Comparison of the Ecoprofiles of Superconducting and Conventional 25 MVA Transformers using the LCA Methodology

Transcription

1 Comparison of the Ecoprofiles of Superconducting and Conventional 25 MVA Transformers using the LCA Methodology L. Martini, R. Berti, F. Barberis, V. Rossi ERSE SpA Italy (formerly CESI RICERCA)

2 Goal and Scope of the LCA study Comparison of the environmental performances of three 25 MVA power transformers with different manufacturing characteristics Identification of the most environmentally friendly solution Identification of critical issues in every environmental profile

3 Life Cycle Assessment Emissions to air, soil and water,waste, Materials PRODUCTION TRANSPORTATION USE END-OF-LIFE Energy, Fuels, Row and Ancillary Materials TOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL BURDEN LCA methodology is the compilation and evaluation of the inputs, the outputs and the potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle (ISO 14040)

4 APPROACH : A from cradle to grave approach was adopted for the comparative Life Cycle Assessment of 25 MVA conventional and superconducting transformers. END-OF-LIFE MANAGEMENT PRODUCTION INSTALLATION USE

5 Functional Unit LOAD FACTOR (%)E Monday - Friday Saturday Sunday DAILY HOURS The transformation of a 150 kv three-phase voltage in a 20 kv voltage supplying a maximum power of 25 MVA, during an operating life of 30 years, according to the above daily load curve

6 Conventional Transformer Paper-oil insulated transformer with copper windings No-load losses = 17 kw Load losses = 118 kw Total weight = kg

7 BSCCO HTS Transformers YBCO HTS BSCCO No-load losses = 21.5 kw Load losses = 22.5 kw Total weight = kg HTS YBCO No-load losses = 10.8 kw Load losses = 13.6 kw Total weight = kg

8 MAIN RESULTS : The HTS YBCO transformer shows the best environmental performance for all stress factors thanks to the lowest energy losses and weight OLD HTX GE PHS EU WH LIFE CYCLE COMPARISON 0 DRR WT TPE EL AA BSCCO CONVENZIONAL YBCO WH (Waste hazardous production) - WT (Waste total production) TPE (Total primary energy consumption) - EL (Electricity consumption) AA (CML Air acidification) - DRR (CML Depletion of non renewable resources) GE (IPCC Greenhouse effect over 20 years) - EU (CML Eutrophication) HTX (USES 2.0 Human toxicity) - OLD (WMO Depletion of the ozone layer average) - PHS (WMO Photochemical oxidant formation) L. Martini-Italy Session 1 Paper 0773

9 MAIN RESULTS : PHF WH WT The load losses during the use phase are the main cause of the life-cycle environmental burden, as their compensation needs the production of the same quantity of electricity. This causes emissions and waste production with a contribute of 99% to the all life-cycle impacts for HTS devices. YBCO TRANSFORMER 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% -20% -40% -60% OLD HTX GE EU DRR BSCCO TRASFORMER AA TPE EL Life cycle Production Intsallation and use End-of-file management WH WT TPE EL AA DRR EU GE HTX OLD PHS Liquid Nitrogen PVC Porcelain Fiberglass reinforced resin PTFE Aluminium Copper Stainless steel Pig iron BSCCO tapes Silicon steel Steel Recycling energy consumption Recycling energy recovery

10 RT1b : State of the Art on Superconductivity a) HTSC: Evolution of a technology after a revolutionary hype b) Material development: BSCCO versus YBCO versus MgB2 1G 2G c) High Temperature versus Low Temperature d) Life cycle costs: Cooling costs versus material costs, versus holistic view of life cycle costs e) Hurdles to be teared down for broad applications f) Future developments: do we need more material research, application research or do we need cheap LN2? L. Martini - Italy RT1b - Superconductivity

11 Commercial HTS conductors : Comparison between 1G and 2G conductors Electrical Field ( μv/cm) 12,0 11,0 10,0 9,0 8,0 7,0 6,0 5,0 4,0 3,0 2,0 1,0 0,0 77 K 1G 65 K 76 K Cost / Performance Ic : 1G vs 2G 1G vs 2G T = 77 K: 183A vs 395A / T = kam A 77K 1G vs 848A < 2G / 65K 1G ~ 2G L. Martini - Italy RT1b - Superconductivity DC Current (A) 2G 65 K

12 Commercial HTS conductors : Comparison between 1G and 2G conductors June 2009 L. Martini - Italy RT1b - Superconductivity

13 Power Potenza (W) Prague, 8-11 June 2009 Cooling vs HTS conductor : Total Power to be removed (Ac loss + thermal) for I nom =220A and L HTS =600m Potenza termica nel criostato Potenza refrigerante Numero minimo di vie in parallelo g p p 1kW Temperature Temperatura (K) (K) L. Martini - Italy RT1b - Superconductivity HTS conductors in parallel Numero di vie in parallelo

14 SUMMARY a) Pre-commercial phase for cables and FCL only b) If available in long length: YBCO better than BSCCO better than MgB2 c) HTS: the only way for applications in the electric power sector d) Cooling costs (capital, running and maintenance costs) >> than HTS material costs e) Cost-effective cooling systems, Cryodielectrics for HV and new testing guidelines/codes f) Application research first, but material research too L. Martini - Italy RT1b - Superconductivity

15 Incidence of production and end-of-life of materials on impact categories 80% BSCCO TRASFORMER 60% 40% 20% 0% -20% -40% -60% WH WT TPE EL AA DRR EU GE HTX OLD PHS Liquid Nitrogen PVC Porcelain Fiberglass reinforced resin PTFE Aluminium Copper Stainless steel Pig iron BSCCO tapes Silicon steel Steel Recycling energy consumption Recycling energy recovery

16 Phases of the transformer life cycle Landfilling Recycling of metals and mineral oil Incineration END-OF-LIFE MANAGEMENT PRODUCTION Row material mining INSTALLATION Semi-finished product manifacturing Transportation Maintenance Energy consumption USE Laying of the basement or the mineral oil collecting tank

17 PHF Photochemical oxidant formation HTX (USES 2.0 Human toxicity) TPE & EL Total primary energy & Electricity consumption AA Air acidification EUT Eutrophication Impact Categories and Critical Flows GE Greenhouse effect over 20 years DRR Depletion of non renewable resources OLD Depletion of the ozone layer WH & WT Hazardous & Total Waste production

18 Life cycle comparison of the transformers 3.0E+10 GREENHOUSE EFFECT 2.5E+10 g eq.co2 2.0E E E E E+00 CONVENZIONAL BSCCO YBCO (a) Carbon Dioxide (CO2, fossil) (a) Methane (CH4) (a) Halon 1301 (CF3Br) (a) Nitrous Oxide (N2O)

19 Comparison of the impacts of each phase in p.u. of life cycle impacts PHF WH WT YBCO TRANSFORMER OLD 0-50 TPE HTX -100 EL GE EU DRR AA Life cycle Production Installation and use End-of-life management

20 MAIN OBJECTIVE : Identification of the most environmentally-friendly solution between 25 MVA conventional and superconducting transformers, with 1G and 2G HTS windings.