Performance Assessments and Training: Essential Tools for Heat Rate Improvement and Reducing Generation

Costs

Presentation to The 2013 Symposium

Marcus CaudillAugust 6, 2013

Motivation for Performance Assessments Electric power industry has been in a state of flux since

the 1990’s– Partial transition from a regulated to a competitive

market– Constantly changing emission requirements– Fluctuations in previously static fuel costs– Technology advances and increase in renewables – Lack of research funding for fossil and nuclear– Changing load profiles– Uncertainty of fleet life cycle

Motivation for Performance Assessments

Reviewing business practices at all levels – management practices – staffing– operations and maintenance

Changing responsibilities– Pushing decision making lower in the organization

Aging workforce / knowledge capture Ultimate goal: minimize production costs Heat rate and generation optimization provides a

significant opportunity for cost containment

Performance Assessment

First step in evaluating performance program effectiveness Evaluate vs. Top Performers Focus on how to cost effectively improve heat rate at

each individual site to meet business goal Not a “One Size Fits All” program

Performance Assessment:Back to Basics

High-level review of current activities Recommendation for continuation / addition / deletion Look at the heat rate “heavy hitters” Identify areas for further review

Performance Assessment

Work Process Staff Interviews

– Heat Rate a Priority?– Heat Rate Tracking?– Factor in Maintenance?– Staff Knowledge?

Commitment / Buy-in– Management– Staff

Communications– Feed forward / feed back

Integration into the business process

Plant Process Critical instrument review Cycle isolation Technology review Equipment Review

– Visual Inspection– Performance Indicators– Compare to Benchmark

Staff Interviews

Provide varied perspectives on– Importance of efficiency, capacity, availability– Equipment condition– Training and education of staff– Communications and dissemination of information– Common plant problems

Interviews can help focus assessment to assure plant concerns are addressed Provides a sense of the plant work culture

Critical Instrument Review

High level review of heat-rate critical instruments– MS, HRH Temperatures– Condenser, MS pressure– Economizer O2– Total list ~ 20 measurements

Overview of calibration methods, procedures and intervals Identification of common instrument problems

Cycle Isolation

Review of plant cycle isolation routines– Immediately after start-up– Periodic walkdowns– Reporting / repair process and prioritization

Condenser check– Highest cost leakages will usually end at the condenser– Others can still have significant cost

Technology Review What tools are available to identify changes in plant

performance?– Control system– Clip board and calculator– Historian / archival system– Performance monitor– Condition monitor– Optimization system (Emissions, heat rate, sootblowing, etc)– Maintenance management– Predictive maintenance

Are the tools used and how? Are plant staff proficient in use of tools at the correct

levels? Are there opportunities for improvement with additional

tools?

Equipment Review: Key Performance Indicators

Controllable losses Turbine efficiency Boiler efficiency Condenser performance Feedwater heater performance Cooling tower performance Process steam Unit maximum capacity

Integration of Performance Into the Business Process

If performance is a business driver, all participants in the business need to understand heat rate– What is the cost of 1 Btu/kWh at your plant?– What items can cause a 1 Btu/kWh loss?– What is the cost of 1 Mw capacity loss?

Is capacity more important than heat rate? Is heat rate more important than capacity? Communication of this information is critical

Performance Assessment Typical Results

Need for heat rate training Improved or expanded cycle isolation monitoring Improved controllable loss monitoring Instrument calibration prioritization Implementation of a performance monitoring program Better distribution of performance results, particularly to

operations

Finding From a Series of Assessments from One Company over a 3 year period HP FWH internal FW side leakage. $243000 annual fuel cost

Main steam and hot reheat thermocouples reading 5°F – 12°F higher than actual– Combination of TC drift and cold junction compensation issues– $50,000+ annual fuel cost

HP Feedwater heater vents isolated– Final feedwater temp 3°F – 5°F low– $30,000+ annual fuel cost

Condenser pressure measurements– Incorrect OEM installation resulting in unreliable water leg

Main steam pressure– Incorrect OEM installation resulting in 30 psi pressure drop from control transmitter to turbine

inlet. Approximate 6 Mw capacity loss.

Poor water distribution in cooling tower

Various cycle isolation– Pegging steam open at full load– FWH vent bypass valves open– Feedwater heater partial bypass– Feedwater heater e-drains open

Performance Assessment Benefits

Provides objective, comprehensive view of existing heat rate improvement activities Identifies strengths and weaknesses in existing

practices Provides a jump-start for establishing a heat rate

improvement program Provides a measure of the quality of current

performance indices

Training

General Plant systems Thermodynamics Control system Emission systems Safety Lock out / Tag out Fire response Others

Heat Rate Specific Cost of heat rate Controllable losses Cycle isolation Performance parameters

– Overall plant– Individual equipment– Common heat rate losses

Heat Rate Training

Helps ops staff quantify and prioritize heat rate issues Excellent

– Refresher for experienced engineers, operators, and techs

– Fundamentals for new engineers, operators and techs with limited experience

HR Training Goals

Increase HR awareness of staff

Provide understanding of HR deviation cost

Identify areas where employees can participate in HR improvement

Initiate inter-departmental HR communications

Initiate the learning process to help optimize performance

Heat Rate Training Benefits

Well trained operator will:– improve unit heat rate by 0.25 to 0.5 percent– reduce auxiliary power usage by about 1 Mw

A 2-unit, 1000 Mw coal-fired site reported 1.5% heat rate improvement as a result of cycle isolation identified after heat rate training. A 4-unit, 2200 Mw natural gas-fired site reported 175

Btu/kWh heat rate improvement in one week as a result of optimizing controllable losses when operating at minimum load as a result of heat rate training.

Bottom Line

Performance improvements provide an opportunity for long-term cost reductions Performance assessment results:

– Evaluation of heat rate optimization best practices – Determine the need for additional efforts– Provide tools to quantify the potential for further heat

rate improvements– Identify best practices that can be applied fleet-wide

Increased knowledge of efficiency results in improved efficiency Power generators investing in performance assessments

and training have an advantage over their competition