Next Article in Journal
Reactive Power Management Based on Voltage Sensitivity Analysis of Distribution System with High Penetration of Renewable Energies
Previous Article in Journal
Corrosion Performance of Engineered Barrier System in Deep Horizontal Drillholes
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 12
Issue 8
10.3390/en12081492
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Development of Total Capital Investment Estimation Module for Waste Heat Power Plant

by
Joon-Young Kim
1,*,
Shelly Salim
2,
Jae-Min Cha
1 and
Sungho Park
1
1
Plant Engineering Center, Institute for Advanced Engineering (IAE), Yongin 17180, Korea
2
Center for Integrated Access Systems, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, Gwangju 61005, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2019, 12(8), 1492; https://doi.org/10.3390/en12081492
Submission received: 12 March 2019 / Revised: 16 April 2019 / Accepted: 18 April 2019 / Published: 19 April 2019
(This article belongs to the Section C: Energy Economics and Policy)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Power plants with waste heat collection and utilization have gained increasing interest in the high energy-consuming industries, such as steel-making and cement manufacturing, due to its energy efficiency. Waste heat power plants possess some intrinsic characteristics, for instance, the main equipment and the working fluids. However, at the time of this research, we could not find an economic analysis suitable to address the specialized aspects of waste heat power plant, making it difficult to measure the total capital investment needed for the business feasibility assessment. In this paper, we introduced our total capital investment estimation module developed for a waste heat power plant by considering its intrinsic features. We followed a systems engineering approach in designing and developing our module. We performed a requirements analysis of the stakeholders related to the waste heat power plant. Simultaneously, we consider the technical aspects by exploring the working fluids and main equipment implemented in the plant. Then, we developed the cost models for each equipment and used them as the basis of the proposed total capital investment estimation module. The performance verification showed that our proposed method achieved the initial accuracy target of a 5.78% error range when compared to the real data from the reference case study.

1. Introduction

Renewable energy sources are expected to become the substitute for the absolutely insufficient fossil energy sources. However, in reality, it is difficult to replace fossil fuels completely, thus, the need to efficiently utilize energy sources remains high [1]. This condition triggers competition between companies in searching for strategies to improve the efficient use of energy [2]. For a long time, the industries with high-energy consumption, such as steel-making, cement, and petrochemical industries, have been utilizing the waste heat for an electric power generation system as an effort to increase their energy efficiency [3]. In fact, around 52% of the total consumed energy is thrown away as waste heat, and the recovery and reutilization of waste heat has been proven to save considerable costs [4]. The cost reduction resulting from waste heat-fueled electric power generation plays a significant role in the rapid development of its market.
However, despite the rapid growth of the waste heat power plant, there is no specialized economic analysis solution for it, thus it is difficult to accurately assess the plant’s economic feasibility. The previously existing economic analysis solutions such as COMFAR III V3.3, ENetOPT V3.6 cannot be applied directly to the waste heat power plant because its various working fluid and distinct main equipment are not considered in the existing cost model, causing errors in the analysis [5,6]. The waste heat power plant industry requires a solution to accurately evaluate the economic feasibility by considering the characteristics of the waste heat power plant such as the working fluid, cycle configuration, equipment type, and equipment cost model.
The objective of this research is to cope with the previously described problems by developing a module to estimate the total capital investment (TCI) design especially for a waste heat power plant. We developed the TCI module by considering the power application of the waste heat generated in the plant industries such as a power plant, steel-making plant, and refinery plant, and the power ranges of more than 10 kW, the most common thermal capacity in the industries. In order to develop such a module, we need to survey and select the working fluids of the waste heat power plant to determine the main equipment that operates with those fluids, and to develop the cost model of that equipment. Furthermore, to develop a TCI estimation module that can be practically used by the industry, we have to address the requirements in the industrial world. Thus, in this paper, we developed the final system that addresses the stakeholders’ requirements systematically by applying systems engineering approaches.
The systems engineering approach used in this research have three main processes [7,8]. The first process is the stakeholder identification and definition process that identifies the stakeholders and their needs associated with the TCI estimation module. A stakeholder’s needs are then transformed into a formal set of stakeholder requirements. The second process is the system requirements definition process that transforms stakeholder requirements into system requirements with technical specifications. Finally, the third process, the functional architecture design process, defines the functions of the TCI estimation module to meet defined system requirements. Thus, our work stands out from the existing knowledge in terms of: (1) The development of a various equipment cost model by using real world cost data and their verifications against openly available reference data, and (2) the application of a systems engineering approach that emphasizes the importance of requirements elicitation and analysis, and architecture modeling.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, a power plant implementing waste heat is introduced and the theoretical background, including the basic concept, of economic feasibility analysis is explained. The related stakeholders are identified and their requirements are extracted by adopting systems engineering approaches in Section 3. In the same section we also described the design of the TCI estimation module from the system architecture and cost model that corresponds with the extracted requirements. In Section 4, we realized and applied the designed module and we verified its performance by comparing the target accuracy and the actual accuracy of the TCI estimation module. Lastly, we completed this paper by presenting the conclusions and future works in Section 5.

2. Theoretical Background

2.1. Introduction of Waste Heat Power Plant

Input energy is required to operate the industrial process, however some portion of the energy might not be used, being discharged to the external environment. The discharged energy is called the waste heat [9,10]. Waste heat has various forms. Typically, waste heat takes form as emission gas or waste hot water discharged to the external environment as a result of fuel combustion or high-temperature equipment’s cooling residue, respectively [11]. In a waste heat power plant, the emission gas or waste hot water are taken as fuel, instead of being released to the external environment. The emission gas or waste hot water still has some amount of remaining heat, and it is sent to a heat exchanger to heat the working fluid. After that, the heated working fluid is used to operate turbines and generate electricity for the second time.
The amount of energy released as waste heat is varied based on the type of the industrial equipment. For example, boilers discharge 8–20% of its energy as waste heat, whereas driers and heating/air-conditioning equipment discharge 10–50% and 30–50%, respectively [12,13]. Therefore, various companies are adopting waste heat power plant to utilize those abundant waste heat, which causes continuous development in the scale of this industry. In fact, the worldwide market scale of a waste heat power plant will exceed USD 30 billion by 2024 [14].
The waste heat power plant can be designed in many ways, depending on the type of the working fluid. Most of related industries apply a steam Rankine cycle that uses steam as the working fluid, because it leads to a steady operation and it has been verified to improve the energy efficiency by more than 20% [15,16,17]. Thus, steel-making plant, cement manufacturing, shipbuilding, and other industries requiring power generation are widely applying a steam Rankine cycle [18]. Recently, in order to further increase the energy efficiency, organic Rankine cycle (ORC) that uses organic, high molecular mass refrigerant as the working fluid in biomass power and heat plants [19,20] and supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle (sCO2 BC) that uses carbon dioxide in the supercritical state as the working fluid and other similar methods are being developed, adding to the various methods to design the waste heat power plant [21,22,23].

