Eagle Bluff Alternative Energy for the Future

Design report

Project Number May 04-10

Client Eagle Bluff Environmental Learning Center Joe Deden, Executive Director 1991 Brightsdale Road Route 2 Box 156A Lanesboro, MN 55949

Faculty Advisors Dr. James McCalley Dr. Mani Venkata Dr.Delly Oliveira

Team Members Abdul Kader Abou Ardate Darko Brokovic Daniel M. Disenhouse Lucas J Kirkpatrick December 17, 2003 Table of Contents

List of Figures and Charts...... LOF-1

List of Tables...... LOT-1

List of Symbols...... LOS-1

List of Definitions...... LOD-1

Introductory Materials...... 1

Abstract...... 1

Acknowledgment...... 1

Problem Statement...... 2

General Problem Statement...... 2

General Solution Approach...... 2

Operating Environment...... 2

Intended Users...... 2

Intended Uses...... 3

Assumptions...... 3

Limitations...... 3

Expected End Product and Other Deliverables...... 4

Approach and Design...... 5

A. Design Objectives...... 5

B. Functional requirements...... 5

C. Constraints considerations...... 5

WIND...... 6 Biothermal...... 10

Solar...... 12

Fuel Cells...... 17

Hydro...... 19

Microturbine...... 21

E. Testing Requirements...... 24

E. Recommendations...... 24

F. Detailed Design...... 25

Current Load and Costs...... 25

Resource Outputs and Costs...... 27

Plan of Combining Resources...... 28

Future Developments Needed...... 29

Resource and Schedules...... 29

Resource Requirements...... 29

Schedules...... 32

Closure Material...... 34

Project Team Information...... 34

Closing Summary...... 36

References...... 37

Appendix A – Wind Data...... A-1

Appendix B – Load Data...... B-1

Appendix C – Hydro Data...... C-1

List of Figures and Charts

Figure 1: An Example of Energy Supplied by Multiple Sources...... 4

Figure 2: Wind capture...... 7

Figure 3: Betz Limit...... 8

Figure 4: BioMax generator...... 11

Figure 5: Typical solar roof design...... 13

Figure 6: Components of the solar electric system...... 14

Figure 7: Solar Application...... 16

Figure 8: Fuel Cell...... 17

Figure 9: A single fuel cell membrane electrode...... 18

Figure 10: Typical Hydro Design...... 20

Figure 11: Water Fall of a Hydro Plant...... 20

Figure 12: Flow system for a microturbine...... 23

Figure 13: Microturbine system...... 24

Figure 14: Chart of Original Effort...... 30

Figure 15: Chart of Updated Effort...... 31

Figure 16: Gant Chart of Projects and Deliverables...... 33

LOF-1 List of Tables Table 1: Wind Bins Sample...... 7

Table 2: Wind Turbine generations for 2001&2002...... 9

Table 3: Biothermal costs and generation...... 12

Table 4: Hydro facts...... 21

Table 5: Microturbine facts...... 23

Table 6: Campus electrical energy facts...... 26

Table 7: House electrical energy facts...... 26

Table 8: Shiitake electrical energy facts...... 27

Table 9: Schroeder electrical energy facts...... 27

Table 10: Entire Facility electrical energy facts...... 27

Table 11: Wind generation costs...... 28

Table 12: Biothermal generation costs...... 28

Table 13: Combined generation costs...... 28

Table 14: Personnel Effort Requirements...... 30

Table 15: Revised Personnel Effort Requirements...... 30

Table 16: Estimated Financial Cost...... 31

Table 17: Revised Financial Cost...... 32

LOT-1

List of Symbols

KW: Kilo (103) Watts KV: Kilo (103) Volts MV: Mega (106) Volts MW: Mega (106) Watts kg: Kilo (103) Grams

LOS-1 List of Definitions

Biothermal – The use of biodegradable products such as wood and corn stalks to create energy.

Grid – The transmission network that connects all power lines and nodes

Interconnection – The point of connection between a power source and the utilities distribution or transmission system.

NEC – National Electric Code

NESC – National Electric Safety Code

LOD-1 Introductory Materials

Abstract Eagle Bluff is an environmental learning center, which has the goal to become energy self-sufficient using environmentally friendly sources. A plan to make Eagle Bluff energy self-sufficient must be reliable, cost effective and environmentally friendly. Sources of generation that were examined to see if they meet these criteria were wind, biothermal, solar, fuel cells and hydro. After all these sources were investigated, a number of plans were developed, which used combinations of these sources. It has been determined that a plan that uses wind and biothermal as energy sources should be further developed.

Acknowledgment Eagle Bluff has been very helpful in the initial consultations. They were able to identify their specific zone of interest and were more then willing to supply the necessary information for demand calculations. They provided the team with monthly electric bills going back over a year. Therefore a chart of their average and peak energy usage and demand will be produced. A chart will help view the difference in demand during different parts of year.

The clients were also very cooperative and took the team on a tour through the buildings showing their main load demands. They also showed the team the 350 KW gas-powered back-up generator. This unit was installed as a back-up power supply for the learning center. Eagle Bluff uses the back-up generator during peak demands, as requested by the electric company. Currently the electric utility tells them to use it approximately once a month for 5-6 hours, resulting in a 30% discount on the electric bill.

To help estimate the load accurately, Eagle Bluff provided the team with original building blueprints. This will provide the square footage of the building area and therefore could be used to estimate lighting load, power outlets and other smaller loads. Also, Eagle Bluff initiated the collection of local wind measurements which will be provided to the team at a later date. This supplemental information should be used to estimate the possibilities of wind generation compared to the other sources such as bio- thermal or solar energy production.

The team was briefed on the facility’s bio-energy resources as a possible solution to the problem. While some facilities have been installed for turning wood into electricity, the necessary equipment such as a high efficient furnace is not in place.

1 Problem Statement

General Problem Statement Eagle Bluff is a residential environmental learning center located in southeast Minnesota. Its maximum energy consumption is 500 KW. The center would like to become energy self-sufficient and remove itself from the electrical grid, except for backup purposes. The center is looking for a solution that is environmentally friendly, reliable, economically feasible and cost effective. A plan that meets these criteria should provide a number of energy sources, an electric layout, economic analysis, and a cost analysis.

General Solution Approach In order to provide Eagle Bluff with the required plan, a variety of energy sources and storage devices were investigated. These sources included wind generation, hydrogen production, solar cells, fuel cells, and biothermal. The electric layout needs will be investigated and a proper system will be designed. All governmental and industrial regulations that apply to Eagle Bluffs situation will be investigated and the results will be reflected in any design. At the end of the research, recommendations were given to Eagle Bluff on what systems they should implement according to their finances, location and the available resources. The expected end product is a report that will include: (1) system requirements and environment, (2) options considered and descriptions, (3) prioritized options and reasons for prioritization, (4) a detailed system design and (5) economic analysis o f investment cost and future operating cost.

Operating Environment Minnesota weather is known to range from hot to cold. Any system designed for Eagle Bluff will need to withstand wind, snow, ice, and low and high temperatures. Because of the latitude, summer daylight hours are long while winter daylight hours are short. These factors were considered when deciding on particular types of equipment for power generation. In the case of solar, wind or fuel cells, they need to be placed in particular location to best optimize the sun, wind, and temperature. Using Minnesota wind demographics as well as average solar exposures for the area needs were taken into account when performing energy calculations.

