See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/325273785

A simple methodology for capacity sizing of cogeneration and trigeneration

plants in hospitals: A case study for a university hospital

Article in Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy · September 2015

DOI: 10.1063/1.4930064

CITATIONS READS

12 1,639

3 authors:

Ahmet Teke Kasım Zor

Cukurova University Adana Alparslan Türkeş Science and Technology University
90 PUBLICATIONS 2,582 CITATIONS 28 PUBLICATIONS 243 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Oguzhan Timur
Cukurova University
16 PUBLICATIONS 302 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Kasım Zor on 21 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 JOURNAL OF RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 7, 053102 (2015)

A simple methodology for capacity sizing of cogeneration

and trigeneration plants in hospitals: A case study for a
university hospital
A. Teke,a) K. Zor, and O. Timur
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Çukurova University,
Adana 01330, Turkey
(Received 26 May 2015; accepted 21 August 2015; published online 2 September 2015)

Energy efficiency applications have great importance for facilities that utilize large
amount of electrical and heat energy. Cogeneration (so called Combined Heat and
Power; abbreviated as CHP) plants with gas engines are capable of generating both
electrical and heat energy simultaneously using a single fuel input. In recent years,
the realization of license exemption for facilities willing to produce electricity just
for their energy demands by ensuring the condition of 80% total efficiency,
low carbon emission of systems contain gas engines, rapid operation for
synchronization and shortness of payback periods make cogeneration and
trigeneration (so called Combined Cooling, Heat and Power; abbreviated as CCHP)
plants more popular. This paper (i) briefly reviews cogeneration and trigeneration
plants and their advantages, (ii) presents a novel methodology to determine the
optimal capacity ratings for the plants by using the energy consumption profile,
(iii) illustrates the calculation procedures including economic profit, thermal
efficiency, and electricity generation of the selected system, and (iv) suggests the
optimal capacity, plant placement and configuration for a medium-scale hospital.
The energy savings potential at the university hospital is estimated as 19.66% and
19.52% with the use of natural gas based cogeneration and trigeneration plant,
respectively. V C 2015 AIP Publishing LLC. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4930064]

I. INTRODUCTION
In order to reach a sustainable development in our society, it is crucial to improve energy
efficiency as one of the most effective means to alleviate resources depletion, energy depend-
ence, and pollution.1 In this context, industrial and social facilities are looking for new ways to
decrease their energy bills regarding to the depletion of fossil fuels and expensiveness of popu-
lar renewable energy technologies in recent years.2,3 Natural gas fuelled engine driven cogener-
ation plants provide simultaneous production of cheap electricity and heat energy using waste
heat recovery.4 In the past, there were several barriers against encouraging the use of natural
gas in Turkey, such as instability of natural gas prices and utilization of natural gas were
limited to certain regions. After natural gas pipelines have become widespread all over Turkey,
installation of cogeneration and trigeneration plants with higher energy efficiency ratings is
becoming very advantageous especially for hospitals. Natural gas is a fuel type with low carbon
emission and Turkey can be stated as a geographic bridge that connects eastern and western
natural gas pipelines due to its strategic location between the European Union and Asia.
Natural gas import of Turkey increased by 11% in 2014 compared to the previous year.5
According to Turkish Cogeneration and Clean Energy Technologies Association, the total
capacity of cogeneration plants is around 9 GW and Turkey’s total installed capacity with
respect to Turkish Electricity Transmission Company reached 70 550.7 MW by March 2015.

a)
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail: ahmetteke@cu.edu.tr.

1941-7012/2015/7(5)/053102/15/$30.00 7, 053102-1 C 2015 AIP Publishing LLC

V
053102-2 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

Considering the relationship between electricity generation by natural gas and total electricity
production, a ratio of 44.1% reveals between 1 June 2014 and 14 May 2015.6 By evaluating
these data, it is obvious that natural gas will keep on holding a strong position for future projec-
tions of energy in Turkey.7,8
For conventional systems in which electrical and heat energy is produced separately, total
system efficiency is 55.1%, but cogeneration and trigeneration plants with a gas engine, which
produces 2.145 MW h electrical energy per hour, have a total efficiency of 90.4% and 87.2%
individually.9–11 The major part of losses is the heat radiated from frame to air. The studies
continue to increase the current efficiency of system up to 96%. As shown in Fig. 1, electrical
efficiency of the cogeneration plant is demonstrated as 41.7% and heat efficiency of the plant is
stated as 48.7%.10 Similarly, electrical efficiency of the trigeneration plant is the same with the
cogeneration plant for winter, but in summer, heat efficiency of the trigeneration plant is 2.7%,
when aftercooler warm water is taken into account and cooling efficiency of a double-effect
absorption chiller which is fed by exhaust gas heat and jacket water heat is 42.8% higher.10–12
Trigeneration plant efficiency is lower than the cogeneration plant efficiency, because conver-
sion efficiency of double-effect absorption chiller is lower than the efficiencies of steam boiler
and jacket water heat exchanger.
Researches focused on energy efficiency, saving potentials, and energy management show
that the hospitals represent 6% of total energy consumption at the utility buildings sector.
Utility buildings are large space offices, shops, hotels, restaurants, educational establishments,
and health-care facilities. HVAC system is the single largest energy consumer in these types of
buildings. It accounts for almost 60% of total energy cost in a building.13 The hospital heating
systems use approximately 43% of the total energy consumption at the hospitals.14,15 The
consumed energy of the university hospital is approximately 40%–45% of campus energy con-
sumption. Various studies have been carried out on the cogeneration or trigeneration application
at the hospitals. The sizes of the facility and the control strategy have strong effects on the
cogeneration or trigeneration plant economy, revealing that the most important parameter is the
generated electricity.16
The reduction of primary energy consumption as well as reduction of operational costs
must be analyzed in detail. The energetic and economic benefits generated by cogeneration or
trigeneration plant depend on plant and user characteristics, plant layout, management strat-
egies, and economic variables. For this reason, a predictive analysis is needed to determine the
optimal configuration of the plant (i.e., engine size, plant configuration, management strategies,
absorption chiller type, and number of engines) that approaches the best energetic solution
while ensuring a reasonable profit.17
In the literature, Gamou et al. considered uncertain energy demands as continuous random
variables for optimal unit sizing of cogeneration systems.18 Cardona and Piacentino proposed a
general and innovative criterion for sizing a trigeneration plant in Mediterranean areas.19
Beihong and Weiding suggested and optimal sizing method for cogeneration plants.20 Biezma
and San Cristobal applied different techniques to the selection between two combined heat and
power (CHP) units for a tire factory in Spain.21 Oh et al. recommended optimal planning and
economic evaluation of cogeneration system based on the annual cost method.22 Sanaye et al.

