UVM Campus Renewable Energy Feasibility Study Executive Summary
payback), but they cannot provide hot-water (heat recovery) and thus are not really cogeneration units and do not offset Cage fuel costs. On paper, the 400 kW UTC fuel cells with hot-water heat recovery have a better payback, but in reality they are too big for the University Heights electrical load. •
A reciprocating engine generator with hot-water heat recovery is a good candidate (nominal 6 year payback) but it would be much larger and nosier than the small microturbine installations.
For the high-gas price / current electricity price cost scenario, none of the above-discussed University Heights cogeneration and alternate configurations indicate a good payback potential (i.e. dozens of years). 5.
FUEL CELLS CHA investigated the potential installation and utilization of fuel cells around the UVM campus.
The study looked at two different types of fuel cells: solid-oxide fuel cells (SOFC) and proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells. Detailed descriptions of these cell types, and the specific units that were examined, can be found in the Fuel Cell section of the report. After a simplified economic analysis, CHA concluded that on the UVM campus there is not a beneficial opportunity for fuel cell installation. Out of the two fuel cell types, CHA found that, theoretically, the UTC 400 model would be more beneficial for UVM. Its lower installed cost and combined heat and power (CHP) benefits are appealing. Under ideal economic conditions (5.00 gas and 15.0 c/kW.hr), the UTC 400 Fuel Cell cogeneration (with CHP) unit would be reasonable. However, since the heating plant already produces and distributes steam to provide heat, there is no need for CHP, rendering the cells’ heat-recovering ability nearly financially neutral at most high electrical load sites. Therefore, the payback period would be longer without the recovery of the heat byproduct of the fuel cell unit. In conclusion, CHA found that, unless under ideal conditions, including future grants and funding, installing either type of fuel cell is not a viable option at the present time. Since there are currently no grants available to fund fuel cell installation costs, the payback period is too long to make utilizing fuel cells financially reasonable. However, if there were funding available, UVM would be a great candidate to participate in a fuel cell pilot program.
10