Optimisation of stand-alone hybrid CHP systems meeting electric and heating loads

Results indicate that whilst the power management strategy used in CHP systems (FEL or FEL/FTL) has minimal effects on the COE, it can appreciably affect other performance indicators. For example, in CHP systems sized based on FEL/FTL, whilst COE = ∼0.20 $/kW h the resulting ηCHP is 66% for PV/Bat/ICE and 44% for PV/Bat/MGT. This is compared to using a PMS of the FEL type which results in similar COE = ∼0.21 $/kW h but with ηCHP = 50% in PV/Bat/ICE systems and 34% in PV/Bat/MGT. In relation to overall environmental impact expressed though Life Cycle Emission-LCE (kg CO2-eq/yr) when heating demand is around 50% of the electric (Electric to Thermal Load Ratio = 60:40), a PMS of the FEL/FTL results in up to 30% lower LCE compared to those with FEL in some CHP systems.