3.4. Variants’ Analysis
The designed decision variants for upgrading the pumping station are characterized by different technical, utility, or economic parameters [
45,
49]. The parameters of the designed variants were adopted according to the price discernment conducted in January 2024. The adopted forecast is valid for the conditions of the first quarter of 2024 (Q1 2024). The obtained financial and environmental parameters of the pumping station modernization variants for Q1 2024 conditions are included in
Table 1,
Table 2,
Table 3,
Table 4,
Table 5 and
Table 6. The values of the financial parameters expressed in money were converted to the purchase of electricity for the negotiated unit price in Q1 2024 and expressed in MWh. Any subsequent price changes will change the calculated parameters. With a possible change in market conditions, one should not count on a qualitative change in the obtained parameters. Therefore, the analysis carried out in the future can be a reference for investment decisions [
18,
19]. However, this decision should be made based on a number of different factors such as economic, technical, utility, environmental, etc. [
42,
46].
When evaluating pumping station modernization options in terms of safety against the occurrence of the “blackout” phenomenon, it is important to consider the operation time of the pumping station independent of the external power supply, i.e., the ability for so-called “island” operation. In island operation mode, due to the safety of repair crews removing the “blackout” phenomenon, connections to the national grid are interrupted. In the decision variants analyzed, the power supply comes from an operating photovoltaic farm or from the combustion of stored hydrogen [
1,
2]. The photovoltaic farm was assumed to operate for 1600 h per year, which is the average value for the Upper Silesia region. During non-sunny periods, an emergency operation mode will be activated. The equipment will be powered by electricity obtained from the combustion of stored hydrogen, followed by hydrogen purchased from an earned financial reserve obtained from the sale of treated water, hydrogen, oxygen, and possibly heat. The reserve is worked out during periods when the pumping station is operating in its primary mode. A number of factors may influence the proposed outsourcing, including the availability of hydrogen, its price, and other considerations. It is proposed that an in-house storage facility will serve as the primary source of hydrogen for cogeneration engines. The in-house stock should be sufficient to maintain the uninterrupted operation of the pumping station for a period of five days. In the event of an emergency, a possible incidental purchase of small quantities of hydrogen will be conducted. In such a scenario, financial considerations will be of secondary importance.
As the first criterion for evaluating the variants, the minimum operating time of the pumping station was used when supplying hydrogen obtained and stored on-site [
23,
37,
39]. In the criterion “Self-supply of hydrogen”, Variants 1 and 2, which provide for burning the entire volume of hydrogen, are the most favorable (
Table 4). With the hydrogen generated, the pumping station can operate for 35 or 34 days (828 and 821 h), respectively. In the other variants, according to the design assumptions, the hydrogen reserve, depending on the momentary filling, allows the pumping station to operate continuously for at least 5 days (120 h).
Table 4.
Analysis of the possibility of emergency operation of the pumping station independent of external power supply for the reality of Q1 2024.
Table 4.
Analysis of the possibility of emergency operation of the pumping station independent of external power supply for the reality of Q1 2024.
| Unit\Variant | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|
Self-powered hydrogen supply | [h] | 828 | 821 | 120 | 120 | 120 | 120 |
Hydrogen supply purchased | [h] | 242 | 305 | 619 | 678 | 867 | 925 |
Supply of own and purchased hydrogen | [h] | 1070 | 1127 | 739 | 798 | 987 | 1045 |
Operation independent of external power supply | [h] | 2670 | 2727 | 2339 | 2398 | 2587 | 2645 |
| Result: | Best | Second | Third |
Once the hydrogen in the company’s own tanks has been used up for continued emergency operation, it will be necessary to purchase hydrogen from a local distributor for the financial reserve previously developed. The largest reserve is generated by variants that provide for the sale of hydrogen. For this reason, in the criterion “Purchased hydrogen supply”, the most favorable variants are 6, 5, 4, and 3, respectively. Purchased hydrogen, in the most favorable variant 6, will allow uninterrupted operation of the pumping station powered by hydrogen combustion for up to 39 days (925 h).
