In-House Energy Management Surveys and Studies: Study of the ANL-East Electrical Distribution System for Potential Energy-Cost Savings

摘要

This study examined three different energy cost saving possibilities in the electric distribution system at Argonne National Laboratory. These are: (1) peak shaving using backup equipment, (2) power factor improvement, and (3) transformer deenergizing. The peak shaving study looked at two options, backup steam powered chillers and emergency generators at peak times. Although there are currently no backup chillers available to peak shave, four are expected to be available by the summer of 1983 each displacing 320 kW, two because of the addition of electric chillers and two as the result of conservation efforts. There are over 15 emergency generators but only the two largest of the five diesel powered ones were considered. These units are rated at 300 and 500 kW. The peak shaving program would include adding real time load recording and control to ANL's energy surveillance system. Using actual load data from 1977 to 1981, four options were evaluated. (1) the 500 kW diesel with the four backup air conditioning units, (2) adding the 300 kW diesel to option 1, (3) the 500 kW diesel by itself, and (4) only the backup air conditioners. There are two means to improve the power factor, (1) install capacitor at the substations, or (2) install capacitors on motors throughout the site. Installing capacitors at the substations would provide a 9.8 year payback while adding capacitors at the motors has a 13.2 year payback. ANL had five unloaded transformers that were energized. Deenergizing these would save $5800. There is no cost to deenergizing. There is an increased likelihood that the transformers would go bad due to moisture damage. Because this increase in likelihood is slight, the decision was made to deenergize these in September 1982. There are also 6 lightly loaded transformers. Deenergizing would save $3000 per year. The cost of load shifting and the current ANL load made this appear unattractive. (ERA citation 08:015240)