poster - International Conference of Agricultural Engineering

poster - International Conference of Agricultural Engineering poster - International Conference of Agricultural Engineering

cigr.ageng2012.org
from cigr.ageng2012.org More from this publisher
10.11.2014 Views

Maximum total contracted active energy is a data supplied by the energy supply company. The energy cost per unit irrigation supply (CENV T ) is 0.044 €·m -3 . The average values obtained in the studied farm were very similar to the average WUA values in this area (from 0.025 to 0.129 €·m -3 , according to the WUA data in the province of Alicante, Spain). The value of energy load index (ICE) corresponds with the maximum operating pressure value of the pump, which is the highest value of the piezometric level of the irrigation network. The average energy efficiency of the pumping system (EEB) was obtained by the aid of the simultaneously measurements of the water and energy parameters cited in chapter 2.2. Efficiency of the energy supply (ESE) quantifies the energy supply according to the topology of the irrigation network, and relates the energy demanded by the irrigation network with the energy supplied by the pump. The product of EEB and ESE presents the general energy efficiency (EEG) of the irrigation system. According to the calculated parameters and the protocol for WUA, the studied irrigation system was classified as a consumer system, into the forth group of energy consumption (600

them cover similar percentages. During the highest energy consumption (February-March and October-November) this percentage increases considerably. Nevertheless, and according to the results, it can be observed that the use of the cheaper periods (P3 and P2) could be increased in the studied irrigation station. For this reason, it is possible to move consumptions from P1 period, and even from P2, to P3 (cheapest period), what would suppose a decrease in energy costs of about 27%. A recommended general measure is to study the offers of the different companies annually, since most of them offer great discounts in the first year. TABLE 2. Energy consumption for lettuce irrigation in the studied farm (2010-2011 season). Consumption period Active Energy Consumption (kWh) Reactive Energy Consumption (kVAr) Average Cosine of phi Monthly Bill (€) June 2010 9,049 3,982 0.92 1,708.44 July 2010 2,660 2,068 0.79 561.36 August 2010 247 227 0.74 141.63 October 2010 11,670 5,857 0.89 2,032.33 November 2010 10,735 3,491 0.95 1,723.95 December 2010 5,018 0 0.95 1,708.44 January 2011 5,688 7,598 0.60 1,845.23 February 2011 11,816 6,632 0.87 2,071.15 March 2011 10,515 6,947 0.83 2,091.63 TOTAL 67,398 36,802 0.89 12,175.71 Another feature to be taken into account is the correction of the power factor to values over 0.95 in order to decrease the reactive energy consumption. For this purpose, an automatic capacitor bank is installed in the electric circuit. This way, a low value in the power factor or cosine of phi (see Table 2) may be due to the next reasons: Bad design of the automatic capacitor bank, since every month a surcharge depending on the reactive energy is applied. In this study, the power factor values were under 0.95 except in December of 2010. Concretely, the surcharge for a power factor value between 0.8 and 0.95 is 0.041554 €·kVArh-1. Bad system maintenance. In this study, decreases of the power factor, and consequently an increment of the penalization, were registered in the monthly bills. This could be caused by the failure of one of the condensers. During January, a power factor of 0.6 was registered, what involves a penalization of 0.062332 €·kVArh-1. This supposed a surcharge of 132.3 € in a bill of 1,845.23€. The budget to repair the automatic capacitor bank is around 125€, whose cost could be recovered in a month. If a redesign of the automatic capacitor bank is chosen instead, the return period of the investment can increase up to 18 months. This measure will only decrease the costs produced by the reactive energy, but not the energy consumption costs. Maximum values of energy consumption (see Table 3) were registered during October of 2010 (seedling phase in three plots and beginning of rosette formation in one plot), January of 2011 (beginning of rosette formation in three plots, rosette formation phase in a plot and seedling phase in two plots), February of 2011 (rosette formation phase in four plots, beginning of rosette formation phase in two plots and seedling phase in one plot) and March of 2011 (heart formation phase and harvesting in two plots and rosette formation phase in five plots). During these months, highest demands of lettuce crops were registered. The total water volume was estimated for every cited month: 58,630 m 3 (October 2010), 28,724 m 3 (January 2011), 59,671 m 3 (February 2011) and 53,100 m 3 (March 2011).