2.2. Basic Concept of the Economic Analysis

The waste heat power plant requires long-term and large-scale investment, thus to avoid unnecessary costs and support efficient investment, the economic feasibility analysis should be performed by considering the overall stages from the business plan until the construction through multiple point-of-views. The representative metric of economic feasibility analysis is the total capital investment (TCI), and in our case of a waste heat power plant, we can use this metric to estimate the investment cost for the construction and operation stages [24], defined as follows:
TCI = FCI + OO = (DC + IC) + OO
where FCI is the fixed capital investment, OO is other outlays, DC is the direct costs, and IC is the indirect costs.
As shown in Equation (1), TCI is the summation of FCI and the other outlays, whereas the FCI is composed of DC and IC [25]. Direct costs include the cost of the equipment contained in the power plant, the installation cost of the corresponding equipment, the cost of pipes providing the utilities, the cost of the land for constructing the power plant, and so on [26,27,28]. Indirect costs include engineering, supervision, construction, and contingency cost. The other outlays are commissioning cost, working capital, licenses cost, research and development cost, and Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC) [29,30]. From the above mentioned costs, the equipment cost occupies the largest part of the TCI, which is about 19.89% of the TCI [31]. Hence, accurate estimation of the equipment cost is the essential to improve reliability of the TCI estimation.
Generally, there are two methods to estimate equipment cost. The first method is the vendor quotation-based calculation approach, where the quotations from vendors that manufacture the equipment are collected and used to predict the equipment cost in a straightforward manner [32,33]. This approach considers various specifications, material quality, etc. with highly accurate price prediction. However, when the specifications are changed, it is difficult to predict the cost fluctuation without getting new quotations from the vendors. The second method is the cost model-based calculation approach, that uses previously sold price data as the bases to develop the cost model that contains the correlation between the equipment cost and its specifications/size [34,35]. The cost model is used to predict equipment cost. In the cost model-based calculation approach, the prediction accuracy depends on the amount of the collected equipment specification/size and cost data from the plant construction. In the case of an accurate cost model is used, whenever equipment specification changes, we can estimate the cost immediately. On the other hand, if an inaccurate cost model is used, differences between the estimated cost and the real cost provided by the manufacturing vendors may occur. The comparisons of the two equipment cost estimation methods are shown in Table 1.

3. Design of TCI Estimation Module

3.1. Objective to TCI Estimation Module

In the current related industry, an economic feasibility analysis optimized for a waste heat power plant is not available. Therefore, TCI estimation, the core of business feasibility assessment, is difficult to perform. In this research, our objective was to develop the TCI estimation module that could be used in the business feasibility assessment stage. For the estimation accuracy, we referred to the economic analysis estimation accuracy indicator proposed by AACE (American Association of Cost Estimators), an international authorized organization in the field of industrial plant’s economic feasibility assessment, as shown in Table 2 [36]. Specifically, we were aiming to meet the class 4 accuracy target, as appropriate for feasibility purpose.

3.2. Requirements Definition of the TCI Estimation Module

In this research, we defined the requirements of the TCI module by following these processes: (1) Stakeholder identification, (2) stakeholder requirements definition, and (3) system requirements definition [37]. Specifically, in the initial stage of the research, we identified the complete stakeholders related directly and indirectly to the system of interest (waste heat power plant) and defined the stakeholder requirements reflecting their needs. Then, the non-technical contents of the stakeholder requirements were transformed in to a well-defined set of system requirements by considering the development and implementation point-of-view.

3.2.1. Stakeholder Identification

In the first step, we identified the stakeholders related to the TCI estimation module development. Considering the target market, i.e., the waste heat power plant industry, we extracted related stakeholders through the overall industry’s value chain analysis. We present samples of the identified stakeholders in Table 3. In general, the stakeholders were categorized as follows: The developers, the users, and the maintainers of the TCI estimation module. Among these stakeholders, the users were divided into five sub-categories: (1) The operating companies who obtain profits by operating the waste heat power plants, (2) the energy demanding companies who need waste heat power plant because of their high energy consumption, (3) the manufacturing companies who produces the main equipment of waste heat power plant, (4) the engineering companies who are responsible for the concept/basic/detailed design of the waste heat power plant, and (5) the constructing companies who perform the waste heat power plant’s civil/structural/construction works based on the result of the detailed engineering.

3.2.2. Stakeholder Requirements Definition

In the second step, we elicited requirements of the TCI estimation module based on the identified stakeholders. For each stakeholder group, we performed interviews, surveys and a functional analysis with the practitioners experienced in business feasibility analysis and TCI estimation module. We wrote the requirement statements by following a systems engineering standard on a requirements analysis [38]. The requirements related to TCI estimation module’s purposes and usages are presented in Table 4.

3.2.3. System Requirements Definition

In the third step, we performed the translation from the stakeholder requirements defined in the users point of view to the system requirements defined in the developer’s point of view. We began with determining the problem domain and solution domain of the TCI estimation module. Next, we defined the technical items that have to be performed in the system level by implementing both the domain experts’ decision technique and quality function deployment (QFD) technique [39]. The results of the above are the system requirements shown in Table 5.

