Sizing Combined Heat and Power Units and Domestic Building Energy Cost Optimisation

Dongmin Yu, Yuanzhu Meng, Gangui Yan, Gang Mu, Dezhi Li and Simon Le Blond
Additional contact information
Dongmin Yu: Department of Electrical Engineering, Northeast Electric Power University, Jilin 132012, China
Yuanzhu Meng: Department of Electrical Engineering, Northeast Electric Power University, Jilin 132012, China
Gangui Yan: Department of Electrical Engineering, Northeast Electric Power University, Jilin 132012, China
Gang Mu: Department of Electrical Engineering, Northeast Electric Power University, Jilin 132012, China
Dezhi Li: China Electric Power Research Institute, Beijing 100192, China
Simon Le Blond: Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK

Energies, 2017, vol. 10, issue 6, 1-17

Abstract: Many combined heat and power (CHP) units have been installed in domestic buildings to increase energy efficiency and reduce energy costs. However, inappropriate sizing of a CHP may actually increase energy costs and reduce energy efficiency. Moreover, the high manufacturing cost of batteries makes batteries less affordable. Therefore, this paper will attempt to size the capacity of CHP and optimise daily energy costs for a domestic building with only CHP installed. In this paper, electricity and heat loads are firstly used as sizing criteria in finding the best capacities of different types of CHP with the help of the maximum rectangle (MR) method. Subsequently, the genetic algorithm (GA) will be used to optimise the daily energy costs of the different cases. Then, heat and electricity loads are jointly considered for sizing different types of CHP and for optimising the daily energy costs through the GA method. The optimisation results show that the GA sizing method gives a higher average daily energy cost saving, which is 13% reduction compared to a building without installing CHP. However, to achieve this, there will be about 3% energy efficiency reduction and 7% input power to rated power ratio reduction compared to using the MR method and heat demand in sizing CHP.

Keywords: sizing combined heat and power (CHP); domestic buildings; the maximum rectangle (MR) method; the genetic algorithm (GA) (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/6/771/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/6/771/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:10:y:2017:i:6:p:771-:d:100202

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().