Making CHP ‘do-able’
November 10, 2010 3 Comments
The Government’s set a target for the UK to generate 15.5 GWe from combined heat and power (CHP) by 2020. Today, only 5.5 GWe is generated from CHP. So, how do we deal with this target shortfall in CHP?
The planning department has, in recent years, relaxed their policy on approving CHP plant projects. On the other hand, they try to insist on new building design incorporating CHP. Of course, nobody likes to be coerced like this. But what is more important is that arguably this approach is not effective. For example, design engineers sometimes find it difficult to justify using CHP instead of the traditional boiler. It is seen to be too costly to build the CHP where the return on carbon reduction will be so little.
There is nothing inherently wrong with CHP, but rather in how we apply it. This large kit, even with better efficiency, is not suitable for a building-by-building application. We need to think at a community scale. It works perfectly well in district heating, or even a small community with several buildings. The key is to have more buildings where the load profile requires a constant energy demand.
CHP is more costly than traditional boilers. When it comes in a larger scale, the capital investment will probably be rejected by your finance director. But, does that really have to be the end of the story?
A happy ending with Energy Supply Contracting?
Perhaps, if you haven’t already done so, you should consider Energy Supply Contracting (which is also called Contract Energy Management in the UK). The service providers (ESCOs) provide low carbon energy to the clients, and the advantage of this business model is that it can allow the end user to enjoy low carbon energy without any upfront cost.
More thoughts on this particular model to follow – but what do you think? Can you tell me about any good or bad experiences with this?