Intended Users The plans created by the design team are intended to be used by Eagle Bluff in selecting new energy sources. The plans will allow Eagle Bluff to determine what forms and amounts of energy sources they would like to install. Also the plans will allow money to be raised to install the new generation and electrical systems. The plans will be used by potential sponsors in determining if Eagle Bluff meets the donation requirements. Visitors to the center will benefit from the implementation of the design. They will be able to view renewable resources and see energy production as it happens.

2 Intended Uses Expected uses are separated into two categories: 1. The project will be used to give Eagle Bluff and understanding of the possible energy solutions. Also the project will be used to determine the best plans for producing electric energy in the most economical and environmentally friendly way. The ultimate goal of having some form of the plans implemented. 2. Educational purposes. This project should increase education opportunities in the Eagle Bluff learning community and open awareness of energy conservation and clean energy production.

Assumptions There are six assumptions listed for this project:

1. The total power needed will not exceed 1 MW. 2. The protective system used will be accepted by the local utility. 3. Project provides reliability of the system and its actual dependency on the electrical grid. 4. Wind Shear factor equals 0.2; a value of 0.1 for roughness length was estimated. 5. Utility’s avoided cost is $0.02/kW 6. Tax breaks and government grants are not included in the current cost analysis.

Limitations There are five limitations listed for this project:

1. Alternative energy resources must be environmentally friendly. 2. Project must include a protective system, that consists of a proven technology and applicable for Eagle Bluff. 3. Project results are to be understandable to the persons not familiar with energy production and distribution. It needs to be understandable so it can be used as an educational material for students visiting the Eagle Bluff learning center. 4. Limited access to wind and sunlight due to geographical location and unpredictable weather. 5. Generation size must satisfy local utilities’ interconnection requirements.

3 Expected End Product and Other Deliverables

The expected end product is an in-depth plan which uses combination of wind and biothermal. All considered resources will be discussed with reasons provided for the chosen solution. A solar unit will also be considered for educational purposes. Eagle Bluff should be able to use the plans to raise money and support for the goal of becoming energy self-sufficient. The goal of the project does not include delivering any hardware or software product to Eagle Bluff.

Wind Bio-Thermal Generator Unit

Legend

Electrical Lines Solar Panels Located on the Roofs Energy Sources

Facilities

Utility Connection, Transformers and Protection Equipment

Figure 1: An Example of Energy Supplied by Multiple Sources

4 Approach and Design

A. Design Objectives The following is a list of the design objectives:

1. Minimum size of 300kW – This is Eagle Bluff’s maximum demand. 2. Renewable energy sources – This falls under the environmental friendly purposes of Eagle Bluff. 3. Final detailed plan using wind and biothermal – They fall into the guidelines of being cost affective and environmentally friendly. 4. Other options considered – A discussion on why some of the other options considered and reasons will be given for not further developing them.

B. Functional requirements The following is a list of the functional requirements:

1. Meeting the demand power consumption of Eagle Bluff – The combination of power resources that Eagle Bluff can use must meet the demand needed to fully maintain their facility. 2. Minimum impact on the environment – Being an environmental friendly place with the least amount of impact on the environment. 3. Upgradeable system design – The design would allow the facility to upgrade the system to generate more power in regard to their needs and expansions. 4. Staying connected to the electrical grid and selling any excess power – The design would help to offset the costs associated with new generator as well as helping to lower costs of daily activities. 5. Back-up generator on standby – This will help if main source becomes unusable for a period of time 6. Educational use – To have the ability to show visiting people the alternative methods of power production

C. Constraints considerations The following is a list of the project constraints:

1. Weather concerns that limit wind and solar power generation – Wind and solar are not constant which would limit their use and increase the use of backup power supply. 2. Cost – Cost of implementing the plan and cost of maintenance as well as the possible fuel supply and storage for certain types of generation 3. Time – Time needed to implement the plan 4. Resources – Land availability and location of generator 5. Reliability of Generation –How reliable is the source of generation 6. Maintenance requirements – The amount of maintenance required and the lifespan of the generation equipment

5 7. Interconnection limitations – Generation should not exceed 1MW due to grid connections requirements. 8. Minimum size of 300kW – This is Eagle Bluff’s maximum demand.

D. Technical approach considerations There are a number of energy technologies that have been investigated as possible solutions to Eagle Bluff’s needs:  Wind  Biothermal  Solar  Fuel Cells  Hydo  Microturbines

These technologies are discussed below.

WIND

The first step taken to study the possibility of having a wind turbine up at Eagle Bluff was to determine the wind profile for that specific region. Wind measurements for Eagle Bluff were available online at Minnesota Wind Sites. The device up at that particular site has a sensor height at 20, 29 and 30 meters and recorded wind speed and direction from 10/14/2000 to 8/4/2003 as ten minute averages (Samples of wind speed statistics are provided in Appendix A). All the wind speeds were put into spreadsheets and the time of the year each wind speed blows was calculated. Table 1 below shows the speed of the wind and the time of the year in hours this particular speed is blowing at 30 meters height. The total number of hours for all the wind speeds sums up to mph Hours/year 8760 hours which is exactly the number of hours in one full year. 0 518.28 1 329.32 After finding the wind speed measurements, the challenge was to calculate how much electrical energy capability such a site holds. For 2 297.67 that, many factors of wind were introduced; roughness length, shear, 3 396.17 Betz limit, density, elevation, height and many others that are not 4 530.97 directly related to the wind. To fully understand the final numbers 5 675.85 accompanied with these measurements, a simple yet clear explanation 6 721.2 of some of the factors that had a significant influence on the calculations 7 703.77 will be presented. 8 703.97 9 647.04 Table 1: Wind Bins Sample 10 559.17 Wind Shear: 11 464.46 The fact that wind speed decreases when moving closer to ground level 12 400.73 is often called wind shear; more height means faster wind. This factor 13 358.07 was introduced to the wind calculations because the wind measurements 14 308.8 15 246.45 16 216.99 6 17 176.57 18 128.27 19 98.291 20 74.691 available were at 30 meters height. The wind shear formula presented below provides wind speed at any desired height v = vref * ln(z/z0 )/(ln(z ref /z0 )) ...(equation1) v = wind speed at height z above ground level. vref = reference speed; known wind speed at height z ref . ln = the natural logarithm function. z = height above ground level for the desired velocity, v z0 = roughness length (explained in the next section) z ref = reference height; known height at the exact wind speed vref assuming z = 70 meters z ref = 30 meters z0 = 0.1 v/vref = ln(z/z0 )/(ln(z ref /z0 )) = ln(70/0.1 )/(ln(30 /0.1 )) this is equal to 1.149

Roughness Length: Is defined as the height above ground level where the wind speed is theoretically zero. This factor is important because it directly related to wind speed; the more roughness of earth surface there is, the more likely that wind will be slowed down. Since the particular site at Eagle Bluff is an open agricultural area without fences and hedgerows and very scattered buildings, a value of 0.1 for roughness length was estimated. This places the site at roughness class 2 (this is only an estimated value, a more accurate roughness length will be determined later). This value was used in equation one to determine wind speed at any desired height.