The last two evaluation criteria are “Supply of own and purchased hydrogen” and “Operation independent of external supply”. These criteria are similar to each other and give the same results. In both criteria, the maximum operating time of the pumping station in emergency mode when supplied with hydrogen (own and purchased) is evaluated, and in the “Operation independent of external power supply” criterion, this value is increased by the maximum operating time of the pumping station supplied with energy generated by a photovoltaic farm [
3,
4]. In both criteria, Variants 1 and 2, which provide for the combustion of all the hydrogen produced, are the most favorable. They obtained uninterrupted operation for 45 and 47 days (1070 and 1127 h), respectively, in the criterion “Supply with own and purchased hydrogen”, and 111 and 114 days (2670 and 2727 h) in the criterion “Operation independent of external power supply”. The equipment of all variants is similar; therefore, the maximum emergency operation time for the other variants in the criterion “Supply with own and purchased hydrogen” was also similar, ranging from 31 to 44 days (739 to 1045 h), and in the criterion “Operation independent of external power supply”, from 97 to 110 days (2339 to 2645 h). If the only evaluation criterion was the duration of protection against the “blackout” phenomenon in the reality of Q1 2024, the most favorable variants would be Variants 1 and 2.
The technical equipment of all variants is similar, which makes the necessary expenditures for their implementation similar. The difference between the cheapest and most expensive variant is only 5.6%. When evaluating variants for modernization of pumping stations safe from the “blackout” phenomenon, variants 3, 1, 4, and 2 (
Table 5) required the least financial outlays in turn. Two of them provide for wholesale of the generated hydrogen. On the other hand, the highest investment was recorded in Variants 6 and 5, which assume retail sales of hydrogen. The highest result is due to the investment in the company’s own vehicle refueling station. The annual additional cost of maintaining the pumping station is also similar. The additional installation of rainwater harvesting from photovoltaic panels only slightly increases the capital expenditure, as well as the additional cost of maintaining the pumping station [
25,
50]. The highest additional employee costs again occurred in Variants 5 and 6 (
Table 5), in which another employee is required to provide round-the-clock service.
Table 5.
Comparison of financial parameters of pumping station upgrade options for Q1 2024.
Table 5.
Comparison of financial parameters of pumping station upgrade options for Q1 2024.
| Unit\Variant | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|
CE—Capital Expenditure | [MWh] | 269,021 | 270,610 | 268,703 | 270,292 | 282,051 | 283,640 |
ACM—Additional annual Cost of Maintaining the pumping station | [MWh] | 1030 | 1133 | 1030 | 1133 | 1030 | 1133 |
AEC—Additional annual Employee Cost | [MWh] | 930 | 930 | 930 | 930 | 1239 | 1239 |
REC—annual Reduction in Energy Costs | [MWh] | −26,125 | −24,978 | 17,986 | 19,095 | 22,354 | 23,374 |
PP—Payback Period | [years]. | - | - | 14.9 | 14.2 | 12.6 | 12.1 |
| Result: | Best | Second | Third |
The process of dewatering the goafs of liquidated mines is a costly process, and regardless of the level of modernization applied, it will remain a process that requires the support of a budget subsidy. In the study to determine some form of efficiency, it was assumed that a form of profit would be a reduction in budget subsidy. The annual reduction in energy costs (REC) was calculated by subtracting from the unpaid annual cost of purchasing electricity (CPE) and from the national grid the sum of the additional annual cost of maintaining the pumping station (ACM) and the additional annual employee cost (AEC) (Formula (1)) resulting from the necessary additional staffing. Other costs are not included in the calculations because they are incurred anyway regardless of the implementation of the pumping station upgrade.
The terms in the above equation are as follows:
REC—annual Reduction in Energy Costs;
CPE—unpaid annual Cost of Purchasing Electricity;
ACM—additional Annual Cost of Maintaining the pumping station;
AEC—additional Annual Employee Cost.
Continuing this line of reasoning, the Payback Period (PP) of the additional expenditures for upgrading the pumping station was determined by dividing the expenditures (Capital Expenditure—CE) by the annual reduction in energy costs (REC) (Equation (2)).
The terms in the above equation are as follows:
According to
Table 4, the most favorable variants in the criterion “Annual energy cost reduction” are Variant 6 and Variant 5. Both of these variants enable the retail sale of hydrogen. Large savings in the purchase of electricity are also provided by Variants 3 and 4, which provide for the wholesale sale of hydrogen. Unfortunately, for Variants 1 and 2, no reduction in energy purchase costs could be achieved.
A comparison of the payback time for the investment in modernization of the mine water pumping station aimed at protection against the “blackout” phenomenon for the evaluated variants, calculated in accordance with Equation (2), is presented in
Table 5. According to the adopted methodology, the fastest payback time will be for Variants 6, 5, and 4, respectively. For the evaluated variants, it ranges from 12 to 15 years. Variants 1 and 2, which envisage burning all the hydrogen produced for captive use, will bring additional costs associated with the purchase of electricity after the upgrade. Due to the increasing costs of energy purchase, it was not possible to determine the payback time in Variants 1 and 2. From the point of view of economic criteria of economics, the implementation of these projects seems inefficient. If the only criterion for evaluating the presented variants were financial parameters, the most favorable variants in the reality of Q1 2024 would be Variants 6 and 5 (
Table 5). The analysis of economic parameters conducted was carried out for the operation of the pumping station in its primary mode. Long-term operation in the emergency mode would worsen the efficiency of variants enabling the resale of a part of the hydrogen, making them functionally and economically similar to variants burning all the hydrogen produced.
