Presentation on theme: "1 | Program Name or Ancillary Texteere.energy.gov Water Power Peer Review Hydropower Advancement Project CH 22.214.171.124 Brennan T. Smith Oak Ridge National."— Presentation transcript:
1 | Program Name or Ancillary Texteere.energy.gov Water Power Peer Review Hydropower Advancement Project CH 126.96.36.199 Brennan T. Smith Oak Ridge National Laboratory email@example.com November 3, 2011
2 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Purpose, Objectives, & Integration HAP Vision –Accelerated Improvement of U.S. Hydropower Asset Performance and Value Prioritized DOE Objectives for the HAP 1.Improved Estimate of Increased Energy Availability from US Hydropower Assets 2.Identification of barriers to increased energy availability 3.Identification of DOE Hydropower Technology Research Priorities for Improved Asset Performance and Value 4.Development and Dissemination of Best Practices, Assessment, and Analysis Tools to Maximize US Hydropower Asset Performance and Value
3 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Technical Approach High-Level Requirements for the HAP –Metrics and Targets for Hydropower Asset Condition and Performance –Standardized Assessment Methodology and Tools used by experienced hydropower professionals –Analyses and Trending of sampled facility results to characterize the state of the U.S. hydropower inventory –Stakeholder Acceptance of Targets, Metrics, and Methods Key Concepts –Asset owners/operators are primary sources of quantitative and qualitative information used in the assessments. –Anonymous Aggregated Reporting enables individual facilities to compare their results to the collection of assessed facilities –No ranking of hydropower facilities!
4 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Technical Approach – Roles Request for Information to Hydropower Industry & Stakeholders Solicitation/Awards for Hydropower Facility Assessments Contract & Deliverable Management for Awardees Best Practices Catalog Drafts (Components) Assessment Manual Draft Component Condition Rating Workbooks Demonstration Assessments (Condition) Best Practices Catalog Drafts (Special) Performance Assessment Process Draft Plant UC/Load Allocation Calculator Demonstration Assessments (Performance)
5 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Technical Approach - Products Phase I of the HAP will produce online documentation and tools to support the assessment process... Best Practices Catalog Assessment Manual Process Guidance Component Rating Workbooks Performance Calculator Hydropower Technology Taxonomy Phase I Demonstration Assessment Reports Center Hill Rhodhiss Flaming Gorge... Phase II will produce reports that provide insight into the state of existing U.S. hydropower assets Public Report of more than 50 Nationwide Assessments Project configuration and assessment summaries Overall and component-level trends in condition across many projects Trends in water-use efficiency, constraints across many projects Correlations between efficiency, condition, and production Summary of opportunities for and barriers to upgrade/improvement Under revision Non-Public Business-Sensitive Assessment Report Archive Controlled by Non-Disclosure Agreements Individual Project Performance and Condition Ratings Project and Component Condition Database Project Performance Database Flow and Generation Data
6 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Technical Approach Hydropower Technology Taxonomy Provides physical and functional hierarchy for Best Practices, Ratings, and Component Condition Database Standardization of scoring is key to meaningful analyses and trending Provides consistent nomenclature for facility characterization, reporting and team/assessor communication Color-coded to indicate HAP coverage and Corps/Reclamation HydroAMP alignment
7 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Technical Approach Best Practices Catalog (BPC) Concepts Functional requirements Typical configurations for components Efficiency role of components Reliability role of components Concise history of technological evolution State-of-the-art for components Brief summary of component material and manufacturing constraints Typical O&M requirements References to testing protocols Components covered Turbines (Francis, Propeller, Pelton) Generators Conveyances Main Transformers Trash Racks Instrumentation and controls for condition monitoring Instrumentation and controls for automation Special Topics Uncontrolled water leakage Flow releases Operational impacts of environmental mitigation systems Condition Rating Workbooks Excel Workbook files User (assessor) fields to enter component scoring Predefined rating scales for ease of use and consistency among different assessors Automated roll-up with weighting factors from parts components units facility aggregate scores Help files and field provide additional guidance Components covered Turbines (Francis, Propeller, Pelton) Generators Conveyances Main Transformers Trash Racks Instrumentation and controls (condition monitoring and Automation) Rating structure Component specific weighting factors for parts (e.g. wicket gates, head cover, shaft, …) Weighted scores for Age, Physical Condition, Technology Level, Operating Impact, and Maintenance Demands
8 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Technical Approach HAP Performance Levels & Assessment 1940’s Francis Technology Retrofit with hub baffle aeration Computationally engineered auto-aerating turbine 80% < < 88% 75% < < 85% 85% < < 92% Wear & Tear WQ Mitigation Upgrade Installed Performance Level (IPL) Current Performance Level (CPL) Potential Performance Level (PPL) Turbine Component Example from Plant X Unit Y What about performance in terms of reliability?
