System or Technology Analysis Methodology

8/9/2019 System or Technology Analysis Methodology

1/47

Lecture:Systems Analysis Methodologies

Dr.JohnC.Wright

MIT

- PSFC

28SEP2010


2/47

Introduction Outline

OUTLINE

Scopingstudy

Systemsanalysis- increasing

detail

Lifecycleanalysis

Simulationmodels

Riskanalysisanduncertainty

How

are

all

these

connected?

2 SE T 4 Systems Analysis


3/47

Introduction Outline

INTRODUCTION

Manyissuesforsustainability requiringbalance

Weneedtoquantifyto

proceed

Deal

with

complexity

and

uncertainty

Thisisthegoal“Systems

Analysis”

End

result

often

involves

very,

verylargecomputercodes

Howdowemakesuch computermodels?



4/47

Scopingstudy

SCOPINGSTUDYCHARACTERISTICS

We’llseemoreofthisinafuelcostsexamplenextweek.

Basicguidelinesforascopingstudy:

Highly

simplified

Mostlylinearanalysis- addseparatecostsVeryfewfeedbackeffects

Advantages

Relativelysimpletounderstand

Good

overall

picture Identificationofweaknesses



5/47

SystemsAnalysis

SYSTEMSANALYSISISTHENEXTSTEPINEVALUATION

Assumeafavorablescopingstudy

Nextstepisadetailedsystemsanalysis

Allelementsareanalyzedinmuchgreaterdetail

For

example

in

our

nuclear

plant

scoping

study

we

gave

the

fuel

pricein$/kg

Inasystemanalysismodelthesecostsarefurtherbrokendown

Fuelcosts:

Mining

costs Conversioncosts

Enrichmentcosts Financecosts



6/47

SystemsAnalysis

MODULARIZATIONOFSYSTEMSANALYSIS

Eachofthesemaybefurtheranalyzedoneortwolevelsdeeper.

Input

data

will

be

based

on

experience

and

future

projections.

Theanalysiswillaccountforuncertainties.

Alllowerlevelcontributionsarecombinedtoformonemoduleof

thesystemscode

thefuelcostmodule. ⇒



7/47

SystemsAnalysis

SAINCLUDESNON-LINEAREFFECTS

AcriticalfeatureinSAistheinclusionofinterdependencies.

Systemsanalysisarenotlinear.

They

include

feedback

effects.Forexampleconsiderminingcosts:

PlentyofReserves – noproblem,linearrelationworks. Reservesdwindle – otherissuesarise Fuelcostswillrise

Will

new

fuel

be

found,

if

so

how

much? Howwillthisaffecttheprojectedcostoffuel?



8/47

SystemsAnalysis

BEWAREOFCOMPLEXCODES.

Systemsanalysiscodecontainsalargenumberofcomplex modules

Oftenhardtounderstandthewholepicture,oftenexpertinpartof

the

picture.

Shouldbemorereliablethanascopingstudythought.

Warning:

Be

very

careful

using

complex

systems

analysis

codes!!



9/47

SystemsAnalysis

SAISNOTONLYABOUTMONEY

Investorsarenottheonlypeopletocarryoutsystemsanalysis

Investorsfocusonfinancialreturns

Architectural

engineers

focus

on

technical

credibility,

schedule,

andcost

Environmentalistsfocusonpollution,wastedisposal,greenhousegasses,etc.

Government

focuses

on

the

public

good



10/47

SystemsAnalysis

GOVERNMENT IMPACTONSAISTHROUGHREGULATION

Desirabilityofaregulationisintheeyeofthestakeholder.

Everyoneisalobbyist.

Financial

institutions. Engineeringfirms.

Environmentalgroups. Industrialgroups.

ConsiderationofimpactofregulationispartofanySA.

There

often

is

an

uncertain

political

aspect

to

a

regulation.



11/47

SystemsAnalysis

STRUCTUREOFASYSTEMSANALYSIS

Numberofapproachestosystemsanalysis

Methodbelowisfairlytypical

Goal

of

the

analysis

–

answer

the

question

Does

it

make

sense

to

build

a

new

power

plant

(of

type

X)?

The

end

product

–

a

large,

complex,

hopefully

all

inclusive,

simulationcode.


S A l i


12/47

SystemsAnalysis

THESIMULATIONCODE

Technicalaspectsfromalifecycleanalysis

Regulation

aspects

from

a

risk

analysis

Includefeedbackeffects

Combinetocreateafinancialanalysis


S t A l i Lif C l A l i


13/47

Attributes: Costs Resource use Emissions Wastes Costs Performance etc.