Betz Law (limit): Betz Law simply states that a wind turbine can only convert 59% of the wind kinetic energy of the wind into mechanical energy. Assuming that one can capture 100% of the wind striking the rotors of the wind turbine, the move-away air would have a zero speed (v2=0); rotors will not rotate. On the other hand, if we capture none of the wind (v1=0), rotors will not turn either. However, there is a way Figure 2: Wind capture http://www.windpower.org in-between the two extremes to capture the maximum possible amount of wind energy. Using Newton’s second law: 2 2 2 2 P = (1/2)*m*(v1 - v2 ) = (1/2)*( *A*(v 1 + v 2 )/2)*(v1 - v2 )…(equation2) P = the power extracted from the unit by the rotor

7 m = the mass of the air streaming through the rotor during one second = the density of the air (1.2 Kg/m3) A = the wind turbine blade area v1 = wind speed in front of rotor v2 = wind speed behind rotor

3 P0 = ( /2)* v 1 *A…(equation3) Where P0 is power from the wind through the same area with no rotor to block the wind Now Cp = P/ P0 = (1/2)*(1 - (v2 / v1 ) 2 ) (1 + (v2 / v1 ))…(equation4) Plotting Cp verses v2/v1 shows that Cp reaches its maximum value of 59%when the ratio v2/v1 is 1/3.

From here, it is obvious that the effectiveness of any wind turbine is measured by the power coefficient Cp which is defined as the power delivered by the rotor divided by the power in the wind striking the area swept by the rotor.

Figure 3: Betz Limit

Wind Turbines:

Wind turbines vary in sizes and shapes, one aspect of wind turbines that is very helpful in determining the electrical energy output of a wind turbine is the power curve. A power curve of a wind turbine determines how much power in Watts (W) is produced at a certain speed (mph or m/s). Extensive research has been done on wind turbines to describe the best turbine to meet Eagle Bluff needs; electrical and economic wise.

The shear coefficient is estimated from equation1 to be about 0.2. This coefficient provides a conversion between the annual generation of power at reference height to the annual generation of power at desired height G2 = G1*(z/z ref)^(shear coefficient) = G1*(z/z ref)^(0.2)…equation5

Wind turbines considered and their outputs Four generators have been considered and analyzed up to this time (Power curves for these turbines are provided in Appendix A). And more generators will also be considered in the future to widen the range of possibilities and choices in which Eagle Bluff could choose. The four wind turbines considered are 1. Fuhrlander 250kW 30m rotor 2. Vestas 660kW 47m rotor 3. Micon 750kW 48m rotor 4. Mitsubishi 1000kW 56m rotor

8 Using the power curves provided in Appendix A, the annual power generation for each wind turbine was calculated for 2001 and 2002 (calculations for 2003 will be conducted). The values initial obtained were actually at the reference height z ref = 30 meters. Using equation5 with the estimated shear coefficient of 0.2, the desired output was calculated at the desired height z = 70 meters. The annual kWh generations for years 2001 and 2002 are presented in the table below

Table 2: Wind Turbine generations for 2001&2002 2 Fuhrlander 250kW Vestas 660kW Micon 750kW 48m Mitsubishi 1000kW 56m 30m rotor (kWh) 47m rotor (kWh) rotor (kWh) rotor (kWh) 2001 429,040 447,923 568,320 704,144 2002 566,472 612,812 758,594 952,708

Since a 250 kW wind turbine is actually less than the average instantaneous consumption of electricity at Eagle Bluff, two 250 kW wind turbines are considered. This step actually has a very important reliability advantage. In case one of the turbines should stop functioning, the second turbine would, the facility would still be getting half the initial power. This is a very important point that Eagle Bluff personal should consider.

Costs The prices of wind turbines have decreased by 80% in the past 20 years. And the wind market of production of energy increases by 30% each year. With the new regulations, the wind energy in growing so fast that is already making changes in the distribution of energy throughout the whole nation.

Prices of wind turbines vary in-relation to the power rating of each of them, the blades diameter and also the tower height. But the average cost of turbines is about $2000/kW. Adding installation costs and maintenance costs raises the price up to about $2250/kW. Operation costs of wind turbines are very low of about $0.01/kW (more detailed research on the costs will be conducted in the economic analysis next semester)

Disadvantages of wind turbines There are a few disadvantages accompanied with the wind turbines.  Neighbors don’t like them because they are noisy, the blades constantly make noise when rotating  They take a lot of land space to install, this is a major concern especially to farmers because they prefer to use that land space for agricultural purposes  Birds usually get killed when they fly into the rotating blades

9 Biothermal Biothermal is one of the many technologies that are being considered as an energy source for Eagle Bluff. As with all sources of energy, there are a number of factors that must be examined:  Fuel Source  Types of Technologies  Power Output  Installation Cost  Operating Cost  Equivalent Annual Cost

Each of these factors is briefly discussed below and the biothermal technology that is currently being considered for Eagle Bluff is presented.

Fuel Source Biothermal energy is energy that is obtained from biodegradable products. This technology covers a wide territory and includes a number of fuels:

 Wood  Switch grass  Rice hulls  Manure  Corn

These sources can be burned to obtain heat directly or the heat can be use to produce electricity by using a turbine. As discussed in technologies, some devices use some of the energy as direct heat and the rest produces electricity. This is system is used to increase total efficiency

Types of Technologies There is quite of variety of technologies that come under the heading of biothermal. Some systems burn the fuel source directly to produce heat while others gasify the fuel and then burn the gas to produce heat. Another method is used in the case of manure. The methane from the manure waste is collected, cleaned and burned. In all of these cases, the energy output is either used to directly produce heat or the heat is used to produce electricity. Under a co-generation system, both heat and electricity are collect and used from the output.

10 Power Output Biothermal generating units vary in size from a 5kW to 20MW. The larger units tend to be co-generation systems that act much like a typical coal plant; the burned fuel is used to operate a steam generator. Small generation units are often used to produce heat for room or a small building. As a result of some government sponsored studies, some generating units that produce 10kW to 30kW are being developed. Some of these units are gasifying fuel such as wood to produce heat. Currently there does not appear to be many technologies that produce electricity in the 100kW to 500kW range.

Costs There are a number of costs that must be examined when studying biothermal units. The technologies that produce electricity have an investment cost of $2,000 per kW. The annual operating and maintenance cost are estimated to be $.08 to $.12 per kW if fuel costs are not included. Combining investment costs and operational cost, an estimated equivalent annual cost of $.20 per kW is obtained. These are rough industry estimates and subject to the technology type and tax breaks.

Figure 4: BioMax generator

Technology Considered for Eagle Bluff Based on the discussed factors, the unit that is currently being examined which will help stratify Eagle Bluff’s needs is a 30kW BioMax generator produced by Community Power Corporation. This device is a self contained unit that gasifies wood to produce electricity. While the unit does not meet all of Eagle Bluffs peak demand, it will supply energy for the small buildings and a series of them can be used to produce more power. The BioMax system power output and cost currently follow the industry trend. However, as more units are produced these costs will come down.

11 Table 3: Biothermal costs and generation Biothermal Plan(assuming no fuel cost) Size(kW): 30 Lifetime (years): 30 Installation Cost: $60,000.00 Operation and Maintenance ($/kW) $0.085 Yearly kWh output 262800 Annual Cost (6% interest) $26,696.93 Cost ($/kWh) $0.19 (Cost if installation not considered($/kWh) $0.085

Solar Solar generation technology does not date way back like the other energy generation technologies. It has been in experimenting and developing phases since 1970’s. However it is just recently technological advancement in the field of solar power allowed more solar system usage than ever before. This trend is growing and solar systems are becoming more and more popular and widely available every year now.

Major obstacle to faster development of the solar energy production was and still is the cost of the equipment. This cost is rapidly decreasing, with increased efficiency and better standards that are in use in the solar systems today. However, solar energy is still not able to seriously compete with cost and amount of conventional power produced from hydro, coal or nuclear power plants. Nonetheless, solar power is the power of the future, with constantly increasing efficiency, generating capacity and rapidly decreasing costs.

