ML20031B331
| ML20031B331 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 09/22/1981 |
| From: | Mcnair G, Roberts P ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8110010235 | |
| Download: ML20031B331 (4) | |
Text
~
9 5
co UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 0007750 DRc NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
SEP3 etgat, 3 BEFORE THE CUlc.e ef
\\
9 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD InnQ
- 7
?
In the Matter of
)
)
PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-387 and
)
50-388
)
ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. )
)
(Susquehanna Staam Electric Station, )
Units 1 and 2)
)
e
/A
'/
'.. V f' ) /'.g \\
AFFIDAVIT OF 6
Ail L GRAYSON E. McNAIR and PRESTON L.
ROBERTS I
IN SUPPORT OF APPLICANTS' ANElER ic'j SEP3 01987 '9; TO NRC STAFF'S MOTION y0?.
F-
SUMMARY
DISPOSITION OF CONTENTION 4 u.s.gll7
[-/
!O County of Lehigh
)
/'
6
\\'/
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
)
Grayson E,
'icNair and Preston L. Roberts, being duly sworn according to law, depose and say as follows:
1.
I, Grayson E. McNair, am Vice President-Consumer and
(
Customer Services for Pennsylvania Power & Light Company
("PP&L") and give this Affidavit in support of Applicants' Answer to NRC Staff's Motion for Summary Disposition of Con-tention 4.
A summary of my professional qualifications and experience is attached as Exhibit "A" to this Affidavit.
I am sponsoring that portion of this Affidavit which describes the impacts that solar alternatives will have on energy and sales go 3 projections.
J
/ {
0110010235 810922 l
PDR ADOCK 05000387 l
G PDR-
).
s.
89 2.
I, Preston L. Roberts, am Manager-Research and Technical Services for PP&L and give this Affidavit in support of Appli-cants' Answer to NRC Staff's Motion for Summary Disposition of Contention 4.
A summary of my professional qualifications and experierme is attached as Exhibit "B" to this Affidavit.
I am sponsoring that portion of this Affidavit which describes various solar alternatires.
3.
PP&L program.: involving solar energy alternatives and the effects which those alternatives will have on PP&L's electricity demand and sales, are described in Exhibit "C" to this Affidavit, a document entitled " Applicants' Testimony of Grayson E. McNair [and] Preston L. Roberts on Contention 4D (Solar Energy Alternatives)", dated September 15, 1981.
As shown in that document, PP&L has had and continues to have extensive programs relating to solar energy alternatives.
However, solar energy cannot be expected to replace the need for Susquehanna.
JsonE. McNair A
~ ' Prest 6rr L Roberts l
Sworn to and subscribed V ay before me this JJ d
of September, 1981.
Ass j$.
p otary Public
'fEAN A. SMOUCK. Notary Pubik l
Allentown. Lenign County. Pa My Commission Ewires May 14,192 L i
I w+
6/k/htf M U RESUME OF GRAYSON E.
McNAIR Q.
Please state your full name and business address, o
A.
Grayson E. McNair, Two North Ninth Street, Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101.
Q.
By whom are you employed and in what capacity?
A.
I am employed by Pennsylvania Power a Light Company (PP&L) as Vice President-Consumer and Community Services.
~
Q.
What are your responsibilities as Vice President-Consumer and Community Services?
A.
I am responsible for the development and administration of PP&L's conservation and load management programs, customer services, rates, market research, customer-relation activities and economic and community development programs.
I am also responsible for research andd development of ways the customer can more wisely use electric' energy supple-mented by alternate energy sources, O.
What is your educational background?
t 1
A.
I received a BEE degree from the University of Virginia in 1962; completed the Power Systems Engineering course in 1
l Schenectady, New Yorl: in 1967; became a registered Pro-fessional Engineer in the Commonwealth 'of Pennsylvania in l
1968; completed several post-graduate courses in electrical engineering at Lehigh Unive,rsity; and was Vir.2 ting Lecturer in Ele;;rical Engineering for three years at Lehigh Univer-l ftM/St Y "A
- fo A FRMHT eF GRAYsoW F.
MAIA/A
^#b iWcroy L.
208E97T
/'sity.
Q.
How long have you been employed by PP&L and in what capacities?
A.
I joined PP&L in 1962 as Graduate Trainee followed by assignment to Distribution Engineering in 1963 with responsibilities for de*,ign of overhead and underground 12
\\j kv facilities.
In 1964 I was transferred to the Melay and Control Engineerlag group and became Project Engineer in 1966, representing PP&L on the Conemargh Relay and Commun-ications Task Force for designing protective relaying for
~
the 500 kv transmission lines.
I was also Chairman of the Transient Stability Committee.
In 1958, I transferred to the Interconnection Planning Section of the System Planning Department as a Project Engineer.
After being a Senior Project Engineer, I was named Transmission and Distribution Planning Engineer in 1971 with responsibilities for long-and short-term planning of all electrical facilities operating at less than 230 kv.
In 1975, I became Assistant Manager-?.ates & Market Research.
I assumed the position of Manager-Conservation Services in 1978.
On January 1,
- 1980, I was appointed to my present position..
BIOGRAPHICAL DATA PRESTON L.
ROBERTS EDUCATION:
B.
S.
1969 Penns/lvania State University Major in Physics, Minor in Mathematice.
Studied in Aerospaca Engineering curriculum for three years.
i M.
S.
1976 Villanova University
)
Electrical Engineering Program, specializing in Automatic Control.
Emphasis on Digital Control utilizing Microprogrammable Processors.
PROFESSIONAL DATA:
Registered Professional Engineer Member.
American Section cf the International Solar Energy Society, Inc,; American Wind Energy Association (AWEA); American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers; Association of Energy Engineers; Advance Conversion and Storage Task Force (EPRI) ; Ucility Interface Standards Committee of AWEA; EPRI Passive Solar Utility Impact Assessment Project.
Board Member:
Lehigh Valley Manpower Solar Utilization Economic Development and Employment Program; Lehigh County Community College Solar Curriculun Advisory Committee EXPERIENCE:
1978 to Present - Manager-Research and Technical Services, Pennsylvania Power and Light Company I am Manager, Research and Technical Services for Pennsylvania Power and Light Company, and am respcnsible for overall Company applications research into alternative and conventional energy technologies on both a residential and commercial / industrial level.
The thirty research projects my group is involved with range from a study to characterize the operating costs and efficiencies cf commercially available electric residential space heating systems to a demonstration of solar repowering of an industrial steam process using high temperature tracking solar concentrating collectors.
GfMt8rr na
- To
$FFtbA WT on:
pAvw t.
men 4iA Akb pssroN t..
RMERTt
e EXPERIENCE: icon' t) 1976 to 1978 - Applications Consultant, Consumer & Community Services, PP&L I specialized in experimental HVAC design both residentially and commercially, electronic equipment design and applications, solar and photovoltaic applications.