FIG. 1. Demonstration of inputs, outputs, and overall efficiencies of conventional generation, cogeneration, and trigenera-
tion plants.
053102-3 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

studied at off-design point in the selection of a CHP system.23 Kavvadias et al. researched for
the design of a Combined Cooling, Heat and Power (CCHP) system sizing, operation strategy
selection, and parametric analysis.24 Cho et al. presented a simple approach for CHP unit
capacity for high-heat power ratio buildings without selling excess electricity to the grid.25
Gimelli and Muccillo expressed optimization criteria for cogeneration systems by multi-
objective approach and application in an hospital facility.17 Yun et al. proposed a power gener-
ation and heat recovery model for reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines.26 Bracco et al.
developed an economic and environmental optimization model for the design and the operation
of a combined heat and power distributed generation system in an urban area.27 Alcan et al.
presented fuzzy multicriteria selection among cogeneration systems through a real case applica-
tion.28 Facci et al. investigated the optimization of combined heat power and cooling systems
operation strategy using dynamic programming.29 Costa and Fichera created a mixed-integer
linear programming model for the evaluation of CHP system in the context of hospital struc-
tures.30 Rossi et al. proposed artificial neural networks and physical modeling for determination
of baseline consumption of CHP plants.31 Kritsanawonghong et al. focused on the feasibility
study of optimal sizing of micro-cogeneration system for convenience stores in Bangkok.32 A
simple sizing method based on load duration curve for combined heat and power units was sug-
gested by Cho and Lee.33 Ghadimi et al. investigated the optimal selection of on-site CHP sys-
tems through integrated sizing and operational strategy.34 Arcuri et al. presented a mixed inte-
ger non-linear programming model for optimal design of a small size trigeneration plant in
civil users.35 Finally, Salata et al. proposed a method for energy optimization with reliability
analysis of a trigeneration and teleheating system on urban scale through a case study.36
This study attempts to propose a novel methodology in determining the optimal capacity
rating through a multi-objective approach presenting a case study to show how to utilize the
maximum benefits of cogeneration or trigeneration plant in a university hospital. The selection
criteria, optimal structural design, economic profitability and feasibility of cogeneration or tri-
generation plant installations in hospitals by means of representative case studies are provided.
After this introductory section, the energy consumption profile of the university hospital is sum-
marized in Section II. The validation of proposed methodology for a real medium-scale hospital
is presented in Section III. The payback period calculations of cogeneration and trigeneration
plants are discussed in Sections IV and V, respectively. Finally, prominent results and sugges-
tions of the paper are discussed in the conclusion.

II. DEMANDS OF A UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL IN 2013

A University Hospital generally serves 7 days and 24 h, thus it has continuous demands to
supply electricity for surgery rooms, cooling for mortuaries, heating for laundries and kitchens,
etc. Facilities just like hospitals those have electrical, cooling, and heat energy demands simul-
taneously during an entire year. Cogeneration and trigeneration plants are very economical
owing to combined production comparing with conventional power plants making separate pro-
duction. To determine the installed capacity of cogeneration or trigeneration plant, it is vital to
identify geographical characteristics of location such as altitude, temperature, humidity, and the
demands such as electrical, cooling, steam, hot oil, hot water, or warm water of a facility by
evaluating at least 1 yr retrospective consumption data of that facility.37 University Hospital is
located in Adana with an altitude of approximately 141 m as shown in Table I. For this altitude
level, it is unexpected to trouble power duration in a reciprocating gas engine belongs to an in-
stalled cogeneration or trigeneration plant. In Adana, the engine can properly operate in winters,

TABLE I. Location of the University Hospital.