3.3. Equipment Cost Model Development

As it has been defined in the system requirements of the TCI estimation module, in order to estimate the TCI, cost estimation of the main equipment used in waste heat power plant is highly required. In our research, we discovered that the equipment specifications were frequently changed during the business feasibility analysis. Thus we aimed to develop the cost model for each piece of equipment to assist the business feasibility analysis. The cost model of the main equipment, namely pumps, turbines, and heat exchangers were developed by considering the design factors, manufacture methods, and the correlation between costs.

3.3.1. Pump Cost Model

The pump is a piece of equipment used to compress the liquid in steam Rankine cycle, organic Rankine cycle, and supercritical CO2 Rankine cycle into a high pressure state [40,41,42]. The components of pumps can be divided into the impeller that compresses the fluid and the motor that drives the impeller, in which the motor costs about 60–80% of the total cost of the pump [43]. In other words, the flow rate and the motor capacity are correlated with the pump cost model. Moreover, the waste heat power plant mostly uses centrifugal water pumps. We surveyed the prices of the centrifugal pumps per the capacity [31,44] and performed a regression analysis. The regression analysis results of a water pump cost model are shown in Figure 1a, for the linear function where the coefficient of determination (R2) equals 0.997. The cost model of the ORC pump and supercritical CO2 pump generally correlated with the motor capacity, that is, the power consumed by the motor. Similarly, we collected the data about the prices of those pumps based on their capacity [44,45,46,47]. However, in the case of these pumps, the data available to the public is very limited, thus we decided to include the real sales price data of the pumps manufacturing company as well. Based on this data, the results of the regression analysis of the pumps are shown in Figure 1b and 1c, for the linear function where the coefficient of determination (R2) equals 0.994 and 0.998, respectively. We could draw the conclusion that, for all three types of pumps, as the flow rate or the power consumption increases, the cost also linearly increases.

3.3.2. Turbine Cost Model

Turbine is used to produce electricity from the expansion work of the working fluids [48]. Fundamentally, the turbine’s design factors such as expansion ratio, number of stages, and others are determined based on the turbine’s electricity generation capacity [49,50]. Those design factors highly influence the cost of turbine. In this research, we surveyed the turbine’s cost based on its electricity generation capacity for every working fluid [31,44,51]. Based on this data, the results of the regression analysis of the steam turbine are shown in Figure 2a, for the exponential function where the coefficient of determination (R2) equals 0.998. The results of the regression analysis of the ORC turbine and supercritical CO2 turbine are shown in Figure 2b,c, for the quadratic function where the coefficient of determination (R2) equals 0.972 and 0.999, respectively. The cost models showed that for the low power turbine, similar with the pump, as the electricity generation capacity increases, the cost also linearly increases, whereas for the high power turbine, as the electricity generation capacity keeps on increasing, the cost differences are decreasing.

3.3.3. Heat Exchanger Cost Model

A heat exchanger is required to absorb the heat from the intermediate/low temperature waste heat to provide energy to the power plant [52], as well as to cool down the working fluid of the power plant by releasing the low heat from the turbine. Generally, the types of heat exchanger used in the waste heat power plant are a shell and tube heat exchanger and a printer circuit based heat exchanger (PCHE) [53]. Both types of heat exchangers have differences in their main design factors and manufacturing methods, making it difficult to create a general heat exchange cost model. Therefore, we developed a cost model for each type of heat exchanger.
The first heat exchanger, the shell and tube heat exchanger, is used widely in the steel, cement, petro chemical, and others industries [54], thus preliminary research about its cost model were available. Couper proposed a concept to calculate a shell and tube heat exchanger’s cost by considering its cost per heat transfer area, material factor, and tube-length correction factor, as shown in Equation (2) [27]:
CP = CB × FP × FM × FL
where CP is the cost of the shell and tube heat exchanger, CB is the cost per heat transfer area, FP is the pressure factor, FM is the material factor, and FL is the tube-length correction factor.
To apply the previous concept, we have to obtain cost per heat transfer area. Therefore, we surveyed the information regarding shell and tube heat exchangers installed in a power plant by referring to the US Department of Energy and created the heat exchanger’s cost based on the heat transfer area [44]. Next, we established the shell and tube heat exchanger cost model with the surface area as the baseline, as shown in Figure 3a.
The second heat exchanger, printed circuit heat exchanger (PCHE), is manufactured by diffused bonding of a metal sheet after it is micro-channel etched using a chemical method [55,56]. However, because cases of PCHE application in industries are not sufficient, preliminary research about the cost model was not available. Therefore, in our research, we surveyed and analyzed the design specification and sales prices of vendors [57,58,59,60,61]. Based on the above analysis, we developed the PCHE cost model, as shown in Figure 3b. In our analysis results, the volume and cost of the heat exchanger showed an exponential relationship. The exponential relationship occurred because as the heat exchanger’s volume increased, the amount of metal needed by the heat exchanger also increased exponentially.