Accomplishments included design of suppleraental energy storage systems and the first base load ice builder design concept for cooling of commercial buildings.
1974 to 1976 - Building Systems Engineer, General Office Building Operations, PP&L Responsible for proper operation and design modifications to the electrical, mechanical and control systems in the General Offi ce -:omplex.
I had direct supervisory responsibility'for nine ;ployees and coordination of work by outside contractors s
performing work in the General Office.
I specified, and i
coordinated the installation of the computer based monitoring and control system for the General Office complex.
I was also i
responsible for all technical training of Building Department employees.
s
~
1972 to 1973 - Saxos Engineer, Powers Regulator Company, Phila.,
PA_.
3 In this position I was responsible for control system applications and sales.
My responsibilities included specification writing and application assistance to consult-ing engineering firms, coordination of system installations i
and customer training.
,1969 to 1973 - Regional Automation Engineer, Powers Regulator Company,.Phila., PA.
In this position I was responsible for the design and application engineering of all centralized digital control systems.
The territory included all of the East Coast. I l
also developed training programs for in-house use and customer i
training.
I was responsible for field installation coordination, purchasing' of materials and start-up of systems.
l l
l
ExHlBri "C "
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the $atter of
)
)
PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
)
)
and
)
Dccket Nos. 50-387
)
50-388 ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. )
)
(Suscuehanna Steam Electric Station, )
Units 1 and 2)
)
APPLICANTS' TESTIMONY C'F f
GRAYSON E. McNAIR PRESTON L.
ROBERTS ON CONTENTION 4D (SOLAR ENERGY ALTERNATIVES) i
(
l September 15, 1981 ee y
&x'Hisir "c "
ro AFFthAVIr 05 l
C#A'noN E.treMet nb tegros c. foders
I.
Introduction PP&L is committed to the development and use of solar energy in its various forms.
This commitment includes the use of solar energy by PP&L's customers where it is in the best interest of the customer utilizing solar energy to reduce nis energy costs, the cost to the utility, and to its other ratepayers.
The use of solar energy by PP&L cuJtomers can reduce future electricity costs for all utility customers if the need for additional utility generating capacity can be reduced or eliminated, or consumption of higher cost fuels such as oil can he reduced.
Meeting this goal is a much more complex problem than merely reducing an individual customer's conventional energy use through application of alternative energy forms.
In an effort to find ways in which solar can be of benefit to the customer, PP&L has a diversified, on-going research program investigating the various ways ox best utilizing solar energy.
The results of this research activity is shared with PP&L's customers and others through published reports, technical papers, customer consultation and advice, and the Company's various customer communications and orograms.
Since 1973, the Company has spent over $1 million on solar research and $500,000 on wind research.
This amount does not include PP&L's contributions for solar research to the Electric Power Research Institute.
"he 1980 Electric Power Rasearen
Institute survey of electric utilities' involvement in solar energy research and demonstration shows EPkL to be third among all utilities nationally in the number of activities in solar energy (Ref. 1).
PP&L is surpassed only by two uti.lities in California, f
PP&L's research effort encompasses customer or dispersed applications and also utility central station generating applications of solar energy.
Among these efforts are:
A.
Active Solar Systems 1.
The Schnecksville Energy Efficient Residence This 1,600 sq. ft. research home was one of the first active solar heated homes constructed in the U.S.
Conceived in 1972-1973 and opened to the public in 1974, the Schnecksv111e unit utilized 206 eq. feet of flat plate collector and extensive heat reccvery from waste heat along with innovative thermal insulation improvements to create a residence with extremely low operating costs.
With respect to the sclar features of the home, it was found that:
a)
South facing glazius was more cost effective for collection of solar energy than active solar space heating systems.
b)
Solar assisted domestic =ater heating and solar assisted heat pumps were the most cost
~
_.... _. _., _. ~ _. _, _
- \\
effective use of active solar.
2.
The Bicentennial Homes In this demonstration of residential solar i
technology in 1976, ppkL incorporatcd the best active st.aia; features of the Schnecksville Energy Efficient Residence, principally solar assisted heat pumpu and active flat plate domestic water heating, into five homes.
The most significant conclusion reached as to solar energy utilization was that solar water heating was far more cost effective than solar space heating.
3.
Concentrating Solar Collectors PP&L is investigating the potential for high temperature, concentrating type collectors for industrial and commercial process heating use.
The atudy will f.ccus on the performance of the systems in our service area which das large amounts of diffuse solar radiation.
The Company plans to make its first test installation of about 100 kilowatto peak thermal output in 1982.
4.
Solar Heat pump Der.sonstration l
The purpose of ruis demonstration project is to design, develop, install and monitor a heat pump system that uses refrigerant cooled solar absorbers as the heating evaparator and cooling condenser.
The l
l 4
l l
l l
_4_
' 1 i
potentiel advantages of such a system are improved efficiency and direct utilization of solar energy by the heat pump for space heating.
The project will test the potential demand and energy savings of such a system, which is designed to be operated without supplemental electric resistance heating.
A prototype 4
installation is now in place in Berks County.
Final results of the testing are expected in 1982.
5.
Low Temperature Grain Dryer The installation of the grain dryer will help determide if solar energy can be used cost-effectively in agricultural applications.
The project is designed to show that some solar applications can be placed into operation at a low installation cost and without the sophisticated hardware that is normally associated with active solar systems.
The test installation is located on the farm of Arthur Wert, Mayor of Mifflinburg.
Wert and the Vocational-Agricultural class of Mifflinburg High Scho?1 built the solar collector with funding and l
instrumentation suppliad by PP&L.
It is scheduled to
~
operate for two drying seasons with a final performance report expected in December, 1981.
(Ref. 2)
Thie grain ryer represents a refinement of a PpkL f
concept tested in 1978-1979 on a farm in Montour County, l'ennsylvania.
I l
i i
6.
Photevoltaic Cells Pd&L has installed a photovoltaic cell array, capable of generating 1 kilowatt of electricity, at its Harwood Wind Electric Station near Hazleton.
This installation consists of polycrystalline silicon photovoltaic cells.
An additional array, consisting of cadmium sulfide thin film cells wil.1 be installed at the site dyring 1981, depending on cell availability.
Through this project, PP&L is collecting data on peak and average array capacity, degradation of cell output related to environmental changes and other factors associated with this technology.
Since 1976, PP&L has funded research with major universities in the development of advanced photovoltaic devices and manufacturing techniques designed to reducs their cost.
7.
Solar Availability PP&L, in cooperation with Lehigh University, Bloomsburg State College, and Lohigh County Community College, is collecting data on solar r.vailability at various locations within its service area.
This d'ta will be made available to custoniers planning solar a
installations, and it will be used to assess solar energy impact on electric service and as a basis for future solar research by PP&L.
The f.hree sites
are in operation and collecting solar availability dr.ta with two more planned.
8.