them cover similar percentages. During the highest energy consumption (February-March<br />

and October-November) this percentage increases considerably.<br />

Nevertheless, and according to the results, it can be observed that the use <strong>of</strong> the cheaper<br />

periods (P3 and P2) could be increased in the studied irrigation station. For this reason, it is<br />

possible to move consumptions from P1 period, and even from P2, to P3 (cheapest period),<br />

what would suppose a decrease in energy costs <strong>of</strong> about 27%.<br />

A recommended general measure is to study the <strong>of</strong>fers <strong>of</strong> the different companies annually,<br />

since most <strong>of</strong> them <strong>of</strong>fer great discounts in the first year.<br />

TABLE 2. Energy consumption for lettuce irrigation in the studied farm (2010-2011 season).<br />

Consumption period<br />

Active Energy<br />

Consumption (kWh)<br />

Reactive Energy<br />

Consumption (kVAr)<br />

Average<br />

Cosine <strong>of</strong> phi<br />

Monthly Bill (€)<br />

June 2010 9,049 3,982 0.92 1,708.44<br />

July 2010 2,660 2,068 0.79 561.36<br />

August 2010 247 227 0.74 141.63<br />

October 2010 11,670 5,857 0.89 2,032.33<br />

November 2010 10,735 3,491 0.95 1,723.95<br />

December 2010 5,018 0 0.95 1,708.44<br />

January 2011 5,688 7,598 0.60 1,845.23<br />

February 2011 11,816 6,632 0.87 2,071.15<br />

March 2011 10,515 6,947 0.83 2,091.63<br />

TOTAL 67,398 36,802 0.89 12,175.71<br />

Another feature to be taken into account is the correction <strong>of</strong> the power factor to values over<br />

0.95 in order to decrease the reactive energy consumption. For this purpose, an automatic<br />

capacitor bank is installed in the electric circuit. This way, a low value in the power factor or<br />

cosine <strong>of</strong> phi (see Table 2) may be due to the next reasons:<br />

Bad design <strong>of</strong> the automatic capacitor bank, since every month a surcharge depending<br />

on the reactive energy is applied. In this study, the power factor values were under<br />

0.95 except in December <strong>of</strong> 2010. Concretely, the surcharge for a power factor value<br />

between 0.8 and 0.95 is 0.041554 €·kVArh-1.<br />

Bad system maintenance. In this study, decreases <strong>of</strong> the power factor, and<br />

consequently an increment <strong>of</strong> the penalization, were registered in the monthly bills.<br />

This could be caused by the failure <strong>of</strong> one <strong>of</strong> the condensers. During January, a power<br />

factor <strong>of</strong> 0.6 was registered, what involves a penalization <strong>of</strong> 0.062332 €·kVArh-1. This<br />

supposed a surcharge <strong>of</strong> 132.3 € in a bill <strong>of</strong> 1,845.23€.<br />

The budget to repair the automatic capacitor bank is around 125€, whose cost could be<br />

recovered in a month. If a redesign <strong>of</strong> the automatic capacitor bank is chosen instead, the<br />

return period <strong>of</strong> the investment can increase up to 18 months. This measure will only<br />

decrease the costs produced by the reactive energy, but not the energy consumption costs.<br />

Maximum values <strong>of</strong> energy consumption (see Table 3) were registered during October <strong>of</strong><br />

2010 (seedling phase in three plots and beginning <strong>of</strong> rosette formation in one plot), January<br />

<strong>of</strong> 2011 (beginning <strong>of</strong> rosette formation in three plots, rosette formation phase in a plot and<br />

seedling phase in two plots), February <strong>of</strong> 2011 (rosette formation phase in four plots,<br />

beginning <strong>of</strong> rosette formation phase in two plots and seedling phase in one plot) and March<br />

<strong>of</strong> 2011 (heart formation phase and harvesting in two plots and rosette formation phase in<br />

five plots). During these months, highest demands <strong>of</strong> lettuce crops were registered. The total<br />

water volume was estimated for every cited month: 58,630 m 3 (October 2010), 28,724 m 3<br />

(January 2011), 59,671 m 3 (February 2011) and 53,100 m 3 (March 2011).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!