Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) is working with industry to independently monitor up to 15 distinct 5 kW-electric (kWe) combined heat and power (CHP) high temperature (HT) proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell systems (FCSs) installed in light commercial buildings. This research paper discusses an evaluation of the first six months of measured performance data acquired at a 1 s sampling rate from real-time monitoring equipment attached to the FCSs at building sites. Engineering performance parameters are independently evaluated. Based on an analysis of the first few months of measured operating data, FCS performance is consistent with manufacturer-stated performance. Initial data indicate that the FCSs have relatively stable performance and a long-term average production of about 4.57 kWe of power. This value is consistent with, but slightly below, the manufacturer's stated rated electric power output of 5 kWe. The measured system net electric efficiency has averaged 33.7%, based on the higher heating value (HHV) of natural gas fuel. This value, also, is consistent with, but slightly below, the manufacturer's stated rated electric efficiency of 36%. The FCSs provide low-grade hot water to the building at a measured average temperature of about 48.4 °C, lower than the manufacturer's stated maximum hot water delivery temperature of 65 °C. The uptime of the systems is also evaluated. System availability can be defined as the quotient of total operating time compared to time since commissioning. The average values for system availability vary between 96.1 and 97.3%, depending on the FCS evaluated in the field. Performance at rated value for electrical efficiency (PRVeff) can be defined as the quotient of the system time operating at or above the rated electric efficiency and the time since commissioning. The PRVeff varies between 5.6% and 31.6%, depending on the FCS field unit evaluated. Performance at rated value for electrical power (PRVp) can be defined as the quotient of the system time operating at or above the rated electric power and the time since commissioning. PRVp varies between 6.5% and 16.2%. Performance at rated value for electrical efficiency and power (PRVt) can be defined as the quotient of the system time operating at or above both the rated electric efficiency and the electric power output compared to the time since commissioning. PRVt varies between 0.2% and 1.4%. Optimization to determine the manufacturer rating required to achieve PRVt greater than 80% has been performed based on the collected data. For example, for FCS Unit 130 to achieve a PRVt of 95%, it would have to be down-rated to an electrical power output of 3.2 kWe and an electrical efficiency of 29%. The use of PRV as an assessment metric for FCSs has been developed and reported for the first time in this paper. For FCS Unit 130, a maximum decline in electric power output of approximately 18% was observed over a 500 h period in Jan. 2012.

References

References
1.
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
,
2009
, “
Hydrogen, Fuel Cells & Infrastructure Technologies Program Multi-Year Research, Development and Demonstration Plan, Planned Program Activities for 2005–2015
,”
U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency, Fuel Cells Program
, Washington, DC.
2.
Colella
,
W. G.
,
Schneider
,
S. H.
,
Kammen
,
D. M.
,
Jhunjhunwala
,
A.
, and
Teo
,
N.
,
2011
, “
Optimizing the Design and Deployment of Stationary Combined Heat and Power Fuel Cell Systems for Minimum Costs and Emissions—Part I: Model Design
,”
ASME J. Fuel Cell Sci. Technol.
,
8
(
2
), p.
021001
.10.1115/1.4001756
3.
Colella
,
W. G.
,
Schneider
,
S. H.
,
Kammen
,
D. M.
,
Jhunjhunwala
,
A.
, and
Teo
,
N.
,
2011
, “
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.
,
8
(
2
), p.
021002
.10.1115/1.4001757
4.
Colella
,
W. G.
,
2010
, “
Optimal Design and Control Strategies for Novel Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Fuel Cell Systems: Part I of II—Datum Design Conditions and Approach
,”
ASME
Paper No. FuelCell2010-33146.10.1115/FuelCell2010-33146
5.
Colella
,
W. G.
,
2010
, “
Optimizal Design and Control Strategies for Novel Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Fuel Cell Systems: Part II of II—Case Study Results
,”
ASME
Paper No. FuelCell2010-33147.10.1115/FuelCell2010-33147
6.
Colella
,
W. G.
, and
Rankin
,
A.
,
2009
, “
Network Design Optimization of Novel Fuel Cell Systems and Distributed Energy Devices: Model Development and Results
,”
3rd European Fuel Cell Technology & Applications—Piero Lunghi Conference (EFC2009),
Rome
, Dec. 15–18.
7.
Colella
,
W. G.
,
Rankin
,
A.
, and
Parker
,
M.
,
2009
, “
Economic and Environmental Optimization Models for Refining Fuel Cell Use
,”
32nd International Association of Energy Economics International Conference—Energy, Economy, Environment: The Global View
(IAEE),
San Francisco
,
CA
, June 21–24.
8.
Colella
,
W. G.
,
Schneider
,
S. H.
,
Kammen
,
D. M.
,
Jhunjhunwala
,
A.
, and
Teo
,
N.
,
2008
, “
Part I of II: Development of MERESS Model—Developing System Models of Stationary Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Fuel Cell Systems (FCS) for Reduced Costs and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions
,”
ASME
Paper No. FuelCell2008-65112.10.1115/FuelCell2008-65112
9.
Colella
,
W. G.
,
Schneider
,
S. H.
,
Kammen
,
D. M.
,
Jhunjhunwala
,
A.
, and
Teo
,
N.
,
2008
, “
Part II of II: Deployment of MERESS Model—Designing, Controlling, and Installing Stationary Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Fuel Cell Systems (FCS) to Reduce Costs and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions
,”
ASME
Paper No. FuelCell2008-65113.10.1115/FuelCell2008-65113
10.
Colella
,
W. G.
,
Tilghman
,
M.
, and
Timme
,
R.
,
2010
, “
Novel Designs for Advanced Stationary Polygenerative Fuel Cell Systems (PFCS)
,” Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, Report No. SAND2010-6187P.
11.
Colella
,
W. G.
,
2010
, “
Network Design Optimization of Fuel Cell Systems and Distributed Energy Devices
,” Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, Report No. SAND2010-5071.
12.
Colella
,
W. G.
, and
Alsup
,
J.
,
2010
, “
Fuel Cell Site Recommendation Report
,” Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, Report No. SAND2010-5593P.
13.
U.S. DOE Technology Installation
,
2004
, “
Assessment of Packaged PEM Fuel Cell CHP Systems
,” U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, Report No. FEMP DOE/EE-0311.
14.
Akhil
,
A.
, and
Black
,
B.
,
2008
, “
Navy Fuel Cell Demonstration Project
,” Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, Report No. SAND2008-5300.
15.
Colella
,
W. G.
,
2011
, “
Initial Deployment and Independent Testing of Micro-combined Heat and Power Fuel Cell Systems in Light Commercial Buildings
,”
European Fuel Cell Conference
,
Rome, Dec. 14–16
.
16.
O'Hayre
,
R.
,
Cha
,
S. W.
,
Colella
,
W. G.
, and
Prinz
,
F. B.
,
2009
,
Fuel Cell Fundamentals
,
2nd ed.
,
Wiley
,
Hoboken, NJ
, pp.
351
370
and 451–482.
17.
Heywood
,
J. B.
,
1988
,
Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals
,
McGraw-Hill
,
New York
.
You do not currently have access to this content.