Solar Assisted Water Heating PPkL is testing the long-term performance of solar assisted domestic water heating systems in homes, to determine the impact on electric load and the customer's energy cost.
Since 1973 PPkL has designed and measured tne performance of approximately 20 active solar assisted water heating systems.
9.
Hybrid Solar Wall Panel PP&L is testing the use of the panel as a low-cost technique for incorporating solar thermal collection, storage, and distribution into existing buildings.
The panol, which uses phase-change material to collect, store, and distribute solar energy, is expected to reduce electrical space heating demand and save energy.
4 The principal benefit of a phase-change material is chat it can store 70 times more energy per pound than water at temperatures between about 20 F and 130 F, reducing the physical size of thermal energy storage systems.
Phase-changa materials absorb large amounts of energy in changing frein a solid to a lignld (change of phase) and release this energy as required for space heating by resolidifying.
t d
I
-. _ -,.- ~.,.
~
B.
Passive Solar Systems Much current PP&L research emphasis is being placed I
on passive solar space heating technology including:
1.
Passive Solar Home Research Project 4
PP&L coordinated construction of six passive solar homes in its service area which were 6 pen to the public in early 1981 and are now being occupied.
This is the second largest utility sponsored passive solar program in the United States, surpassed only by the program initiated by the Tennessee Valley Authority, and has received wide acclaim within the solar industry.
The Compa.ny is evaluating the potential of this solar technology as a load management tool.
The Company hopes to demonstrate that pascive ef;2r space heating can be integrated effectiv(ly into electrically heated homea and PP&L's system.
PP&L plans to monitor energy use in the homes for a 30 month period, after which it will made a final report available to the public.
2.
Passive Solar Collection Using Phase-Change Salts Two of the Company's passive solar homes will use heat pumps designed by PP&L that use phase-change salts as a method of storing solar energy.
The system can store low-grade thermal energy collected from sunspaces and solar greenhouses during the day for use by the heat
pump as reqdired, eliminating the need for back-up electric resistance heat on-peak and allowing the heat pump to operate at maximum efficiency at all times.
- 3. Tannersvil'e Service Center PP&L is constructing a new area service center near Stroudsburg which has incorporated into its design a complete integration of passive solar concepts.
Included in the solar features of the building are natural lighting (commonly called daylighting) which reduces artificial lighting energy consumption, a convecting Trombe wall, and phase-change solar energy storage.
Many of the concepts embodied in the project are at the leading edge for the state-of-the-art in low energy use commercial buildings.
Following suitabbt verification of the design elements, the features demonstrated at the Tannersv111e Service Canter will be shared with architects and engineers ir our service area for their consideration and inclusion in new commercial buildings.
C. Wind "1srgy 1.
Harwood Wind Electric Experimental Station The Company is continuing to monitor the electric energy produced by a commercially available 45 KW peak
=
output downwind horizontal axis wind turbine at the Harwood substation site outside of Hazleton, PA.
The asynchronous turbine, installed in 1978, is 4
iucerconnected with PP&L's 12 KV distribution system through a D.C. to A.C. invertor incorporating battery storage.
This is the prevalent coans of interconnection among the nine customer owned wind elsatric systems in PP&L's service area.
This experimental installation br.s been constructed by PP&L to gain operating experience with equipment of the type uti?.izied by our customers.
Out of this research facility we have learned much about the safety, performance, and electrical characteristics of small wind machines.
The knowledge gained has been shared with over 200 PP&L customers who have inquired about wind generation applications, over 35 utilities from across the U.S.,
and five foreign countries.
Unfortunately, the Harwood installation has not performed to our expectations, nor the manufacturers' j
claims.
The power generated by the wind turbine has amounted to a disappointing 1-2% of its output capability.
The potential in the wind at the Harwood site is 2,200 kilowatt-hours per square meter of rotor
..-2.---....---.
area per year.
The wind turbine should be able to extract 15-18% of this available energy or about 46 000 KWH/yr.
An engineering study conducted in 1980 recommended several changes be made to the installation to improve performance.
These changes are being made.
2.
Assessment of Wind Potential PP&L is un'dertaking a detailed study of the wind potential in the PP&L service territory.
Through an innovative " computer mapping" techniq".e developed by our engineering staff, PP&L can establish more precisely the wind potential of the service area pr.-d the best locations for wind generating systems.
With this information, PP&L can better advise customers who are considering installation of these devices.
3.
Wind Availability PP&L, in cooperation with Lehigh University, Bloomsburg State College, and Lehigh County Community College, is collecting data on wind availability at various locations within its service area.
This data will be made available to customers planning wind installations, and it will be used to assess wind energy impact on electric service and as a basis for future wind research by PP&L.
The three sites are in i
operation and collecting wind availabi'.ity data with two more planned, l
l
II.
Alternate Energy Resource Potential Before the impact of solar energy on the need for conventional electrical energy and capacity can be determined, some assessment of the solar energy resource must be made.
As described above, PPkL has undertaken several research nativities to determine the solar resource potential in our service area.
The following discussion relates our findings to date.
A.
Solar Radiation The availability of solar energy determines in great part the economic viability of solar thermal applications.
Actual measurements of the daily amount of solar energy which is available to provide space and water heating, generate electricity through use of photovoltaic devices and generate steam for use in industrial processes are not available from any weather reporting station in our service area.
All published data for major cities in central eastern Pennsylvania has toe." estimated using mathematical techniques.
Beginning in 1975, PP&L contracted with Lehigh University to conduct long term solar data gathering in the Allentown area. (Ref. 3)
The results of five years of data collection show the average annual total radiation on a horizontal surface to be 382,892 BTU /sq. ft.
This is about 8% less than the 415,282 BTU /sq. ft. estimated for Allentown by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (Ref. 4).
As a result, solar installations can be expected to save the customer less con'Jentional energy than estimated.
This
I has been observed in installations monitored by PP&L and others.
When the Lehigh University data is correlated to our recorded annual syster peak load for the same years, we find that our peak day can be characterized as a one Of high solar t
availability (clear, sunny skies) preceded by several days of low availability (cloudy or overcast).
The implications of this correlation is that the only solar technologies which could impact on our peak capacity requirements ere those which can provide energy directly and immediately under the typical solar conditions observed.
Since PP&L's annual peak typically occurs between the last two weeks l
in January and first two weeks in February near 10AM - 11AM only photovoltaics and direct gaia passive solar technologies can impact at that time.
B.
Wind Resource Similar data collection has been and is being performed for wind energy potential, as previously described.
.While wind energy potential is more site specific and fewer generalized conclusions can be reached, our work to date indicates that several small areas of our service area may have excellent wind energy potential.
However, they are located in uninhabited, isolated locations.
Pennsylvania's prevailing winds are from the northwest.
The mountains in our service area run generally from southwest to northeast.
The best wind sites, therefore lie on the
. - 1 mountain ridges.
Unfortunately, most of our customers live in the valleys which have very little L ad energy potential.
C.
Institutional Barriers, Although not related to the availability of solar energy, institutional barriers can impede the full development potential of the solar resources.
These barriers include:
1.
The lack of reliable, trained installation ana service organization.J.
2.
The overall complexity of active solar installations.
3.
Restrictive zening ordinances and state tax laws.
4.
Reluctance of lending institutions to finance solar in new ccnstruction.
PP&L has made a concerted effort to crekte a utility environment where alternative energy development is not impeded.
In fact, by removing rate restrictions, introducing special buy-back rates for electrical energy generated from alternative sources, working actively with our customers interested in solar applications, soliciting support of community planners and officials in alternative energy development projects, minimizing interconnection requirements for wind and other small producers, and investigating the best means of utilizing solar energy, PP&L is hoping to foster economical solar development.
l n.n
,n v-r-w-
w
III. Alternate Energv Dnvelopment lotantial Active solar systems are currently the most widespread method of capturing and utilizing solar energy.
F:ssive solar systems are gaining increased attention and are expected to play an increasingly important role in the future.
For all types of solar systems, however, there exist practical limitations that preclude extensive market penetration before 1995.
A.
Active Sclar Applications t
1 Of all dispersed solar tachnologies, flat plate active i
solar thermal is by far the most commonly used.
As of December, 1979, it was estimated th t over 275,000 sqc.re feet a
of flat plate collectar was lu place in Pennsylvania (Ref. 5).
Almost 70% of th$:' was installed in space heating and domestic hot water heating applications.
The technology base for flat plate collector systems is nearly fully dkvsloped commercially.
The costs of flat plate collectors and associated hardware are nearing a point where no further reductions due to economies of scale can be expected.
The range of unit costs quoted by installers in our service area for flat plate collectors is currently approximately $27-$36 per square foot for commercially available systems (installed) including the 40%
federal tax credits.
In work done by PP&L, in over 20 test installations since 1973, it has been demonstrated that the average energy collected on an annual basis by flat plate systems with water
-~,r.,
,.,--.----.-.e-,--
- ~ - - -.,
,..,-.n
,,~-,-~,--,,-,-o.--,
---e,-
storage ranges frcm 25 KWH/sq. f t.;'ys. for space heating to 31 KWH//sq. ft./ year for dcmestic hot water heatdog (Ref. 6, 7, 8).
In a mtjor study by Penn State University actual collection of solar energy for flat plate domestic hot water systems averaged 25.1 KWH/sq. ft./yr over Pennsylvanis
[Ref. 9).
Based on these estimates of energy production and the previously stated installed costs, current life cycle costs for domestic hot water flat plate systems is estimated at approxicately 219/ kilowatt-hour with the 40% federal tax credit 1;cludsd.(see calculation 1).
When compared to PP&L's current average residential rate of approximately 4-1/29/ kilowatt acur, flat plate activo solar dovectic hot water systems are not yet cost-effective.
Similarly, the economics for 5.ctive solar space heating are not favorebJe at this timo.
The customer cost for solar space heating is appraximately 17.79 per kilowatt hour (see calculation 2).
Because of the current poor economics of solar hot water heating relative to conventional wator heating we do not expect high saturations of active solar water heating in the time frame of 1980-1995.
The impact of new water heating technologies such as the heat pump water heater developed by the Department of Energy which achieves energy savings comparable to solar water heating at a substantially lower cost ($900 installed vs. $1,800 for solar including tax credits) will tend to slow the growth of solar installation.
t l.-
\\
Likewise, che complexity and cost of active solar space heating will prevent substantial market penetration for this technology.
The simplicity and favorable economics of passive sol.r apace heating will make this the preferred technology for new homes which utilize solar energy for space heating.
The majority of active space heatLag installations will be made ir retrofit applicatione, By 1995, we expect 6,000 homes with electric water heating will install active solar water heating and 1,500 homes will install active solar space heating, mostly as retrofits to existing homes.
B.
Solar Concentrator Systems Concentrating technology is seeing more frequent application especially where higher quality thermal energy, including steam is required.
Concentrators are in a dynamic stzte of development with much work being done on reflector design, materials, etc.
A concentrating collector system requires Isrge amounts of flat land.
Several square miles would be required, for example, for a 100 megawatt plant.
In the PP&L service territory, this would mean farmland, which is not likely to be eliminated for this purpose.
Relatively more land area is required in the northeastern U.S. than the southwest and other areas where this technology is being demonstrated.
The reason for this is that Pennsylvania has larger amounts of diffuse sclar radiation due
. - ~.
A.
to sunlight scattering from dust, pollutants, and absorption by water vapor, and smaller amounts of direct benm radiation i
required for concentrator systems.
No empirical data for concentrating type systems are available for PP&L's service area although PP&L is hoping to gain some operating 6xpw lence from tb4 colar concentrator demonstration project previously discussed under PP&L alternate energy initiatives.
The U.S. Department of Energy has estimated the capital costs of a concentrator solar plant to range between $2,760 to $5,020 per kilowatt (Ref. 10).
This equater to appioximately 12.8 to 15.19 per kilowatt hour Z evelized over f;he life of the plant.
Again, this is significantly higher than currect PP&L costs to generate electricity.
A9 a result, PP&L does not expect to see much development of solar concentrators until after 1995.
C.
Photovoltaic Technology Photovoltaic arrays have been used to supply power in remote locations and in space program applications.
The primary drawbacks of photovoltaics are high costs and low efficiency, both of which wers being addressed by several federal programs administered by the U.S. Department of Energy.
The General Electric Co.,
in a study of photovoltaic impacts on electric uOilities for the Electric Power Research Tustitcte indicates that photovoltaic power plant applications wou.'d require about 30 percent of all silicon produced
-n
annually in the U.S.
to support a national goal of 1%-2% of total installed capacity in the form of photovoltaics by the year 2000.
This is clearly not achievable without substantial 1
increased production capability by manufacturers.
This means that photovotaics must compete with the demands of the electronics industry for the existing silicon production capacity.
(Ref. 11)
This same study indicates that current levelized busbar costs for photovoltaic technologies are approximately 149 to 259/KWH for a 100 megawatt plant.
These costs are based on a 30 year lifo, but actual life expectancy is actually closer to 20 years.
In dispersed residential applications costs are even higher due to the lack of econunles of scale available in large installations.
D.
Passive Solar Space Heating PP&L expects that the largest solar potential will be l
realized in passive solar space heating applications.
l We feel that the most cost effective applications of passive solar space heating will be the increased use of south l
facing glazing with some form of moveable night insulation to 1
reduce heat loss through the glazing at night or on overcast days (a " Sun-Tempered Home"). Other homes will be built with more extensive passive solar treatment, similar to PP&L's passive solar research homes, which will generate greater 4
savings than sun-tempering and have inherent abilir.y through mass storage to qualify for time-of-day rate structures.
As an example of the savings which can be expected from the sun-tempering type of solar construction, for a 2000 sq. ft.
home in Allentown wi"x 120 sq. ft, of south glazing (80% of the total glass area) using night insulation, a homeowner can expect to save about $128/yr. at current rates (see calculation 3).
This analysis assumes that the night (moveable) window insulation is in place from about 5 pH to 8 AM during the winter months.
This also assumes (from Balcomb) an R-9 moveable insulation (Ref. 11).
In fact, the overall thermal resistance of the best night insulation is only R-4.
This alone would reduce solar savings by 15% or $19/yr.
The above savings analysis also as:'imes adequate chermal storage mass exists in the home without need to add mass to store solar energy and minimize space temperature fluctuation.
Fcr the example given, mass storage cff 30 lbs./ft.2 of south i
glazing would be required to keep daily space temperature l
swings to less than 10 F/ day.
The actual mass of a frame partition wall home wtuld be only about fS lbs./ft.2 The result of this low mass case would bc very large daily l
temperature swings, on the order of 18 F, 0
l To limit these space temperature swings to less than U
10 F/ day requires either an increase in tbermal mass (at some l
l a,.
,-~---w-
- - ~,,
.-----m
' 1 i
cost) er a reduction ir touth glazing area to about 120 sq. ft.
with a corresponding reduction in annual savings.
Eased on the preliminary performance estimates for PPkL's six passive solar research homes, we expect that a passive
,i solar home optimized on an economic basis can result in a i
demand savings of 3 KW/home on the winter peak and an energy savings of 6,000 KWH/yr. (Ref. 12) l There are costs associated with implementing passive solar i
space heating or suntempering.
PPkL's Passive Solar Home Research Project resulted in the following average incremental l
l construction costs:
)!
Direct Gain (South Windows):
$5.00/sq. ft. of glass i
Night insulatica (R4):
$5.50/sq. ft. of glass Trombe Wall Construction:
$19.00/sq. ft. of tromba wall Greenhouse:
$42.00/sq. ft. of greenhouse floor ares Site Built Sunspace:
$24.00/sq. ft. of floor area Additional Insulation:
$1,500/home From this data construction costs for cuatempering range from
$3,000 to $6,000 and from $6,000 to $14,000 for a passive solar home.
We are forecasting that 5,000 passive solar homes using electrical space heating as a supplement will be in-place in our service area by 1995 and that an additional 10,0GO electrically beated homes will be sun-tempered.
. This corrOcpondo to 8% to 12% of the new olcctrically heated homes expected to be constructed betv2en 1980 and 1995 and assumes greater consumer acceptance of passive solar construction.
For a significantly greater number of homes to be constructed using passive solar technologies, several current barriers will have to be overcome.
One major barrier is zoning restrictions.
Zoning restrictions would have to be changed to aermit or require i
southern orientation in new construction and to protect solar access.
In a study of solar zoning for the City of Los Angeles, city planners concluded that zoning to protect solar access for single fas.ly construction would significantly reduce housing densities, increasing costs to the homeowner.
The impact was much less severe for multifamily dwellings where more architectural and planning control by local zoning boards exists (Ref. 13).
PPkL has attempted to address these issues l
in a document on energy efficient community planning sent to l
planners and zoning officials throughout our service area (Ref. 14).
While PP&L can and has suggested wais to address l
these issues, their resolution rests with institutional and governmental bodies.
IV.
Expected Impact of Alternate Energy Technologies on PP&L's l
Capacity and Energy Requirements The combined demand for electrical energy from all customers determines, in large part, the installed generating capacity 1
(
l i
required to meet that demand.
The greatest demands on PP&L's system occur between 7:00 AM and 9:00 PM which is defined as the "on-peak" period.
'ene highest annual hourly demand for energy is defined as the annual system peak.
The growth in this annual demand each year must be constrained to allow new capacity additions to be deferred.
The goal of PP&L's conservation programs, of which solar utilization is a component, is to reduce on-peak demand and electrical energy use.
For example, the charac.teristics of solar utilization technologies, could, if planned only to reduce energy consumption, result in a higher demand.
Even though PP&L's peak day can be typically characterized as one of high solar availability, as previously stated, it is possible that 1:. a given year the solar availability will be low on our peak day.
For this reason solar energy cannot always be counted on to make a positive contribution to annual peak load reduction and therefore capacity requirements.
Thus PP&L must either have available the capacity to supply the load on that day or be able to obtain the needed capacity from other generating sources.
Costs are currently the principal deterrent to widespread development of solar technologies.
This conclusion has been confirmed in PP&L's own research and demonstration projects and by other solar investigators.
This is evidenced by the need to offer tax credits and other financial incentives to make a technology,
which cannot now compete with conventional energy sources, attractive to consumers.
In addition, only passive solar, flat plaia' collectors, and wind energy systems have been developed commercially to the point where widespread application is possible.
Most other solar applications require energy storage to make the technology economical.
However, once the customer has invested in storage, it may be cheaper for him to buy off-peak electrical energy under PP&L's time-of-use rate structures.
The availability of these rate structures may actually discourage solar applications because the same economic advantage can be achieved through the time-of-use rates as for the solar system without the need to invest in solar equipment.
For instance, when off-peak water heating is compared to solar water heating using PP&L's off-peak water heating rate provision, the average residential customer can realize economic savinga better than those from a solar water heater for about one-sixth the initial cost of the solar system.
In addition, with time-of-use rates, the entire load is moved off PP&L's peak to a period when existing capacity is available.
Even though the fuel consumed at the power plant is not saved, the individual rate payer achieves the same economic. benefit as he would from investing in solar and the utility sees a real reduction in on-peak demand.
I l
l
A.
Active Solar Water Heating The company expects active solar water heating to result in a demand reduction of 1 KW per installation and an energy savings of 2,500 KWH/yr. The total impact by 1995 is expected to 'oe:
6,000 installations x 1 KW 6 MW saved
=
installation 6,000 installations x 2,500 KWH/yr. = 15,000 MWH/yr. saved installation The demand savings quoted by the intervenors for owner built active solar water heating systems at 2 KW per unit (Ref. 15) is high.
Based on our experience, the demand contribution to PP&L's peak from conventional electric domestic hot water heating is only about 1 KW.
B.
Active Solar Space Heating The average reduction in electrical heating energy demand through application of active solar space heating is approximately 2 KW/home and an energy savings of 5,000 KWH/home, based on our prior experience with the Schnecksville rceidence, the Bicenntenial Homes demonctration, and metered data from other active solar space heating systems in our service area.
3ased on our estimates of active system penetration by 1995 we expect to see a savings of:
Demand:
2 KW x 1,500 homes = 3 MW saved home Energy:
5,000 KWH x 1,500 homes = 7,500 MWH/yr.
home/ year
.---o
t C.
Passive Solar Space Heating i
Based on our projections of development potential PP&L expects to realize savings from passive solar heated and sun-tempered homes of:
Demand Passive Homes:
5,000 Homes x 3 37
= 15 MW saved Home Suntempered Homes:
10,000 Homes x 1.7 KW = 17 MW saved Home Total Demand Savings 32 MW Energy Passive Solar Homes:
5,000 Homes x 6,000 TWH = 30,000 MWH saved per year Home Sun-tempered Homes:
10,000 Eomes x 2,500 KWH = 25,000 MWH saved per year Home Total Energy Savings 55,000 MWH saved per year D.
Wind Technologies PP&L expecto the savings from an estimated 250 installations of wind electric systems by 1995 to amount to a reduction in winter peak load (demand savings) of 1 MW and an annual energy savings of 75r MWH/yr.
E.
Total Impact The total expected savings from all solar technologies by 1995 is, therefore:
Technology Demand Savings Energy Savings Active Solar Water Heating 6 MW 15,000 MWH/yr.
Active Solar Space Heating 3 MW 7,500 MWH/yr.
Concentrating Collectors Negligible Negligible Photovoltaics Negligible Negligible Passive Solar Space Heating 32 MW 55,000 MWH/yr.
Wind 1 MW 750 MWH/yr.
Total 42 MW 78,250 MWH/yr.
4
e -
These projected savings are siready included in our current load forecast.
It must be recognized that, even under the most optimistic projection, not all of these customers could be expected to follow PP&L's recommendations relP,1ve to solar energy alternatives.
We also expect, however, that some customers will implement alternative energy technologies regardless of economic viability.
Our long range forecast attempts to account for these factors.
e
i Conclusions In light of the activitiel described previously, and our consideration of solar energy's impact on energy and capacity pinnning, solar energy in its various forms has been adequately considered as an alternative to new capacity additions and conventionally generated electrical energy.
Solar energy cannot be expected to replace the need for the r,;
Susquehanun Steam Electric Station.
PP&L will continue to research solar technologies and develop sound programs to encourage practical solar utilization for the benefit of all it's customers.
~
k.
i REFERENCES 1)
" Electric dtility Solar Energy Activities:
1980 Suivay" Electric Power Research Institute, December, 1980, p.
236.
2)
Pennsylvani'a Farmer";
Volume 205, No. 2, August 8, 1981
_. p.36.
3)
" Report on Wind and Solar Data Gathering:
1975-1979";
R. Sarubi and D. Leenov, Lehigh University for PP&L.
July, 1979.
4)
"On the Nature and Distribution of Solar Radiation"; U.S.
Department of Commerce, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration for U.S. Department of Energy.
April, 1978, 5)
Buildings Energy Use Data Book, Edition 2; 1
J.
L. Blue, et al.
Gak Ridge National Laboratory.
December, 1979, p. 639.
6)
" Summary Report - PPkL Energy Efficient House"; B. Hamel,
')
H. Brown, W. Steigelman.
Franklin Institute Research Laboratories.
June, 1976.
4
^'
7)
" Performance Analysis - Solar Systems in PP&L's Bicentennial Homes DemonstrLtion Project:' R. Romancheck, PP&L.
September, 1978.
8)
" Annual Performance of Ten Solar Domestic Hot Water Heating Systems"; R. Deppen, PP&L April, 1977.
9)
" Solar Systems Monitoring in Pennsylvania"; W. Aungst.
Pennsylvania State University for the Northeast Solar Energy Center.
May, 1980, 10)
Summary of Solar Energy Technology Characterizations; U.S.
Department of Energy, Technology Assessments Division, l
September, 1980.
l 11)
Photovoltaic Power Plants Assessment: General Electric Corp. for the Electric Power Research Institute.
June, 1978.
12)
"A Passive Solar Research Project for an Electric Utility" P. Roberts, PP&L.
Paper presented at ISES/ Solar hising l
Conference, May, 1991.
13)
" Solar Envelope Zoning:
Application of the City Planning l
Process"; City of Los Angeles for SERI, June, 1980.
l 14)
" Energy Conservation Ideas for Community Planning"; PP&L, j
' June, 1979.
l l
REFERENCES (Con c.
15)
ECNP's Responses to Board's Memorandum and Order on Discovery Motions (II) dated January 18, 1980.
16)
Procedings of the Second National Passive Solar Conference; pape.' presented by J. D. Balcomb, "A Simple Empirical Method for Estimating the Performance of Passive Solar Buildings", Volume II p. 377, March, 1978.
CALCULATION 1 Annual Water Heating Load for Family of four (4):
19.364 MMBTU (from p. 31) or 19,364,000 BTU = 5674 KWH 3413 BTU yr.
yr.
M Annual Solar Savings from Solar:
27.46% (from p. 31) or 5674 KWH x 0.2746 = 1558 K'fH yr.
yr.
or 1558 KWH 26 KWH
=
yr.-ft.2 yr.
60 sq. ft. collector Total cost of solar over 20 years = $6,547 (from p. 31)
Total savings in energy over 20 years = 1558 KWH x 20 yrs.
yr.
= 31,160 KWH Equivalent cost of energy saved from solar:
$6,617
= $0.21 Cost
=
Energy Saved 31,160 KWH KWH
_yg_
3 ALLENTOWN PA LATITUDE: 40.65 ACTIVE SYSTEM ANALYSIS
'IME PERCENT INCIDENT HEATING WATEP DEGREE AMBIENT SOLAR SOLAR LOAD LOAD DAYS TEMP (MMBTU)
(MMBTU)
(MMBTU)
(F-DAY)
(F)
'2.48 1.49 0.0 1.645 1153.8 28.40 AN 2
EB 23.18 1.54 0.0 1.485 997.2 30.20 2R 29.83 1.80 0.0 1.645 833.4 37.40 PR 26.30 1.65 0.0 1.592 453.6 50.00
%Y 23.45 1.59 0.0 1.645 190.C 60.80 UN 24.96 1.52 0.0 1.592 21.6 69.80 UL 26.78 1.61 0.0 1.645 0.0 73.40 UG 30.22 1.69 0.0 1.645 5.4 71.60 PP 36.08 1.76 0.0 1.592 84.6 64.40 T
40 30 i.95 0.0 1.645 343.8 53.60 V
25.89 1.44 0.0 1.592 680.4 42.80 C
15.27 1.24 0.0 1.645 1063.8 30.20 LAR 27.46 19.26 0.0 19.364 5828.4 c*o
- uECONOMIC ANALYSIS ****
'ECIFIED COLLECTOR AREA =
- 60. FT2 ITIAL COST OF SOLAR SYSTEM = $
3000.
HE ANNUAL MORTGAGE PAYMENT FOR 10 YEARS = $
345.
