Analysis of IEC Recommendations in Selected APEC Economies

Transcription

1 Reducing Losses in Power Distribution through Improved Efficiency of Distribution Transformers (EWG A) Analysis of IEC Recommendations in Selected APEC Economies 18 December 2017 Bangkok, Thailand Sommai PhonAmnuaisuk International Institute for Energy Conservation

2 Outline Introduction IEC Technical Specification Analysis approach and methodology Findings from surveys and analysis Conclusions and Recommendations

3 Introduction Project title: Reducing Losses in Power Distribution through Improved Efficiency of Distribution Transformers Objective: To build awareness and capacity of policy makers on impacts of adopting IEC TS (Energy Efficiency Technical Specification) in terms of energy loss and GHG emission reductions To come up with key recommendations (in consultation with key stakeholders) on the next steps Timeline: November 2016 January 2018

4 IEC Technical Specification Published in January 2017 Power Transformers Part 20: Energy Efficiency Provides methods for efficiency and efficiency index calculation Provides two levels of recommendations Level 1 is for basic energy performance Level 2 is for high energy performance Energy performance MAY be specified in one of the following ways: Minimum PEI (Peak Efficiency Index) Maximum load losses and maximum noload losses Minimum Efficiency Index at a load factor of 50%

5 IEC Recommendations Observations Energy Performance Indicator 50Hz DT 60Hz DT Minimum PEI (Method A) Maximum load losses & noload losses Minimum Efficiency Index at a load factor of 50% (Method B) Energy efficiency recommendations for 50Hz and 60Hz DTs not harmonized Any 50Hz DTs meeting max. load losses & noload losses also meet minimum PEI and EI B50 EI B50 recommendations for 60Hz DTs harmonized with DOE 2010 and 2016 regulations Details of a loss capitalization method provided Additional requirements suggested, e.g., total losses, efficiency at another load factor and/or power factor

6 Efficiency at 50% Load Factor World Practices on DT Efficiency Survey vs IEC Recommendations Efficiency values based on equations developed from an analysis of existing world standards and regulations in 2013 for DTs (15 kva to 3,150 kva threephase DTs) LiquidFilled, ThreePhase (50Hz) LiquidFilled, ThreePhase (60Hz) % % Efficiency at 50% Load Factor (Method A) 99.50% 99.00% 98.50% 98.00% Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 EIA50 Level 1 EIA50 Level % 99.00% 98.50% 98.00% Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 EIB50 Level 1 EIB50 Level % 97.50% kva Rating kva Rating

7 ANALYSIS APPROACH & METHODOLOGY

8 Estimation of Energy Savings by Energy Efficient DTs Several studies for APEC and ASEAN have been conducted since 2013 Previous APEC Study in 2013 Average load factors were used for estimation of total energy losses and savings DT efficiencies based on EI B50 Popular kva ratings were considered in potential efficiency improvements Operational parameters not considered in the previous analysis: Diversity of daily load profiles (load curves) and load factor in different enduse sector Different DT designs at the same energy efficiency index

9 Diversity of Daily Load Profiles/ Load Factors 1 Ideal Case Average loading factor Average RMS loading factor % 50% :00:00 02:00:00 04:00:00 06:00:00 08:00:00 10:00:00 12:00:00 14:00:00 16:00:00 18:00:00 20:00:00 22:00:00 00:00:00 Worst Case % 71% :00:00 02:00:00 04:00:00 06:00:00 08:00:00 10:00:00 12:00:00 14:00:00 16:00:00 18:00:00 20:00:00 22:00:00 00:00:00 Realistic Case % 57% :00:00 02:00:00 04:00:00 06:00:00 08:00:00 10:00:00 12:00:00 14:00:00 16:00:00 18:00:00 20:00:00 22:00:00 00:00:00

10 Efficiency (%) Different DT Designs for the same Efficiency Index Design NoLoad Losses (W) Load Losses (W) Design A Design B Design C % 99.10% 98.90% 98.70% 98.50% 98.30% 98.10% 97.90% Design A Design B Design C 97.70% 97.50%

