Next Article in Journal
Modeling and Scaling of the Viscosity of Suspensions of Asphaltene Nanoaggregates
Previous Article in Journal
A Step towards the Hydrogen Economy—A Life Cycle Cost Analysis of A Hydrogen Refueling Station
Article Menu
Issue 6 (June) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Energies 2017, 10(6), 771; doi:10.3390/en10060771

Sizing Combined Heat and Power Units and Domestic Building Energy Cost Optimisation

1
Department of Electrical Engineering, Northeast Electric Power University, Jilin 132012, China
2
China Electric Power Research Institute, Beijing 100192, China
3
Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Chi-Ming Lai
Received: 17 March 2017 / Revised: 8 May 2017 / Accepted: 26 May 2017 / Published: 1 June 2017
(This article belongs to the Section Electrical Power and Energy System)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [3632 KB, uploaded 5 June 2017]   |  

Abstract

Many combined heat and power (CHP) units have been installed in domestic buildings to increase energy efficiency and reduce energy costs. However, inappropriate sizing of a CHP may actually increase energy costs and reduce energy efficiency. Moreover, the high manufacturing cost of batteries makes batteries less affordable. Therefore, this paper will attempt to size the capacity of CHP and optimise daily energy costs for a domestic building with only CHP installed. In this paper, electricity and heat loads are firstly used as sizing criteria in finding the best capacities of different types of CHP with the help of the maximum rectangle (MR) method. Subsequently, the genetic algorithm (GA) will be used to optimise the daily energy costs of the different cases. Then, heat and electricity loads are jointly considered for sizing different types of CHP and for optimising the daily energy costs through the GA method. The optimisation results show that the GA sizing method gives a higher average daily energy cost saving, which is 13% reduction compared to a building without installing CHP. However, to achieve this, there will be about 3% energy efficiency reduction and 7% input power to rated power ratio reduction compared to using the MR method and heat demand in sizing CHP. View Full-Text
Keywords: sizing combined heat and power (CHP); domestic buildings; the maximum rectangle (MR) method; the genetic algorithm (GA) sizing combined heat and power (CHP); domestic buildings; the maximum rectangle (MR) method; the genetic algorithm (GA)
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Yu, D.; Meng, Y.; Yan, G.; Mu, G.; Li, D.; Blond, S.L. Sizing Combined Heat and Power Units and Domestic Building Energy Cost Optimisation. Energies 2017, 10, 771.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Energies EISSN 1996-1073 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top