3.4. Functional Architecture Design of TCI Estimation Module

To develop the final system based on the previously defined system requirements is not a trivial process. There are cases of a highly complicated system with plenty of requirements, that after the system is completely developed, it is required to be re-designed because it fails to address some essential requirements. In order to avoid such a problem we conducted architecture design and defined the system functions to satisfy the requirements of the TCI estimation module by following a systems engineering approach. Specifically, we performed a functional analysis to define the TCI estimation module’s functions that have to be accomplished by the module from the external level to the system level (top, middle, and bottom). Moreover, in the architecture, we created an integrated architecture by linking the detailed functions with their related components. We applied Integrated Definition for Functional Modeling (IDEF0), a modeling approach that is widely used to analyze the functions of complex systems, to perform the above processes systematically. The architecture design of TCI estimation module developed through these processes is explained as follows.
The external level (level 0) of the TCI estimation module architecture is shown in Figure 4a. The level 0 of the architecture shows the information flows between the TCI estimation module and its external modules. The external modules (A1–A3) are the design modules of the main equipment of waste heat power plant, and the TCI estimation module (A0) obtain inputs from those external modules in the form of pumps, turbines, heat exchangers design factors, and specification information. From those inputs, the TCI estimation module internally implements the cost models developed earlier to calculate the equipment cost and produces the TCI value as its output.
Figure 4b shows the top level of the system (level 1) of the TCI estimation module, that consists of the ‘Set-up General Project Data’ function to prepare the required basic information for estimating TCI and the ‘Calculate Total Capital Investment’ function (A52) to estimate the TCI based on the input information.
From the two functions in the level 1 architecture, the middle level of the system (level 2) architecture of the ‘Calculate Total Capital Investment’ function is shown in Figure 4c. The level 2 architecture of the ‘Calculate Total Capital Investment’ function consists of 16 functions, such as ‘Calculate Total Purchased Equipment Cost’, ‘Calculate Total Direct Cost’, ‘Calculate Total Indirect Cost’, ‘Calculate Fixed Capital Investment’, ‘Calculate Start Up Cost’, and so on.
For a detailed analysis, we showed the bottom level of system (level 3) architecture of ‘Calculate Total Purchased Equipment Cost’ function that consists of four functions in Figure 4d. The functions in ‘Calculate Total Purchased Equipment Cost’ function are: (1) ‘Calculate total pump cost’ function, (2) ‘Calculate total turbine cost’ function, (3) ‘Calculate total heat exchange cost’ function, and finally (4) ‘Calculate total purchased equipment cost (internal)’ that takes the computation results of the functions (1) through (3) as inputs to estimate the total equipment cost. These functions are the results of the implementation of system requirements SyR #4–6 to the system architecture.

4. TCI Estimation Module Implementation and Case Study

4.1. Development of TCI Estimation Module Prototype

It is necessary to verify the accuracy of the TCI estimation module with the previously designed architecture. Basically, the functional architecture has defined up to the bottom level of the module, namely the unit functions, and we developed them through programming into a prototype. In this research, we use Mathworks Matlab that is optimized in computing formulas, without other separate toolbox.
In Table 6, we presented the source code of the unit function, input variables, output variables, operation principles, and algorithm to calculate the AFUDC, as an intermediate process in order to estimate the TCI. We performed similar processes for each unit function and an integrated module with all unit functions. In the developed TCI estimation module, we anticipated the cost of equipment in future years by allowing the users to input a variable called ‘annual inflation rate’. This variable is used to reflect the fluctuations in the cost of equipment, raw material, and labor that finally allow the TCI estimation module to calculate the costs in future years.

4.2. TCI Estimation Module Performance Verification

The most accurate method to verify whether the developed TCI estimation model estimates the TCI value properly is to input the equipment cost of an actual operating waste heat power plant to the TCI estimation model and compare the estimated TCI with the actual TCI occurred during the construction of the plant. In this case, if the difference between real TCI and the TCI estimated by the TCI estimation module falls between the range of −15% to +30%, then it can be regarded that the performance objective in this research is achieved.
However, it is difficult to perform the direct comparison because the equipment cost and TCI occurred during a waste heat power plant construction is not made available to the public due to the corporate’s privacy and security issue. Moreover, power plant industries tend to close their information, which makes it difficult to gather related data. Therefore, in this research, we referred to the data provided by the US National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) about the Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) power plant’s TCI estimation case study [62]. We compared the TCI proposed in the case study and estimated TCI from our designed TCI estimation module as an alternative approach to verify the performance of the TCI estimation module.

4.2.1. NETL NGCC Case Study

Before we describe the NETL NGCC case study, we would like to briefly explain the NGCC power plant to show the resemblance of it to our system of interest, a waste heat power plant. The NGCC power plant takes natural gas as fuel and uses the resulting high-temperature combustion gas to operate a set of high-pressure gas turbine and generate electricity for the first cycle. After that, the intermediate-temperature discharged gas is once again sent to a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) unit, where steam is produced by using the remaining heat of the discharged gas. This steam is then passed through a steam turbine to generate more electricity, for the second cycle, thus the term combined cycle. Basically, the NGCC power plant are up to 20% more efficient than the coal-fired power plant because they can also generate additional electricity from waste heat by recovering it [63]. In addition, liquid natural gas (LNG), one of gas fuels, has the advantage of low pollutants such as sulfur oxide (SOx) and nitrogen oxide (NOx). For example, LNG has only 4.4% of SOx and 57% of NOx compared to coal [63,64]. The NGCC power plant has higher thermal efficiency with lower environment pollution compared to single-cycle power plants because of the afore-mentioned operation method, thus it is widely utilized in the power generation industries.
The NETL’s NGCC report contains the analysis data about the TCI occurred during the construction of net power 512 MW NGCC in two plants located in the Montana and North Dakota states of the US [62]. For each plant, the report analyzes both the condition with CO2 separation and without CO2 separation, thus there are total of four case studies available (S31A, S31B, L31A, and L31B). In our research, we selected the S31A case study (Montana NGCC without CO2 separation) because it has the most similar equipment configuration of the waste heat power plant. In the S31A case study, the NGCC power plant consists of a combustion turbine and generator, HRSG, steam turbine and generator, condenser, stack, and other auxiliary equipment. The process after the combustion turbine is the process of reusing the waste heat to generate power, which can be considered as the target system in our research, the waste heat power plant. Thus, we decided the boundary of our target system as the remaining equipment of the NGCC power plants excluding the combustion turbine and generator. We represent the block flow diagram (BFD) of the NGCC power plant’s general structure and the target equipment in Figure 5.

4.2.2. TCI Analysis and Comparison

We put the input data from equipment cost of a waste heat power plant used in the NETL S31A case study to our designed TCI estimation module and compared the estimated TCI with the NETL S31A case study’s TCI, in order to verify the performance of our TCI estimation module. We used the basic input data and assumptions needed for TCI estimation identical with the NETL S31A case study, as presented in Table 7.
Then, these data were connected with the input variables, output variables, and algorithms of each unit function of the previously described prototype to calculate the detailed design factors for TCI estimation. Based on the above basis and assumption of the NETL S31A, we obtained the estimated TCI from our TCI estimation module as $325,353,306, in which this value has the difference of $17,776,456 compared to the referenced TCI value of NETL S31A, as shown in Table 8. The result, +5.78% errors, showed that the TCI estimation module has achieved the target estimation accuracy class 4 (−15% to +30%), and thus can be used sufficiently for the business feasibility assessment phase.