11 Daily Energy Losses (Wh) Diversity of Daily Load Profiles Ideal Case Worst Case Realistic Case :00:00 02:00:00 04:00:00 06:00:00 08:00:00 10:00:00 12:00:00 14:00:00 16:00:00 18:00:00 20:00:00 22:00:00 00:00: :00:00 02:00:00 04:00:00 06:00:00 08:00:00 10:00:00 12:00:00 14:00:00 16:00:00 18:00:00 20:00:00 22:00:00 00:00: :00:00 02:00:00 04:00:00 06:00:00 08:00:00 10:00:00 12:00:00 14:00:00 16:00:00 18:00:00 20:00:00 22:00:00 00:00:00 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 26%74% Higher 9%24% Higher Ideal Case Worst Case Realistic Case Design A (NL=30W, LL=408W) 3,102 5,397 3,854 Design B (NL=66W, LL=264W) 3,102 4,587 3,588 Design C (NL=96W, LL=144W) 3,102 3,912 3,367 Source: Estimation by ICA

12 Daily Energy Losses (Wh) Daily Energy Losses (Wh) Daily Energy Losses (Wh) Diversity of Loading Factors 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 50% Average loading factor 3,500 3,000 35% Average loading factor 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, Ideal Case Worst Case Realistic Case Design A (NL=30W, LL=408W) 1,880 3,004 2,248 Design B (NL=66W, LL=264W) 2,311 3,039 2,549 Design C (NL=96W, LL=144W) 2,671 3,067 2,801 Ideal Case Worst Case Realistic Case Design A (NL=30W, LL=408W) 3,102 5,397 3,854 Design B (NL=66W, LL=264W) 3,102 4,587 3,588 Design C (NL=96W, LL=144W) 3,102 3,912 3,367 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 75% Average loading factor Ideal Case Worst Case Realistic Case Design A (NL=30W, LL=408W) 6,098 6,621 7,790 Design B (NL=66W, LL=264W) 5,041 5,379 6,135 Design C (NL=96W, LL=144W) 4,160 4,344 4,756

13 Analysis Approach and Methodology Step A: Compiling DT Data Classifications by kv/kva Step B: Defining DT Losses/ Efficiency Step C: Defining Analysis Parameters Step D: Estimating Per Unit Annual Energy Losses Step E: National Impact Analysis Baseline Scenario MEPS/ Utilities Procurements Typical Load Profiles for Different End Use Sectors x PG&E DTs for Residential Customers Annual Load Factor Baseline Scenario Per Unit Annual Energy Losses Extrapolation at the APEC Economy Level Baseline IEC Savings Energy Demand of PEA GWh 12,000 11,500 11, ,500 10,000 9, IEC Scenario Load losses/no load losses Efficiency at 50% load Peak efficiency index 9,000 8,500 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec DT designs to meet efficiency requirements IEC Scenario Per Unit Annual Energy Losses Key Variables: Electricity Tariff (current/ projection), Emission Factor, discount rate, service life

14 Comprehensive Data Required Stock of installed DTs classified by kv and kva Popular kva rating, Expected lifetime of DTs Typical load profiles of different enduse sectors, seasonal variation and load factors Average loading factor or average RMS loading Current energy performance standards National Standards and Utility Procurement Specifications Electricity tariff, electricity emission factor Data collection activities include: Review of secondary resources Questionnaire distribution Direct interview with utilities

15 Key Parameters and Assumptions (1) Baseline (businessasusual) scenario Energy performance levels based on either the national MEPS or the utilities procurement documents. IEC scenario Level 1 recommendations are not used due to their less stringentcies. For 50Hz DTs level 2 energy performance recommendations on noload and load losses and EI B50 For 60 Hz DTs level 2 energy performance recommendations on EIB50 The PEI recommendations referenced as indicators not as EE options

16 Key Parameters and Assumptions (2) Per unit analysis characteristics of the most common kva rating represent the whole DT population (Utilityowned, liquidimmersed) Focus on three major enduse sectors: Residential, Commercial and Industrial (Three sets of daily load profile) Annual average loading factors based either on feedback from APEC/ASEAN economies or historical energy consumption statistics Maximum loading factor for DTs is 100% (at any time of the day) no overloaded! Two analysis points annual average loading factors (per data collection) & 50% loading factor

17 Baseline Scenario Baseline Scenario LiquidImmersed DT (50Hz, 24 kv, 3,150 kva) LiquidImmersed DT (60Hz, 2,500 kva) MEPS or maximum noload/ load losses requirements of utilities MEPS or efficiency index a specific % loading MEPS or efficiency index a specific % loading Baseline Model Noload/load losses Baseline Model With noload/load losses that deliver the required efficiency Index Baseline Model With noload/load losses that deliver the required efficiency Index Annual energy loss analysis Not implemented in selected economies Flat/Constant Daily Load Profile (no peak demand) Residential Sector Daily Load Profile (evening peak demand) Commercial Sector Daily Load Profile (afternoon & evening peak demand) Industrial Sector Daily Load Profile (multiple peak demand) % Load Factor Variation Analysis results per model

