Dr R S E T H U M A D H A V A N

P r o f e s s o r & C o - o r d i n a t o r

I n s t i t u t e f o r E n e r g y S t u d i e s A n n a U n i v e r s i t y, C h e n n a i

E N E R G Y G E N E R A T I O N – S C E N A R I O R e n e w a b l e

5 . 0 %N u c l e a r

2 . 7 %

H y d r o 2 6 . 0 %

T h e r m a l

6 6 . 3 %

T O T A L I N S T A L L E D C A P A C I T Y

= 1 3 1 0 0 0 M W

0

50000

100000

Peak Normal

E L E C T R I C I T Y E L E C T R I C I T Y P E A K v s N O R M A LP E A K v s N O R M A L

8 0 6 3 1 M W

9 . 1 %

P E A K D E M A N D D E F I C I T - 9 . P E A K D E M A N D D E F I C I T - 9 . 1 %1 %

8 8 6 6 7 M W

MW

0

250

500

G e n e r a t i o n D e m a n d

Billion un

its

G E N E R A T I O N v s D E M A N D

7 . 4 %

E N E R G Y D E F I C I T - 7 . 4 %

4 1 1 . 7

3 8 1 . 4

0

5000

10000

Peak Normal

P E A K v s N O R M A P E A K v s N O R M A LL

6 5 0 0 6 4 0 0M

W

1 . 5 %

P E A K D E M A N D D E F I C I T - 1 . P E A K D E M A N D D E F I C I T - 1 . 5 %5 %

0

20

40

60

G e n e r a t i o n D e m a n d

5 2 5 3 . 6

E N E R G Y D E F I C I T - 3 %E N E R G Y D E F I C I T - 3 %

M W

3 %

136 5 266 9 77430 000

80 000

1 38 000

70 - 71 80 - 81 90 - 91 01 - 02 03 - 04 04 - 05 10 - 11

O I LG R O W I N G I M P O R T B I L L

R s

i n

C

r o

r e s

?7 0 % of consumption imported

5 4736 693 7 758

11 500

9392854

2 317

0

5000

10000

15000

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006

Conventional

Renewable

M W

Year 1990 1995 2000 2004 2005Conventional

MW5 473 6 693 7 758 10 950 11 500

Renewable 4 285 939 1 648 2 317% 0.1 4.3 12.1 15.1 20.1

H E A R T E N I N G I N F OG R O W T H O F R E I N T N

m i l l i o n t o n s / y e a r

• P L A N N I N G• I M P L E M E N T A T I O N

&• M O N I TO R I N G

THE ACTIVITY OF ELECTRICAL UTILITIES Encourages consumers to modify their level and usage pattern of electricity

D S M C O M P R I S E S

A I M S T Y P I C A L L Y To minimize the Cost of Generation,

Transmission & Distribution of

Electricity

To meet Customer Energy Needs

a) always without Quality Deterioration &

b) at Lowest Possible Cost

A C H I E V I N G T H E T A R G E T 3 P R O N G E D A P P R O A C H

1 k V A Monitoring &

Optimization

2 Energy Efficiency Program

3 Renewable Energy usage O P T I O N S

k V A M O N I T O R I N G R E C O R D

(i) Contract Demand

(ii) Maximum Demand Reached

(iii) Average Demand

(iv) Minimum Demand

Avoidable

Can be curtailed

U s e f u l

Avoidable 5 5 . 8 %Can be Curtailed 2 4 . 2 %

Useful 2 0 . 0 %

k V A U S A G E P A T T E R N

P R O C E S S I N D U S T R Y

Useful4 6 . 4 %

Avoidable 1 1 . 8 %Can be

Curtailed 4 1 . 8 %

I T

Useful5 5 . 6 %

Avoidable7 . 3 %

Can be Curtailed 3 7 . 1 %

E L E C T R O N I C S

• Proper Scheduling of Operation

• Shifting of Peak Hour Operation to

non - Peak Hour Operation wherever

Feasible

• Possible Elimination of Operation

altogether

A c h i e v e d t h r o u g h

1 k W Saving = 1 k V A Saving

7 0 0 0 k W h Saving + 12 k V A Saving

Rs 2 9 4 0 0 / y R s 3 6 0 0 / y

7 0 0 0 h / y 1 2 m o n t h

Rs 4 . 2 / k W h Rs 3 0 0 / kVA

T O T A L S A V I N G S R s 3 3 0 0 0 / y / k W

B E F O R E O P T I M I Z A T I O N

1 3 5 . 51 7 8 . 6 8

k V A

A F T E R O P T I M I Z A T I O N

75

150

22516.30

18.00

19.30

21.00

22.30

24.00

1.30

3.00

4.30

6.00

7.30

9.00

10.30

12.00

13.30

15.00

Time

kVA

Average = 1 2 6 k V A

Maximum = 1 5 6 . 6 1 k V A

Minimum = 9 5 . 3 k V A

I N S H O R T

• A n a l y z e t h e E n e r g y B i l l

k W h C h a r g e s k V A C h a r g e s

Reduce k W h As a Fall out k V A Reduction

H I G H E R C O S T S A V I N G

HIGHER THE kVA % BETTER IS THE SCOPE k V A

1 8 . 5 %

k W h8 1 . 5 %

k V A2 4 %

k W h7 6 %

k V A3 7 %

k W h6 3 %

M O T O R S P U M P S

A I R C O M P R E S S O R S

I L L U M I N A T I O N ( Minor )

1 k W = R s 3 3 0 0 0 / yCapital Cost 1 % & Operation Cost 9 9 %

Possible to save not less than 2 0 %

I N E L E C T R I C A L U T I L I T I E S

A l l t h e s e c a n h a p p e n w i t h v e r y l e s s

i n v e s t m e n t

Operating Cost

9 9 % Capital Cost1 %

L I F E C Y C L E C O S T

1 k W = Rs 3 5 0 0 0 / y

• Even a small motor of 7 . 5 kW consumes Rs 1 5 Lakhs of Power in 1 0 years.