5. Conclusions

A waste heat power plant that collects and utilizes unused waste heat to generate electricity has proved its production cost reduction and it is growing rapidly in high energy-consuming industries. However, despite its fast development, the waste heat power plant lacks a specialized total capital investment estimation, which makes it difficult to assess business feasibility accurately. In this research, we aimed to solve the aforementioned problem by developing a total capital investment (TCI) estimation module that could be used during a business feasibility assessment of a waste heat power plant.
In order to achieve our goal, we considered the related industry demands in developing the TCI estimation module. We implemented the systems engineering approach by exploring the stakeholders related to the value chain of the waste heat power plant and extracting requirements from them. Then, based on the requirements, we designed the system architecture of the TCI module, including its functions and detailed information. Simultaneously, we developed the cost models required by each operation of the detailed functions. We also went one step further by creating the prototype of our TCI estimation module based on the designed architecture and by performing the prototype’s performance verification to the reference case study of a NETL (National Energy Technology Laboratory) NGCC (Natural Gas Combined Cycle) power plant. From the results of our verification, we have confirmed that our TCI estimation module has met its initial development goal by achieving error range of 5.78%, compared to the real data from the reference case study.
Through systematic processes, we have developed the concept to estimate the total capital of the waste heat power plant that did not exist at the time of our research. However, we are aware of the limitations in our study regarding our performance verification method by comparing the proposed solution with the case study from the reference materials. It will be more helpful to the industry if the proposed TCI estimation module results are to be compared to the real waste heat power plant’s TCI value. Thus, we aim to overcome those limitations by performing additional verification of our proposed module and by improving the functions to increase the accuracy. We also plan to expand the scope of the economic analysis for a business feasibility assessment of a waste heat power plant, by providing net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), levelized cost of energy (LCOE), and other similar analyses. Moreover, the developed TCI estimation module implements the equipment cost models that consider a wide range of specifications. We expect that the TCI estimation module can be applied for small-scale waste heat power plants with quite high accuracy, since we considered low-valued specifications (our cost models start from small/near-zero specification value), however its application might not be suitable for large-scale waste heat power plants, especially when the specification value exceeds the values used during the cost model development. We are planning to analyze the accuracy of our TCI estimation module to a wide range of waste heat power plants in our future works. We also plan to expand our cost model to include more equipment, including an air cooled heat exchanger, plate heat exchanger, and other possible equipment to increase our equipment library and promote the implementation of our TCI estimation module in the real-world industry.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.-Y.K. and J.-M.C.; Requirements Definition, J.-Y.K. and S.S.; Equipment Cost Model Development, J.-Y.K. and J.-M.C. and S.P.; Functional Architecture Design, J.-Y.K. and S.S. and J.-M.C.; TCI Estimation Module Development & Performance Verification, J.-Y.K. and J.-M.C. and S.S.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, J.-Y.K. and S.S.; Writing—Review & Editing, J.-Y.K. and S.S. and J.-M.C.