18 Energy Efficiency Scenario IEC Scenario LiquidImmersed DT (50Hz, 24 kv, 3,150 kva) LiquidImmersed DT (60Hz, 2,500 kva) Scenario IEC LL50: IEC , Table 4, Max noload losses & load losses Level 2 for 50Hz Scenario IEC EI50: IEC , Table 6, EIB50 Level 2 for 50Hz Scenario IEC EI60: IEC , Table 5, EIB50 Level 2 for 60Hz Two DT models with different load vs efficiency the same EI B50 Level 2 for 50Hz Multiple DT models with different load vs efficiency the same EI B50 Level 2 for 60Hz Model A Noload/load losses Model B Noload/load losses (high total loss) Model C Noload/load losses (low total loss) Model D Noload/load losses (high total loss) Model E Noload/load losses (med total loss) Model XX Noload/load losses (low total loss) PEI (%) of each model for comparison & reporting Annual energy loss analysis Flat/Constant Daily Load Profile (no peak demand) Residential Sector Daily Load Profile (evening peak demand) Commercial Sector Daily Load Profile (afternoon & evening peak demand) Industrial Sector Daily Load Profile (multiple peak demand) % Load Factor Variation Analysis results per model

19 FINDINGS FROM DATA COLLECTION/SURVEY

20 DT Performance Standards in APEC

21 Data Collection Results Sufficient data obtained from the Philippines, Thailand, USA (only PG&E) and Vietnam Vietnam s national MEPS is based on EI but it is less stringent than utilities requirements excluding from the analysis 50Hz DTs (Thailand & Vietnam) max. noload and load losses requirement 60 Hz DTs (Philippines & USA) EI B50 (Guideline on noload/load losses also available for electric cooperatives)

22 Maximum NoLoad Losses in Thailand and Vietnam

23 Maximum Load Losses in Thailand and Vietnam

24 Minimum Efficiency Index (EI B50 ) Single Phase DT in Philippines and USA

25 Minimum Efficiency Index (EI B50 ) Three Phase DT in Philippines and USA

26 Diversity of Daily Load Profiles and Loading Factors Residential Sector Max. Loading Factor: 58% 84% 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Commercial Sector Max. Loading Factor: 81% 88% 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% % IndustrialSector Max. Loading Factor: 48% 91% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

27 PER UNIT ANALYSIS

28 Efficiency Efficiency Four DTs Designs 50Hz Baseline: 3Phase, 160 kva DT, PEA, Thailand % % % % Baseline: based on existing losses requirements % Baseline Model Design A % Design B % Design C % % Loading Factor Baseline: 3Phase, 250 kva DT, SPC & HCMC, Vietnam % % % % % Baseline Model Design A % Design B % Design C IEC : based on level 2 EI B50 for 50Hz Design A max. IEC noload/load losses Design B low noload losses and high load losses Design C High noload losses and low load losses % % Loading Factor

29 Efficiency Efficiency Four DTs Designs 60Hz Baseline: 1Phase, 50kVA DT, Philippines % % % Baseline Model % Design A Design B Design C % % Loading Factor Baseline: 1Phase, 25 kva DT, PG&E, USA % % % % % % Baseline Model % Design A Design B % Design C % % % Baseline: based on DOE 2010 requirements, NEMA TP1 compliant IEC : based on level 2 EI B50 for 60Hz (or DOE 2016) Design A Medium noload losses and high load losses Design B low noload losses and high load losses Design C High noload losses and low load losses Loading Factor

30 Unit Installed MVA Installed Per Unit Analysis Philippines (1) Utility Owned DT Population 50,000 40,000 1Phase, 50 kva DT selected for per unit analysis 2,500 2,000 30,000 1,500 20,000 3phase 1,000 3phase 10,000 1phase 500 1phase kva Rating kva Rating Distribution Transformer Efficiency Profile 50 kva, SinglePhase, 60Hz NoLoad Losses (W) PEI gained = 0.025%0.38% EI B50 gained = 0.03% Load Losses (W) Total Losses (W) PEI (%) Baseline Model % 99.08% Design A % 99.11% Design B % 99.11% Design C % 99.11% EI B50

31 Per Unit Annual Savings (kwh) Per Unit Annual Savings (kwh) Per Unit Analysis Philippines (2) Loading factors: 48% to 78% Typical Loading Factors 50% Loading Factor Design A Design B Design C Flat Residential Commercial Industrial Design A Design B Design C Flat Residential Commercial Industrial , Savings = 1% to 2% Savings = 4% to 5% Savings = 7% to 20% Savings = 2% to 3% Savings = 3% to 4% Savings = 1% to 12%

