19H - ALTERNATIVE ENERGY STUDY - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

16 job No. 2669.01 Water Systems Alternative Energy Feasibility Study When this savings is applied to the appropriate hours for each month with the rate schedule in use at the site, the monetary savings for one year is projected to be $38,441. The electricity saved through this rate schedule is worth approximately $0.09 per kWh on rate TOU-PA-3-E. The projected cost to purchase and install the new hydro turbine is $718,000. This involves removing the existing turbine/generator and installing a new, similar unit and connecting it to the electrical and control systems. Interconnection with SCE is required for this project, but since the turbine is small relative to the site load, and since a turbine generator has been tied to SCE in the past, a large effort is not projected. The Pressure Reduction Turbine project at SA -1 is likely eligible for an SCE incentive through the statewide Self Generation Incentive Program. This is currently offering $600 per kW for this type of installation. This incentive of $79,200 would lower the capital cost of the project to $638,763. Note that half of this incentive is likely to be payable upfront, while the other half is payable over the first five years of operation. For simplicity's sake it is all being treated as an upfront incentive. Only the SA -1 is eligible for an incentive under the SGIP program. This turbine will offset electricity already used at the site. Since the turbines at SA -3 and SA -6 will primarily export power to other sites, as they have no significant power use onsite to offset, they likely do not qualify for the SGIP incentive. Also, SGIP incentives for solar power generation were fully expended a number of years ago. In this application, the demolition of the existing unit is expected to include the removal of the generator, turbine shaft, impellers and upper housing. The existing turbine has a large bell set in concrete to house the impellers which hang down from the frame. This bell can likely be filled with rebar and concrete to form the foundation for the new turbine, whose impeller does not hang lower than the inlet and outlet pipes. The typical design of a head recovery turbine puts it in parallel with the existing PRV. Water flow through the turbine is the first loading order, controlled to a setpoint such as 8 CFS by the turbine wicket gates. If the resulting flow does not meet the pressure requirements of the plant discharge, the parallel PRV can open to maintain the desired pressure setpoint. In this case, the parallel PRV is installed in a room at a lower elevation than the existing turbine. However, it is expected that the turbine alone would operate normally when the 8 CFS flow is desired. In the new scenario, the manual valve and PRV installed in series with the turbine not necessary. A new automated valve will be installed upstream of the turbine to provide a remote shut off for water flow through the turbine. The existing manual valve and PRV in series with the turbines can be opened fully or removed to create a smaller pressure drop. The existing turbine generator is 32 years old, presumably approaching the end of its useful life. Should the turbine fail the baseline generation would be zero kWh per year. In that case the installation of the new turbine would increase net -generation by 877,140 kWh per year. When this savings is applied to the appropriate hours each month the monetary savings for one year is projected to be about $90,000. Note that these savings assume that the rate schedule remains unchanged for the meter that serves the whole site. CITY OF SANTA ANA 19H-24 Newcomb I Anderson I McCormick