Funding

This work was supported by the Technology Innovation Program funded by the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy, Republic of Korea (No. 20000725).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bendig, M.; Maréchal, F.; Favrat, D. Defining waste heat for industrial processes. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2013, 61, 134–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kreith, F.; Goswami, D.Y. Energy Management and Conservation Handbook; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2008; ISBN 1420044303. [Google Scholar]
  3. Papapetrou, M.; Kosmadakis, G.; Cipollina, A.; La Commare, U.; Micale, G. Industrial waste heat: Estimation of the technically available resource in the EU per industrial sector, temperature level and country. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2018, 138, 207–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Forman, C.; Muritala, I.K.; Pardemann, R.; Meyer, B. Estimating the global waste heat potential. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 57, 1568–1579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. COMFAR–UNIDO. Available online: https://www.unido.org/resources/publications/publications-type/comfar-software (accessed on 27 January 2019).
  6. ENetOPT-Infotrol Technology Co., Ltd. Available online: http://www.infotrol.co.kr/products/enetopt_en.php (accessed on 27 January 2019).
  7. ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288: Systems and Software Engineering—System Life Cycle Processes. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/63711.html (accessed on 11 March 2019).
  8. Walden, D.D.; Roedler, G.J.; Forsberg, K. INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook Version 4; INCOSE: Santiago, CA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  9. Turner, W.C. Energy Management Handbook; Fairmont Press: Lilburn, GA, USA, 2001; ISBN 0881733377. [Google Scholar]
  10. Reay, D.A. Industrial Energy Conservation: A Handbook for Engineers and Managers; Pergamon Press: Oxford, NY, USA, 1977; ISBN 0080208673. [Google Scholar]
  11. Bonilla, J.J.; Blanco, J.M.; Lopez, L.; Sala, J.M. Technological recovery potential of waste heat in the industry of the Basque Country. Appl. Therm. Eng. 1997, 17, 283–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Brückner, S.; Liu, S.; Miró, L.; Radspieler, M.; Cabeza, L.F.; Lävemann, E. Industrial waste heat recovery technologies: An economic analysis of heat transformation technologies. Appl. Energy 2015, 151, 157–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Woolley, E.; Luo, Y.; Simeone, A. Industrial waste heat recovery: A systematic approach. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2018, 29, 50–59. [Google Scholar]
  14. Gupta, A.; Singh Bais, A. Waste Heat to Power Market Share Size 2019–2025 Growth Report; Global Market Insights, Inc.: Selbyville, DE, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  15. Andreasen, J.G.; Meroni, A.; Haglind, F. A comparison of organic and steam Rankine cycle power systems for waste heat recovery on large ships. Energies 2017, 10, 547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zhang, X.; Wu, L.; Wang, X.; Ju, G. Comparative study of waste heat steam SRC, ORC and S-ORC power generation systems in medium-low temperature. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 106, 1427–1439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Pierobon, L.; Benato, A.; Scolari, E.; Haglind, F.; Stoppato, A. Waste heat recovery technologies for offshore platforms. Appl. Energy 2014, 136, 228–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Incropera, F.P.; Bergman, T.L.; Lavine, A. Foundations of Heat Transfer, 6th ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA; ISBN 0470646160.
  19. Hung, T.C.; Shai, T.Y.; Wang, S.K. A review of organic rankine cycles (ORCs) for the recovery of low-grade waste heat. Energy 1997, 22, 661–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Drescher, U.; Brüggemann, D. Fluid selection for the Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) in biomass power and heat plants. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2007, 27, 223–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chen, Y.; Lundqvist, P.; Johansson, A.; Platell, P. A comparative study of the carbon dioxide transcritical power cycle compared with an organic rankine cycle with R123 as working fluid in waste heat recovery. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2006, 26, 2142–2147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Dostal, V.; Hejzlar, P.; Driscoll, M.J. The Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Power Cycle: Comparison to Other Advanced Power Cycles. Nucl. Technol. 2006, 154, 283–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Park, S.; Kim, J.; Yoon, M.; Rhim, D.; Yeom, C. Thermodynamic and economic investigation of coal-fired power plant combined with various supercritical CO2 Brayton power cycle. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2018, 130, 611–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Short, W.; Packey, D.J.; Holt, T. A Manual for the Economic Evaluation of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Technologies; National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, USA, 2005; ISBN 1410221059.
  25. Bejan, A.; Tsatsaronis, G.; Moran, M.J. Thermal Design and Optimization; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1996; ISBN 0471584673. [Google Scholar]
  26. Humphreys, K.K.; Wellman, P. Basic Cost Engineering, 3rd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1995; ISBN 9780429259104. [Google Scholar]
  27. Couper, J.R. Process Engineering Economics; Marcel Dekker: New York, NY, USA, 2003; ISBN 0203911393. [Google Scholar]
  28. Brown, T. Engineering Economics and Economic Design for Process Engineers; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; ISBN 1420008102.
  29. Conkling, R.L. Energy Pricing: Economics and Principles; Springer: Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; ISBN 3642154913. [Google Scholar]
  30. Drbal, L.F.; Boston, P.G.; Westra, K.L. Power Plant Engineering; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Norwell, MA, USA, 1996; ISBN 146130427X. [Google Scholar]
  31. Peters, M.S.; Timmerhaus, K.D.; West, R.E. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers, 5th ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2003; ISBN 0072392665. [Google Scholar]
  32. Glosten, L.R.; Harris, L.E. Estimating the components of the bid/ask spread. J. Financ. Econ. 1988, 21, 123–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. McKetta, J.J.; Cunningham, W.A. Encyclopedia of Chemical Processing and Design; Marcel Dekker: New York, NY, USA, 1976; ISBN 0824724933. [Google Scholar]
  34. Sinha, V.T. Estimating capital costs from an equipment list: A case study. Eng. Costs Prod. Econ. 1988, 14, 259–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Garrett, D.E. Chemical Engineering Economics; Van Nostrand Reinhol: New York, NY, USA; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1989; ISBN 9401165440. [Google Scholar]
  36. AACE-International. AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97 Cost Estimate Classification System—As Applied in Engineering, Procurement, and Construction for the Process Industries; AACE-International: Morgantown, WV, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  37. Kim, J.-Y. Smart chemical plant architecture development based on a systems engineering. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Systems Engineering Symposium (ISSE), Vienna, Austria, 11–13 October 2017; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  38. ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148: Systems and Software Engineering—Life Cycle Processes—Requirements Engineering. Available online: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6146379 (accessed on 11 March 2019).