• Operating Cost Capital Cost within 3 weeks of usageMotor Rating kW 7.5 37Efficiency % 86 92Power Input kW 8.72 40.22Running Period h / y 6 000 6 000Energy Input kWh 52 320 2 41 320Running Cost @ Rs 3.50 / kWh 1 83 120 8 44 620Running Cost for 10 y Rs 18 31 200 84 46 200First Cost Rs 18 000 70 000First Cost as % of Running Cost 0 . 9 8 0 . 8 3

• A 3 7 kW motor consumes Rs 7 2 Lakhs in 1 0 years.

A n E x a m p l e

L I F E C Y C L E C O S T

Initial Cost + Energy Cost + Maint. Cost

Initial Cost2 %

Maintenance Cost3 %

Energy Cost 9 5 %

1 0 0 %Motor

90 %

10 % Motor Losses

90 % Pump Input

Pump

85 %

13.5 % Pump Losses

15.3 %

Throttling Valve

Losses

12.2 % Losses due to

Leakage, Extra

Flow, etc

76.5 % Pump Output

61.2 % Output

Head Lost

in Valve

s 20 %

Losses Due to

Leakage, Extra Flow etc. 20 %

4 9 %

Motor 7.85 %

Oversized Motor, Motor

with Low Efficiency

15 % Motor Losses

85 % Pump Input

85 % Pump

Losses

29.75 % Valve Losses

14.75 % Losses due to

Leakage, Excess Flow, undersized

pipe.

59.5 % Output

29.75 % Output

Pump 70 % Operation at Flow Less or

More than Design

Low Pump

Losses Due to Leakage,

Excess Flow

Undersized Pipe 50 %

Head Lost in Valves 50 %

1 5 %

W E L L D E S I G N E D P U M P I N G S Y S T E M

S

M A N Y A C T U A L I N D U S T R I A L

S Y S T E M S

A I R I S F R E E B U T N O T T H E C O M P R E S S

E D A I R

A I R C O M P R E S S O R

Rs 0.5 L

Rs 7.23 L

Rs 0.5 L

Rs 6 L

Rs1.3 L

Rs 0.5 L

Rs 6.26 L

Rs 0.97 L

Permissible Saved Excess Leakage

15th Aug 03 24th Oct 03 15th Jan 04

M A J O R L O S S T A R O L E A K A G E S

There are many more areas for E N C O N

E N C O N I N I L L U M I N A T I O N

1 Replace 4 0 W by 3 6 / 2 8 W E E L

2 Opt for C F L at Viable Locations

3 Install Electronic Ballast ( 3 W ) in Place of Conventional Copper Chokes ( 15 W )

4 U s e O c c u p a n c y

S e n s o r s i n B a t h

R o o m s & T o i l e t s

5 Prefer Task Lighting

6 A v o i d C o m m o n S w i t c h e s

T N 2 4 0 8 M W ( 5 6 . 8 % )

T N continues to be No.1 in the Country in Harnessing Wind Energy

S T A T U S as on 3 1 . 1 0 . 0 5

N A T I O N - 4 2 3 6 . 2 M W

Other States 1 8 2 8 . 2 M W

( 4 3 . 2 % )

W I N D M I L L O U T P U T Capacity

kWPower Generation

Million kWh / y2 5 0 0 . 5 0

5 0 0 1 . 1 57 5 0 2 . 0 0

1 0 0 0 2 . 8 0 1 5 0 0 4 . 5 0 2 0 0 0 6 . 0 0

1 9 5 0 0 M W

Sugarcane Trash

Sugarcane Tops

Paddy Straw

Coconut Husk

B I O M A S S P O W E RC O M B U S T I O N R O U T E

B I O M A S S P O W E RG A S I F I C A T I O N R O U T E

V I L L A G E L E V E L P O W E R G E N E R A T I O N

B I O G A S E N E R GY

T h e r m a l + P o w e r

( B u r n e r ) ( E n g i n e )

V E G G I E P O W E R

4 8 0 0 k W h / 3 0 tons V E G Waste

K O Y A M B E D U – C H E N N A I

P O W E R F R O M V E G E T A B L E W A S T E S

W A S T E W A T E R – S T A R C H

I N D U S T R Y

W A S T E W A T E R - B A G A S S E H A N D L I N G

P O U L T R Y L I T T E R F O R E N E R G Y

C O N C L U S I O N T H E F I R S T & F O R E M O S T A C T I V I T Y

I N E N C O N I S T O G O F O R D S MI t(i) Sets in Discipline(ii) Informs the Avenues for E N C O N(iii) Help in Avoiding Wastage of

Energy W I T H O U T D S M

O N L Y H A L F W O R K I S D O N E