where to next?

[mobile_bob]

seems a bit slow these days on the forum, the reasons are likely related to time of year
everyone being busy with their lives, the heat, etc. however it is my opinion that the lack of new engine's to work
with has dramatically limited new membership, along with this ongoing recession tightening everyone's budgets
doesn't help matter either.

so i am thinking it is way past time to refocus the forum, maybe look back to where we came from, where we have been
and most importantly where we are going with all this.

while continued discussion of engine issues is worthwhile, there is just not enough meat left on that bone to keep things going
and afterall we are a "cogeneration" forum... that means we are all about the production of both electrical power and the recovery of
heat to provide for thermal loads.  the cogen discussion certainly has lots of legs left, there are all sorts of avenues and topics we need to
fully explore, research/develop, discuss and publish results of.

recently i bought another book, one which i think i already have an earlier copy of on cogeneration, having reread it some things came to mind.
1. we are registered with the epa as a research group
2. a conversation i had with one of the directors of the epa combined heat and power project. the conversation left me with the very distinct impression that we will never get the epa to approve a diesel engine for cogen use in this country, never, ever, nada... however i was repeatedly told that they are most interested in the use of nat gas as a fuel for a prime mover. At the time i didn't give it much thought, because we are for the most part very aligned with the diesel engine technology.

i have given this a lot more thought recently, (mainly because i have a bit more time to think about such things) and i am thinking that we may have a real shot at getting an exclusion for an engine type for use in cogeneration provided it is fueled by nat gas. 

what  i am also fairly certain of is there is no way they would ever approve a listeroid for such service, because it is just too antiquated in design to provide a clean and tamperproof engine running on any fuel, let alone nat gas.

i do however think it is possible we can get them to at least talk about, and consider a changfa type, for this purpose.  there are reasons i am leaning toward the changfa that i will get into later down the road, it relates to things like efficiency of heat exchangers, the ability of the cooling system to handle a pressurized  enclosed environment running at high enough temperatures, and a few other things, first cost being one of those.

my further thinking involves the startup of a research and development facility, so that real testing with real quantifiable results can be had. there needs to be someplace where testing can be done, documented, and available for inspection by the epa or any other interested entity.
i just don't see any other way of working with the epa with the goal of getting approval for an exemption.

putting myself in their shoes, if i were them, there is no way on God's green earth that i would approve any exclusion for any group that did not have a central location, someplace i could observe, or drop in if i so chose. it goes without saying that a disparate group scattered all over the globe would not qualify even if they were all qualified experts, let alone a group of diy'ers

having said all that, i am convinced we have the brain power to design, test, and prove a functional and competitive micro cogeneration system. i know we can build one that will compete well in efficiency and cost. all the pieces of the project are here, and those that might be missing or needing further development or refinement surely can be handled once they are identified.

if we establish a common goal, working with common parts, and using a refined design, the chances of success are infinitely higher than going at it each to his own.

anyway, i came across dr. joseph orlando (the author of the book)  from march 2011
the presentation is informative and there is some good info contained in it.

http://energy.maryland.gov/SEN/pdfs/2_CHP_102_Orlando.pdf

i would expect you guys to read this paper, and make comments about what it contains, and comments about the direction i think we
ought to take.

i will go it alone if need be, however i think it would be much more interesting and beneficial to everyone  if we could get the membership to step up and take part, if only in a minor role.  not everyone needs to build a cogen, not everyone needs one to start with!  but nearly everyone can take a bit of time to do some google searches and report back info that might be helpful at different stages of the project.  many can take the time to ask questions, review reports, provide constructive critique, etc.

so now you have thought about this for a long time, what do you think? 



bob g

[BioHazard]

so now you have thought about this for a long time, what do you think?

I think you're definately on the right road, Bob. If we can somehow present ourselves as a devoted group of smart people, they might work with us a little more than just some guy trying to import a few headless diesels.

I see so much application for natural gas cogen on the commercial level, one could possibly start a company devoted just to pushing the idea and it's economics. My head almost explodes when I walk into home depot in the winter and they've got ten billion killowatts of lights burning AND enourmous nat. gas powered heaters. The potential savings in an environment like that is huge.