Altitude Relative humidity Maximum Minimum

Location (m) (R/H) temperature (! C) temperature (! C)

University Hospital, Adana, Turkey 141 Above 50% 44.0 " 8.1
053102-4 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

but it is too hard to cool down the engine in summer months. In order to prevent from such a
failure, it is recommended to build up a strong system for engine cooling.
Electricity consumption graphs of the hospital in 2013 with respect to tariff periods
(Daytime period is between 06:00 and 17:00, primetime period is between 17:00 and 22:00,
and nighttime period is between 22:00 and 06:00, respectively.) are illustrated in Figs. 2–4.
According to the local electrical distribution authority, without taxes and additional fees,
unit price of the daytime period is 0.102 $/kW h, the primetime period is 0.167 $/kW h, and
the nighttime period is 0.053 $/kW h (US Dollar/Turkish Lira Exchange Rate is 2.2258 at
15:30 on 21 November 2014 determined by Republic of Turkey Central Bank). Average of
given tariff prices for 24 h operation and 16 h operation (nighttime is not considered) including
taxes and additional fees are approximately calculated as 0.121 $/kW h and 0.145 $/kW h,
respectively. It is important to show that electricity generation by a cogeneration or trigenera-
tion plant using natural gas is more feasible than buying electricity from local electrical distri-
bution companies in daytime and primetime periods. Therefore, unit price of electricity produc-
tion in a cogeneration or trigeneration plant can be calculated as given below

pE ¼ ðCF % pNG Þ=Pnet ; (1)

FIG. 2. Daytime electricity consumption of hospital during 12 months.

FIG. 3. Primetime electricity consumption of hospital during 12 months.

053102-5 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

FIG. 4. Nighttime electricity consumption of hospital during 12 months.

where pE is unit price of electricity generation by natural gas per kW h, CF is engine fuel
consumption per hour, pNG is unit price of natural gas, and Pnet is the net electrical output
power for 1 h, respectively. For instance, if a cogeneration or trigeneration plant with an energy
production of 2145 kW h per hour is considered, fuel consumption of gas engine is 513.9 m3/h,
unit price of natural gas in Adana region with taxes is 0.393 $/m3 and net electrical power
production for 1 h is 2090 kW (55 kW is reduced owing to energy consumption of auxiliary
equipment in cogeneration or trigeneration plant), then the unit price of electricity generation
by natural gas is 0.097 $/kW h. This unit price is lower than the tariff prices of the hospital
provided by local electrical distribution companies. Consequently, electricity generation in a
cogeneration or trigeneration plant by natural gas is more feasible for the hospital than buying
electricity from the grid. The obtained unit price for cogeneration or trigeneration plant also
mentions that buying electricity from the grid is more advantageous than producing electricity
by cogeneration or trigeneration plant at nights, hence nighttime tariff is approximately 0.053
$/kW h and indicates that it is not feasible to run cogeneration or trigeneration plant at night-
time periods.
When heat energy demands of the hospital are investigated, the hospital needs steam for
sterile storage, laundry, and kitchen with a pressure of 4.5 bar and at least 1.5 ton/h during the
whole year as illustrated in Fig. 5.

FIG. 5. Steam demand of university hospital during 12 months.

053102-6 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

FIG. 6. Cooling demand of university hospital between May and November.

For cooling, the hospital has significant demands between May and November as shown in
Fig. 6. Thus, a trigeneration plant with a double-effect absorption chiller may be considered for
this hospital in order to obtain hot water between November and May, and cool water between
May and November.

III. VALIDATION OF PROPOSED METHODOLOGY: CASE FOR A REAL HOSPITAL

A stable operation for cogeneration or trigeneration plants should be provided by balancing
the cooling, heat and electrical energy production at the same time by selecting a capacity that
can satisfy the desired demands at the highest level as shown in Fig. 7. For the university
hospital, the methodology illustrated in Fig. 7 will be applied due to the current legislation in
Turkey. After the implementation of the methodology, selection criteria also contain cost of
electricity and fuel, cost of supplying and installing equipment, space requirement, and cost
analysis.41

FIG. 7. Flowchart of the proposed methodology.

053102-7 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

In the university hospital, the feasible period of the operation of cogeneration or trigenera-
tion plant contains daytime and primetime periods for cheaper electricity production. When the
electric demands of the university hospital are analysed, the hospital has minimum demands of
approximately 1.5 MW per hour in March and November. It is an undesirable condition for
reciprocating gas engines to operate below 50% of full load. Hence, the electric power capacity
of the suggested cogeneration or trigeneration plant should be less than or equal to 3 MW per
hour as given in the below formula:39

CE ' PAVGðminÞ =LðminÞ : (2)

In order to determine the optimal capacity rating with respect to steam demands of the hos-
pital, the minimum steam demand should be considered and that is 1.5 ton/h for the hospital in
August. A reciprocating gas engine with a capacity of 2 MW per hour electric power generation
can provide 1.5 ton/h at a pressure of 4.5 bar. Therefore, the heat capacity of the suggested
cogeneration plant should be equal to or greater than 2 MW per hour as given in the below
formula:39

CH ( PSteamðcorrÞ : (3)

For installing a trigeneration plant, it is important to determine the cooling capacity of

absorption chillers by evaluating cooling demands of the hospital. When the cooling demand is
analysed, the minimum cooling demand during summer period is about 2 MWt per hour in
May which can be obtained in a double-effect absorption chiller driven by a reciprocating
engine should have an electric power production capacity that is equal to or greater than 2 MW
per hour as given in the below formula:39

cC ( PCoolingðCorrÞ : (4)

In determining the optimal capacity ratings for cogeneration and trigeneration plants,
MTU Onsite Energy Natural Gas Engine (see Table II) with an electricity generation
capacity of 2.145 MW per hour was selected for both plants with respect to the following
equations, respectively:39

cOptðCHPÞ ¼ cE \ cH ; (5)

cOptðCCHPÞ ¼ cE \ cC : (6)

Consequently, MTU Onsite Energy cogeneration or trigeneration plant with selected

capacity rating operates at full load or near full load during an entire year and the hospital con-
sumes produced cooling, heat, and electricity totally.