Solar energy is widely used in the nature for a long time. Plants use it for the process of photosynthesis; some of the animal species use it for the managing body temperature. It is a natural way of providing light to earth.

Idea behind the conversion of the energy from the sun to the electricity is simple one. Light waves from the sun are captured by solar panels where electric current is produced. Process is as follows:

Light comes in the form waves from the sun to the earth. Waves are constructed out of the tiny particles, called photons. Since they are moving in the waves and traveling towards earth, photons carry kinetic energy and when they hit the solar panels they transfer their energy to the valance electrons. Energy absorbed by the electrons make them to move and soon after, valance electrons are leaving their positions, creating flow of the current.

However, size wise, a photon is much smaller than an electron. Therefore, a much larger number of photons is needed to move the electron from its valance position. Simplified, this means that the panel needs to be in good sunlight and angle of the impact needs to be as close to the ninety degrees as possible for the best efficiency. If there is no sun light, during night or cloudy day, there will be no electricity produced from solar system.

12 Figure 5: Typical solar roof design

The solar panel position is very important. Good sun tracking monitor that positions panel towards the sun all the time greatly improves efficiency, but this device also adds to the price. A solar panel that has been positioned at 15 degrees inclined towards south by latitude in the fixed position will produce as much as 30% more energy than the horizontally flat fixed panel and about 20% less than the panel with a sun tracking device.

Installation of such additional devices such as sun tracking device do increase the efficiency and capacity of produced energy, but they also add to the price and the complexity of the system. The economic wisdom of installing a sun tracking device will be determined by comparing cost of device over the energy gained with it over life time of the system. However, complexity of the system is more important aspect. Fixed systems without tracking devices are usually more dependable and maintenance free. They can withstand greater storms and winds up to 120 miles per hour. Therefore, almost all of the systems installed today are fixed horizontal systems with certain degree of inclination. Angle of inclination will depend on the geographical position. At the equator there will be no angle and plate should be absolutely flat, which makes exactly 90 degrees, and best efficiency.

Currently produced in the solar panel is the direct current, and to be used in the home, for example, it needs to be converted to the alternating current. Inverter does this, which is the next component in the solar system. There are different kinds of inverters offered on the market today and they range in the price, relative to its size, capacity and efficiency. Size of the inverter is determined by the amount of the energy that is produced by the solar panels. If the panels are not able to produce rated value of the inverter, it is waste of money to buy bigger inverter. Bigger area needs to be covered by solar panels or their inclination needs to be adjusted. Efficiency of the inverter is very important since not much energy is produced by solar panels and it needs to be conserved as much as possible.

13 However, sun does not shine 24 hours a day. Depending on the part of the year, location, sun radiation and cloud index, approximations of solar energy can be made. During a night or cloudy days, solar panels do not output any energy. To sustain the needs, one more component is necessary in the solar system. That component is a battery, and not just one, banks of the batteries. Again, depending on the size of the solar system, appropriate size of the battery bank can be determined.

Figure 6: Components of the solar electric system.

Battery banks add extra cost to the already expensive system. They also add complexity and maintenance cost over the period of time. This option is not absolutely necessary, but is preferable to collect any excess energy produced by the solar panels during a day when usage is not big and production exceeds the demand. If electrical power is not used instantly, it is lost. This process of matching generation with demand is a load balance. During a night and clouds there is no energy produced. By installing battery banks, overall reliability of the system and operational time are greatly improved and any excess energy produced can be used in time of need, such as during a night or longer periods of the cloudy days.

By adding all of the necessary components, system greatly suffers on the efficiency side. It is important to state that in recent years advance of technology made solar systems possible to at least effectively use, but still, overall efficiency of the system is somewhere in the neighborhood of 10-15 %. This is constantly improving but it is still low to be adequately competitive with other alternative or conventional sources.

However, no matter how much system is effective and how much it can save, one thing is important. It is absolutely necessary to conserve energy. It is up to us, consumers, to use energy wisely and not waste it. Installation of the energy efficient loads is one way to conserve. Use natural gas heating instead if electric heating. Do not use electric heating

14 and other heavy motor loads at the same time. Improve lightning efficiency, by using more efficient neon lamps instead of conventional light bulbs.

In recent years awareness of the global warming prompted development of the alternative sources in U.S. Now there are loans and certain government subsidizes to help and ease the cost of the solar power. Over a million households around the U.S have installed solar systems on their roofs and that number is growing every day. Due to deregulation, power companies are obligated to by any excess energy produced form alternative sources, back to the grid.

Still with all of the advancement, solar energy is still most the expensive. Cost of electric energy produced by the solar system is around 25 cents per kilo Watt-hour which is about 3 times higher than the cost for conventional energy on national average. Of course this is installation cost divided by the expectancy of life of the solar system. Maintenance and running costs are almost zero, but initial investments are usually higher that average total return over lifetime of the system which is usually around 20-25 years.

Installation cost is about 8-12 dollars per Watt, which is 8000-12000 per kWh. Government subsidizes for about 2-4 dollars per Watt on the installation cost but still even with this help, for the decent 2.5 kW system installed in the home ballpark of $20,000 needs to be devoted. System as this one installed in the Midwest, for example, will save around 300 dollars per year in the energy cost. It is easy to see that in 20 years, solar system is not even able to pay for itself.

However, solar energy is a way of investing into the future. It is good to have system like this in case of power outage. With battery banks it makes truly remarkable back-up system in case of emergency and it generates certain revenues.

It is more than evident that solar energy is the energy way of the future. Its impact that is already done may not be so obvious, but people do depend on this kind of power. Cell phones, GPS, satellite television is transmitted over satellites. However, satellites that orbit around earth and are powered by the solar energy, because it is the best solution for the situation. It is secure and constant source of the energy as long as the full view of the sun is possible.

15

Figure 7: Solar Application

Finding and implementing the ideas for the alternative energy sources for the Eagle Bluff learning center in Minnesota, solar energy was one of the options. However, by studying the load curve and average usage it become obvious that solar energy regarding for the moment its cost, will not play any vital role in the energy needs of the learning center. Wind and bio-thermal will have impact on the bills, and solar would do almost not noticeable impact.

In the southern Minnesota sun radiation index is on yearly average about 4kWh/m^2/day, taking that national average is about 6-7kWh/m^2/day, and in southern parts of U.S is even close to 10kWh/m^2/day. This means that solar energy in this part of the country is not very applicable, but it is possible. Cloud index is also above national. This means less sunny days than on the national average. Winters are longer farther north from the equator, the incident angle is getting smaller than 90 degrees which added to already low efficiency of the system, it makes clear why there is not many solar panels on the Midwest roofs. All of those factors combined limit possibilities for the solar generation in that area, and initial costs prevents any bigger developments.

However, solar energy generation is not entirely impossible at the Eagle Bluff learning center site. As the mater of fact, there would be even better opportunity by displaying this system as a learning objective than in generation purposes. Whole site would benefit tremendously from the impact that students and teachers would have as the display of value for the renewable energy. This would ignite students to think appreciate and conserve energy. It would also increase awareness to the students of how hard is to produce renewable energy.

Eagle Bluff would benefit from additional power it gets but most of the credit would be ability to show and explain to the students something that other schools are not able to. After all this is the environmental learning center. Therefore, as a displaying purpose, solar system should be used at the Eagle Bluff.

16 One thing is certain, renewable alternative energy is here to stay. It is the energy of the future. Just the matter of time is before science and technology further increase capacity and efficiency of the solar energy conversion. Prices will most certainly rapidly to decrease just as they did in the past decades. All of those factors will contribute to fact that solar energy will take us to the limits of our universe and on the other side provide lightning and other needs in the future. It is clean, sufficient energy source. It does not add to the green house gasses and global warming. The best of all, after installation costs, it is absolutely free, with minimum close to zero maintenance requirements.

Fuel Cells A fuel cell operates at an efficiency of 40-50%, significantly higher than conventional power generators. A steam power plant is typically 35% efficient, while the efficiency of an internal combustion engine in most vehicles is only about 15%. The Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) type fuel cell would be best suited for Eagle bluff. PEM fuel cells are compact and produce a powerful electric current relative to their size. They operate at a lower temperature (less than 100 degrees Celsius or 212 degrees Fahrenheit) which allows for faster start-up and rapid response to changes in the demand for power (load following).

Figure 8: Fuel Cell

The core of a PEM fuel cell consists of a membrane electrode assembly (MEA), which is placed between two flow-field plates. The MEA consists of two electrodes, the anode and the cathode, which are each coated on one side with a thin catalyst layer and

17 separated by a proton exchange membrane (PEM). The flow-field plates direct hydrogen to the anode and oxygen (from air) to the cathode. When hydrogen reaches the catalyst layer, it separates into protons (hydrogen ions) and electrons.

The free electrons, produced at the anode, are conducted in the form of a usable electric current through the external circuit. At the cathode, oxygen from the air, electrons from the external circuit and protons combine to form water and heat. PEM fuel cells use a solid polymer membrane (a thin plastic film) as an electrolyte as opposed to a liquid or high-temperature ceramic.

Figure 9: A single fuel cell membrane electrode

Hydrogen Hydrogen flows through channels in flow field plates to the anode where the platinum catalyst promotes its separation into protons and electrons. Hydrogen can be supplied to a fuel cell directly or may be obtained from natural gas, methanol or petroleum using a fuel processor, which converts the hydrocarbons into hydrogen and carbon dioxide through a catalytic chemical reaction. This will obviously not be environmentally friendly, but at the same time will be more cost-effective than the current system in use.

Membrane Electrode Assembly Each membrane electrode assembly consists of two electrodes (the anode and the cathode) with a very thin layer of catalyst, bonded to either side of a proton exchange membrane.

Air Air flows through the channels in flow field plates to the cathode. The hydrogen protons that migrate through the proton exchange membrane combine with oxygen in air and electrons returning from the external circuit to form pure water and heat. The air stream also removes the water created as a by-product of the electrochemical process.

Flow Field Plates Gases (hydrogen and air) are supplied to the electrodes of the membrane electrode assembly through channels formed in flow field plates.

18 Fuel Cell Stack In order to obtain the desired amount of electrical power, individual fuel cells are combined to form a fuel cell stack. By increasing the number of cells in a stack will increase the voltage, while increasing the surface area of the cells increases the current.

Amount of fuel used will depend on how many times they go to the back-up system per year; this will depend on the wind speeds throughout the year.

Hydro The hydro system that would most fit the Eagle Bluff need is a run-of-the-river hydro project, in which a portion of a river's water is diverted to a channel, pipeline, or pressurized pipeline (penstock) that delivers it to a waterwheel or turbine. The moving water rotates the wheel or turbine, which spins a shaft. The motion of the shaft can be used for mechanical processes, such as pumping water, or it can be used to power an alternator or generator to generate electricity.

The amount of electricity a hydropower plant produces depends on two factors: How Far the Water Falls The farther the water falls, the more power it has. Generally, the distance that the water falls depends on the size of the dam. The higher the dam, the farther the water falls and the more power it has. Scientists would say that the power of falling water is "directly proportional" to the distance it falls. In other words, water falling twice as far, has twice the energy. Amount of Water Falling. More water falling through the turbine will produce more power. The amount of water available depends on the amount of water flowing down the river. Bigger rivers have more flowing water and can produce more energy. Power is also "directly proportional" to river flow. A river with twice the amount of flowing water as another river can produce twice as much energy. A simple diagram of the system will look like this

19 Figure 10: Typical Hydro Design

Figure 11: Water Fall of a Hydro Plant

20 In order to calculate the amount of electricity the Root River can produce they need to obtain the elevation drop (head) from the entry of the penstock to the exit. In addition we needed to find the average river flow at spot in the river or one closest upstream and extrapolate the data to that spot. The Root River data is shown in Appendix C. The equation that engineers use to calculate the power generated is shown as the following

Power = (Height of drop in river elevation) x (River Flow) x (Efficiency) / 11.8

Table 4: Hydro facts Power The electric power in kilowatts (one kilowatt equals 1,000 watts). Height of Dam The distance the water falls measured in feet. The amount of water flowing in the river measured in cubic feet per River Flow second. This data was extrapolated from Pilot Mound and found to be a yearly average of 162.5 cubic feet per second How well the turbine and generator convert the power of falling water into electric power. For older, poorly maintained hydro plants this might Efficiency be 60% (0.60) while for newer, well operated plants this might be as high as 90% (0.90). 11.8 Converts units of feet and seconds into kilowatts.

For the Root River in the Eagle Bluff area, assuming they buy a turbine and generator with an efficiency of 85%. Then the power for the river will be:

Average Power = (20 feet) x (162.5 cubic feet per second) x (0.85) / 11.8 = 234.11 KW

Peak Power = (20 feet) x (203.3 cubic feet per second) x (0.85) / 11.8 = 292.88 KW

The approximate costs involved with this project are as follows given the following assumptions: Capital cost $/kW: $1700-2300/kW cap. Operation cost/kWh: (0.4¢) Maintenance cost/kWh: 2 (0.3¢) Total cost/kWh: (2.4¢) Operating life: 50+ years

There is no water storage required because it is a run-of-the-river hydro plant

Microturbine

Microturbine generators can be divided in two general classes:

1) Recuperated microturbines, which recover the heat from the exhaust gas to boost the temperature of combustion and increase the efficiency,

21 2) Unrecuperated (or simple cycle) microturbines, which have lower efficiencies, but also lower capital costs.

The average microturbine costs $650-1000/kW Most microturbines are considered not environmentally friendly

The benefits of the Micro Turbine are:

Extreme low emissions The MicroTurbine has the lowest emissions of any non-catalyzed fossil fuel combustion system: the NOx emissions (on natural gas) are as low as 9 ppm (about 10 gr/GJ)

Virtually maintenance-free The MicroTurbine has only one rotating part, using innovative air bearing technology. So the unit does not need an oil system or a liquid coolant system, so reducing drastically the maintenance necessary.

Plug-and-play Using smart power electronics the unit is ready to run when you connect the fuel line and the power cables: no synchronization equipment, no electronic safety devices, no transformer are needed! The unit can also be remotely monitored and controlled.

Compact and light The Microturbine is about the size of a refrigerator and weighs roughly 500 kg.

Fuel diversity The Microturbine can handle a wide range of fuels: natural gas, biogas, flare gas, wet gas, propane, diesel, kerosene, etc.

Multi-pack capability The product range consists of a 30 kW unit and a 60 kW unit. But the MicroTurbine has a multi-pack capability (up to 10-pack units): so a 10-pack 30 kW system acts as one 300 kW unit.

Various applications Applications like electricity (grid connected or standalone), power quality, resource recovery (like waste gas to electricity), cogeneration, cooling, drying processes, direct CO2 fertilization, hybrid electric vehicles (like busses), marine (like yachts), rental, etc. With only one rotating part and no liquids for cooling or lubrication, the Microturbine requires very little maintenance: the unit basically requires service once every 8.000 hours, so at continuous operation once a year. At the first service interval it's only required to change-out the air and gas filter: this is a job of about 15 minutes. This makes the microturbine a reliable power source, requesting little attention and causing very limited down time.