  39. Cohen, L. Quality Function Deployment: How to Make QFD Work for You, 1st ed.; Addison-Wesley: Boston, MA, USA, 1995; ISBN 0201633302. [Google Scholar]
  40. Macchi, E. Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) Power Systems; Woodhead Publishing: Duxford, UK, 2016; ISBN 0081005113. [Google Scholar]
  41. Ishigai, S. Steam Power Engineering: Thermal and Hydraulic Design Principles; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1999; ISBN 0521626358. [Google Scholar]
  42. Sarkar, J. Review and future trends of supercritical CO2 Rankine cycle for low-grade heat conversion. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 48, 434–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Jones, G.M.; Sanks, R.L.; Tchobanoglous, G.; Bosserman, B.E. Pumping Station Design, 3rd ed.; Elsevier/Butterworth-Heinemann: Burlington, MA, USA, 2008; ISBN 0080560059. [Google Scholar]
  44. Loh, H.P.; Jennifer, L.; White, C.W., III. Process Equipment Cost Estimation; National Energy Technology Laboratory: Morgantown, WV, USA, 2002.
  45. Karassik, I.J. Pump Handbook; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2001; ISBN 0070340323. [Google Scholar]
  46. Hou, S.; Zhou, Y.; Yu, L.; Zhang, F.; Cao, S.; Wu, Y. Optimization of a novel cogeneration system including a gas turbine, a supercritical CO2 recompression cycle, a steam power cycle and an organic Rankine cycle. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 172, 457–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Mignard, D. Correlating the chemical engineering plant cost index with macro-economic indicators. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2014, 92, 285–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Dick, E. Fundamentals of Turbomachines; Springer: Heidelberg, Germany; ISBN 9401796270.
  49. Bloch, H.P.; Singh, M.P.; Bloch, H.P. Steam Turbines: Design, Applications, and Rerating, 2nd ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2009; ISBN 0071641009. [Google Scholar]
  50. Fielding, L. Turbine Design: The Effect on Axial Flow Turbine Performance of Parameter Variation; ASME Press: New York, NY, USA, 2000; ISBN 0791800865. [Google Scholar]
  51. Driscoll, M.J. Supercritical CO2 Plant Cost Assessment; Center for Advanced Nuclear Energy Systems: Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2004; Volume MIT-GFR-01. [Google Scholar]
  52. Thulukkanam, K. Heat Exchanger Design Handbook, 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2013; Volume 20135140, ISBN 1439842124. [Google Scholar]
  53. Ahn, Y.; Bae, S.J.; Kim, M.; Cho, S.K.; Baik, S.; Lee, J.I.; Cha, J.E. Review of supercritical CO2 power cycle technology and current status of research and development. Nucl. Eng. Technol. 2015, 47, 647–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Shah, R.K.; Sekulić, D.P. Fundamentals of Heat Exchanger Design; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2003; ISBN 0471321710. [Google Scholar]
  55. Mylavarapu, S.K.; Sun, X.; Christensen, R.N.; Unocic, R.R.; Glosup, R.E.; Patterson, M.W. Fabrication and design aspects of high-temperature compact diffusion bonded heat exchangers. Nucl. Eng. Des. 2012, 249, 49–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Southall, D. Diffusion bonding in compact heat exchangers. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Supercritical CO2 Power Cycles Symposium, Troy, NY, USA, 29–30 April 2009; SwRI: San Antonio, TX, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  57. Dostál, V. A Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Cycle for Next Generation Nuclear Reactors. Ph.D. Thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  58. Dewson, S.; Grady, C. PCHE–Printed Circuit Heat Exchangers. In Proceedings of the Heatric Workshop; MIT: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  59. Shiferaw, D.; Carrero, J.M.; Le Pierres, R. Economic analysis of SCO2 cycles with PCHE recuperator design optimisation. In Proceedings of the 5th International Supercritical CO2 Power Cycles Symposium, San Antonio, TX, USA, 29–31 March 2016; SwRI: San Antonio, TX, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  60. Hinze, J.F.; Nellis, G.F.; Anderson, M.H. Cost comparison of printed circuit heat exchanger to low cost periodic flow regenerator for use as recuperator in a s-CO2 Brayton cycle. Appl. Energy 2017, 208, 1150–1161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Engineering Sciences Data Unit. Selection and Costing of Heat Exchangers; Engineering Sciences Data Unit: London, UK, 2006; ISBN 0856798185. [Google Scholar]
  62. U.S. Department of Energy—National Energy Technology Laboratory. Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants; Volume 3c: Natural Gas Combined Cycle at Elevation; National Energy Technology Laboratory: Morgantown, WV, USA, 2011.
  63. Jaramillo, P.; Griffin, W.M.; Matthews, H.S. Comparative life-cycle air emissions of coal, domestic natural gas, LNG, and SNG for electricity generation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, 6290–6296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. De Gouw, J.A.; Parrish, D.D.; Frost, G.J.; Trainer, M. Reduced Emissions of CO2, NOx and SO2 from U.S. Power Plants Due to the Switch from Coal to Natural Gas with Combined Cycle Technology. Earth’s Future 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Energies 12 01492 g001 550
Figure 1. Pump cost model.
Figure 1. Pump cost model.
Energies 12 01492 g001
Energies 12 01492 g002 550
Figure 2. Turbine cost model.
Figure 2. Turbine cost model.
Energies 12 01492 g002
Energies 12 01492 g003 550
Figure 3. Heat exchanger cost model.
Figure 3. Heat exchanger cost model.
Energies 12 01492 g003
Energies 12 01492 g004a 550Energies 12 01492 g004b 550Energies 12 01492 g004c 550
Figure 4. Functional architecture of TCI estimation module.
Figure 4. Functional architecture of TCI estimation module.
Energies 12 01492 g004aEnergies 12 01492 g004bEnergies 12 01492 g004c
Energies 12 01492 g005 550
Figure 5. Simplified back flow diagram (BFD) of the Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) system and target boundary in the S31A case study.
Figure 5. Simplified back flow diagram (BFD) of the Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) system and target boundary in the S31A case study.
Energies 12 01492 g005
Table
Table 1. Comparisons of equipment cost estimation methods.
Table 1. Comparisons of equipment cost estimation methods.
Cost Estimation MethodVendor Quotation-Based Calculation ApproachCost Model-Based Calculation Approach
Calculation basisQuotations provided by the manufacturing vendorsCorrelation between equipment’s specification/size and cost
Advantage(1) High accuracy
(2) Able to predict various specifications/material quality		(1) Able to predict the price fluctuation based on the specification change
(2) Able to develop the cost model based on the former research or quotation
Disadvantage(1) Difficult to collect quotations
(2) Difficult to predict the price fluctuations based on the specification change		(1) Might be different with the manufacture vendors’ quotation
(2) Difficult to predict various specifications/material quality
Table
Table 2. Mission of the economic analysis module.
Table 2. Mission of the economic analysis module.
Estimate ClassProject Definition MaturityTypical Purpose of EstimateExpected Accuracy RangePreparation Effort 1
Class 50% to 2%Concept screeningL: −20% to −50%
H: +30% to +100%		1
Class 41% to 15%Study or feasibilityL: −15% to −30%
H: +20% to +50%		2 to 4