TABLE II. The features of MTU20V4000L63 gas engine generator. Below rating values are valid if the engine is running
at rated load.

Gas engine-generator set with heat recovery

system compatible for cogeneration and
trigeneration plants MTU20V4000L63

Electrical output power (kW) 2145

Thermal output of exhaust (kW) 1204
Thermal output of jacket water (kW) 1155
Thermal output of aftercooler (kW) 140
Cooling output of double-effect absorption 880
chiller corresponding to electric chiller (kW)
Fuel consumption (m3/h) 513.9
053102-8 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

IV. SUGGESTED COGENERATION PLANT FOR THE HOSPITAL

Planned cogeneration scenario is demonstrated in Fig. 8. It is also critical to place the
cogeneration system a place that is close to the heat centers and the high voltage side of bus
bars. Here in this hospital, there is an available site to establish cogeneration system very close
to both heat collectors of the hospital and medium voltage level bus bars as shown in Fig. 9.
The red lines indicate cogeneration pipelines and the blue lines indicate trigeneration pipelines.
New cogeneration plant is planned to be settled inside of the existing heat center of the hospi-
tal. For this situation, pipeline installation cost will be decreased automatically. All the current
pipelines can be used in the new cogeneration plant of the hospital. An efficient cogeneration
plant contains engine-generator set, steam boiler, 0.4 kV/34.5 kV step-up transformer, and a
container can be settled at the hospital.

A. Feasibility and profitability study for suggested cogeneration plant

The synthesis of optimization of cogeneration plant implies searching for design and
operation parameters that minimize or maximize an objective function, such as annual economic
cost, environmental load, or thermodynamic efficiency under a given set of constraints.38 A
feasibility study is performed to calculate cost saving and investment costs for planned cogenera-
tion plant.

1. Savings in suggested cogeneration plant

a. Electrical savings. Generating electricity by cogeneration plant reduces electrical energy
consumption from the grid, thus not buying expensive electricity from the grid is a significant
saving. Electrical savings calculation is indicated below:

ES ¼ OH % P % pUð16Þ % UF; (7)

where ES is electrical savings for 1 yr, OH is operating hour of cogeneration plant during a
year, P is electrical output power produced for 1 h, pU(16) is the unit price of grid electricity for
16 h use in daytime and primetime periods (cogeneration plant will not operate in nighttime)
and UF is utilization factor which is the ratio of average electric power production for an hour
during an average day and total electric power at full load (in order to calculate hourly chang-
ing part loads). If we consider that cogeneration plant will operate 16 h per day (considering
5400 h per year excluding failures and maintenances), produce 2145 kW electrical output power
in an hour, utilization factor is 91.89% (average for a typical day is 1971 kW) and the unit price

FIG. 8. Cogeneration scenario of university hospital.

053102-9 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

FIG. 9. Schematic view of cogeneration and trigeneration plants.

of grid electricity for 16 h/day is 0.145 $/kW h, then electrical saving of cogeneration plant is
calculated as 1 543 325 $/yr.

b. Heat savings. Heat savings are steam savings, jacket water savings, and aftercooler
savings. Producing steam, hot water, and warm water by cogeneration plant reduces heat costs
of the hospital. Steam saving calculation is illustrated below:

SS ¼ ðOH % TP % pNG % UFÞ=ðLHV % gB Þ; (8)

where SS is the steam saving for 1 yr, TP is the thermal output power generated by exhaust
gas during 1 h, gB is the steam boiler efficiency, PNG is the unit price of natural gas, UF is the
utilization factor which is the ratio of average heat power production for an hour during an
average day and total heat power at full load for steam boiler (in order to calculate hourly
changing part loads), and LHV is the lower heating value. If we consider that cogeneration
053102-10 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

plant will operate 5400 ho per year, it can produce 1204 kWt thermal output power in an hour,
have a steam boiler efficiency of 80%, a utilization factor of 92.54% and lower heating value
of 10 kW h/m3, and unit price of natural gas is 0.393 $/m3, then steam saving of cogeneration
plant is calculated as 295 564 $/yr.
Jacket water saving calculation is stated below:

JWS ¼ ðOH % TP % pNG % UFÞ=ðLHV % gE Þ; (9)

where JWS is the jacket water saving for 1 yr, TP is the thermal output power of jacket water
during 1 h, gE is the jacket water exchanger efficiency. If we consider that cogeneration plant
will operate 5400 h per year, produce 1155 kWt thermal power in an hour, have a jacket water
exchanger efficiency of 80%, a utilization factor of 91.17% and lower heating value of 10 kW
h/m3, and unit price of natural gas is 0.393 $/m3, then jacket water saving of cogeneration plant
is calculated as 279 338 $/yr. Aftercooler saving calculation is calculated as given in the follow-
ing equation:

AS ¼ ðOH % TP % pNG % UFÞ=ðLHV % gE Þ; (10)

where AS is the aftercooler saving for 1 yr, TP is the thermal output power of aftercooler
during 1 h, gE is aftercooler exchanger efficiency. If we consider that cogeneration plant will
operate 5400 h per year, produce 140 kW thermal power in an hour, have an aftercooler
exchanger efficiency of 80%, a utilization factor of 91.19% and lower heating value of 10 kW
h/m3, and unit price of natural gas is 0.393 $/m3, then aftercooler saving of cogeneration plant
is calculated as 33 866 $/yr. Total heat savings are resulted in the following equation:

THS ¼ SS þ JWS þ AS; (11)

where THS is total heat savings and summation of all heat related savings. Hence, for this case,
total heat saving is calculated as 608 768 $/yr.

2. Expenses in suggested cogeneration plant

a. Total fuel consumption. Total fuel consumption of the gas engine can be calculated as
given below:

CTF ¼ CF % OH % pNG % UF; (12)

where CTF is total fuel consumption. For 5400 operation hours, engine fuel consumption at full
load is 513.9 m3/h, unit price for natural gas is 0.393 $/m3, and UF is 92.26%, then total fuel
consumption is calculated as 1 006 186 $/yr.

b. Internal electrical consumption. Calculation of internal electrical consumption for auxiliary

equipment of cogeneration plant is indicated below:

CIE ¼ PAUX % OH % pUð16Þ % UF; (13)

where CIE is the internal electrical consumption for 1 yr, OH is the operating hour of cogenera-
tion plant during a year, PAUX is the electrical output power of auxiliary equipment for 1 h,
PU(16) is the unit price of grid electricity for 16 h use and utilization factor is 91.89%. If we
consider that cogeneration plant will operate 5400 h per year, auxiliary equipment consume 55
kW electrical power in an hour, the unit price of grid electricity for 16 h/day is 0.145 $/kW h,
then internal electrical consumption expense of cogeneration plant is calculated as 39 572 $/yr.

c. Service and spare part expenses. For cogeneration plants, service and spare part expenses
are considered as a single fee per operating hour. If cogeneration plant will operate 5400 h in a
053102-11 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

year, and if service and spare part expense is nearly 17 $/h for one engine-generator set, then
total expense is calculated as 91 800 $/yr.

d. Operator expenses. In this hospital, the cogeneration plant is planned to operate for 16 h
in two shifts by two different operators, and gross salary for each operator is 3600 $/month.
For 1 yr, total operator expense is calculated as 86 400 $/yr and total expenses (SOE) becomes
1 223 958 $/yr.

3. Payback calculation of suggested cogeneration plant

Total revenue can be calculated as shown in the following formula and therefore total reve-
nue is calculated as 928 135 $/yr for this plant:

TR ¼ ES þ THS " SOE: (14)

Planned cogeneration plant should consist of engine-generator set in a sound-isolated con-

tainer, heat recovery steam boiler and its mechanical piping, switchgear units for high voltage
synchronization by using step-up transformer, neutral resistor, and electrical cabling. For such
needs, an investment cost (CCP) of 1 250 000 $ is offered for cogeneration plant installation.42
Finally, payback time (TP) can be found illustrated below:

TP ¼ CCP =TR: (15)

Due to the total revenue founded above and offered price for the cogeneration plant the
payback time is calculated as 1.35 yr. A cogeneration plant with a steam boiler and electrically
synchronized from high voltage level would be a very sensible investment for the University
Hospital according to the above calculations.

V. SUGGESTED TRIGENERATION PLANT FOR THE HOSPITAL

When cooling demands of the hospital are analysed, it is seen that electric chiller units of
the hospital operate between May and November. Between November and May, hospital needs
hot water. A trigeneration plant with a double-effect absorption chiller unit satisfies the need of
this hospital during an entire year. From May to November, trigeneration plant will produce
cold water; from November to May, it will produce hot water. Planned trigeneration scenario is
demonstrated in Fig. 10. An efficient trigeneration system contains an engine-generator set, a
double-effect absorption chiller unit with cooling tower, a 0.4 kV/34.5 kV step-up transformer,
and a container can be settled at the hospital.

A. Feasibility of suggested trigeneration plant

A feasibility study has savings, expenses to calculate the payback period of the planned tri-
generation plant.

1. Savings in suggested trigeneration plant

a. Electrical savings. Generating electricity by trigeneration plant is the same with cogenera-
tion plant calculated in Sec. IV and will provide 1 543 325 $/yr electrical savings.

b. Cooling savings. Cool water production by absorption chiller unit reduces the utilization
of electric chiller units and this causes a saving in the energy bill. This cooling saving can be
formulated as

CS ¼ OH % PCH % pUð16Þ % UF; (16)

where CS is cooling saving, PCH is the correspondent electric chiller unit power of double-
effect absorption chiller unit. If trigeneration plant produces cold water 16 h/day from May to
053102-12 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

FIG. 10. Trigeneration scenario of university hospital.

November (2700 h/yr by excluding failures and maintenances), correspondent electric chiller
unit power of double-effect absorption chiller unit is 880 kW, the unit price of grid electricity
for 16 h/day is 0.145 $/kW h, and the utilization factor is 90%, then the cooling saving is
calculated as 310 068 $/yr.

c. Heat savings. Heat savings in trigeneration plant are exhaust-jacket water savings and
aftercooler savings. Producing hot water and warm water by trigeneration plant reduces heat
costs of the hospital. Exhaust-jacket water saving calculation is stated below:

EJWS ¼ ðOH % TP % pNG % UFÞ=ðLHV % gE Þ; (17)

where EJWS is the exhaust and jacket water saving for 1 yr, TP is the total thermal output
power of exhaust and jacket water during 1 h, gE is the exchanger efficiency. If we consider
that trigeneration plant will operate 2700 h per year (from November to May), produce
2050 kW thermal power in an hour, have an exchanger efficiency of 80%, a utilization factor of
91.17%, and lower heating value of 10 kW h/m3, and unit price of natural gas is 0.393 $/m3,
then exhaust-jacket water saving of trigeneration plant will be 247 897 $/yr.
Aftercooler saving calculation is the same with cogeneration plant calculated in Sec. IV
and will provide 33 866 $/yr. Total heat savings are resulted in the following equation:

THS ¼ EJWS þ AS; (18)

where THS is the total heat savings and summation of all heat related savings. Hence, for this
case, total heat saving is 281 763 $/yr.

2. Expenses in suggested trigeneration plant

a. Total fuel consumption. Total fuel consumption of the gas engine is the same with cogen-
eration plant calculated in Sec. IV and the expense is 1 006 186 $/yr.

b. Internal electrical consumption. Internal electrical consumption for auxiliary equipment of

trigeneration plant is calculated as in Eq. (13), where CIE is internal electrical consumption for
1 yr, OH is operating hour of trigeneration plant during a year, PAUX is electrical output power
of auxiliary equipment for 1 h, PU(16) is the unit price of grid electricity for 16 h use and
utilization factor is 91.89%. If we consider that trigeneration plant will operate 5400 h per year,
auxiliary equipment consume 70 kW electrical power in an hour, the unit price of grid
053102-13 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

electricity for 16 h/day is 0.145 $/kW h, then internal electrical consumption expense of trigen-
eration plant is calculated as 50 365 $/yr.

c. Service and spare part expenses. Service and spare part expense for trigeneration plant is
the same with cogeneration plant calculated in Sec. IV and that is 91 800 $/yr.

d. Operator expenses. Operator expense for trigeneration plant is the same with cogeneration
plant calculated in Sec. IV and that is 86 400 $/yr. As a consequence, sum of expenses (SOE)
will be 1 234 751 $/yr.

3. Payback calculation of suggested trigeneration plant

Total revenue can be calculated as shown in the following formula and therefore total
revenue will be 900 405 $/yr for this plant:

TR ¼ ES þ CS þ THS " SOE: (19)

Planned trigeneration plant should consist of an engine-generator set in a sound-isolated

container, a double-effect absorption chiller unit, cooling tower and extra piping, switchgear
units for high voltage synchronization by using step-up transformer, neutral resistor, and electri-
cal cabling. For such needs, a price (PCCHP) of 1 750 000 $ is offered for trigeneration plant
installation.42 Finally, payback time (TP) can be found illustrated below:

PCCHP
TP ¼ : (20)
TR

Due to the total revenue founded above and offered price for the trigeneration plant, the
payback time will be 1.94 yr. A trigeneration plant with double-effect absorption chiller
unit, cooling tower and electrically synchronized from the high voltage level can seem a very
sensible investment for the University Hospital according to the above calculations.

VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The paper assesses the economic and technical performances of cogeneration and trigenera-
tion plants which supply a university hospital. Total energy consumption of the University
Hospital for last 12 months is 4535.54 TOE (21 477 372 kW h electrical energy (1846.72 TOE)
and 2727 ton of fuel oil (2688.82 TOE)). The estimated energy saving is 891.72 TOE using
cogeneration plant and 885.32 TOE using trigeneration plant. As a result of the detailed analy-
sis on the existing system, approximately 19.66% energy saving potential is estimated
with cogeneration plant and 19.52% with trigeneration plant at the university hospital. In this
paper, energy saving potential with the installation of cogeneration or trigeneration plant is
demonstrated step by step as summarized in Table III.
The primary energy savings (PESs) provided by cogeneration were calculated in accord-
ance with
! "
Fc
PES ¼ 100 % 1" ; (21)
ðEc =gec " Qcc =gcc Þ

where gec ¼ 0.38 (electrical efficiency of a coal-fired thermal power plant) and gcc ¼ 0.80 (effi-
ciencies of steam boiler and exchangers) for the separate production of electricity and heat,
respectively. Ec is the cogenerated electricity, Fc is the consumption of natural gas measured by
its LHV, and Qcc is the cogenerated useful heat.40 In the case study of the University Hospital,
primary energy savings were calculated as 41.14% for the cogeneration plant.
All studies and calculations indicate that a trigeneration plant with double-effect absorption
chiller, cooling tower, and electrically synchronized from high voltage level can seem a very
053102-14 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

TABLE III. Energy saving potentials for overall HVAC systems.

Electrical energy Electrical energy Annual Initial cost for Payback

HVAC system savings (kW h/yr) savings (TOE/yr) saving ($/yr) investment ($) period (yr)

Installation of cogeneration plant 10 370 705 891.72 928 135 1 250 000 1.35
Installation of trigeneration plant 10 296 274 885.32 900 405 1 750 000 1.94

sensible investment for University Hospital according to the calculations due to the above cool-
ing, heat, and electrical energy consumptions, but the hospital infrastructure is not conformable
to implement a trigeneration centre. A cogeneration plant with steam boiler and electrically
synchronized from high voltage level would be a very feasible investment for the university
hospital according to the calculations due to the above electrical and heat energy consumptions.

VII. CONCLUSIONS
HVAC systems are the major part of electrical energy consumption at the hospitals.
Heating and cooling systems have a different significant in the HVAC systems. Cogeneration
plants generate electrical and heat energy simultaneously using a single fuel input and utilize
higher efficiency rating, consolidate its role in low carbon distributed energy systems day by
day.
Unlicensed electricity generation for onsite cogeneration plants ensuring the efficiency
condition of at least 80% has changed the cogeneration mentality in Turkey from “Generate,
use, and sell surplus energy to the grid” to “Generate as much as you need and use the
produced energy onsite” as in most countries of the European Union. This change also affects
capacity sizing criteria that should be based on the electrical consumptions first and necessitates
installing new cogeneration plants with higher efficiencies. Meanwhile, cogeneration plant own-
ers who want to sell electricity must obtain electricity production license.
Eventually, Turkey’s geographical location, natural gas pipelines passing through Turkey
and share of natural gas fuelled power plants are considered together, cogeneration and trigen-
eration plants will sustain their advantages in order to generate cheaper electricity independ-
ently from changes in electrical and natural gas prices.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge the Electrical, Electronics and Informatics Research
Group of the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUB€ ITAK)
_ (Project No.
EEEAG-113E769) for full financial support.
The authors are also grateful for research and financial support provided by the Scientific
Research Project Unit of Çukurova University (Project No. FYL-2014-2351).
1
S. M. Lera, J. Ballester, and J. M. Lera, “Analysis and sizing of thermal energy storage in combined heating, cooling and
power plants for buildings,” Appl. Energy 106, 127–142 (2013).
2
F. Freschi, L. Giaccone, P. Lazzeroni, and M. Repetto, “Economic and environmental analysis of a trigeneration system
for food-industry: A case study,” Appl. Energy 107, 157–172 (2013).
3
M. Liu, Y. Shi, and F. Fang, “Combined cooling, heating and power systems: A survey,” Renewable Sustainable Energy
Rev. 35, 1–22 (2014).
4
T. Pan, D. Xu, Z. Li, S. Shieh, and S. Jang, “Efficiency improvement of cogeneration system using statistical model,”
Energy Convers. Manage. 68, 169–176 (2013).
5
Turkish Petroleum Pipeline Corporation (BOTAŞ), 2015, see http://www.botas.gov.tr/
6
1-year Retrospective Energy Production Data of Turkey, 2015, see http://www.enerjiatlasi.com/elektrik-uretimi/
7
F. Magnani, P. Silva, M. Guerra, and E. Hornsby, “Adaptability of optimized cogeneration systems to deal with financial
changes occurring after the design period,” Energy Build. 58, 183–193 (2013).
8
J. M. P. Chen and M. Ni, “Economic analysis of a solid oxide fuel cell cogeneration/trigeneration system for hotels in
Hong Kong,” Energy Build. 75, 160–169 (2014).
9
H. Onovwiona and V. Ugursal, “Residential cogeneration systems: Review of the current technology,” Renewable
Sustainable Energy Rev. 10, 389–431 (2006).
 053102-15 Teke, Zor, and Timur J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 7, 053102 (2015)

10
MTU Onsite Energy AoE20V4000L63 Gas Engine Technical Catalogue Webpage, 2015, see http://www.mtudda.co-
m.au/attachments/article/1113/GR2145N5.pdf
11
Broad X Non-electric Chiller Model Selection & Design Manual Webpage, 2015, see http://www.broadusa.com/
index.php/lieterature/product-catalogs/doc_download/42-broad-x-non-electric-chiller
12
Directive 2004/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 on the promotion of
Cogeneration based on a useful heat demand in the internal energy market and amending Directive 92/42/EEC, Official
Journal of the European Union, L52/50, 21 February 2004.
13
A. Teke and O. Timur, “Assessing the energy efficiency improvement potentials of HVAC systems considering economic
and environmental aspects at the hospitals,” Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 33, 224–235 (2014).
14
R. V. Heur, “Power quality utilization guide: Hospitals energy efficiency,” in Leonardo Energy (European Copper
Institute, 2008), pp. 1–24.
15
ASHE, American society for healthcare engineering, healthcare energy guidebook, Results of the healthcare energy pro-
ject November 2001 through December 2003, 2004, p. 26.
16
G. K. Alexis and P. Liakos, “A case study of a cogeneration system for a hospital in Greece. Economic and environmental
impacts,” Appl. Therm. Eng. 54(2), 488–496 (2013).
17
A. Gimelli and M. Muccillo, “Optimization criteria for cogeneration systems: Multi-objective approach and application
in an hospital facility,” Appl. Energy 104, 910–923 (2013).
18
S. Gamou, R. Yokoyama, and K. Ito, “Optimal unit sizing of cogeneration systems in consideration of uncertain energy
demands as continuous random variables,” Energy Convers. Manage. 43, 1349–1361 (2002).
19
E. Cardona and A. Piacentino, “A methodology for sizing a trigeneration plant in Mediterranean areas,” Appl. Therm.
Eng. 23(13), 1665–1680 (2003).
20
Z. Beihong and L. Weiding, “An optimal sizing method for cogeneration plants,” Energy Build. 38, 189–195 (2006).
21
M. V. Biezma and J. R. San Cristobal, “Investment criteria for the selection of cogeneration plants—A state of the art
review,” Appl. Therm. Eng. 26, 583–588 (2006).
22
S. Oh, H. Lee, J. Jung, and H. Kwak, “Optimal planning and economic evaluation of cogeneration system,” Energy 32,
760–771 (2007).
23
S. Sanaye, M. A. Meybodi, and S. Shokrallahi, “Selecting the prime movers and nominal powers in combined heat and
power systems,” Appl. Therm. Eng. 28, 1177–1188 (2008).
24
K. C. Kavvadias, A. P. Tosios, and Z. B. Maroulis, “Design of a combined heating, cooling and power system: Sizing,
operation strategy selection and parametric analysis,” Energy Convers. Manage. 51, 833–845 (2010).
25
W. Cho, J. Kim, and K. Lee, “Combined heat and power unit capacity for high-heat to power ratio buildings without sell-
ing excess electricity to the grid,” Energy 38, 354–361 (2012).
26
K. T. Yun, H. Cho, R. Luck, and P. J. Mago, “Modeling of reciprocating internal combustion engines for power genera-
tion and heat recovery,” Appl. Energy 102, 327–335 (2013).
27
S. Bracco, G. Dentici, and S. Siri, “Economic and environmental optimization model for the design and the operation of
a combined heat and power distributed generation system in an urban area,” Energy 55, 1014–1024 (2013).
28
P. Alcan, A. Balin, and H. Basligil, “Fuzzy multicriteria selection among cogeneration systems: A real case application,”
Energy Build. 67, 624–634 (2013).
29
A. L. Facci, L. Andreassi, and S. Ubertini, “Optimization of CHCP systems operation strategy using dynamic pro-
gramming,” Energy 66, 387–400 (2014).
30
A. Costa and A. Fichera, “A mixed-integer linear programming model for the evaluation of CHP system in the context of
hospital structures,” Appl. Therm. Eng. 71(2), 921–929 (2014).
31
F. Rossi, D. Velazquez, I. Monedero, and F. Biscarri, “Artificial neural networks and physical modeling for determination
of baseline consumption of CHP plants,” Energy Syst. Appl. 41, 4658–4669 (2014).
32
S. Kritsanawonghong, W. Gao, and P. Iamtrakul, “Feasibility study of optimal sizing of micro-cogeneration system for
convenience stores in Bangkok,” Energy Power Eng. 6, 69–81 (2014).
33
W. Cho and K. Lee, “A simple sizing method for combined heat and power units,” Energy 65, 123–133 (2014).
34
P. Ghadimi, S. Kara, and B. Kornfeld, “The optimal selection of on-site CHP systems through integrated sizing and
operational strategy,” Appl. Energy 126, 38–46 (2014).
35
P. Arcuri, P. Beraldi, G. Florio, and P. Fragiacomo, “Optimal design of a small size trigeneration plant in civil users: A
mixed integer nonlinear programming model,” Energy 80, 628–641 (2015).
36
F. Salata, A. D. L. Vollaro, R. D. Lietovollaro, and L. Mancieri, “Method for energy optimization with reliability analysis
of a trigeneration and teleheating system on urban scale: A case study,” Energy Build. 86, 118–136 (2015).
37
K. Zor and A. Teke, “Pistonlu gaz motorlarıyla tahrik edilen kojenerasyon sistemleri ile yerinde enerji € uretimi,” 3e
Electrotech-Aylık Enerji, Elektrik, Elektronik Teknolojileri Dergisi, Vol. 234, 2013, pp. 176–182.
38
S. Jayasekara, S. K. Halgamuge, R. A. Attalage, and R. Rajarathne, “Optimum sizing and tracking of combined cooling
heating and power systems for bulk energy consumers,” Appl. Energy 118, 124–134 (2014).
39
K. Zor and A. Teke, “Onsite energy production with cogeneration plants driven by reciprocating gas engines,” in 1st
South East European Conference on Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems,
SEESDEWES2014.0237, 2014, pp. 1–9.
40
M. Carvalho, M. A. Lozano, J. Ramos, and L. M. Serra, “Synthesis of trigeneration systems: Sensitivity analyses and
resilience,” Sci. World J. 2013, 604852.
41
V. K. Patel, “Combined heat and power a technology that combines economic and environment developments,”
EnerzeeCare Technology Services, 2007, pp. 1–11.
42
Investment costs for cogeneration and trigeneration plants offered by South Anatolia Region Sales Engineer at MTU
Onsite Energy Turkey Branch (Address: MTU Motor Turbin San. ve Tic. A.S. Kurtulus Mah. Mucahitler Cd. No:78
Ahmet Adakoglu Is Merkezi Asma Kat, 01130, Seyhan/Adana/TURKEY).

View publication stats