22 Table 5: Microturbine facts Microturbine Overview Commercially Available Yes (Limited) Size Range 25 ñ 500 kW Fuel Natural gas, hydrogen, propane, diesel Efficiency 20-30% (Recuperated) Environmental Low (<9-50 ppm) NOx Other Features Cogen (50-80°C water) Commercial Status Small volume production, commercial prototypes now. Investment costs 650-1000 dollars/KW Operational costs .05-.08 KW/hr

Figure 12: Flow system for a microturbine

23

Figure 13: Microturbine system

E. Testing Requirements For this particular power system design, power simulation program such as Modelica. This would enable the visualization of the design before it is completed.

E. Recommendations After careful study of the previously described resources, it is recommend that a detailed plan be developed which uses wind turbines and biothermal generators in with a grid backup, to supply Eagle Bluff’s energy needs. All of the other investigated resources should be noted in the final report with an explanation concerning why they do not meet Eagle Bluff’s needs. There are number of reasons for this recommendation

Reasons for wind and biothermal

The following is the reason for wind and biothermal:

 Wind should be investigated further because initial calculations have shown that will be able to produce enough energy to meet Eagle Bluffs needs. Also investment costs are low compared to many of the other sources.

 Biothermal should be considered because a steady backup is needed so that energy can be supplied when the wind is not blowing. Also the investment costs are low when compared to the alternatives.

24 Reasons for Ending further development of the other sources The following are reasons for ending development of the other resources:

 Hydro is not politically feasible because the existing plan is an historical land mark and the water tunnel contains rare bats. The investment cost of developing a new site and tunnel are too high.

 Solar would be quite useful as a renewable demonstration but the investment cost needed to make solar a substantial energy sources is to high.

 Fuel ells require a high investment cost and they would only be useful for energy storage. This causes the cost per kW to be quite high.

 Micoturbines are highly efficient and would be useful as a replacement for Eagle Bluffs’ gas fired generator. However, the turbine must be discarded as a possible solution because it does not meet the criteria of being a renewable energy source.

F. Detailed Design A design must be developed that uses wind and biothermal as the sources of energy. In creating this design there are a number of points that must be considered:

 Current load  Current costs  Resources outputs  Resources costs

Each of these points will be examined and the results of a wind and biothermal combined plan will be shown. Also, the further developments needed to complete this plan will be discussed.

Current Load and Costs

Eagle Bluff’s billing data spanning from 11/10/01 to 8/10/03 were collect and studied so that an understanding of the facilities usage could be obtained. For each month, bills from four different meters were examined: the House’s meter, the Shiitake building’s meter, the Campus’s meter, and Schroeder building’s meter. These bills were examined for a number of values:  Base cost  Cost per kWh with the base cost

25  Cost per kWh without the base  Average kW usage, max usage  Average yearly cost.

From these usages and costs, averages where obtained which were used to estimate total yearly costs and usages. The billing information for each meter is summarized below. The complete billing information can be found in Appendix B.

Campus Building The Campus accounts for 80% of the total load and 71% of the yearly bill. Because of the campus’s high usage the utility Tri-County Electric Cooperative, has installed a demand meter. This meter is useful because it allowed the load factor of the Campus to be calculated. This load factor was calculated to be an average of 38.4%. The monthly campus load factor was applied the entire facility to obtain an estimate of Eagle Bluff’s peak usage.

Table 6: Campus electrical energy facts

Campus Average Base $/kW with Base $/kW w/o Base kW Peak kW Cost Cost Cost 50.52 229 $225.00 $0.053 $0.047

House Building The House accounts for 2.8% of the load and 4.2% of the yearly bill. Three of the bill examined had recalculated numbers. This meant the utility did not take a reading for that month but calculated it from previous year’s usages. In this situation, the usage was determined by using the calculated cost per kWh for the surrounding months and applying it to the utilities calculated cost. Because of the House’s low usage this estimate was satisfactory. The peak load of the house was obtained using the load factor obtained for the Campus.

Table 7: House electrical energy facts

House Average Estimate Base $/kW w/o Base kW Peak kW Cost $/kW with Base Cost Cost 1.74 9 $18.70 $0.089 $0.074

26 Shitake Building The Shitake accounts for 1.2% of the load and 2% of the yearly bill. Four of the bills where missing. For calculations involving these bills, a estimate of 500kWhs was used. This was based on the fact that Shitakes average monthly usage is 472kW with out these bills. As in the case of the House, the peak load was obtained using the Campus’s load factor.

Table 8: Shiitake electrical energy facts

Shiitake Average Estimated Base $/kW w/o Base kW Peak kW Cost $/kW with Base Cost Cost 0.65 4 $18.70 $0.116 $0.077

Schroeder Building Next to the Campus, Schroeder is the largest consumer of power. The Schroeder meter accounts for 16% of the load and 22.8% of the yearly bill. As in the case of the House and the Shitake, the peak demand was calculated using the Campus load factor.

Table 9: Schroeder electrical energy facts

Schroeder Average Estimated Base $/kW w/o Base kW Peak kW Cost $/kW with Base Cost Cost 9.97 49 $120.50 $0.086 $0.069

Total Facility Using the bills from each building and the calculations a set of values where obtained that would usage yearly usage estimates to be made.

Table 10: Entire Facility electrical energy facts

Entire Facility Est Avg Est Yearly Est Yearly Monthly Yearly Avg $/kW Avg $/kW kW Usage Usage (kWh) Cost Base cost Base cost w/o base with base 60 525600 $31,536.00 $382.90 $4,594.80 $0.052 $0.06

Resource Outputs and Costs The cost and power output capabilities of the chosen wind and biothermal generating resources determine what the cost of producing energy will be with the new design. The investment and operational costs along with the power outputs for the Fuhrlander 250kW

27 wind turbine and for the BioMax biothermal generator are discussed in the tables below. The investment costs include all the necessary utility interconnect costs.

Table 11: Wind generation costs

Wind Size (2-250kW turbines): 500 Lifetime (years): 20 Installation Cost: $1,000,000.00 Operation and Maintenance ($/kW) $0.01 Yearly kWh output 500,503 Annual Cost (6% interest) $77,653.94 Cost ($/kWh) $0.17

Table 12: Biothermal generation costs

Biothermal (assuming no fuel cost) Size(kW): 30 Lifetime (years): 30 Installation Cost: $60,000.00 Operation and Maintenance ($/kW) $0.085 Yearly kWh output 262800 Annual Cost (6% interest) $26,696.93 Cost ($/kWh) $0.19

Plan of Combining Resources

The following table demonstrates the expected outputs that will be gained from using a combination of wind turbines with a biothermal generator. These estimates will be revised as the details of the plan are further investigated. It appears that such a plan will have an investment cost of $1,060,000 which will be spread out over a 30 year period. The cost of the equipment will be offset by selling back the excess power at $.02 per kW. The income is low compared to the overall cost and will not play a large factor in reducing the cost.

Table 13: Combined generation costs Wind, Biothermal, and grid back up Excess Power Sold Back(kWh) 237,703 Selling income ($.02/kW) $4,754.06 Cost of being connect to the Utility $4,594.80 Total Annual Cost (includes investment costs) $104,191.62 Total Cost ($/ kW) $0.14

28 Discussion of Data The plan shows that Eagle Bluff will be paying more for power then their current costs. Eagle Bluff will be paying $0.14 per kW verse the current cost of $.06 per kW. The cost per kW does not truly reflect the total costs. The power produce with proposed plan is 763,303kW verses the expected usage of 525,600kW. However, the costs in the plan do not include government grants, tax breaks, and donations. The estimates show what the costs are if no aid is provided.

Future Developments Needed

The proposed plan for Eagle Bluff needs further development in several areas.

 Biothermal needs deeper research  Exact layout needs to be designed  Wind profile needs refining  Tax breaks and grants need researching  Net metering equipment  Grid tie protection

Currently the plan gives a generic view of a system that has both wind and biothermal as resources. Situations will occur where the wind does not blow or when the wind turbine is producing but not at a peak time. This will all affect the cost of the system. Net metering equipment needs to be looked along with protection equipment. All of these factors must be carefully considered along with an economic analysis, and then a determination can be made if the plan is cost effective.

Resource and Schedules

Resource Requirements The resources to be used on this report are the gas money spent to make trips up to Eagle Bluff. The other thing is the dollars spent on paperwork and copy materials. Weather charts will be provided from the Minnesota state department as well as the wind tests from the Eagle Bluff center itself. The Team has a budget of $150.00 that the team will not exceed in any circumstances. Table 14 and Table 15 show the estimated and actual personal effort requirements. Chart 13 and 14 show estimated and actual hours spent by each member of the group. The tasks in the Tables are as follows:

 Task 1 – Problem definition  Task 2 – Technical implementation and considerations  Task 3 – System design  Task 4 – End product demonstration  Task 5 – Project reporting Table 14: Personnel Effort Requirements

29 Personnel Effort Requirements Task Task Task Task Task Total Personnel Name 1 2 3 4 5 s Abou Ardate, Abdul Kader 12 35 36 14 20 117 Brokovic, Darko 11 34 37 15 20 117 Disenhouse, Daniel 8 37 36 16 25 122 Kirkpatrick, Lucas 9 38 35 15 30 127 Totals 40 144 144 60 95 473

Table 15: Revised Personnel Effort Requirements

Revised Personnel Effort Requirements Task Task Total Personnel Name Task 1 2 3 Task 4 Task 5 s Abou Ardate, Abdul Kader 12 57 36 14 20 139 Brokovic, Darko 11 49 37 15 20 132 Disenhouse, Daniel 10 54 36 16 25 141 Kirkpatrick, Lucas 12 60 35 15 30 152 Totals 45 220 144 60 95 564

Individual Estimated Time spent in Hours

117 127

Abdul Kader Abou Ardate Darko Brokovic Daniel Disenhouse Lucas Kirkpatrick

117 122

Figure 14: Chart of Original Effort

30 Actual Time Spent in hours on Tasks 1,2,5

74 83 Abdul Kader Abou Ardate Darko Brokovic Daniel Disenhouse Lucas Kirkpatrick

65 74

Figure 15: Chart of Updated Effort

Table 16: Estimated Financial Cost

Estimated Financial Cost Item W/O LABOR WITH LABOR

Material and Resources a. Poster & misc $65.00 $65.00 b. Trip Costs $100.00 $2,160.00 Subtotal $165.00 $2,225.00

Labor at $10.30 per hour (separate from trip labor) a. Abou Ardate, Abdul Kader $1,205.10 b. Brokovic, Darko $1,205.10 c. Disenhouse, Daniel $1,256.60 e. Kirkpatrick, Lucas $1,308.10 Subtotal $4,974.90 Total $165.00 $7,199.90

Table 17: Revised Financial Cost

31 Revised Estimated Financial Cost Item W/O LABOR WITH LABOR

Material and Resources a. Poster & misc $52.00 $52.00 b. Trip Costs $50.00 $1,080.00 Subtotal $102.00 $1,132.00

Labor at $10.30 per hour (separate from trip labor) a. Abou Ardate, Abdul Kader $1,431.70 b. Brokovic, Darko $1,359.60 c. Disenhouse, Daniel $1,452.30 e. Kirkpatrick, Lucas $1,565.60 Subtotal $5,809.20 Total $102.00 $6,941.20

Schedules The technology investigated consumed more than the expected time that was originally assigned, but the team was able to deliver results on schedule. It appears that the team is on task for next semester. However, it is thought that the detailed project design will take longer than expected.

32 Figure 16: Gant Chart of Projects and Deliverables

The breaks in the chart represent the following breaks in order Thanksgiving break, winter break, and spring break. During these times there will be no deliverables scheduled

Closure Material

33 Project Team Information The following is a list of the contact information for the client, advisors and team.

1. Client Information The following is the client’s contact information:

 Eagle Bluff Environmental Learning Center Executive Director: Jerome "Joe" Deden 1991 Brightsdale Road Route 2, Box 156A Lanesboro, MN 55949 Telephone number: 888-800-9558 (in Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin) 507-467-2437 Fax: (507) 467-3583 Email: director @eagle-bluff.org

2. Faculty Advisor Information The following is the advisor’s contact information:

 VENKATA S S Office Address: 2211 COOVER City/State: Ames, IA 50011 Office Phone: 515-294-3459 Home Phone: 515-292-3632 Fax: 515-294-3637 Email: [email protected]

 MCCALLEY JAMES D Office Address: 1113 COOVER City/State: Ames, IA 50011 Office Phone: 515-294-4844 Home Phone: 515-233-0280 Fax: 515-294-4263 Email: [email protected]

 DELLY OLIVEIRA Visiting Professor in Power Engineering Office Address: 1113 COOVER City/State: Ames, IA 50011 Office Phone: 515-294-2072 Home Phone: 515-292-6262 Fax: 515-294-8432

34 Email: [email protected]

3. Student Team Information The following is the team’s contact information:

 ABOU-ARDATE ABDUL KADER F Major: Electrical Engineering Univ Address: 102 OAK BLVD #308 City/State: HUXLEY IA 50124 Phone: 515-460-0857 Email: [email protected]

 BORKOVIC DARKO Major: Electrical Engineering Univ Address: 3730 SKYLINE CIRCLE City/State: DES MOINES IA 50310 Phone: 515-277-0383 Email: [email protected]

 DISENHOUSE DANIEL MARK Major: Electrical Engineering Univ Address: 402 N MAIN ST BOX 185 City/State: ROLAND IA 50236 Phone: 515-388-4109 Email: [email protected]

 KIRKPATRICK LUCAS J Major: Electrical Engineering Univ Address: 1316 South Duff Trailer 11 City/State: AMES IA 50010 Phone: 712-420-1195 Email: [email protected]

35 Closing Summary

While renewable energy is important and must be developed, it is highly expensive. However, with grants and tax breaks, this cost may be brought down to a cost that competes with local utilities’ selling price. This design will be further investigated and developed because it is compatible with Eagle Bluff’s environmental needs and also has the potential to reduce the dependence on the grid. These conclusions were reached after careful research of various renewable technologies.

36 References

A. Hunter Fanney, Kenneth R. Henderson and Eric R. Weise. “Measured 35kW system performance”, 2003

American Wind Energy Association.

Arthur R. Bergen and Vijay Vittal. Power Systems Analysis. Prentice Hall: 1986, 2000.

Ballard Power Systems

Community Power Cooperation 11/18/03.

EE 303 Course Notes. Iowa State University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Spring 2002.

Element 1 power systems

Energy Research Center

Geveke Power Systems

How A Hydroelectric Project Can Affect A River. Foundation for water and Energy Education.

Inside Wind Turbines

Isolation index by geographical location

Jarod Smeenk ISU Researcher. Personal Interview. 10/16/03

Larry Flowers. Wind Energy: Technology, Markets, Wind Energy: Technology, Markets, Economics and Stakeholders, November 2003.

37 Links to solar related homepages

Wind turbines as distributed generation Energy. Wise News Issue 65, March 2000.

ME3 - Sustainable Minnesota - Wind Energy Information.

Michael A. Klemen. AWH-FAQ Perfect Turbine, 2001.

Microturbines. California Energy Commission

Minnesota Wind Sites.

Monthly Streamflow Statistics for Minnesota

National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

Prices on the costs and approximations of the costs for alternative energy sources

Solar energy and how it works

Solar radiation index by geographical location

Sunshine Sensor type BF3

Small Hydropower Systems, published in July 2001

Ted Kjos of Tri County Electric. Phone interview. 11/3/03

US Department of Energy. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. < http://www.eere.energy.gov/>

38 Wind Energy Manual.

Wind Energy Manual, Iowa Energy Center, 2000

Wind Powering America.

39 Appendix A – Wind Data

mph kW Fuhrlaender 250 kW Wind Turbine Power Curve 0.0 0.0 Rotor: 30 Meters 1.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 350.0 6.0 0.5 300.0 7.0 2.1 W k 8.0 4.8 d 250.0 e

9.0 8.6 t a

10.0 16.8 r 200.0 e

11.0 25.0 n

e 150.0

12.0 29.5 G

13.0 34.1 r

e 100.0

14.0 43.7 w o 50.0

15.0 54.6 P 16.0 67.7 0.0 17.0 82.3 18.0 97.5 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 19.0 113.9 Wind Speed mph 20.0 130.3 21.0 145.0 22.0 160.0 23.0 173.6 24.0 187.3 25.0 200.2 26.0 212.9 27.0 220.7 28.0 225.3 29.0 229.8 30.0 234.4 31.0 239.0 32.0 244.0 33.0 249.0 34.0 251.7 35.0 301.4 36.0 69.5 37.0 170.5 38.0 269.9 39.0 273.1 40.0 277.7 41.0 284.5 42.0 290.8 43.0 294.9 44.0 299.0 45.0 299.5 46.0 299.9 47.0 296.7 48.0 292.6 49.0 289.1 50.0 285.9

A1 mph kW Vestas 660 kW Wind Turbine Power Curve 0.0 0.0 Rotor: 47 Meters 1.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 700.0 4.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 600.0 6.0 0.0 W

7.0 0.1 k

500.0 ,

8.0 0.3 d e 9.0 3.6 t 400.0 a 10.0 19.7 r e

11.0 35.7 n

e 300.0 G

12.0 56.2 r

13.0 76.6 e 200.0 14.0 102.0 w o

15.0 128.6 P 100.0 16.0 159.2 17.0 192.4 0.0 18.0 227.7 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 19.0 265.9 20.0 304.0 Wind Speed, mph 21.0 346.3 22.0 387.9 23.0 427.9 24.0 467.9 25.0 503.1 26.0 537.1 27.0 565.5 28.0 590.2 29.0 610.6 30.0 624.7 31.0 637.5 32.0 644.7 33.0 652.0 34.0 654.3 35.0 656.8 36.0 657.7 37.0 658.6 38.0 659.5 39.0 660.0 40.0 660.0 41.0 660.0 42.0 660.0 43.0 660.0 44.0 660.0 45.0 660.0 46.0 660.0 47.0 660.0 48.0 660.0 49.0 660.0 50.0 660.0 mph kW Micron 750 kW Wind Turbine Power Curve 0.0 0.0 Rotor: 48 Meters 1.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 800.0 6.0 0.0 7.0 3.5 700.0

8.0 12.4 W

k 600.0 ,

9.0 22.6 d e

10.0 37.8 t 500.0 a 11.0 53.1 r e 400.0 12.0 73.2 n e

13.0 93.4 G

300.0 14.0 118.5 r e

15.0 144.8 w 200.0 o

16.0 179.7 P 17.0 220.2 100.0 18.0 263.6 0.0 19.0 311.2 20.0 358.7 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 21.0 410.8 Wind Speed,mph 22.0 462.2 23.0 508.7 24.0 555.1 25.0 592.1 26.0 626.7 27.0 655.7 28.0 681.1 29.0 702.4 30.0 717.6 31.0 731.2 32.0 738.4 33.0 745.5 34.0 747.5 35.0 750.5 36.0 748.0 37.0 745.6 38.0 741.9 39.0 737.5 40.0 732.7 41.0 727.3 42.0 722.0 43.0 716.9 44.0 711.9 45.0 707.1 46.0 702.4 47.0 698.8 48.0 695.6 49.0 693.9 50.0 693.2 mph kW Mitsubishi 1000 kW Wind Turbine Power Curve 0.0 0.0 Rotor: 56 Meters 1.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 1200.0 5.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 1000.0 7.0 4.2 W k 8.0 14.6 , d

e 800.0

9.0 26.2 t a

10.0 42.1 r e 600.0 11.0 58.0 n e

12.0 85.3 G

13.0 112.5 r 400.0 e

14.0 145.3 w o 200.0

15.0 179.4 P 16.0 224.4 17.0 276.6 0.0 18.0 333.1 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 19.0 395.8 20.0 458.5 Wind Speed,mph 21.0 527.3 22.0 595.0 23.0 664.5 24.0 734.1 25.0 793.8 26.0 851.1 27.0 901.8 28.0 948.2 29.0 980.4 30.0 991.3 31.0 1000.0 32.0 1000.0 33.0 1000.0 34.0 1000.0 35.0 1000.0 36.0 1000.0 37.0 1000.0 38.0 1000.0 39.0 1000.0 40.0 1000.0 41.0 1000.0 42.0 1000.0 43.0 1000.0 44.0 1000.0 45.0 1000.0 46.0 1000.0 47.0 1000.0 48.0 1000.0 49.0 1000.0 50.0 1000.0 Sample of Wind Speed Statistics: 7/4/2003 - 8/4/2003

WS30W Description mph Average 7.19 Max | Min 24.73 | 0.22

Minnesota Wind Sites Sample of Wind Speed Statistics: 1/1/2001 - 4/1/2001

WS30W Description mph Average 8.22 Max | Min 24.04 | 0.25

Minnesota Wind Sites

Appendix B – Load Data

B1 Appendix C – Hydro Data

The following table is monthly downstream monthly data used to get a yearly average upstream 1991 387 451 1,015 1,344 2,279 989 844 959 685 555 1,440 1,671 1992 770 692 2,140 2,062 1,179 844 785 640 885 655 1,079 767 1993 569 448 920 4,325 1,960 2,665 2,112 2,257 1,303 922 798 737 1994 602 740 1,321 1,271 1,100 857 773 1,082 726 798 657 471 1995 305 538 1,348 1,702 1,179 961 817 763 639 586 564 455 1996 439 697 1,700 849 627 1,260 685 498 439 416 475 484 1997 446 481 2,415 1,331 933 687 1,221 864 700 691 550 480 1998 461 982 1,129 1,482 870 1,584 1,589 1,061 710 793 897 631 1999 610 852 881 2,520 1,876 1,239 1,840 1,722 941 732 655 564 2000 492 856 798 601 1,403 4,389 2,658 987 760 90 year Mean of 414 501 1,395 1,201 845 948 834 667 576 521 520 435 monthly streamflows