32 Per Unit Analysis Thailand Metropolitan Electricity Authority (MEA) PEI gained = 0.035%0.145% EI B50 gained = 0.005% Distribution Transformer 500 kva, Three Phase, 50Hz, 24kV Efficiency Profile NoLoad Losses (W) Load Losses (W) Total Losses (W) PEI (%) Baseline Model 670 3,030 3, Design A 459 3,900 4, Design B 230 4,913 5, Design C 918 1,887 2, EI B50 Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA) PEI gained = 0.35%0.52% EI B50 gained = 0.31% Distribution Transformer 160 kva, ThreePhase 50Hz, 22kV Efficiency Profile NoLoad Losses (W) Load Losses (W) Total Losses (W) PEI (%) Baseline Model 360 2,100 2, % % Design A 189 1,750 1, % % Design B 95 2,167 2, % % Design C , % % EI B50

33 Per Unit Annual Savings (kwh) Per Unit Annual Savings (kwh) Per Unit Analysis Thailand, MEA Loading factors: 66% Typical Loading Factors 50% Loading Factors 3, , , ,000 2,000 Design A Design B Design C Flat Residential Commercial Industrial Design A Design B Design C Flat Residential Commercial Industrial 3, , Savings = 9% to 13% Savings = 5% to 9% Savings = 12% to 19% Savings = 2% to 4% Savings 1% Savings = 1% to 4%

34 Per Unit Annual Savings (kwh) Per Unit Annual Savings (kwh) Per Unit Analysis Thailand, PEA Loading factors: 73% Typical Loading Factors 50% Loading Factor 6,000 2,600 5,000 2,500 4,000 3,000 2,000 Flat Residential Commercial Industrial 2,400 2,300 2,200 2,100 Flat Residential Commercial Industrial 1,000 2, ,900 Design A Design B Design C Design A Design B Design C Savings = 24% to 27% Savings = 36% to 41% Savings = 29% Savings = 31% to 32% Savings = 27% to 28% Savings = 15% to 22%

35 Per Unit Analysis USA, PG&E (1) 1Phase, 25 kva DT selected for per unit analysis Source: Electric Program Investment Charge (EPIC), PG&E, December 2016 PEI gained = 0.042%0.385% EI B50 gained = 0.04% Distribution Transformer 25 kva, SinglePhase, 60Hz Efficiency Profile NoLoad Losses (W) Load Losses (W) Total Losses (W) PEI (%) Baseline Model % 98.91% Design A % 98.95% Design B % 98.95% Design C % 98.95% EI B50

36 Per Unit Annual Savings (kwh) Per Unit Annual Savings (kwh) Per Unit Analysis USA, PG&E (2) Loading factors: 40% to 70% Typical Loading Factors 50% Loading Factors Design A Design B Design C Flat Residential Flat Residential Commercial Industrial Design A Design B Design C Commercial Industrial Savings = 3% to 4% Savings = 2% to 8% Savings = 13% to +14% Savings = 4% Savings = 1.2% to +0.8% Savings = 4%

37 % Share Per Unit Analysis Vietnam (1) 20.00% 18.00% 16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Utility Owned Distribution Transformers 3Phase, 250 kva DT selected for per unit analysis Others kva Rating Source: Market Study for Utility Distribution Transformer Vietnam, ICA, 2015 PEI gained = 0.115%0.247% EI B50 gained = 0.1% Distribution Transformer 250 kva, ThreePhase, 50Hz, 22kV Efficiency Profile NoLoad Losses (W) Load Losses (W) Total Losses (W) PEI (%) Baseline Model 340 2,600 2, % % Design A 270 2,350 2, % % Design B 135 2,946 3, % % Design C 540 1,166 1, % % EI B50

38 Per Unit Annual Savings (kwh) Per Unit Annual Savings (kwh) Per Unit Analysis Vietnam (2) Loading factors: 84%88% Typical Loading Factors 50% Loading Factors 9,000 1,600 8,000 1,400 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 Flat Residential Commercial Industrial 1,200 1, Flat Residential Commercial Industrial 0 0 1,000 Design A Design B Design C Design A Design B Design C Savings = 11% Savings = 38% to 39% Savings = 13% Savings = 16% Savings = 12% Savings = 2% to 3%

39 Summary of Potential Energy 50% Loading Factor 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% Design A 10% Design B 5% Design C 0% 5% 10% Philippines Thailand (MEA) Thailand (PEA) USA Vietnam 15%