END PROP INC BACKUP INSUR. COST SAVNGS PW OF INTRST OF YR DEPRC TAX TAX FUEL MAINT WITH WITH SOLAR p
PAID PRINC DEDUL. PAID SAVED COST COST SOLAR SOLAR SAVNGS Jo 0
1800 0
0 0
0 0
1200
-1200
-1200 0
251 1706 0
59 109 172 29 498
-260
+234 238 1600 0
63 105 190 31 524
-262
-213 224 1479 9
67 102 209 33 553
-264
-193 207 1341 0
71 97 230 35 584
-267
-176 187 1i84 0
75 92 253 37 619
-270
-160 165 1005 0
80 86 278 40 657
-273
-146 140 801 0
85 79 306 42 700
-277
-133
'12 568 0
90 70 336 45 746
-282
-122 79 302 0
95 61 370 47 7?7
-286
-112 42 0
0 101 50 407 50 854
-292
-103 0
G 0
10e er 448 53 572 46 14 0
0 0
113 39 493
~6 624 55 15 0
0 0
120 42 542 60 681 66 17 0
0 0
.127 44 596 63 744 78 18
++
0 0
0 135 47 656 67 812 92 19 0
0 0
143 50 722 71 887 108 20 0
0 0
152 53 794 76 969 125 21 0
0 0
161 56 873 80 1059 145 22 0
0 0
171 59 961 85 1158 167 22 0
0 0
181 63 1057 90 1266 191 23 E DISCOUNTED RATE OF RETURN IS LESS THAN 0.0%
kSUNTILUNDISC. FUEL SAVINGS = INVESTMENT 19.
fMULATIVE SAVINGS NEVER EXCEEDED THE ' MORTGAGE PRINCIPAL DISCOUNTED CUMULATIVE ?OLAR SAVINGS = $
-2862.
ESENT WORTH OF YEARLY f0TAL COSTS WITH SOLAR = $
6547.
fESENTWORTHOFYEARLYTOTALCOSTSW/0 SOLAR
=$
3946.
ESENT WORTH OF CUMULATIVE SOLAR SAVINGS = $
-2600.
s*** READY *****
4 CALCULATION 2 Assumptions:
See p.
33 Analysis includes savings for space heating using active solar.
Annual spaco heating load from p. 33 Space heat:
45,961,000 BTU f 3,413 BTU = 13,466 KWH yr.
KWH yr.
Solar contribution to load (from p. 33) = 34.21%
The annual solar savings is:
13,466 KNH x 0.3421 = 4607 KJH yr.
yr.
The cost of the solar system over 35 years is:
$23,585 (from p. 34)
The equivalent cost per kilowatt-hour of energy saved by the solar system is:
l
$28,585 (4607 KWH x 35 yrs.) " $0.177 yr.
KWH l
f i
r
% YF
.WHAT XX (FLOW RATE / COL. AREA)(SPEC. HEAT)? 2.15 BTU /H.F-F2 I IF 2.WHAT IS-(EPSILON)(CMIN)/(UA)?...........
2.00
[
4 C'OLLECTOR AREA...............................
200.00 FT2 5 FRPRIHE-TAU-ALPHA PRODUCT (NORMAL INCIDENCE)..
0.70 6 FRPRIME-UL PR0 DUCT...........................
0.83 BTU /H-F-F2 7 IHCIDENCE ANGLE MODIFIER (ZERO IF NOT AVAIL.)
0.0 8 NUMBER OF TRANSPARENT C0 VERS.................
2.00 9 COLLECTOR SL0PE..............................
60.00 DEGREES 10 AZIMUTH ANGLE (E.G. SOUTH =0.
WEST =90)........
0.0 DEGREES 11 STORAGE CAPACITY.............................
20.32 BTU /F-FT2 12 EFFECTIVE BUILDING UA........................
420.00 BTU /F-HOUR 13 AVERAGE HOURLY INTERNAL HEAT GENERATION......
2000.00 BTU /H 14 HOT WATER USAGE..............................
0.0 GAL / DAY 15 WATER SET TEMP.(TO VARY BY MONTH. USE CT)....
140.00 F 16 WnTER MAIN TEMP (TO VARY BY MONTH. USE CT)....
51.80 F 17 CITY CALL NUMBER.............................
5.00 18 ACTIVE PRINT GUT BY MONTH =f.
BY YEAR =2.......
1.00 19 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ? YES=t.
N0=2..............
1.00 20 (UNUSED).....................................
2.00 21 SOLAR SYSTEM THERMAL FERFORMANCE DEGRADATION.
0.50 %/YR 22 PERIOD OF THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS..............
35.00 YEARS 23 COLLECTOR AREA DEPENDENT SYSTEM COSTS........
55.00 $/FT2 COLL 24 CONSTANT SOLAR C0STS.........................
2500.00 $
25 DOWN PAYMENTi% OF ORIGINAL INVESTMENT).......
32.59 %
26 ANNUAL INTEREST RATE.ON MORTGAGE.............
14.00 %
27 TERM 0F MORTGAGE.............................
30.00 YEARS 28 ANNUAL NOMINAL (MARKET) DISCOUNT RATE.........
12.00 %
29 EXTRA INSUR..MAINT. IN YEAR 1(% OF ORIG.INV.)
2.50 %
30 ANNUAL % INCREASE IN ABOVE EXPENSES..........
8.00 %
31 PRG.SENT COST OF SOLAR BACKUP FUEL (BF).......
12.11 $/NMBTU 32 BF RISE: %/YR=1. SEQUENCE OF VALUES =2(USE CF).
1.00 33 IF i. WHAT IS THE ANNUAL RATE OF BF RISE.....
10.00 %
34 PRESENT COST OF CONVENTIONAL FUEL...........
12.31 $/MMBTU 35 CF RISE: %/YRai. SEQUENCE OF VALUES =2(USE CF).
1.00 36 1F i. WHAT IS THE ANNUAL RATE OF CF PISE.....
10.00 %
37 ECONOMIC PRIt.f OUT BY YEAR =1.
CUMULATIVE =2...
1.00 38 EFFECTIVE FEDERAL-STATE INCOME TAX RATE......
39.00 %
39 TRUE PROP. TAX RATE PER S OF ORIGINAL INVEST.
2.00 %
40 ANNUAL % INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX RATE.......
6.00 %
41 CALC.RT. OF RETURN ON SOLAR INVTMT?YES=1.NO=2 1.00 42 RESALE VALUE
(% OF ORIGINAL INVFSTMENT).....
0.0 43 INCOME PRODUCING BUILDING? YESM.N0=2........
2.00 44 DPRC.' STR.LN=1.DC.BAL.=2.SM-YR-DGT=3.NONE=4.
1.00 45,IF 2.
WHAT % OF STR.LN DPRC.RT.IS DESIRED?...
150.00 %
- a 4 6 U S E F U L L I F E F O _R D E___P R. E.C....P. U R.P O S E S_...............
