuated tube collectors, as illustrated in Figure 20 below, consist of several individual highly

insulated glass cylinders that each contains a black metal pipe through which the heat transfer

fluid passes. The space between the pipe and the glass tube is „evacuated‟, so the air is removed.

The glazed collectors are normally dark or black to absorb the sun‟s heat energy and they are

90

positioned, facing south, on either a roof or wall. The collectors convert the sunlight into heat

and the glazing prevents the heat from escaping.71

Figure 20 - Evacuated tube collector.70

Similar technologies are used to heat swimming pools by solar thermal energy. The water

temperature for swimming pools ranges from 29oC to 37

oC, and most solar systems are capable

of supplying this. There are two main types of solar heating used. The most common system,

which is not relevant to Queen‟s, is designed to heat a pool in use for the spring to fall season.

The second type is designed to provide year round heat for enclosed pools. The collectors used

generally consist of flat plate copper tube absorbers enclosed in an insulated box with a glass

cover. Due to this system operating under freezing conditions in the winter, a glycol antifreeze

mixture is circulated from the panels to one side of the heat exchanger. The water from the pool

is circulated through the other side of the heat exchanger to transfer the heat to the pool.72

The four primary components that make up a solar pool heating system are solar collectors,

storage tanks, a control package, and a backup heat source. The collectors used are either flat

plate copper tube or flexible plastic panels. They range in size from 4 feet by 6 feet to 4 feet by 8

feet. The storage tank system also includes multiple internal heat exchangers and pumps to

ensure that the hot water flows to the pool and the cold water flows through the collectors. The

control package includes sensors that monitor the collector‟s and pool‟s temperature. A backup

heat source is required to heat the pool if the sun is not available.72

91

6.5 Solar PV – In Depth Technology

Solar panels are made up of cells, as shown in Figure 21. A solar cell is approximately circular,

and is 3 to 7 ½ centimeters in diameter. The cells are organized into rows and columns on a solar

panel. There are many types of solar cells available and they can be divided into subcategories.

The four general types of silicon PV cells are: single crystal silicon, polycrystal silicon, ribbon

silicon, and amorphous silicon. Ongoing research is being performed on all these types of PV

cells to increase their efficiency and lower the cost of manufacturing.73

Figure 21 – A solar panel made up of solar cells (single crystal silicon).74

Single crystal silicon cells are the most common. These are illustrated in Figure 22. They are

made by purifying silicon, which is then melted and then crystallized into ingots. The ingots are

sliced very thinly, and these slices become the individual cells, which are usually black or blue in

color. A cell is attached to a base, called a backplane, and this is usually a layer of metal,

typically aluminum. The metal is used to reinforce the cell and to provide an electrical contact.

The top side of the cell must have access to sunlight so a thin grid of metal is attached rather than

92

a continuous layer. The grid must be thin enough to admit sufficient amounts of sunlight but

wide enough to carry adequate amounts of electrical energy.75

Figure 22 – Single crystal silicon cells.76

Polycrystalline cells (Figure 23) are manufactured and operated in a similar manner to single

crystal cells. The key difference is the lower cost silicon used, which results in a slightly lower

efficiency, however the cells are cheaper. As opposed to having a solid color of single crystal

cells, polycrystalline cells have random patterns of crystal borders.75

Figure 23 – Polycrystalline cells.77

To make ribbon type PV cells a ribbon is grown from the molten silicon instead of an ingot,

which is used to produce the two types above. These cells are layered with an anti-reflective

coating, however they operate the same as single and polycrystal cells. The process of how

ribbon silicon is made can be seen in Figure 24 below.75

93

Figure 24 - Method of making ribbon silicon.78

Amorphous silicon differs from the three types of cells above because it does not have a distinct

crystal structure; see Figure 25 below. These cells can be abbreviated to aSi and the technology

is often called thin film silicon. aSi cells are produced in a variety of colors and are made by

depositing very thin layers of vaporized silicon in a vacuum onto a support. The support could be

glass, plastic, or metal. The performance of these cells has the potential to drop as much as 15%

upon initial exposure to sunlight. This drop takes around six weeks and due to this the efficiency

of amorphous silicon is less than half that of the other three cells. There is great potential in this

technology to be cheap, however currently this is not the case.75

Figure 25 – Amorphous silicon array.79

94

PV cells come in many different sizes. The cells can be grouped together in modules (which

typically contain 40 cells) or panels to produce higher voltages and increased power.

Approximately 10 of these modules are collected together to form PV arrays. Flat-plate

stationary arrays are the most common; however portable and tracking arrays are also available.

Portable arrays are small and are convenient for traveling purposes. Tracking arrays follow the

sun across the sky. Flat-plate arrays are stationary but do allow adjustments in their tilt angle; the

angle at which the array faces the sun relative to a horizontal axis. These flat-plate PV arrays can

be mounted at a fixed angle on a wall or roof or they can be mounted on a tracking device that

follows the sun to allow maximum sunlight capture. The modules can be oriented between south-

east and south-west, although due south is best, and they need an unobstructed view of the sun.