I also like the idea of a more available, more open source option than the current Honda/Marathon systems that are out of reach of most people.

[Frank S]

 The infrastructure of the US being what it is. Aging antiquated vulnerable to weather, poorly maintained, inadequate for immediateness of cross switching between one or more generative/ heating/ purification during almost even the most minor of natural events.
simple or I should say micro co-gen capabilities is a subject that needs addressing in depth.
  Now the paper was primarily focusing on the use of natural gas.
This could be a small step towards improving the use of natural gas thereby reducing the wastes.
However without a redirection of how nat gas is used in say a residence or a commercial business  through the use of co-gen the supply of natural gas would be greatly curtailed to the end user during peak usage times.
a Natural gas furnace  blows more of the usable energy out of the exhaust and loss of thermal conductive heat  exchange than what actually goes to heat a facility in most cases.
Internal combustion engines be they reciprocating or turbine are horribly inefficient compared with how they could be properly designed to recover waste heat.

  I'll give you a small example of an experimental total Gas home I knew of in the 60s MR Russel his (real name) worked for Lone Star Gas in Texas back when I was a teenager.
  He built a 7 bedroom 4000sf home this was a concrete home no wood as structure very thick walls & well insulated He had 2 Natural gas driven generators to provide all of his electrical needs and was not even tied to the electric company's lines. They had more than enough electrical to power his home the entire farm and dairy production. their monthly fuel bill for Nat gas only was less than our electric bill alone with similar electrical requirements where we lived there was no NAt gas pipeline crossing our property anywhere so we relied on propane for cooking and heat costing us even more and our farm house was no where near as large as his not even half the size I would say
So would a study such as this be viable? sure. Could such a model be constructed say a test model of a small town or a few commercial business ? again Sure. Would a government controlled entity such as the EPA ever take notice of such a venture? Hard to say in-fact I would seriously doubt it The EPA is not about trying to find ways to 1 clean up the environment 2 reduce pollution of the air and land 3 reducing the so called effect man has on the planet. NO EPA exist for the pure purposes of  collecting revenue for the Government and to lend itself to which ever agenda happens to be vogue at the time. This may not be how it was envisioned but that is the way it is now.
Sorry to go off on a tangent here but not one solitary government on this planet could give to beans about the planet or the people populating it if it does not put money in the coffers

[Frank S]

The only way for a venture such as the one on the Dr's Report to ever make a credible difference to the world or even a small part of it will be through private enterprise and or DIYer's 

[hal]

Years ago I supplied natural gas cylinder heads and repair parts the natural gas fields.   The mainstay up in Alberta are Cat 3306NG engine.   The smallest engines that I seen were the Cat 3304NG.   For smaller applications I would look into the 3 cylinder Kubota NG.  To bad we couldn't get a conversion kit made for the 2 cylinder Yanmar from the Surplus center.   I wonder if Yanmar makes a natural gas cylinder head for that engine.   

[BioHazard]

One thing that I think is important is for us to find a common engine without a limited supply. (I know, that's a lot to ask for) Things like the surplus center Yanmar are great when they pop up, but we need something repeatable, not in limited supply here and there.

If we could get a MFG like changfa onboard, with a blessing from the EPA, we'd really have something we could work with.

[rl71459]

Hi everybody

I have not posted in a while, I like this Nat Gas topic, But have many questions, It sounds like Hal may be able to answer some of these.

Hal
1, Being that you supported these (CAT) nat gas engines. Do you have some numbers of how many hours can be expected from a properly built engine/head ?

2, Can non NG engines be reliably converted ? Or will life be significantly reduced even with head upgrades ?

3, Can you give some examples if there are any?

4, Does NG fumigation (sp?) of a Diesel significantly reduce life ?

Again, Great Topic... Keep it coming.

