2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.078
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative techno-economic analysis of biomass fuelled combined heat and power for commercial buildings

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
27
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 77 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Systems de-coupling was contemplated as a competitive alternative for bioenergy production; particularly, the option of de-coupling fast pyrolysis step and diesel engine generation step was reported to be the least expensive option up to 5 MWe, as compared to three other de-coupling scenarios: combustion and steam cycle modules, gasification and diesel engine, and pressurised gasification and gas turbine combined cycle. Several studies have been also performed to determine the production cost of electricity from different thermochemical conversion technologies and interestingly, these costs remain within close limits regardless of the technology employed [110][111][112]. Other studies have gone beyond by calculating the production cost of the biofuels by including upgrading steps.…”
Section: Economic Impactmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Systems de-coupling was contemplated as a competitive alternative for bioenergy production; particularly, the option of de-coupling fast pyrolysis step and diesel engine generation step was reported to be the least expensive option up to 5 MWe, as compared to three other de-coupling scenarios: combustion and steam cycle modules, gasification and diesel engine, and pressurised gasification and gas turbine combined cycle. Several studies have been also performed to determine the production cost of electricity from different thermochemical conversion technologies and interestingly, these costs remain within close limits regardless of the technology employed [110][111][112]. Other studies have gone beyond by calculating the production cost of the biofuels by including upgrading steps.…”
Section: Economic Impactmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other factorial approaches are applied by for instance Huang et al [38,39], who use the ECLIPSE program, designed for technical, environmental and economic process analysis, to estimate the costs of the proposed biomass ORC systems. Finally, the module costing technique illustrated by Turton et al [13] is a commonly used factorial cost estimation method based on the approach of Guthrie [13].…”
Section: Estimating the Total Investment Costs: Multiplication Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An increasing amount of researchers estimate the costs of components based on equipment correlations, using either percentages ( [32]) or multiplication factors ( [33][34][35]) to estimate the total project costs based on the module/equipment costs. Techno-economic ( [22,[36][37][38][39][40][41]) as well as thermo-or exergoeconomic ( [33,[42][43][44]) methods are used to simultaneously analyze technical and economic aspects and tradeoffs. Figure 1 displays a review of published data on estimated ORC investment costs.…”
Section: Orc Investment Costs: a Brief Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are several low temperature applications in which the ORC can be used, like: solar thermal [6], geothermal [7], oceanic [5], biomass [8], combined heat and power [9], waste heat from power plants [10], waste heat from industrial processes [11] or others [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%