9 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Technical Approach Plant Performance Calculator Used to establish long-term (M>>8760) production potential baseline under assumption of flexible unit commitment, perfect dispatch, and scenarios of (installed, current, potential) unit efficiencies Currently Excel-based solver implementation, but will leverage Optimization Toolbox solver in the future. Performance Assessment
10 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Plan, Schedule, & Budget Schedule Initiation date: March 2010 Planned completion dates: –Phase I – Process Development – Dec 2011 –Phase II – Nationwide Assessments – Dec 2012 –Phase III – Upgrade Feasibility Studies – TBD, contingent on funding Milestones: –Draft BPC and Assessment Manual – Sep 2011 (delayed, but near complete) –Demo Assessments at Center Hill and Rhodhiss - Field Reports Complete Sep 2011 –Flaming Gorge Demo Assessment delayed pending Reclamation approvals –Request for Info to Industry with BPC & Manual Publication – November 2011 –Assessment Team solicitation issued – February 2012 –Assessment Awards – April 2012 –Training Workshop – May 2012 –Assessments Completed – Sep 2012 –Analysis and Reporting – Dec 2012
11 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Plan, Schedule, & Budget Phase IPhase IPhase II FY10-11FY12FY12 ExpendituresEstimateEstimate ORNL $820K $125K $960K --Mesa $450K $500K* $220K --HPPi $125K $50K $130K --Sentech $404K $50K $50K Assessment Awards $2,500K TOTALS$1,799K $725K$3,860K TOTAL PHASE I & II FY10-FY12$6,384K Budget History FY2009FY2010FY2011 DOECost-shareDOECost-shareDOECost-share 00$3,285,0000$1,915,0000** *includes Flaming Gorge Demo Estimate **USACE-Nashville and Duke Energy provided in-kind support to host Center Hill and Rhodhiss demos, respectively, and provided historical operations data.
12 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Accomplishments and Results FINDINGS: Turbine Runners are candidates for rehabilitation or replacement. A more modern hydraulic design and improved methods of delivering aeration through the runner will provide significant efficiency improvements. Wicket Gates, Stay Vanes, Spiral Case may yield efficiency improvements via surface rehabilitation and re-profiling. Draft Tube may yield efficiency improvements from surfacing, shaping, and slot fillers. Aging generator may see efficiency gain via air cooler and ventilation upgrades. Improved shaft vibration sensing could improve bearing performance, reliability 60 years of service through a personnel efforts to maintain the plant. 1950’s technology in general could be improved for better efficiency and reliability. Center Hill Assessment Demonstration Awaiting hourly data from Corps for Performance Analysis Condition Rating in Progress with updated HAP Tables
13 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Accomplishments and Results FINDINGS: Improved hydraulic design and aeration through the turbine runner may provide significant efficiency improvements. 86 year-old cast iron runners (Units 1 and 3) are expected to be at the end of their service life, and are candidates for replacement. Stay vanes may see efficiency improvement via surface rehabilitation and re-profiling. Some efficiency improvements from draft tube modifications, but slot fillers are not applicable (no gates) 1920’s technology (e.g. cast iron runners) still in use--opportunities at Rhodhiss to use updated technology to not only improve unit efficiency and performance but also reliability. Rhodhiss Assessment Demonstration Performance Analysis in progress Condition Rating in Progress with updated HAP Tables
14 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Challenges to Date Industry Priorities: –Asset managers are focused on reliability. Separating efficiency from reliability is not credible. What is appropriate DOE role? –Industry focuses on licensing challenges—upgrades are always controlled by licensing risk management more than efficiency cost- benefit –Capital allocation—incremental hydropower does not compete well with large chunks of baseload capacity expansion or quick-payback flexible gas-fired generation. Lessons learned –HAP will need to address absence of monitoring data and estimate value of monitoring –Asset management and operations staff are aware of conditions and upgrade opportunities—HAP focus should allow for interview/cataloging as much as direct inspection. –Hydropower operations data for performance assessment may have longer lead time than anticipated
15 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Next Steps FY12 Next Steps RFI issue Nov 2011 to gather feedback on proposed assessment— consider alternative procurement methods Technical Expert Review of BPC and Manuals –Enhanced collaboration of Corps and Reclamation to leverage HydroAMP and HMI experience for non-federal assets Resolve process for performance assessment on many assets— individual assessments or core team assessments? Additional Opportunities Apply performance and condition assessment to FY10 ARRA-funded upgrade projects Apply performance and condition assessment to multiple projects in Optimization Toolset Demos Interface with industry initiatives for operational excellence Long-term program for collaborative benchmarking based on HAP database