• Korean Journal of Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Engineering
• /
• v.17 no.6
• /
• pp.560-568
• /
• 2005

The cost accounting of electricity and heat produced from an energy system is important in evaluating the economical efficiency and deciding the reasonable sale price. The OECOPC method, suggested by the author, was applied to a 650 MW combined cycle cogeneration system having 4 operating modes, and each unit cost of electricity and heat products was calculated. In case that a fuel cost is ${\\}400/kg$ and there are no direct and indirect cost, they were calculated as follows; electricity cost of ${\\}23,700/GJ$ at gas-turbine mode, electricity cost of ${\\}15,890/GJ$ at combined cycle mode, electricity cost of ${\\}14,146/GJ$ and heat cost of ${\\}6,466/GJ$ at cogeneration mode, and electricity cost of ${\\}14,387/GJ$ and heat cost of ${\\}4,421/GJ$ at combined cycle cogeneration mode. Further, these unit costs are applied to account benefit on this system. Since the suggested OECOPC method can be applied to any energy system, it is expected to contribute to cost accounting of various energy systems.

• Proceedings of the SAREK Conference
• /
• 2009.06a
• /
• pp.1197-1202
• /
• 2009

Cost allocation on cogeneration is a methodology dividing the input of common cost to electricity cost and heat cost. In the cost allocation methodology of the electricity and heat on a cogeneration, there are energy method, work method, proportional method, benefit distribution method, reversible work method, various exergetic methods, and so on. In previous study, various cost allocation methodologies have been applied and analyzed on a gas-turbine cogeneration producing the 33.1 MW of electricity and the 32.2 Gcal/h of heat, a steam-turbine cogeneration producing the 22.2 MW of electricity and the 44.3 Gcal/h of heat, and combined-cycle cogeneration producing the 314.1 MW of electricity and the 279.4 Gcal/h of heat. In this study, we integrately analyze the results of previous studies and examine the generality and rationality each methodology. Additionally, a new point of view on the values of alternative electricity efficiency and alternative heat efficiency in the previous methodologies was proposed. As the integrated result, we conclude that reversible work method of various common cost allocation methodologies is most rational.

• Clean Technology
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.53-58
• /
• 2023

This study shows the summary of the economic performance of excess electricity conversion to hydrogen as well as methane and returned conversion to electricity using a fuel cell. The methane production process has been examined in a previous study. Here, this study focuses on the conversion of methane to electricity. As a part of this study, capital expenditure (CAPEX) is estimated under various sized plants (0.3, 3, 9, and 30 MW). The study shows a method for economic optimization of electricity generation using a fuel cell. The CAPEX and operating expenditure (OPEX) as well as the feed cost are used to calculate the discounted cash flow. Then the levelized cost of returned electricity (LCORE) is estimated from the discounted cash flow. This study found the LCORE value was ¢10.2/kWh electricity when a 9 MW electricity generating fuel cell was used. A methane production plant size of 1,500 Nm³/hr, a methane production cost of $11.47/mcf, a storage cost of $1/mcf, and a fuel cell efficiency of 54% were used as a baseline. A sensitivity analysis was performed by varying the storage cost, fuel cell efficiency, and excess electricity cost by ±20%, and fuel cell efficiency was found as the most dominating parameter in terms of the LCORE sensitivity. Therefore, for the best cost-performance, fuel cell manufacturing and efficiency need to be carefully evaluated. This study provides a general guideline for cost performance comparison with LCORE.

• Journal of The Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers
• /
• v.53 no.2
• /
• pp.53-60
• /
• 2011

This study was conducted to investigate the effect of hydropower factors (watershed, gross head), operation ratio and unit electricity cost on the benefit-cost ratio (B/C ratio) of small hydropower using agricultural reservoirs. The equation of B/C ratio was expressed as a function of watershed area, gross head, operation ratio and unit electricity cost. The benefit increased with watershed area, gross head and unit electricity cost, while the cost increased with watershed area and gross head but decreased with operation ratio. The B/C ratio increased with watershed area, gross head, operation ratio and unit electricity cost. While the effect of gross head on the B/C ratio decreased with watershed area, the effect of operation ratio and unit electricity cost on the B/C ratio increased with watershed area. The operation ratio is an important factor to affect the B/C ratio and therefore we need to develop hydropower for the heightened dams to expect high operation ratio due to continuous water release. The unit electricity cost is also an important factor to affect the B/C ratio and the B/C ratio was always below 1 unless unit electricity cost is over 60 Won/kWh under given conditions. The reservoirs with economic feasibility for small hydropower development were three in 21 when the equation of B/C ratio was appled to the study reservoirs. The results can be used to choose the appropriate reservoir with economic feasibility for development of small hydropower.

• Korean Journal of Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Engineering
• /
• v.20 no.9
• /
• pp.624-630
• /
• 2008

When various kinds of outputs are produced from a single energy system, the methodology which allocates the common cost to each output cost is very important because it is directly related with the profit and loss of producers and purchasers. In the cost allocation methodology of the heat and the electricity on a cogeneration, there are energy method, work method, proportional method, benefit distribution method, exergetic methods, and so on. On the other hand, we have proposed a worth method which can be applied to any system. The definition of this methodology is that the unit cost of a product is proportion to the worth. Where, worth is a certain evaluating basis that can equalize the worth of products. In this study, we applied worth method to a steam-turbine cogeneration which produces 22.2 MW of electricity and 44.4 Gcal/h of heat, and then we allocated 2,578 $/h of common cost to electricity cost and heat cost. Also, we compared with various cost allocation methods. As the result, we conclude that exergy of various kinds of worth basis evaluates the worth of heat and electricity most reasonably on this system.