Rob

[mobile_bob]

nat gas fumigation is a mature art, cat certainly has aligned itself with its use in cogen, and the company that makes the fumigation
unit and controls, also makes it to fit cummins and detroit diesel engines

all three companies have approved the fumigation changeover without concern to engine warranty issues, they will stand behind their engine's in other words.

there need be not internal modification of any of these companies engines, which tells me there is no longevity issues associated with natgas fumigation technology.

we might have to install a better valve and exhaust seat in a changfa, but that really shouldn't be a problem.

the chinese are all over building nat gas engines, and i bet changfa has variants of the 195, 1115 and maybe others that are made to run on
nat gas.

a couple years back i found a chinese company that can supply helical cut gears for the gear train, which would go a long ways toward quieting that part of the engine's noise (which is significant part of the noise and to this point the hardest to correct).

i am absolutely convinced we can attain very close to 90% overall efficiency with the 195 if used in cogen mode, we can harvest all the coolant heat and a high percentage of the exhaust heat. we can attain 75-80% without breaking a sweat. 

iirc the epa wants to see better than 65% in cogen use, that we can do no problem, we just need approval for import of an engine family/model
and i really think the 195 is the best compromise of size,  power,  quality, technology and cost.  one thing for certain is i have never seen a changfa that needed to be completely stripped down to get the sand out.

\

bob g

[veggie]

Co-Gen is Co-Gen regardless of fuel.
Diesel (or biofuels in diesel engines) is just a small subset of the co-gen arena. However, it has been the easiest to attain, build, and maintain. Especially with cheap reliable single cylinder versions.
Nat gas is an excellent clean fuel and a swing towards more discussion on NG engines, conversions, and power production seems like an excellent and natural progression.

veggie

[uber39]

Hi All,
       I'm more of a reader and learner if that makes sense? I for one love diesels and the fact they also run on a wide mix of fuels both virgin and waste.
       The problem with town gas is if your not in town you don't have it. I live 300 yards from the gas main but they still want in excess of $18,000 for me to tap into it. Therefor we live with grid for electric, bottle gas for cooking and wood for heat.
       What will work for some wont work for all.
       Please don't hate me for this post, its just my situation. And has been for near 20 years, we do have grid feed solar and they pay us well for it, but I'm not aloud to feed in off the wind turbine,    Doesn't mean I don't. Still working on the co-gen part as well.
       By the way you guys are awesome with the work that you do. the info on this forum is priceless.
       Thank you all
            uber39 

[Ronmar]

I am in the same boat as Uber39, no supply of gas, nor is there ever likley to be. So for me, looking at available fuels, diesel is the biggest bang for the buck...  Sadly, Uber and myself are not the only folks in this boat, as most rural residents suffer from this limitation.  I refuse to live in a suburb or city for any reason, let alone for availability of natural gas:)  If I did, the neighbors would likley complain about the noise of the cogen system:) 

Veggie is correct, cogen is cogen.  From that viewpoint IMO the biggest hinderance to widespread use of cogen is the generation of heat.  Yes, you read that correctly, heat.  Winter in the north, Lights and heat all in one neat package, it is great and wonderfully efficient.  But for at least half the year(more in some places) for a good portion of the world, heat is not your friend.  So it is all a waste product and there goes your efficiency.  What is really needed is an attainable absorbtion chiller to make the cogen system a viable attractive system for the entire year. I think that is the biggest nut to crack for the viable cogen system...   

[SteveU.]

Hi All
I have to echo uber39's and Ronmar's sentiments. If many of us do not chime in on a NG co-gen solution it's because we do not have and realistically will never have the NG supplied to us. 15+ expensive mountain miles to the nearest supply point to ever supply my valley with only a ~700 household market. And here even though legally possible our "Public" Grid supplier throws up so many $$$$$ road blocks that I do not know of a single currently working private individual grid tie system. Just Federal $ subsidized Demonstration projects. Now our Public Grid supplier DOES have a NG generation plant capable of 40% of system needs that can supply based on current market pricing. This is a paper shuffle to then qualify them as a BPA capable system "supplier" for the lowest wholesale Federal Hydro wholesale buy rate. And their EPA approved generation site way out in an old aluminum smelter footprint has NO CHP built in to anything. Just blow off the "waste heat" into the air.

On a more positive notes: their initial generation Plant consisted first of 20, later expanded to 50? leased Cat engined NG fueled gen sets. Since replaced by a GE gas turbine. So stand-a-lone engine sets had to be manufactured, supplied, and then put back on the market for cheap. My rate payers pocket book says you are welcome.
Now I have now ran several of the Kubota's DG972 three cylinder NG engines on different gaseous fuels. IT already IS EPA certified on NG.
It would seem to me for those who are on NG supply lines and do have electrical grid tie capability allowed the way to go for a registered compliant, insurable, stand-a-lone CoGen system. The extra "cost" for this of a couple a thousand per unit buys you a non-Chinese, 1st world quality engine already halfway to total certified, insurable system compliance. This is why both the APL/GEK and VictoryShop woodgas people evolved to this route on their smallest offerings. Small, SMOOTH, QUIET and manufactuer pre-compliant tested/certified with a wide spread dealer parts and service availability.
Not to Diss the 195 Changfa's MB. I really like my R180. But until someone finally pony's up and these can be offered and marketed like the some of the rebranded Chinese tractors lines I think they will always remain a dedicated DYI solution. And if/when that happens the price to cover overheads and ROI's will be up there too right along with the current production Kubotas, etc.
Ha! Ha! Back into my don't ask/don't tell woodgas fuel corner.

Regards
Steve Unruh

[XYZER]

I enjoy solving any problem and cogen is one that would be fun but as others have mentioned I could build a NG cogen but would not be able to use it. NG is kind of like the high speed internet.......the masses have it but we country hicks are left to our own devices. I am not a survivalist but I plan on being one of the last ones to have the lights go out I am not "off grid" and lets face it beating the price of electricity if already available is impossible. When they start a program like the electrification of the US with NG I will defiantly have to change my tactics. I kind of have a problem with our inability to turn our meters backwards no matter our cost and not getting a credit when we need it. I can get a solar system installed that will dump to the grid but if the grid goes down I am in the dark. I really don't like the idea of being connected to any utility if the $hit hits the fan. Paranoid?....yea maybe.....But what about a universal cogen that could adapt to what ever fueled heat source? The problem is all fueled engines waste lots of energy to heat. If I heated 20 gallons of hot water on my way home from work in my truck I could save the cost of a hot shower every evening .  I really liked the Chinese diesel utterpower got his hands on! But back to the EPA issue.......come and get me coppers        

[Carlb]

I enjoy solving any problem and cogen is one that would be fun but as others have mentioned I could build a NG cogen but would not be able to use it. NG is kind of like the high speed internet.......the masses have it but we country hicks are left to our own devices. I am not a survivalist but I plan on being one of the last ones to have the lights go out I am not "off grid" and lets face it beating the price of electricity if already available is impossible. When they start a program like the electrification of the US with NG I will defiantly have to change my tactics. I kind of have a problem with our inability to turn our meters backwards no matter our cost and not getting a credit when we need it. I can get a solar system installed that will dump to the grid but if the grid goes down I am in the dark. I really don't like the idea of being connected to any utility if the $hit hits the fan. Paranoid?....yea maybe.....But what about a universal cogen that could adapt to what ever fueled heat source? The problem is all fueled engines waste lots of energy to heat. If I heated 20 gallons of hot water on my way home from work in my truck I could save the cost of a hot shower every evening .  I really liked the Chinese diesel utterpower got his hands on! But back to the EPA issue.......come and get me coppers        

They do make grid tie solar inverters that will also charge a battery bank and they will still work if the grid goes down. 


Carl

[Tom Reed]

Another off-grid person here no nat gas, water, sewer, phone or cable here either. A big part of my interest in co-gen is getting off the big oil teat. Doing co-gen diesel with b100 and waste oil's accomplishes that, using nat gas seems to put us back on a different teat on the same udder. Like my country boy analogy?

My personal goal is to lessen my dependency on yet another teat on that udder LP gas. A couple of solar thermal panels on the roof will move our home in that direction. Even though our Listeroid co-gen system functions well at 150-200 hours run time per year does not generate enough heat to really make much of a difference in how much firewood is burned each year.