Biomass Boiler + CHP = 2010 headache?
Posted: Mon Dec 02, 2013 2:24 pm
Hi guys
We've just taken on a design from another consultant who only carried out a 2006 Part L analysis. It has a biomass boiler and CHP which is causing me problems because the two appear to be messing each other up under 2010.
I'm sure this design was fine under 2006 when the notional building stuck with using natural gas but, now that the 2010 notional building matches the actual building's biomass carbon factor, the addition of a CHP unit is a massive problem. Here's why:
The system heat source is a biomass fuel boiler in conjunction with gas CHP (boiler rank 1 after the CHP). Of course, the notional building switches to the biomass carbon factor and its heating emissions drop to almost zero. Meanwhile, my actual building is using a big chunk of CHP which is on a gas carbon factor. Since the generated power is woefully inadaquate to make up for the difference in carbon factors we are in the daft situation of getting more favourable results if we remove the biomass boiler completely OR remove the CHP.
In fact, we even get better results if we get rid of the CHP and the Biomass entirely rather than having them both together.
This appears to be a rather toxic combination under 2010. Thoughts, ideas?
CP
We've just taken on a design from another consultant who only carried out a 2006 Part L analysis. It has a biomass boiler and CHP which is causing me problems because the two appear to be messing each other up under 2010.
I'm sure this design was fine under 2006 when the notional building stuck with using natural gas but, now that the 2010 notional building matches the actual building's biomass carbon factor, the addition of a CHP unit is a massive problem. Here's why:
The system heat source is a biomass fuel boiler in conjunction with gas CHP (boiler rank 1 after the CHP). Of course, the notional building switches to the biomass carbon factor and its heating emissions drop to almost zero. Meanwhile, my actual building is using a big chunk of CHP which is on a gas carbon factor. Since the generated power is woefully inadaquate to make up for the difference in carbon factors we are in the daft situation of getting more favourable results if we remove the biomass boiler completely OR remove the CHP.
In fact, we even get better results if we get rid of the CHP and the Biomass entirely rather than having them both together.
This appears to be a rather toxic combination under 2010. Thoughts, ideas?
CP