To provide power to a household, between 10 and 20 PV arrays are required however for

industrial applications, hundreds of arrays must be interconnected to form a large, singular PV

system.80

6.6 Wind Turbines – In Depth Technology

6.4.1 Foundation

A pile or flat foundation, which is dependent on the subsoil strength, ensures the stability of the

turbine as it anchors the turbine to the ground. Flat foundations are most common, where a large

reinforced concrete plate is installed under the earth to form the base of the generator. Pile

foundations are used when the subsoil is soft, and here the foundation plate is secured in with

piles into the earth.81

6.4.2 Tower

The wind turbine tower is subjected to high loads; the weight of the nacelle, the rotor blades, and

the force of the wind. The height of the tower is crucial in generating the maximum amount of

energy because the turbine must be at a specific height to capture the wind. Generally, a tubular

95

construction of concrete or steel is used; however another, less common, option is the lattice

form.81

6.4.3 Rotor and Rotor Blades

The rotor and blades convert the wind energy into rotary mechanical movement by capturing the

energy into the rotation of the hub. Multiple blades are attached to a hub and these blades must

withstand large loads, therefore they must be durable. The primary materials used are synthetics

reinforced with fiberglass and carbon fibers. The blades are heated during freezing temperatures

to prevent them from icing over and becoming damaged. These blades function similar to wings

on an airplane. As wind moves over the blades, it causes „lift‟ which makes the blades rotate.

Rotors can either have two or three blades, and the diameter ranges in size. However in large

turbines, it has been determined that the three-blade rotor is more efficient.

The hub is the center of the rotor to which the blades are attached and is usually made from cast

iron or cast steel. The main purpose of the hub is to direct the energy from the blades to the

generator. If the turbine has a gearbox, the hub is connected to its slowly rotating shaft which

converts the wind energy to rotational energy. If the turbine has a direct drive, the hub sends the

energy straight to the generator. 81

6.4.4 Pitch System

The pitch system allows for regulation of the generators power output. This system includes

pitch single ball race bearings, internal gearing, and electric brake motors. It is also used as a

brake if the wind speeds exceed 90 km/h (25 m/s), where the blades can be spun perpendicular to

the direction of rotation, thus decelerating and halting the generator. The system has a control

that constantly measures the power output to determine if the blades are spinning within a safe

range, and they will alter accordingly. Another method that can be used for power management

is stall control. Here rotor blades are attached to the hub at a fixed angle so that turbulence

96

occurs behind the blade at a particular wind velocity, causing flow separation, and the power

input is reduced if necessary. Regardless of which method is used for power control, two

independent brake systems must be used and they are usually an aerodynamic break system and

mechanical system. The aerodynamic break is the primary one and the mechanical break is used

if the principal break fails or if the turbine is being repaired. 81

6.4.5 Yaw System

Large turbines are installed with a yaw system which allows the nacelle to constantly adjust its

position in accordance to the direction and force of the wind. The system is composed of one or

more gearboxes with electric break motors as prime movers. The number of gearboxes is

dependent on the size of the turbine. The gearboxes are mounted at the top of the tower,

vertically, with their output shafts and pinions facing downwards and engaging with the yaw

ring, which connects the element between the nacelle and the tower. In most systems the yaw

ring is fitted with a hydraulic break system. This locks down when the system is not in use to

ensure the nacelle does not rotate unless the yaw system is in use. 81

6.4.6 Generator and Controller

The generator in a wind turbine converts mechanical energy into electrical energy. For high

power turbines, asynchronous generators are generally used because they allow for

synchronization with the grid, are very durable, and require little maintenance. Synchronous

generators are more efficient; however they require additional equipment to be connected with

the grid. All generators have to be cooled, and this is usually performed by a ventilator. The

controller is an electronic device located inside the nacelle which constantly records the turbines

performance. This information is then used to control the pitch and yaw to ensure that the turbine

operates under optimal conditions. This information is also relayed to an operator who oversees

the turbine‟s performance. 81

97

6.4.7 Nacelle

All the turbines machinery is held in the nacelle, which is generally constructed of steel. It is

connected to the tower with bearings because it must be able to rotate in the direction of the

wind. It provides protection for all the internal components of the turbine. The size of the nacelle

depends on the size of the turbine. The temperature inside the nacelle can be quite high due to

the heat generated from the gearbox and the generator. Ventilators are used to keep it cool.

Conversely, during the winter, the temperature drops below freezing, and this can cause the oil in

the gearbox to freeze. Heaters are installed to warm up the oil so the system can run smoothly. 81

6.4.8 Monitoring Devices

A wind vane and anemometer are installed on the turbine to measure the direction and magnitude

of the wind. This information is then used to ensure the turbine is facing directly into the wind

for maximum operating efficiency. Both the monitoring devices are heated to ensure they do not

freeze and malfunction. Inside the nacelle there are also sensors measuring the speed of the

rotors and generator as well as the temperature of all its inside components. 81

98

6.5 Pure Cell 200 Fact Sheet

100

6.6 DFC1500MA Fact Sheet

104

6.7 RETScreen for Solar System on University Club

110

6.8 Immosolar IS-PRO 2000 Tinox Fact Sheet

113

6.9 RETScreen for Solar System on the Lasalle Building

120

6.10 Canadian Solar Inc. CS6A - 180 Fact Sheet

122

6.11 RETScreen for Solar PV System

129

6.12 RETScreen for Single 1.65 MW Wind Turbine

136

6.13 RETScreen for Multiple (20) 1.65 MW Wind Turbines

143

6.14 Vestas V82 Fact Sheet

147

6.15 Entegrity Wind Systems - EW15 Fact Sheet

148

6.16 RETScreen for Single Small Wind Turbine (50kW)

154

6.17 RETScreen for Multiple (20) Small Wind Turbines (50kW)

apsc 400: team - queen's university · 2015-02-27 · ii executive summary physical plant...

Documents