Class 310% to 40%Budget, authorization, or controlL: −10% to −20%
H: +10 % to +30%		3 to 10
Class 230% to 70%Control or bid/tenderL: −5% to −15%
H: +5% to +20%		4 to 20
Class 150% to 100%Check estimate or bid/tenderL: –3% to −10%
H: +3% to +15%		5 to 100
1 Degree of relative effort.
Table
Table 3. Stakeholder identification of the total capital investment (TCI) estimation module.
Table 3. Stakeholder identification of the total capital investment (TCI) estimation module.
CategoryNameDescription
DevelopersTCI module developing companiesAlgorithms, UX/UI developers, …
UsersPlant operating companiesPublic, private power corporation, …
Energy demanding companiesSteel-making, cement plants, …
Plant equipment manufacturing companiesTurbines, pump manufacturers, …
Plant engineering companiesBasic, detailed design companies, …
Plant constructing companiesCivil, structural works companies, …
MaintainersTCI module maintaining companiesOperating, maintenance agencies, …
Table
Table 4. Stakeholder requirements of the TCI estimation module.
Table 4. Stakeholder requirements of the TCI estimation module.
No.NameDescription
StR#1Working fluid model applicationTCI estimation module shall apply working fluid model of the waste heat power plant
StR#2Equipment cost estimationTCI estimation module shall calculate the equipment cost of the waste heat power plant
StR#3Total direct cost estimationTCI estimation module shall calculate the total direct cost of the waste heat power plant
StR#4Total indirect cost estimationTCI estimation module shall calculate the total indirect cost of the waste heat power plant
StR#5Fixed capital investment estimationTCI estimation module shall calculate the fixed capital investment of the waste heat power plant
StR#6Working capital estimationTCI estimation module shall calculate the working capital of the waste heat power plant
………
Table
Table 5. System requirements of the TCI estimation module.
Table 5. System requirements of the TCI estimation module.
No.NameDescription
SyR#1Steam model applicationTCI estimation module shall be able to apply steam model as the working fluid.
(Related stakeholder requirement: StR#1)
SyR#2Organic refrigerant model applicationTCI estimation module shall be able to apply organic refrigerant model as the working fluid. (StR#1)
SyR#3Supercritical carbon dioxide (CO2) model applicationTCI estimation module shall be able to apply supercritical carbon dioxide (CO2) model as the working fluid. (StR#1)
SyR#4Pump cost estimationTCI estimation module shall be able to calculate the cost of the pump used in the waste heat power plant. (StR#2)
SyR#5Turbine cost estimationTCI estimation module shall be able to calculate the cost of the turbine used in the waste heat power plant. (StR#2)
SyR#6Heat exchanger cost estimationTCI estimation module shall be able to calculate the cost of the heat exchanger used in the waste heat power plant. (StR#2)
SyR#7Total onsite cost estimationTCI estimation module shall be able to calculate the cost occurred at the construction site of waste heat power plant. (StR#3)
SyR#8Total offsite cost estimationTCI estimation module shall be able to calculate the cost occurred outside the construction site of waste heat power plant. (StR#3)
SyR#9Total direct cost estimationTCI estimation module shall be able to calculate the total direct cost that includes the total onsite and offsite cost. (StR#3)
SyR#10Engineering and supervisor cost estimationTCI estimation module shall be able to calculate the design and construction supervision cost of waste heat power plant. (StR#4)
SyR#11Construction cost estimationTCI estimation module shall be able to calculate the cost required for construction of waste heat power plant. (StR#4)
SyR#12Contingency estimationTCI estimation module shall be able to calculate the extra cost additionally occurred for the design and construction of waste heat power plant. (StR#4)
………
Table
Table 6. Implementation example of TCI estimation module.
Table 6. Implementation example of TCI estimation module.
NameDescription
FunctionCalculate AFUDC details
Input variables (1) Plant facilities investment
 (2) land cost
 (3) escalated start-up cost
 (4) annual inflation rate
 (5) first PFI supply rate
 (6) second PFI supply rate
 (7) common equity financing fraction
 (8) common equity required annual return
 (9) preferred stock financing fraction
 (10) preferred stock required annual return
 (11) debt financing fraction
 (12) debt required annual return
Output variables (1) AFUDC common equity
 (2) AFUDC preferred stock
 (3) AFUDC debt
 (4) AFUDC PFI escalated investment
Operation principlesCalculate the detailed factors of AFUDC based on the calculated plant equipment investment cost
Calculate annual investment cost by estimating the ratio of owner’s equity, preferred stock, and debt
Algorithm[PFI & PFI escalated investment calculation]
 (1) PFI = plant facilities investment × (first PFI supply rate);
 (2) PFI escalated investment = PFI × (1 + (annual inflation rate))2;
[AFUDC Common equity calculation]
 (1) common equity escalated investment = PFI escalated investment × (common equity financing fraction);
 (2) AFUDC common equity = common equity escalated investment × (1 + (common equity required annual return))1.5—common equity escalated investment;
…
Table
Table 7. Basis and assumptions for TCI calculation.
Table 7. Basis and assumptions for TCI calculation.
NameValue
Economic life35 years
Design and construction year1 years
No. of labors5
Working hours per year2600 h
Average labor unit cost$34.65 /h
Capacity factor85%
Equipment installation20%
Land cost0.03%
Civil architectural and structural20%
Service facilities30%
Engineering and supervisor cost10%
Construction cost and contractor’s profit15%
Fixed O&M cost9%
Variable O&M cost9%
Indirect cost contingency15%
Plant Facilities investment for start up2%
Annual inflation rate3%
Fuel escalation rate3%
Common equity2.25%
Debt6%
Total income tax rate3.8%
Purchased equipment$112,022,000
Table
Table 8. Calculation accuracy of developed TCI module.
Table 8. Calculation accuracy of developed TCI module.
CategoryNameValue ($)
TCI estimation moduleTotal purchased equipment cost112,022,000
Total onsite cost134,426,400
Total offsite cost59,371,660
Total direct cost193,798,060
Total indirect cost84,786,651
Fixed capital investment278,584,711
Start-up cost7,825,426
Escalated start-up cost8,301,995
Fuel cost3,729,571
Escalated fuel cost10,188,835
Working capital3,439,355
Escalated working capital3,648,812
AFUDC total current18,549,480
AFUDC total future18,742,668
Total capital investment (TCIM)325,353,306
NETL S31ATotal purchased equipment cost112,022,000
Total plant cost206,921,000
Total owner’s costs79,197,000
Total overnight cost286,118,000
TCI multiplier1.075
Total capital investment (TCIR)307,576,850
Difference between TCI estimated by the module and NETL (D)
(D = Abs(TCIM − TCIR))		17,776,456
TCI estimation module error (E)
(E = D/TCIR × 100)		+5.78%

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kim, J.-Y.; Salim, S.; Cha, J.-M.; Park, S. Development of Total Capital Investment Estimation Module for Waste Heat Power Plant. Energies 2019, 12, 1492. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12081492

AMA Style

Kim J-Y, Salim S, Cha J-M, Park S. Development of Total Capital Investment Estimation Module for Waste Heat Power Plant. Energies. 2019; 12(8):1492. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12081492

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kim, Joon-Young, Shelly Salim, Jae-Min Cha, and Sungho Park. 2019. "Development of Total Capital Investment Estimation Module for Waste Heat Power Plant" Energies 12, no. 8: 1492. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12081492

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop