D

Journal of Energy and Power Engineering 8 (2014) 826-835

DAVID

PUBLISHING

Implementation of Spreadsheet Modeling to Compare

the Annual Energy Performance and Cost of
Microgeneration Systems
Andrew Putrayudha Soesanto1, Evgueniy Entchev2, Eun Chul Kang3 and Euy Joon Lee3
1. Renewable Energy Engineering, University of Science and Technology, Daejeon 305-350, Korea
2. Renewables and Integrated Energy Systems Laboratory, Canmet Energy Research Centre,Ottawa,K1A 0E4 Canada
3. Energy Efficiency Department, Korea Institute of Energy Research, Daejeon 305-343, Korea
Received: December 30, 2013 / Accepted: January 13, 2014 / Published: May 31, 2014.
Abstract: This paper presents the investigation of energy and cost saving of microgeneration systems which consist of conventional,
load sharing, renewable energy and hybrid-renewable energy systems application featuring single detached house and office buildings
by implementing spreadsheet modeling. Microsoft excel is employed as the spreadsheet application in this study. The system
performance of each case is calculated under typical weather of ottawa, canada. These cases are calculated and analyzed in terms of
thermal/cooling load (building demand) and natural gas/electricity consumption (energy supply) as well as the financial part by
involving several parameters which are initial cost, annual energy consumption cost, annual operational and maintenance cost, inflation
rate, and return on investment. Moreover, a house and an office have the same geometry of 200 m2. Total of seven cases modeling are
developed; Case-1- a house with boiler and chiller, Case-2- an office with boiler and chiller, Case-3-a simple sum of Case 1 and Case 2,
Case-4- a load-sharing model, Case-5- a load-sharing with GSHP (ground source heat pump), Case-6- a load-sharing with ground
source heat pump-fuel cell hybrid system (FC-GSHP)and Case-7- a load-sharing with GSHPphotovoltaic hybrid system
(PVT-GSHP). As the results, it will be observed the efficiency of the load-sharing, renewable energy, hybrid-renewable energy
implementation comparing to the conventional system.
Key words: Spreadsheet, GSHP, FC, PVT, microgeneration.

1. Introduction
The use of fossil fuels for heat and electricity
generation and for transportation has been becoming
the major sources of GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions.
One way to reduce these emissions is by replacing the
fossil fuels with the renewables. Various types of
renewables, such as photovoltaic, solar collector,
GSHP (ground source heat pump), wind turbine, FC
(fuel cell), etc. have been worldwide implemented as
the substitute of the fossil energy [1].
Mostly, the renewable energy device can only produce
Corresponding author: Andrew Putrayudha Soesanto, Dr.,
research fields: geothermal and solar thermal energy. E-mail:
ejlee@kier.re.kr.

one type of energy which is either heat or electricity.

Improving the renewables efficiency can be done by
integrating the heat-device basis and electricity-device
basis which is usually called CHP (combined heat and
power) system. This study employs the GSHP, FC and
photovoltaic-thermal as the main devices to model the
small CHP systems, or usually called microgeneration,
and applies them to both single residential and office
buildings. This study also uses boiler and chiller to model
the conventional systems, since they get the electricity
from the grid, as the reference case to be compared with
the renewable and hybrid-renewables. Canmet Energy
Research Centre and Korea Institute of Energy Research
have initiated a joint project for modeling and simulation

Implementation of Spreadsheet Modeling to Compare the Annual Energy

Performance and Cost of Microgeneration Systems

of FC-GSHP (fuel cell-ground source heat pump system)

and PVT-GSHP (photovoltaic thermal-ground source
heat pump) systems and its results have been done by
using TRNSYS.
The objective of this paper is to know how much
energy is required to fulfill the building demands in
terms of HVAC use by implementing the simple
spreadsheet modeling. HVAC stands for heating,
ventilation, air conditioning and HVAC system
provide collectively or individually the processes of
comfort heating, ventilating and air conditioning
within a building. Moreover, the other objective is also
to know how much energy and cost saving can be
achieved by using renewable (heat pump) and hybrid
renewable (FC-GSHP and PVT-GSHP) in comparison
to conventional (boiler and chiller) system. Weather
data, building properties, hourly load schedule, and
equipments characteristic are taken into account.