40 Annual Energy Loss (kwh) Annual Energy Loss (kwh) Annual Energy Loss (kwh) Annual Energy Loss (kwh) PEI vs Annual Energy 50% Loading Factor 1Phase, 50 kva DT, 60Hz, Philippines 3Phase, 160 kva DT, 50Hz, Thailand (PEA) 4, % 14, % 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, % % % % % % Flat Residential Commercial Industrial PEI (%) EIB50 (%) 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2, % % % % % % % % Flat Residential Commercial Industrial PEI (%) EIB50 (%) % % Baseline Model Design A Design B Design C Baseline Model Design A Design B Design C 1Phase, 25 kva DT, 60Hz, USA (PG&E) 3Phase, 250 kva DT, 50Hz, Vietnam (SPC & HCMC) 1, % 9, % 1,300 1,280 1,260 1, % % % Flat Residential 8,500 8, % % % % Flat Residential 1,220 1,200 1,180 1, % % % Commercial Industrial PEI (%) EIB50 (%) 7,500 7, % % % % Commercial Industrial PEI (%) EIB50 (%) 1, % 6, % Baseline Model Design A Design B Design C Baseline Model Design A Design B Design C

41 NATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

42 Key Parameters and Assumptions for National Impact Analysis % share of DT kva installed in each enduse sector based on % share of national electricity consumption Growth of annual DT installation based on historical data Daily load profiles, loading factors, annual installed capacity growth constant throughout the analysis period

43 DT Stock (MVA) Replacement of Existing DT Stock 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Projection of DT Stock in Vietnam New Installation Replacement Baseline Model Stock With an estimated lifetime of 20 years, all existing DT stock will be replaced by new DTs by 2037

44 Estimated Annual Energy Savings and GHG Emission Reduction Country Philippines Thailand USA Vietnam Popular UtilityOwned DTs SinglePhase, 60 Hz, 50 kva ThreePhase, 50 Hz, 160 kva (PEA) & 500 kva (MEA) SinglePhase, 60 Hz, 25 kva ThreePhase, 50 Hz, 250 kva Utility Owned DT Installed Capacity (MVA) EI B50 Level 2 (Design C) Annual Energy Savings (GWh) GHG Emission Reduction (ktco2e) ,200 * ,655 1,394 2, , ,000 ** 652 1, ,015 1,578 2, ,412 Note: * Estimated installed capacity of DTs in three distribution utilities (two in Luzon, one large and one small, and one in Mindanao) ** Aggregated capacity of DTs installed in the PG&E system

45 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

46 Conclusions (1) IEC high energy performance (level 2) for noload and load losses are not necessarily applicable for all utilities in APEC and ASEAN Already less stringent than the procurement specifications of some utilities (e.g. MEA) Diversity of daily load profiles (or load curves) for different enduses (e.g., residential, commercial and industrial applications) results in variations of energy losses in DTs. Within 5% range Variation of average loading factors has greater impacts on energy losses than diversity of daily load profiles Energy losses of a DT at a specific loading factor cannot be estimated using PEI.

47 Conclusions (2) EI B50 will be meaningful and more accurate for determination of energy performance when comparing DTs at loading factors close to 50%. It is virtually impossible to predict uncertainty of EI B50 as it depends on DT designs (noload and load loss values). Noload and load losses allow for better estimation of the actual energy losses of DTs under different operating conditions. Most utility load profile data show high loading factor of more than 50% DTs with lower load losses (Design C) are generally more effective in reducing energy losses than adoption of DTs with lower noload losses, higher PEI or higher EI B50 with high load losses.

48 General Recommendations More stringent energy performance requirements than level 2 should be included in IEC More resources in collecting demand data and understanding typical loading factors in major enduse sectors needed These will assist in determination of the energy performance parameters for DTs that best reflect the actual situation. With limited data on energy demand profiles, noload and load losses requirements for procurement of DTs should be adopted as estimation of energy losses & savings will be made easier.

49 Specific Recommendations for Policy Makers (Utility & NonUtility) Focusing on common DT ratings Implementation of MEPS can focus on specific DT ratings Identifying typical load factors for each common rating Using IEC as a guide, and selecting the energy performance criteria that facilitate the impact assessment and respond to the typical load factors. Either noload/load losses or Efficiency two loading factors (e.g. 50% and 100%) recommended Use mix of losses, i.e. low noload losses for light load ratings and low load losses for high load ratings

50 QUESTION & ANSWER

51 THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION