The maximizing emission reductions and economic savings simulator (MERESS) is an optimization tool that evaluates novel strategies for installing and operating combined heat and power (CHP) fuel cell systems (FCSs) in buildings. This article discusses the deployment of MERESS to show illustrative results for a California campus town and, based on these results, makes recommendations for further installations of FCSs to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. MERESS is used to evaluate one of the most challenging FCS types to use for GHG reductions, the phosphoric acid fuel cell (PAFC) system. These PAFC systems are tested against a base case of a CHP combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT). Model results show that three competing goals (GHG emission reductions, cost savings to building owners, and FCS manufacturer sales revenue) are best achieved with different strategies but that all three goals can be met reasonably with a single approach. According to MERESS, relative to a base case of only a CHP CCGT providing heat and electricity with no FCSs, the town achieves the highest (1) GHG emission reductions, (2) cost savings to building owners, and (3) FCS manufacturer sales revenue each with three different operating strategies, under a scenario of full incentives and a $100/tonne carbon dioxide tax (scenario D). The town achieves its maximum emission reduction, 37% relative to the base case with operating strategy V: stand-alone (SA) operation, no load following (NLF), and a fixed heat-to-power ratio (FHP) (SA, NLF, and FHP; scenario E). The town’s building owners gain the highest cost savings, 25% with strategy I: electrically and thermally networked (NW), electricity power load following (ELF), and a variable heat-to-power ratio (VHP) (NW, ELF, and VHP; scenario D). FCS manufacturers generally have the highest sales revenue with strategy III: NW, NLF with a FHP (NW, NLF, and FHP; scenarios B, C, and D). Strategies III and V are partly consistent with the way that FCS manufacturers design their systems today, primarily as NLF with a FHP. By contrast, strategy I is novel for the fuel cell industry, in particular, in its use of a VHP and thermal networking. Model results further demonstrate that FCS installations can be economical for building owners without any carbon tax or government incentives. Without any carbon tax or state and federal incentives (scenario A), strategy I is marginally economical with 3% energy cost savings but with a 29% reduction in emissions. Strategy I is the most economical strategy for building owners in all scenarios (scenarios A–D) and, at the same time, reasonably achieves other goals of large GHG emission reductions and high FCS manufacturer sales revenue. Although no particular building type stands out as consistently achieving the highest emission reductions and cost savings (scenarios B-2 and E-2), certain building load curves are clear winners. For example, buildings with load curves similar to Stanford’s Mudd chemistry building (a wet laboratory) achieve maximal cost savings (1.5% with full federal and state incentives but no carbon tax) and maximal emission reductions (32%) (scenarios B-2 and E-2). Finally, based on these results, this work makes recommendations for reducing GHG further through FCS deployment. (Part I of II articles discusses the motivation and key assumptions behind the MERESS model development.)
Skip Nav Destination
e-mail: wgcolel@sandia.gov
e-mail: shs@stanford.edu
e-mail: kammen@berkeley.edu
e-mail: aditya11@stanfordalumni.org
e-mail: nigelteo@gmail.com
Article navigation
April 2011
This article was originally published in
Journal of Fuel Cell Science and Technology
Research Papers
Optimizing the Design and Deployment of Stationary Combined Heat and Power Fuel Cell Systems for Minimum Costs and Emissions—Part II: Model Results
Whitney G. Colella,
Whitney G. Colella
Resources and Systems Analysis,
e-mail: wgcolel@sandia.gov
Sandia National Laboratories Energy
, P.O. Box 5800 MS 1108, Albuquerque, NM 87185
Search for other works by this author on:
Stephen H. Schneider,
Stephen H. Schneider
Center for Environmental Science and Policy,
e-mail: shs@stanford.edu
Stanford University
, Environment and Energy Building—MC4205, 473 Via Ortega, Stanford, CA 94305
Search for other works by this author on:
Daniel M. Kammen,
Daniel M. Kammen
Energy and Resources Group,
e-mail: kammen@berkeley.edu
University of California, Berkeley
, Berkeley, CA 94720
Search for other works by this author on:
Aditya Jhunjhunwala,
Aditya Jhunjhunwala
Management Science and Engineering, Terman Engineering Center,
e-mail: aditya11@stanfordalumni.org
Stanford University
, 380 Panama Way, Stanford, CA 94305
Search for other works by this author on:
Nigel Teo
Nigel Teo
Management Science and Engineering, Terman Engineering Center,
e-mail: nigelteo@gmail.com
Stanford University
, 380 Panama Way, Stanford, CA 94305
Search for other works by this author on:
Whitney G. Colella
Resources and Systems Analysis,
Sandia National Laboratories Energy
, P.O. Box 5800 MS 1108, Albuquerque, NM 87185e-mail: wgcolel@sandia.gov
Stephen H. Schneider
Center for Environmental Science and Policy,
Stanford University
, Environment and Energy Building—MC4205, 473 Via Ortega, Stanford, CA 94305e-mail: shs@stanford.edu
Daniel M. Kammen
Energy and Resources Group,
University of California, Berkeley
, Berkeley, CA 94720e-mail: kammen@berkeley.edu
Aditya Jhunjhunwala
Management Science and Engineering, Terman Engineering Center,
Stanford University
, 380 Panama Way, Stanford, CA 94305e-mail: aditya11@stanfordalumni.org
Nigel Teo
Management Science and Engineering, Terman Engineering Center,
Stanford University
, 380 Panama Way, Stanford, CA 94305e-mail: nigelteo@gmail.com
J. Fuel Cell Sci. Technol. Apr 2011, 8(2): 021002 (16 pages)
Published Online: November 24, 2010
Article history
Received:
July 7, 2008
Revised:
March 25, 2010
Online:
November 24, 2010
Published:
November 24, 2010
Connected Content
A companion article has been published:
Optimizing the Design and Deployment of Stationary Combined Heat and Power Fuel Cell Systems for Minimum Costs and Emissions—Part I: Model Design
Citation
Colella, W. G., Schneider, S. H., Kammen, D. M., Jhunjhunwala, A., and Teo, N. (November 24, 2010). "Optimizing the Design and Deployment of Stationary Combined Heat and Power Fuel Cell Systems for Minimum Costs and Emissions—Part II: Model Results." ASME. J. Fuel Cell Sci. Technol. April 2011; 8(2): 021002. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4001757
Download citation file:
Get Email Alerts
Cited By
State of Health Estimation Method for Lithium-Ion Batteries Based on Multifeature Fusion and BO-BiGRU Model
J. Electrochem. En. Conv. Stor (November 2025)
Nitrogen and Phosphorus Co-Doped Hard Carbon Materials as High-Performance Anode for Sodium Ion Batteries
J. Electrochem. En. Conv. Stor (August 2025)
In-situ synthesis nano PtRuW/WC HER catalyst for acid hydrogen evolution by microwave method
J. Electrochem. En. Conv. Stor
Ultrasound-Enabled Adaptive Protocol for Fast Charging of Lithium-Ion Batteries
J. Electrochem. En. Conv. Stor (August 2025)
Related Articles
Optimizing the Design and Deployment of Stationary Combined Heat and Power Fuel Cell Systems for Minimum Costs and Emissions—Part I: Model Design
J. Fuel Cell Sci. Technol (April,2011)
Economic and Scenario Analyses of New Gas Turbine Combined Cycles With No Emissions of Carbon Dioxide
J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power (July,2005)
Discussion and Analysis of Flue Gas Utilization in a Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cell Engine During Idle Operation
J. Fuel Cell Sci. Technol (February,2006)
Parameter Optimization on Combined Gas Turbine-Fuel Cell Power Plants
J. Fuel Cell Sci. Technol (November,2005)
Related Proceedings Papers
Related Chapters
Introduction
Consensus on Operating Practices for Control of Water and Steam Chemistry in Combined Cycle and Cogeneration
Performance and Mechanical Equipment Standards
Handbook for Cogeneration and Combined Cycle Power Plants, Second Edition
Risk Mitigation for Renewable and Deispersed Generation by the Harmonized Grouping (PSAM-0310)
Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment & Management (PSAM)