Energy Conservation
As energy costs continue to rise, knowledge of energy efficient technologies and best practices are becoming more valuable. While these practices have slowly gained acceptance within the water and wastewater industries, increasingly strained budgets coupled with aging infrastructure make energy efficiency a feasible option to save money. Through desire and innovation our staff has kept the Authority on the cutting edge of energy efficient technologies. As eluded to in the history page of this website the Authority for the most part pioneered microturbine technology utilizing anaerobic digester off gases. In fact its pilot program was the first of its kind to be successful in North America. That 30 KW digester gas fired microturbine generator provided the Authority with yet another opportunity to apply current technology with exceptional pay back that proved to further reduce its increasing energy demands.

Upon completion of the Anaerobic Digestion Complex Refurbishment and Upgrade Project in the spring of 2007 the production of digester gases not only increased significantly, but their rate of generation was more stable and easier to predict. During 2008 it became apparent that the Authority should move from the microturbine Pilot Scale generation of electricity to Full Scale, as such a Co-Generation Project Technology Evaluation was undertaken.
Our evaluation focused on microturbine and internal combustion engine technologies. Equipment manufacturers of the above referenced technologies were provided with current operating data which defined annual digester gas production and digester gas properties. They were requested to select the size and quantity of their equipment with the ultimate goal of providing the maximum annual electrical energy and heat production as a function of available digester gas. Other pertinent data required to be provided by the equipment manufacturers included expected emission rates, capital cost of equipment including gas conditioning systems, noise, delivery time, and description of proposed factory protection plan and associated cost of plan.

Once all information was received from the equipment manufacturers, staff and consultants proceeded to conduct life cycle analyses for each of the responses received in the effort to identify the most cost effective technology for the Authority’s co-generation project. The life cycle analyses considered equipment capital cost, potential rebate amount, annual electrical and natural gas energy savings, and cost of the factory protection plan. The present value of all costs, rebate amount and energy savings was calculated over a nine 9 year timeframe (duration of a standard factory protection plan) at an interest rate of 3%. The technology having the highest net present value was deemed to be the most cost effective technology. Non-cost factors were also considered in the overall technology evaluation which included amount of excess gas required to be flared via the waste gas burners, emission rates, and noise. All pertinent data had been compiled and summarized in an “Evaluation Summary- Microturbines verses Internal Combustion Engines”.

As a result of that analysis the internal combustion engines proposed by Senergie (2 units at 140 Kw each) exhibited the highest present value and therefore were deemed to be the most cost effective technology for the Authority’s co-generation project. In addition, the proposed combined heat and power co-generation system proposed by Senergie utilizes all available digester gas for the production of electrical and heat energy and therefore will not require flaring of excess digester gas, satisfies the allowable emission rates, and easily met established noise criteria of 70dB (A) at a distance of 1 meter (3.3 feet) from the equipment. In fact at the assumed property line of the Authority (a distance of 25 feet from the co-generation equipment), the noise level at this distance reduces to 52 dB(A) which is equivalent to the noise produced by a window air conditioner unit.

Based upon the recommendation of staff the Authority once again decided to move forward with a significant capitol investment in an effort to reduce its dependency on third party energy providers, reduce its carbon footprint, and moreover insulate its User-base form upward spiraling and out of Authority control increases in energy cost.
By the spring of 2010 the project had been designed, publically bid, constructed. The system underwent start-up operations during February and was officially placed into service on March 1, 2010. The table below clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of the project.




POWER
POWER


TOTAL
PURCHASED
GENERATED
OFFSET OF
MONTHLY

KW
FROM JCP&L
BY SMRSA
3RD
COST
2010
DEMAND
KW
KW
DEPENDENCY
SAVINGS
MARCH
229,282
136,742
92,540
40.36%
14,806
APRIL
236,602
85,822
150,780
63.73%
25,633
MAY
228,824
103,875
124,949
54.60%
22,491
JUNE
230,748
96,337
134,411
58.25%
24,194
JULY
236,027
92,930
143,097
60.63%
25,757
AUG
236,316
97,798
138,518
58.62%
24,933
SEPT
215,444
99,693
115,751
53.73%
19,678
OCT
220,878
114,375
106,503
48.22%
18,106
NOV

210,149

102,679

107,470

51.14%

18,270
DEC

235,934
121,612

114,322

48.46%

18,292
2011










JAN

228,978
115,086

113,892

49.74%

19,362
FEB

215,255

112,482

102,773

47.74%

16,444
MARCH
228,911
106,226
122,685
53.60%
19,630
APRIL

150,661
60,720
89,941
59.70%
15,290
MAY

243,414
108,098

135,316

55.59%

21,651
JUNE

221,422
100,087
121,335
54.80%
19,414
JULY
240,833
96,658
144,175
59.87%
23,068
AUG
211,497
94,907
116,590
55.13%
18,654
SEPT
225,960
118,878
107,082
47.39%
17,133
OCT
214,012
128,802
85,210
39.82%
12,782
NOV
209,367
108,825
100,542
48.02%
16,087
DEC
218,827
122,738
96,089
43.91%
14,413
2012









JAN
234,611
153,167
81,444
34.71%
12,217
FEB
197,550
120,183
77,367
39.16%
11,605
MAR
208,303
101,983
106,320
51.04%
15,948
APRIL
204,157
102,411
101,746
49.84%
15,262
MAY
239,647
122,310
117,337
48.96%
17,601
JUNE
202,976
98,646
104,330
51.40%
15,650
JULY
188,894
107,703
81,191
42.98%
12,179
AUG
196,160
127,417
68,743
35.04%
9,624
SEPT
158,038
104,110
53,928
34.12%
6,471
OCT
186,397
88,647
97,750
52.44%
11,730
NOV
200,044
131,216
68,828
34.41%
8,259
DEC
221,682
124,167
97,515
43.99%
10,727
2013









JAN
235,250
146,289
88,961
37.82%
9,786
FEB
187,291
129,746
57,545
30.72%
6,330
MARCH
193,579
136,861
56.718
29.30%
6,239
APRIL
194,282
113,464
80,818
41.60%
9,698
MAY
215,240
99,169
116,071
53.93%
13,929
JUNE
93,726
97,542
-3,816
-4.07%
-458
JULY
235,566
126,304
109,262
46.38%
12,019
AUG
208,885
103,586
105,299
50.41%
11,583
SEPT

217,799

105,980

111,819

51.34%

11,182
OCT

203,993

99,800

104,193

51.08%

12,503
NOV

205,679

109,117

96,562

46.95%

N/A
DEC

218,573

132,311

86,262

39.47%

9,489
2014










JAN

217,992

123,642

94,350

43.28%

10,379
FEB

204,030

134,525

69,505

34.07%

7,646
MAR

166,126

88,532

77,594

46.71%

4,656
APR

190,896

124,294

66,602

34.89%

7,326
MAY

203,729

81,441

122,288

60.02%

14,675
JUNE

200,369

68,427

131,942

65.85%

15,833
JULY

212,253

66,629

145,624

68.61%

17,475
AUG

213,883

78,758

135,125

63.18%

16,215
SEPT

191,964

79,542

112,422

58.56%

14,615
OCT

190,183

84,847

105,336

55.39%

12,640
NOV

199,351

96,559

102,792

51.56%

12,335
DEC

220,213

132,704

87,509

39.74%

9,626
2015










JAN

224,126

135,481

88,645

39.55%

9,751
FEB

202,760

132,655

70,105

34.58%

7,712
MAR

214,362

134,142

80,220

37.42%

8,824
APR

189,225

79,958

109,267

57.74%

13,112
MAY

200,945

69,516

131,429

65.41%

15,771
JUNE

206,492

73,171

133,321

64.56%

15,999
JULY

218,512

75,547

142,965

65.43%

17,156
AUG

217,258

80,308

136,950

63.04%

16,434
SEPT

205,616

109,789

95,827

46.60%

11,499
OCT

198,509

96,675

101,834

51.30%

12,220
NOV

192,966

94,638

98,328

50.96%

12,783
DEC

194,008

74,725

119,283

61.48%

14,314
2016










JAN

196,423

93,342

103,081

52.48%

12,370
FEB

210,741

120,461

90,280

42.84%

10,834
MARCH

181,639

82,774

98,865

54.43%

11,864
APRIL

184,985

77,111

107,874

58.31%

12,945
MAY

187,080

68,942

118,138

63.15%

15,358
JUNE

202,083

68,171

133,912

66.27%

17,409
JULY










AUG










SEPT










OCT










NOV










DEC

































The Authority remains firmly committed to its energy conservation program, and has put in place the following Best Management Practices to insure it’s continued efforts into the future:

*  Benchmark it's energy
consumption to that of other similar facilities.

*
Performed continued assessments to identify best practices to save energy.

*  Established a capital improvement program to generate funds to implement energy-efficiency projects.

*  Appointed an energy advocate among facility staff to champion energy-efficiency projects.

*  Instituted a program to continuously monitor, review and assess energy consumption on a  monthly and yearly basis.

*  Developed and maintained communications with management to increase awareness of the value of energy management.