Sum cumulative attributes over total life cycle of product to compare net impact

SystemsAnalysis LifeCycleAnalysis

LIFECYCLEANALYSIS(LCA)ELEMENTS

Production ofRaw Materials

ManufacturingProcess

Use ofProduct

Disposal

Energy

Recycle Wastes

Emissions

Wastes Wastes Wastes

Comprehensivecradle-to-grave,wells-to-wheels,dust-to-dust

analysisIncludes

Rawmaterials

Materials

processing

Manufacturing

Distribution Repairandmaintenance Wastedisposal

Decommissioning



14/47

MacDonald’s

Styrofoam or paper?

Trees (natural?) Oil (bad?)

Chemicals (worse)

Paper (good ?)

Styrofoam (??)

Chlorine orPeroxide

Pulp Acid or Alkali

Benzene + C2H4 + etc.

CFCs

McD

Hard to recycleCO2 Styrene

Oil

PCBs +Paper

PentaneDioxins

Plastic coating Polystyrene foamWater

WastewaterLandfill Trash Recycle

Courtesy of Elisabeth M. Drake. Used with permission.


15/47

Hydrogen Production Example

•

Make from steam methane

reforming?

•

Make from water electrolysis

using wind power?



16/47


17/47

SMR Results

H2 is a clean fuel, but its product ion from natural gas

has environmental consequences

H2

plant itself produces few emissions, except CO2

CO2 is the largest air emission (98 wt%) and accountsfor 77% of the GWP

0.64 MJ of H2 produced for every 1 MJ of fossilenergy consumed



18/47

Wind/Electrolysis Study

turbines electrolyzer H2 storage

Wind turbines:

Atlantic Orient Corporation (50kW x 3)

Class 5 wind data from upper Midwest site

(North Dakota)

Electrolyzer:

Stuart Energy (30 Nm3/hr nominal capacity)

Cars fueled: fleet of 46 at 3 kg/car/week



19/47

GWP and Energy Balance -

Wind/Electrolysis

Preliminary results:

• GWP = 650 g CO2-eq/kg H2 – Only 5% of the greenhouse gas emissions from SMR

• Energy balance = 20 MJ of H2 produced for every1 MJ of fossil energy consumed – 31 times more than the net energy balance from SMR

• Emissions are from equipment manufacture

–

Majority from concrete bases for wind turbines – Water consumption in electrolysis accounts for nearly

all resources



20/47

Hydrogen Production Choice?

•

Wind power offers significant reduction in GHG

emissions

• For transportation, there is a mismatch between

wind turbine energy availability and the large

concentrated populations of cars

• Costs for hydrogen from wind power are MUCH

higher than those from SMR

• For SMR, more fossil energy is consumed than H2energy produced


SystemsAnalysis LifeCycleAnalysis


21/47

ACCURACYREFLECTSUNCERTAINTIES

Technicalaccuracyisgood

Basedonestablishedengineeringprinciples

AmountoffuelperyearAmount

of

stainless

steel

pipe

Averagelifetimeofvalves

Convertingtechnicalinto$moredifficult

Interestrates

Inflation

rates

Costoffuel


SystemsAnalysis AnExample


22/47

ANLCAOFNUCLEARFUELCOSTINCLUDINGSCARCITY

Costofnuclearfuelincludingscarcity

Referencecase:U=$2000/kg

Breakdown

from

the

MIT

study

for

cost

per

kg

Ore $437Enrichment $117Fabrication $825StorageandDisposal $351

Total

$2040



23/47

!"

#$%& (&)&*&+,& -.%/&*0

12 3 2.&4 ,$05 678889:;5? 3 ! @>& A?&*%B C+B 7B!D!8!8 :>?*9

F 3 F.*+ *G5& !B!D!8H :>?*9

E*

:;

I2 3 >5? 9F 3 2.&49E* 7B8D!8J :;?* 8BMH ,&+509:>?*


24/47

/" 01 $., 23,45' / 01 .,652 *$ &', 7

8$'* $- $., 3' *+&' 9::;01,' H2 #$$ % " )*+,-.

!"

#$%&' $) *+, %$'* $- $.,

"


25/47

01,23 .,-,./,- 2- 2 45&67%8& 84 7%9,

$ % ! " ! " ! $ #$&'

# %

08-7 84 8., $%(( %&6.,2-, .23%'(: 2- .,-,./,-'$%&'(,

;%93(, 98',(


26/47

2345/6 $. *30,/+6 7,+*)1 4+8 09+*:/

#()9 )(4/

&1 0$1) $. $6/ :$/1 37 */# 6/1/6;/1

4+8 5/ .$3*'


27/47

#$+%% %--%01/ 2%1%+)34345 '

6%7890%)%41 ,- ,82 4(.%/

6%7890% ,82 0,98 78941/ :31$ ;

=> %8%01+3031? 2%)942 :388 340+%9/% %90$

?%9+ @ )%%1 4%: 2%)942 :31$ 4(.%/


28/47

5,)*62% 3%+)/

7%+%8 '2(.% 9 :;;8 '1,;8 #? 9 "; @+/8 3 6/

)%+

!"

#$% '()*%+ ,- '(.%/ 01,234

*


29/47

!"

#$% '$($)*$(

'$($)*$( +, -,%. /,(0 ,1 ,)$ +,$( 23

4,(0 ,1 ,)$ +,$( 23 ($5)/6 1,) .$% ,)$

#$% )$($)*$( /,(0 7,)$ 065. 8.80859 )$($)*$(

:20 ;,2 9,($ 7,)$


30/47

1 (2345$ 3-6$5

7$)$ '28 9 !:; ?@A-)$B C2 9 DEE F ?@A-)$B

G.6 ?H 9 !

#-/$ /I$ J$$6KG,? 5--4

C-)$+/0 6$4$.6( -. '2+/0

'2+/0 6$4$.6( -. C-)$+/0

% & $ % % ' & $ % ! "' ( !"#

$

' ! #'() *"! % &&

$ $ " # $ " * " ' !"#

% & !"#

$ % % !"#

!"

#$% '$($)*$( +,-./0



31/47

EQUATIONSFORTHECOSTOFOREARENON-LINEAR

Knownreservesandcostoforeareinter-related

10N (t )M F t

C ore(t ) =C i

exp k 1

R i (t )−10N (t )M F t N coal

N (t ) =N i0

+ +k 2N i0 t

T p

C ore(t )−C i R i (t ) =R i 0 1+k 3C ore(t )

k 1 =2.3,k 2 =0.05,k 3 =2




32/47

COSTOFOREFROMSYSTEMSANALYSIS

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

0 10 20 30 40

Year

C[$/kg]

N[#]

R[107 kg] Notethesingular

response

around40

years.Whatcausesthis?

Whatdoesa

plot

of

R

vs

C

looklike?




33/47

CONCLUSION

Costoforeincreasesby30

Oreis1/5thecostofuranium

COE

of

uranium

=

0.56

cent/kWhr

Thisyields3.8cents/kWhr

Notasbadwhenyoucalculatethepresentvalue

Still – itcouldbeaproblem

Uncertainty:

what

is

the

sensitivity

to

k 1,

k 2,

k 3


Systems

Analysis

Risk

Analysis


34/47

RISKANALYSIS

Riskanalysisinvolvesaccidentstopeopleormechanicalfailures

Toomanyinjuriesorfailureslowerthecapacityfactorandreduce

revenue

Wewanttominimizeriskbutitisnotpossibletoachievezerorisk

Qualitativelyriskcanbewrittenas

Risk=Frequency×Consequence


Systems

Analysis

Risk

Analysis


35/47

TYPESOFRISK

Riskcanbecontinuousordiscrete

Continuous:exposuretotoxicfumes

Discrete:steampipeexplosion

Consequencescouldcauseminorinjuries

Consequencescouldcausedeath

Consequencescouldinvolvelandorwatercontamination

Even

if

no

human

or

ecological

damage,

mechanical

failures

lowercapacityfactor


Systems

Analysis

Risk

Analysis


36/47

AVOIDINGRISK

Threebasicapproaches:

Ultra

robust

design

to

minimize

failure

Redundancy – onesystemfails,anothertakesover

Increasedshut-downsformaintenanceandrepairs


Systems

Analysis

Risk

Analysis


37/47

DETERMININGRISK

Howdowedeterminerisk?

Thisistherealmofriskanalysis

Singlecomponentfailuresrelativelyeasy

QualificationdataavailableHistoryofrealworldexperienceCanpredictthemeantimebetweenfailure

Singlesmallfailuresoftenharmless

Single

gigantic

failures

very

rare


Systems

Analysis

Risk

Analysis

C F


38/47

COMPLEXFAILURES

Largest

danger:

often

a

sequence

of

minorfailuresleadstomajorcatastrophe

Forexample:TMI,Challenger

Analysis

requires

sophisticated

tools

FaulttreeanalysisEventtreeanalysisUncertaintyanalysis

Probabilityofasevereaccident

Greaterforasequenceofminor

failures

Smallerforasinglemajorfailure

Fault

Tree

example


Systems

Analysis

Risk

Analysis

W ?


