Potential of Thermal Energy Storage for a District Heating System Utilizing Industrial Waste Heat

• Published in: Energies (Basel) Vol. 13; no. 15; p. 3923
• Main Authors: Kauko, Hanne, Rohde, Daniel, Knudsen, Brage Rugstad, Sund-Olsen, Terje
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Basel MDPI AG 01-08-2020
• Subjects: Alternative energy sources; Boilers; By products; Carbon monoxide; Costs; District heating; Electricity; Electricity distribution; Electricity pricing; Emissions; Energy management; Energy resources; Energy storage; Ferrosilicon; Gases; Heat; Industrial parks; industrial waste heat recovery; Industrial wastes; Production costs; Sensitivity analysis; Storage tanks; Thermal energy; thermal energy storage; Waste heat
• ISSN: 1996-1073; 1996-1073
• DOI: 10.3390/en13153923

The potential for utilizing industrial waste heat for district heating is enormous. There is, however, often a temporal mismatch between the waste heat availability and the heating demand, and typically fossil-based peak boilers are used to cover the remaining heat demand. This study investigates the potential of applying a thermal energy storage tank at the district heating supply system at Mo Industrial Park in Norway, where waste heat from the off-gas of a ferrosilicon production plant is the main heating source. To cover peak heating demands, boilers based on CO gas, electricity, and oil are applied. The reduction in peak heating costs and emissions is evaluated as a function of tank size for two different scenarios: (1) a scenario where CO gas, which is a byproduct from another nearby industry, is the main peak heating source; and (2) a scenario where no CO gas is available, and electricity is the main peak heating source. The highest economic viability is obtained with the smallest storage tank with a volume of 1000 m3, yielding a payback period of 7.1/16.2 years and a reduction in total heat production costs of 14.6/10.0% for Scenarios 1/2, respectively. The reduction in CO2 emissions is 19.4/14.8%, equal to 820/32 ton CO2 for the analyzed period. Sensitivity analysis shows a significant reduction in payback period for Scenario 2 with increasing electricity prices, while the payback period in Scenario 1 is most sensitive to the emission factors.