Thermo-economic assessment of small scale biomass CHP: steam turbines vs ORC in different energy demand segments

The energy performance and profitability of CHP plants, and the selection of the optimal conversion technology and size, are highly influenced by the typology of energy demand (load-duration curve, temperature of heat demand, heat and electricity load patterns). In the small scale range, where CHP can be particularly promising to match local heat and power demand, the technologies based on boilers coupled to steam turbines (ST) and bottoming Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) can be operated in flexible mode to match the energy demand. This is particularly important when high temperature heat is required (i.e. industrial end users). In the case of solid biomass fired CHP, the boiler + ST/ORC option could be competitive with the alternatives of boiler + Stirling engine, externally fired GT or gasification + ICE. In this paper, a thermo-economic comparison of the following biomass-CHP configurations is proposed: (A) boiler + ST + bottoming ORC, (B) boiler + ST, (C) boiler + ORC and (D) configuration (A) with option to switch on or off the bottoming ORC on the basis of the heat demand available. The focus is on a 1 MWt biomass boiler, and the plants are operated to serve residential (r), tertiary (t) and industrial (i) heat and power demand. The thermodynamic cycles are modeled by Cycle-Tempo, while the energy demand is modeled through simplified indicators (temperature of heat demand, equivalent thermal demand hours). On the basis of the results of thermodynamic simulations, upfront and operational costs assessment, and Italian energy policy scenario (feed-in tariffs for biomass electricity), the global energy conversion efficiency and investment profitability is estimated, for each CHP configuration and energy demand segment. The results indicate the optimal CHP configuration for each end user and the key technical and economic factors in the Italian legislative framework. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.