Kalam Adil, King Abigail, Moret Ellen, Weerasinghe Upekha
Ivring B, Harris Graduate School of Public Policy Studies, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA.
Chem Cent J. 2012 Apr 23;6 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S3. doi: 10.1186/1752-153X-6-S1-S3.
Combined Heat and Power (CHP) systems can provide a range of benefits to users with regards to efficiency, reliability, costs and environmental impact. Furthermore, increasing the amount of electricity generated by CHP systems in the United States has been identified as having significant potential for impressive economic and environmental outcomes on a national scale. Given the benefits from increasing the adoption of CHP technologies, there is value in improving our understanding of how desired increases in CHP adoption can be best achieved. These obstacles are currently understood to stem from regulatory as well as economic and technological barriers. In our research, we answer the following questions: Given the current policy and economic environment facing the CHP industry, what changes need to take place in this space in order for CHP systems to be competitive in the energy market?
We focus our analysis primarily on Combined Heat and Power Systems that use natural gas turbines. Our analysis takes a two-pronged approach. We first conduct a statistical analysis of the impact of state policies on increases in electricity generated from CHP system. Second, we conduct a Cost-Benefit analysis to determine in which circumstances funding incentives are necessary to make CHP technologies cost-competitive.
Our policy analysis shows that regulatory improvements do not explain the growth in adoption of CHP technologies but hold the potential to encourage increases in electricity generated from CHP system in small-scale applications. Our Cost-Benefit analysis shows that CHP systems are only cost competitive in large-scale applications and that funding incentives would be necessary to make CHP technology cost-competitive in small-scale applications.
From the synthesis of these analyses we conclude that because large-scale applications of natural gas turbines are already cost-competitive, policy initiatives aimed at a CHP market dominated primarily by large-scale (and therefore already cost-competitive) systems have not been effectively directed. Our recommendation is that for CHP technologies using natural gas turbines, policy focuses should be on increasing CHP growth in small-scale systems. This result can be best achieved through redirection of state and federal incentives, research and development, adoption of smart grid technology, and outreach and education.
热电联产（CHP）系统在效率、可靠性、成本和环境影响方面能为用户带来一系列益处。此外，在美国，增加热电联产系统发电量被认为在全国范围内具有实现可观经济和环境效益的巨大潜力。鉴于推广热电联产技术能带来诸多好处，增进我们对如何最好地实现热电联产技术预期推广的理解具有重要意义。目前认为这些障碍源于监管以及经济和技术壁垒。在我们的研究中，我们回答以下问题：鉴于热电联产行业当前面临的政策和经济环境，该领域需要发生哪些变化才能使热电联产系统在能源市场具有竞争力？
我们的分析主要聚焦于使用天然气轮机的热电联产系统。我们的分析采用双管齐下的方法。首先，我们对州政策对热电联产系统发电量增长的影响进行统计分析。其次，我们进行成本效益分析，以确定在哪些情况下资金激励对于使热电联产技术具有成本竞争力是必要的。
我们的政策分析表明，监管改进并不能解释热电联产技术采用的增长情况，但有可能在小规模应用中鼓励热电联产系统发电量的增加。我们的成本效益分析表明，热电联产系统仅在大规模应用中具有成本竞争力，而在小规模应用中，资金激励对于使热电联产技术具有成本竞争力是必要的。
综合这些分析，我们得出结论，由于天然气轮机的大规模应用已经具有成本竞争力，针对主要由大规模（因而已经具有成本竞争力）系统主导的热电联产市场的政策举措并未得到有效引导。我们的建议是，对于使用天然气轮机的热电联产技术，政策重点应放在促进小规模系统中热电联产的增长上。通过重新调整州和联邦的激励措施、研发、采用智能电网技术以及推广和教育，可以最好地实现这一结果。