2. Case Study
Total of seven case studies were developed, which
are Case-1- a house with a boiler and a chiller, Case-2an office with a boiler and a chiller, Case-3- a simple
sum of Case-1 and Case-2, Case-4-load sharing
between a house and an office with one boiler and one
chiller, Case-5-load sharing between a house and an
office with GSHP, Case-6-load sharing between a
house and an office with FC-GSHPand Case-7) load
Table 1 Case study.
Cases

Heating/cooling systems
Cooling
Heating

House
only
Office
Chiller + Fan Coil Boiler + Fan Coil
only
Simple
Case 1 + Case 2
Case 1 + Case 2
sum
Loads
Load
Chiller + Fan Coil Boiler + Fan Coil
sharing
Load
GSHP Fan Coil GSHP Fan Coil
sharing
Load
GSHP Fan Coil FC-GSHP-Fan Coil
sharing
Load
GSHP Fan Coil PVT GSHP an Coil
sharing

Case 1 Chiller + Fan Coil Boiler + Fan Coil

Case 2
Case 3
Case 4
Case 5
Case 6
Case 7

Remarks

827

sharing between a house and an office with PVT-GSHP.

All cases are summarized here in Table 1.

3. Methods
There are several steps to do the spreadsheet
modeling approach in this study. First is gathering
weather data from NASA (National Aeronautics and
Space Administration) and summarizing them into bin
data. Second, determining the building properties
referring to the building which was used in TRNSYS
modeling. Third one is calculating the building loads
(heating load and cooling load) based on the ASHRAE
Fundamental Book. The fourth step is determining the
hourly load schedule in the weekday and weekend.
Furthermore, the fifth is modeling the equipments by
generating their mathematical equations based on
equipments which were used in TRNSYS, finally, the
last step is calculating the energy consumption, energy
saving and cost saving as the final results.
3.1 Weather and Location Data
Weather data used in this paper was Ottawa,
Canadas in the latitude of 45.421 N and longitude of
-75.692 W [2]. These data were inserted into the
NASA website [3], with the output chosen was average
air temperature at 2 m. In addition, start date and end
date selected were from January 1, 2011 to December
31, 2011. Its result can be seen in Fig. 1.
Afterwards, these weather and location data can be
summarized in Table 2.
3.2 Building Properties
Load and structures 3-D multi-zone building
(TRNSYS Type 56) is used to simulate the residential
and office buildings. The two buildings are separated
from each other where there is no any thermal
interaction between them. The house and office have
the same surface area of 200 m2 with a flat roof and
each building is simulated as a single zone through the
present modeling. The house and office specifications
are presented in Table 2. The buildings height is 2.7 m

Implementation of Spreadsheet Modeling to Compare the Annual Energy

Performance and Cost of Microgeneration Systems

828

40
20
0
-20

1
24
47
70
93
116
139
162
185
208
231
254
277
300
323
346

Temperature (C )

Ottawa weather data

-40

Days of year
Fig. 1 Ottawa weather data.
Table 2 Summary of Ottawa weather and location data.
Location
Winter outdoor
Winter indoor
Summer outdoor
Summer indoor
Sensible heat ratio
Elevation
Latitude
Longitude

Ottawa
-24.21 oC
21 oC
26.62 oC
23 oC
0.7
112 m
45.421o
-75.692o

and the window to wall area ratio is fixed to be 22% for

both house and office. The overall heat transfer
coefficient has value of 0.54, 0.351, 0.283 and 1.69
W/m2K for roof, external wall, floor and windows
respectively. SHGC (solar heat gain coefficient) for
window has value of 0.705, as shown in Table 2. The
building is designed as rectangle which has the same
length of each side/wall. Each wall faces north, east,
south, west with windows attached on it. The area of
wall including the windows is 152.71 m2, since
window to wall ratio is 22%, the area of window is
therefore 33.6 m2. On the other words, the net area of
each wall and the area of each window are 29.78 m2
and 8.4 m2, respectively. These building properties
data are summarized in Table 3.
3.3 Building Load Calculation
Building load calculation is based on the ASHRAE
fundamental book in the chapter 28 and 29 entitled
residential cooling and heating load calculations and
nonresidential cooling and heating load calculation
procedures. Load calculation determines total sensible

Table 3 Summary of building properties.

Item

House

Office

Unit

Area
Height
Window/wall area ratio
Roof U-value
External wall U-value
Floor U-value
Window U-value
Window SHGC
Window area
Wall area

200
2.7
22
0.54
0.351
0.283
1.69
0.705
33.6
119.12

200
2.7
22
0.54
0.351
0.283
1.69
0.705
33.6
119.12

m2
m
%
W/m2K
W/mK
W/m2K
W/m2K
%
m2
m2

cooling load due to heat gain: (1) through structural

components (walls, floors and ceilings); (2) through
windows; (3) caused by infiltration and ventilation; (4)
due to occupancy [4].
Direct application of procedures for calculating
cooling load due to heat gain for flat glass results in
unrealistically high cooling loads for residential
installations. Window GLFs (glass load factors) as well
as SCs (shading coefficients) modified for single and
multifamily residential cooling load calculations and
including solar heat load plus air-to-air conduction, are
given in ASHRAE fundamental book. Whereas,
window U-value is given in Table 1. The formula for
calculating the heating and cooling loads through
window are given in the following equations:
qc = GLF WA (window area)/1,000
qh = U WA (window area) (ti-to)/1,000