Energy evaluation criteria were set for the primary mode of pumping station operation. When operating in the emergency mode, the greatest importance is given to satisfying the main sentence, i.e., blackout resistance, and the importance of energy criteria is no longer so important [
9,
10].
When evaluating designed energy solutions using RESs, the most frequently indicated parameter is the consumption of generated energy by RESs for its own purposes, i.e., energy self-consumption. In this study, the criterion “Self-consumption of energy” is understood as the direct use of “green” energy generated by the photovoltaic system plus the energy obtained from its own hydrogen to power the pumping station. When evaluating the criterion “Self-consumption of energy”, the most favorable variants are Variants 1 and 2, which provide for the complete combustion of the generated hydrogen on-site for own purposes. These variants managed to cover up to 27% of their own energy needs. The rest, about 73% of the energy needs, must be financed from the financial security developed or from a budget subsidy [
21,
47]. In the other variants, which provide for the resale of a part of the generated hydrogen, the working photovoltaic farm covers only about 18% of the annual energy needs of the pumping station (
Table 6).
Table 6.
Comparison of energy and environmental parameters of pumping station upgrade options for Q1 2024.
Table 6.
Comparison of energy and environmental parameters of pumping station upgrade options for Q1 2024.
| Unit\Variant | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|
Autoconsumption of energy | [%] | 26.75 | 26.99 | 18.26 | 18.57 | 18.26 | 18.57 |
Financial security for energy purchases | [%] | 18.80 | 22.22 | 40.26 | 43.50 | 53.81 | 56.93 |
Covering the cost of energy purchases | [%] | 45.55 | 49.21 | 58.53 | 62.08 | 72.07 | 75.51 |
Reducing the carbon footprint | [Mg CO2/year] | 7524 | 7591 | 5137 | 5224 | 5137 | 5224 |
| Result: | Best | Second | Third |
The criterion “Financial security of energy purchase” is understood as the share of electricity that can be purchased from the revenue from gas, heat, and treated water trading. In this criterion, Variants 6, 5, and 4 are the most favorable, respectively. These variants provide for the virtual storage of energy by its sale. The financial surplus generated on an annual basis would make it possible to cover between 40% and 57% of annual energy needs. Variants with all-hydrogen combustion develop a much smaller financial reserve (
Table 6), allowing financing 18 to 22% of the annual energy requirements.
The same classification of variants was obtained in the criterion “Coverage of energy purchase costs”, where “Self-consumption of electricity” and “Financial security of energy purchase” were added together. In this criterion, variants 6, 5, and 4 are consecutively the most favorable (
Table 6). They allow to reduce the budget subsidy for the purchase of electricity at the pumping station by 62 to 76%.
Related to the criterion “Autoconsumption of electricity” is the criterion “Reduction of carbon footprint”. The approximate reduction in the carbon footprint of the retrofitted pumping station was determined by multiplying the amount of energy replaced by the “green” energy generated by the photovoltaic farm (Formula (3)) when powering the pumping station (autoconsumption of “green” energy) by the electricity emission factor.
The terms in the above equation are as follows:
RCF—Reduction in Carbon Footprint;
SC—Self-Consumption of “green” energy;
EEC—Electricity Emission Factor.
According to the adopted procedure for calculating the criterion “Reduction of carbon footprint” (Formula (3)), Variants 1 and 2 are the most favorable (
Table 6), allowing the reduction in equivalent CO
2 emissions to the atmosphere by about 7500 Mg CO
2 per year, when the other variants provide only about 5100 to 5200 Mg CO
2 per year [
33,
55].
Due to most energy criteria, the most favorable variants in the reality of Q1 2024 would be Variants 6 and 5 (
Table 5). Variants 1 and 2 prove to be the best when assessing the degree of direct use for powering the pumping station of energy generated and stored at the pumping station site and when assessing the reduction in equivalent CO
2 emissions to the atmosphere.