20.00 YEARS 5 ALLENTOWN PA LATITUDE: 40.65 c
ACTIVE SYSTEM ANALYSIS TIME PERCENT INCIDENT HEATING WATER DEGREE AMBIENT SOLAR SOLAR LOAD LOAD DAYS TEMP (MMBTU)
(MMBTU)
(MMBTU)
(F-DAY)
(F)
! JAW 20.50 5.43 10.142 0.0 1153.8 28.40 CEB 27.?6 5.96 8.708 0.0 997.2 30.20 MAR 43.54 7.56 6.913 0.0 833.4 3T.40 i
APR 76.96 7.72 3.132 0.0 453.6 50.00 H47 600.0G 7.95 0.435 0.0 100.8 60.80 l wbH 0.6
' 44 v.6 0.0 21.6 69.30 JUL 0.0 8.26 d.G 0.0 0.0 73.40 l
AUG G.0 3.20 0.0 0.0 5.4 71.60 i Se*
6.0 7.75 9.e 0.0 84.6 64.40 GCT ca.01 7.70 1.978 0.0 343.8 53.60 NOV 36.39 5.34 5.418 0.0 680.4 42.80 L~DEC 16.51 4.48 9.235 0.0 1063.6 30.20
r-
- ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ****
SPECIFIED COLLECTOR AREA =
200. FT2 INITIAL-COST OF SOLAP SYSTEM = $
13500.
THE ANNUAL MORTGAGE PAYMENT FOR 30 YEARS = $
1300.
END PROP INC BACKUP INSUR. COST SAVNGS PW OF INTRST OF YR DEPRC TAX TAX FUEL MAINT WITH WITH SOLAR
- +o
, YR PAID.PRINC DEDUCT PAID SAVED
./JST COST SOLAR SOLAR SAVNGS O
O 9100 0
0 0
0 0
~4399
-4399
-4399 1
1274 9074 0
269 602 372 337 1677
-liii
-992 2
1270 9045 0
286 607 410 364 1753
-1131
-901 W
1266 9012 6
303 612 452 393 1837
-1152
-820 1261 8974-0 321 617 499 425 1928
-1174
-746 5
1256 8931 0
340 622 c,J 459 2027
-1198
-680-6 1250 8882 0
361 628 495 2135
-1224
-620 7
1243 8826 0
382 634 6e9 535 2253
-1251
-565 8
1235 8762 0
405 640 738 578 2382
-1279
-516 9
1226 8690 0
430 646 814 624 2522
-1309
-472 19 12i6 8607 0
456 652
'897 674 2675
-1341
-431 il 1204 8512 0
483 658 989 720 2843
-1375
-395 12 1191 8404 0
512 664 1091 786 3025
-1411
-362 13 1176 i28 O
543 670 1203 849 3225
-1449
-332 14 ii39 8141 0
575 676 1327 917 344J
-1490
-304 13 1139 7981 0
610 682 1463 991 3681
-1533
-283 16 1117 7799 0
647 688 1613 1070 3942
-1579
-257 17 1091 75??
O 685 693 1778 1156 4227
-1627
-237 18 1062 7355 0
727 698 1961 1248 4538
-1678
-218
,19 6029 7085 O.
770 702 2162 1348 4878
-1733
-201
- 20 992 6778 0
816 705 2383 1456 5251
-1791
-185
' 21 948 6427 0
865 70T 2628 1573 5658
-1852
-171 o**
22 899 6028 0
917 708 2897 1698 6104
-1918
-158 23 843 5572 0
972 708 3194 1834 6593
-1987
-146
~24 780 5053 0
1031 706 3521 1981 7127
-2061
-135 25 707 4461 0
1093 702 3882' 2140 7712
-2140
-125
'26 624 3786 0
1158 695 4279 2311 8353
-2223
-116 27 530 3016 0
1228 685 4717 2496 9056
-2313
-108 28 422 2139 0
1301 672 5200 2695 9825
-2408
-100
~29 299 1139 0
1380 655 5733 2911 10669
-2510
-93
.30 159 0
0 1462 632 6319 3144 11593
-2619
-87
'31 0
0 0
1550 604 6966 3396 11308
~1435
-42' 32 0
0 0
1643 641 7678 3667 12349
-1489
-39
.33 0
0 0
1742
-679 8464 3961 13488
-1542
-36 34 0
0 0
1846 720 9329 4278 14734
-1594
-33
'35 9
0 0
1937 763 10283 4620 16078
-1644
-31 inE DISCOUlwTED RATE UF RETURN IS LESS THAN 0.0%
YRS Umiu. o 4 DISC. FUEL SAVINGS = INVESTMENT 23.
UUiiULATIVE SAVINGS NEVER EXCEEDED THE ' MORTGAGE PRINCIPAL UNDISCOUNTED CUMULAT[VE SOLAR SAVENGS = $
-61988.
PRESENT WORTH OF YEARLY TOTAf. CUSTS WITH SOLAR = $
28585.
'PRESENT WOR TH OF YEARLY TOTAL COSTS W/0 SOLAR
= 5 13232.
PRESENT.WGdTH OF CUMULATIVE SOLAR SAVINGS = $
-15353.
CALCULATION 3 CALCULATION:
l Assumptions:
2,000 sq. ft, sun-tempered home in Allengown Heatloss (design):
4 watgs/sq. ft. @ 10 F 5800 degree dsys/yr. @ 65 F Base 3800 degree days /yr. @ 55 F base (accounting for improved thermal insulation and internal gains)
South Glazing equal to 6% of floor area or 120 sq. ft.
Insulated to R-30 ceiling R-16 walls R-19 floor over basement double glgzed wfndowsg Design temp. diff.: 70
- 10
= 60 F Heat Loss = watts x No. sq. ft.
sq. ft.
= 4 W x 2,000 sq. ft, sq. ft.
= 8,000 W
= 8 KW Annual Energy Consumption = Loss x Degree Days /yr. x 24 Design Temp. Difference
= 8 KW x 3800 x 24 60
= 12,160 KWH/yr.
The Solar Load Ratio passive performance estimating method developed by D. Balcomb defines the building load coefficient (BLC) as (Ref. 16):
BLC = BTU Load degrge days
@ 65 F Base I
Load = 12,160 KWH x 3413 BTU yr.
EWE
= 41,502,080 BTU er.
)
CALCULATION 3 (Con't)
The building load coefficient then is:
BLC = 41,502,080 BTU yr.
5800 D.D.
yr.
= 7155.5 BTU U.
The load collector ratio (LCR) is defined as:
LCR v,ELC
'Araa of South Glazing
= 7156 120 sq. ft.
= 59 From tables of solar savings fraction (SSF) vs. LCR for Allentown using direct gain south facing glass we find that an LCR of 50 corresponds to an annual solar savings fraction of 25%.
Therefore the annual savings in energy is:
12,160 KWH/yr. x 0.25 = 3040 KWH/yr.
or Based on PP&L's average cost per kilowatt-hour for the trailing bleck of our Residential Rate (RS) the annual dollar savings is
$128/yr.
_