39/47

WHATTODO?

Recommendationsvarybygroup

Builderstendtounderestimateriskstokeepthecostdown

Example:

Don’t

worry

–

the

Big

Dig

is

safe

Others

tend

to

overestimate

the

risks

to

avoid

or

delay

construction

Example:Nuclearisunsafe – don’tbuildit.

Example:Windkillbirds – don’tbuildit.

Oftenthearbiterofrisksaregovernmentagencies – theEPA,

NRC,

FDA,

etc.Desireriskinformedregulations

Regulationsconsistentwithseverityoftherisk



40/47

!"

#$ &''()*+,*-./ /0,12'/

345 64/) +-)7 ,88/9* 94$)*+(9*-4$ 94)* 48 ,245/+ 2',$*:

#))(1/ -$-*-,' 9,2-*,' 94)* -$9'(6/) ,''+/;(',*-4$) ,))49-,*/6 5-*< +-)7

#) 94$)*+(9*-4$ 2+49//6)= $/5 +-)7) 1,> ?/-6/$*-8-/6

@


41/47

3**-4% +$% /)/+/52 .56/+52 .(*+ /* '.56

3**-4% +$% /)/+/52 .()*+,-.+/() +/4% /* #.

7%8 ,%9-25+/()* (:+%) (..-, ,5)1(42;

; '

=5.$ )%8 ,%9-25+/() /).,%5*%* +/4% >; +

?(52@ .52.-25+% +$% )%8 .(*+ (: +$% 625)+

/).2-1/)9 )%8 ,%9-25+/()*

!"

#$% '()*+,-.+/() 0(1%2


42/47

'%( 0*+,-./0-1*+ -14% #05 6 *.171+89 -14% #0:9/, %;-.8 .%7/98-1*+ -14% '-

' 6 .#05 6 -*-89 +/48-$%48-10899?

" " # ! ! ! " $ ! ""

! ! %" $

@*9A% =*. #05

'*-% -$8- .- B C =*. 0*4:9%-1*+

" " !

! !

! % $

!"

#$% '%( )*+,-./0-1*+ 2%.1*3


43/47

- +./.012 1234/%5, $*06+ 7*2 ,$% 5%( 8*+,

'*,% ,$1, , 156 ) 12% 2%01,%6

91:% , 0123%2 ; 7%(%2 (*2:%2+ 5%%6%6< 0%16+

,* 0*(%2 8*+,+

=4, ,$%> 12% ?1.6 *@%2 1 0*53%2 ,./%

A.B%6 8*+,+ C%D3D .5+42158%< E%5%7.,+< %,8DF 0%16

,* 1 5%, .582%1+% .5 )81? 64% ,* 6%01>+

$% & & ! !"# ! "!"# ' & ! "& !"# &

! $ (

!"

#$% '%( )*+,


44/47

+,-)%.%,/ 0,-&1$%2 34)$54)% 4,$ &46#)

( ( !!"#$

"( %"&'#

46#) -#2/2 0,-)%42% 42 / 0,-)%42%2,-)%.%,/4& &46#) -#2/2 4)% 4221.%$ /# 2-4&%0,%4)&8 50/3 0,0/04& &46#) -#2/2 *&46#)

: 02 4 -#,2/4,/ 46#1/ %;14& /# :

!!

7 +

&

*

( + %"&'# ! !( %"&'# , )

9

"#$%& (#) *


45/47


46/47

!"

#$%&'$( #*+' ,+- '

8

2

Ccapny( )

0.50 y

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.52

3.5

5

6.5

8

delta t (years)

T o t a l C a p i

t a l C o s t


47/47

MIT OpenCourseWarehttp://ocw.mit.edu

22.081J / 2.650J / 10.291J / 1.818J / 2.65J / 10.391J / 11.371J / 22.811J / ESD.166J

Introduction to Sustainable Energy

Fall 2010

For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms .
http://ocw.mit.edu/http://ocw.mit.edu/termshttp://ocw.mit.edu/termshttp://ocw.mit.edu/termshttp://ocw.mit.edu/

System or Technology Analysis Methodology

Documents

Transcript of System or Technology Analysis Methodology