The study analyzed selected safety variants against the “blackout” phenomenon, which can be applied to the analyzed mine water pumping station. Six feasible technical and organizational arrangements were presented for analysis. The variants are characterized by a similar level of initial outlays, but a different degree of security against the lack of electricity supply from the national grid and a different level of satisfaction of financing the purchase of electricity for the pumping station (
Table 1,
Table 2,
Table 3,
Table 4,
Table 5 and
Table 6). All analyzed variants of modernization of pumping stations provide for generation of electricity only for own needs and do not require a license for generation and distribution of electricity. It should be assumed that their implementation in legal terms will not be difficult [
3,
4].
The variants that involve storing the generated surplus electricity in the form of hydrogen obtained by electrolysis and burning it entirely during periods of energy shortage (Variants 1 and 2) stand out for their great potential. These variants protect the pumping station to the greatest extent from external power shortages. Thanks to such a technical and organizational arrangement of the pumping station’s operation, up to about 50% per year of independence of the pumping station from energy supplies from the national grid is achieved. The expenditures incurred on the modernization of the pumping station will, unfortunately, only increase the cost of purchasing electricity, and although Variants 1 and 2 should be considered the most secure in the event of a “blackout”, their implementation in this form is economically inefficient. The decision to implement it can only be based on concern for the highest possible level of protection of the system against external power failure [
24,
44].
For economic reasons, the implementation of variants 3, 4, 5, and 6 was proposed as a modification of Variants 1 and 2. In all of them, the surplus electricity stored in the form of hydrogen is partially stored virtually by its wholesale (Variants 3 and 4) or retail sale at the company’s own vehicle refueling station (Variants 5 and 6). For technical reasons of gas trading and to protect the pumping station from “blackout”, it is envisaged to store in its own tanks a volume of hydrogen allowing five days’ supply of pumping station equipment. A comparison of the functional parameters of the designed variants is presented in
Figure 2. To allow comparison of parameters with different units and different absolute values, the current value of the analyzed parameter was divided by the largest value, reducing the parameters of the variants to unmandated values from 0 to 1. Particularly noteworthy in this group of variants are Variants 5 and 6. Despite the fact that the expenditures for their implementation are the highest, they are comparable in terms of Variants 1 and 2’s pumping station operating time independent of energy supply from the national grid. In the basic mode of operation, the payback time for pumping station modernization in Variants 5 and 6 is the shortest, and the coverage of the cost of purchasing electricity from the national grid is provided to the greatest extent. The variation in the values of the functional parameters of Variants 5 and 6 is the smallest (
Figure 2).
Increasing the volume of water treated, in spite of greater investment, increased the efficiency of the project. For image and social reasons [
7,
8], in the creation of new jobs, despite the increase in additional labor costs, Variants 5 and 6 are promoted (
Table 5). Analyzing all the presented evaluation criteria, for the conditions of Q1 2024, the variant with partial retail sale of produced hydrogen and additional installation for obtaining rainwater from photovoltaic panels, that is, variant 6, is recommended for implementation. The low efficiency of the electrolysis process and the subsequent hydrogen combustion process of the entire volume of produced hydrogen makes the implementation of Variants 1 and 2 seem economically inefficient. The evaluation of alternatives was prepared in consideration of the circumstances that would be in effect during the first quarter of 2024. In the absence of any unforeseen and substantial alterations in circumstances in the near term, it is recommended that the analysis presented be adapted to the prevailing political, economic, and environmental circumstances. In the unpublished section of the study, due to the volume of the manuscript, it was determined that the economic parameters of the variants for the modernization of the pumping stations of the pit water are most influenced by the value of the currently negotiated electricity purchase price. An increase in the purchase price of electricity will result in enhanced profitability of the project. The decline in electricity prices observed recently, in the first and second quarters of 2024, has extended the Payback Period for the investment. The purchase of energy for the third and fourth quarters of 2024 has increased in the negotiated price of energy and a corresponding increase in the economic efficiency of the project. The largest component of the price of electricity is the cost of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. The increase in the price of electricity also has the paradoxical effect of improving the economic efficiency of the retrofit. The study also examined the influence of fluctuations in the EUR/PLN exchange rate, the cost of constructing a photovoltaic farm, and the price of hydrogen. To facilitate comparison of the impact of changes in these factors, their changes were analyzed with an assumed constant price of electricity negotiated in Q1 2024. The alterations in the parameters of the designed variants were frequently the consequence of an increase or decrease in the absolute value of the analyzed factors, with the magnitude of change often exceeding 15 percentage points. The analysis indicates that a change in the EUR/PLN exchange rate and a change in the purchase price of hydrogen result in a change in the parameters of the design variants with a very similar change in their values, expressed in percentage terms. The calculations do not indicate that the effect of changes in the absolute value of these factors is significant.