• Proceedings of the SAREK Conference
• /
• 2008.11a
• /
• pp.351-356
• /
• 2008

When various kinds of outputs are produced from a single energy system, the methodology which allocates the common cost to each output cost is very important because it is directly related with the profit and loss of producers and purchasers. In the cost allocation methodology of the heat and the electricity on a cogeneration, there are energy method, work method, proportional method, benefit distribution method, various exergetic methods, and so on. On the other hand, we have proposed a worth evaluation method which can be applied to any system. The definition of this methodology is that the unit cost of a product is proportion to the worth. Where, worth is a certain evaluating basis that can equalize the worth of products. In this study, we applied this methodology to a gas-turbine cogeneration which produces 119.2 GJ/h of electricity and 134.7 GJ/h of heat, and then we allocated 3,150 $/h of fuel cost to electricity cost and heat cost. Also, we compared with various cost allocation methods. As the result, we conclude that exergy of various kinds of worth basis evaluates the worth of heat and electricity most reasonably on this system.

• Korean Journal of Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Engineering
• /
• v.21 no.4
• /
• pp.252-259
• /
• 2009

When various kinds of outputs are produced from a single energy system, the methodology which allocates the common cost to each output cost is very important because it is directly related with the profit and loss of producers and purchasers. In the cost allocation methodology of the heat and the electricity on a cogeneration, there are energy method, work method, proportional method, benefit distribution method, various exergetic methods, and so on. On the other hand, we have proposed a worth evaluation method which can be applied to any system. The definition of this methodology is that the unit cost of a product is proportion to the worth. Where, worth is a certain evaluating basis that can equalize the worth of products. In this study, we applied this methodology to a gas-turbine cogeneration which produces 119.2 GJ/h of electricity and 134.7 GJ/h of steam, and then we allocated 3,150 $/h of fuel cost to electricity cost and steam cost. Also, we compared with various cost allocation methods. As the result, we conclude that reversible work of various kinds of worth basis evaluates the worth of heat and electricity most reasonably.

• Journal of Energy Engineering
• /
• v.15 no.1 s.45
• /
• pp.14-22
• /
• 2006

Various pros and cons are raised as to the nuclear and renewable power portions. In order to generate scientific, objective, and comparative data, this study reviewed energy policies of some countries and derived 34 possible energy mix scenarios depending on the nuclear portion, the renewable portion and the make-up power sources. For each scenario, the unit electricity cost was calculated using the BLMP (Base Load Marginal Price) and SMP (System Marginal Price) methodology, which is currently adopted in Korean electricity market. The unit electricity cost for the current energy mix was 22.18 Won/kWh and those fir other scenarios spreaded from 19.74 to 164.07 Won/kWh excluding the transmission costs and profits of the electric utility companies. Generally, the increased nuclear power portion leads reduction in the unit electricity cost while the trend is reversed in the renewable power portion. Notable observation is that when the renewable power portion exceeds 20%, as the scenario cannot enjoy the benefit of cheap base load, the unit electricity cost at low demand time zone is increased.

• Korean Journal of Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Engineering
• /
• v.20 no.5
• /
• pp.321-326
• /
• 2008

This paper presents and analyzes the effects of on-grid electricity cost, fuel price and initial capital cost of a CHP system, on the optimum DG and AC capacity and NPV, by using the ORNL CHP Capacity Optimizer, which was applied to a library in a university. By considering the current domestic energy cost and initial capital cost, it is shown that the installation and operation of the CHP system is not economical. However, with the current domestic CHP installation cost and fuel price, the NPV achieved by the installation of CHP system is greater when the on-grid electricity price is a factor of ${\times}1.5$ the present value. Regarding the initial capital cost of the CHP system, the reduction of the DG cost is much more economical than that of the AC cost, with respect to NPV. Electricity cost and fuel price have opposite effects on NPV, and NPV is more sensitive to an increase of the electricity cost than an increase of the fuel price.

• 한국태양에너지학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2008.04a
• /
• pp.281-286
• /
• 2008

Current feed-in tariffs(FIT) of Electricity generating from new and renewable energy sources are reappraised with the corrected formula of levelized generation cost(LGC) of utility power. The LGC of new and renewable electricity should be formulated in explicitly reflecting the capital cost and corporate tax during the economic life cycle based on its realistic application data. An applicable term of the FITs should, especially, be equal to the economic life cycle. The revised FITs issued in 2006 were, however, derived from the incorrect formula described in the study of KERI(Korea Electrotechnology Research Institute), and consequently misestimated. The reappraisal values for FIT of new and renewable electricity were shown and interpreted in this paper. An FIT of PV more than 30 kW, for example, should be 972.86 won/kWh instead of current 677.38 won/kWh increasing 43.6%. An upward revision of other FITs for new and renewable electricities should also be required in the range of 8.6% to 47.3%.