(1)
(2)

Moreover, the heating and cooling load calculation

through window are shown in the table below, where
total cooling load and heating load are 3.58 kW and
2.57 kW, respectively as shown in Table 4.
In addition, the calculation for the heating and
cooling load through wall, roof and floor are done in
the similar way as window. Their equations as well as
the table which results cooling loads of 0.2, 2.27, 0.11
kW, respectively, and heating load of 1.89, 4.88, 2.56
kW, respectively, can be seen in Table 5:
qc = U CLTD Area/1,000

(3)

qh = U Area (ti-to)/1,000

(4)

Implementation of Spreadsheet Modeling to Compare the Annual Energy

Performance and Cost of Microgeneration Systems
Table 4 Building loads due to heat gain through windows.
Area
GLF
U
SC
qc (kW) qh (kW)
Windows
(W/m2) (m2)
(W/m2K)
North
1.69
0.5 57
8.4
0.48
0.64
East

1.69

0.5 142

8.4

1.19

0.64

South

1.69

0.5 85

8.4

0.71

0.64

West

1.69

0.5 142

8.4

1.19

0.64

3.58

2.57

Total

Table 5 Building loads due to heat gain through walls, roof

and floor.
Walls
North

U
CLTD
Area (m2) qc (kW) qh (kW)
(W/m2K) (K)
0.351
2
29.78
0.02
0.47

East

0.351

29.78

0.07

0.47

South

0.351

29.78

0.03

0.47

West
Total

0.351

29.78

0.07
0.2

0.47
1.89

CLTD
U
(W/m2K) (K)
Roof 1 0.54
21
Roof

Area (m2) qc (kW)

200

Total
U
CLTD
(W/m2K) (K)
Floor 1 0.283
2
Floor

Area
(m2)
200

Total

qh (kW)
4.88

2.27

4.88
qh (kW)

0.11

2.56

0.11

2.56

the number of people inside (occupants). In this paper,

for house case, LPD, EPD and occupants are assumed
as 4.7 W/m2, 8.2 W/m2, and four persons respectively
and for office case, 20 W/m2, 16 W/m2, and 20 persons
respectively. Internal load due to the occupant is
assumed as 67 W/person. Those are presented in
Tables 6 and 7.
Finally, the peak load can be calculated by summing
all of loads from each component above. It results that
house peak heating load is 25.86 kW, house peak
cooling load is 14.54 kW, office peak heating load is
25.86 kW, and office cooling load is 20.23 kW.
3.4 Hourly Load Schedule

2.27

qc (kW)

Besides that, infiltration is the one of parameter that

should be included into the account. Infiltration is the
unintentional or accidental introduction of outside air
into a building, typically through cracks in the building
envelope and through use of doors for passage.
Infiltration is sometimes called air leakage. The type of
the buildings, either house or office, are assumed to

Hourly load schedules for the house and office are

presented in the Figs. 2 and 3. They define how
percentage of energy used in each particular hour.
Those pictures also present the load difference between
weekday and weekend. For house on the weekday, the
peak load is between 1:00 to 07:00 and 18:00 to 24:00,
whereas the base load is in the daytime between
9:00-16:00 which is only 20%. On the weekend, the
different thing is only in the base load value which is
slightly higher, 30%.
On the other hand, for the office on the weekday, the
peak load happens in the day time and the base load
happens from evening to early morning. Whereas, on
the weekend, there is no peak load [5]. Those graphs
can be seen in Figs. 2 and 3.
Table 6 House load due to internal gains.
W/m2

have loose structure. The air exchange rates (ACH)

Internal Gains

values can be found in the ASHRAE fundamental book

Lighting power density

4.7
Equipment power density 8.2
Occupants
1.34
Total

on Chapter 28, Tables 7 and 8. Its equation as well as

its results is shown as following:
1.2

ACH

room volume

829

Area (m2) qc (kW)

200
200
200

0.94
1.64
0.27
2.85

,
,

ti to
(5)
Furthermore, internal gains which is defined as the
heat gain comes from the collection of heat given off
by sources inside the building such as LPD (lighting
power density), EPD (equipment power density) and

Table 7 Office load due to internal gains.

Internal Gains

W/m2

Lighting Power Density 20

Equipment Power Density 16
Occupants
6.7
Total

Area (m2)
200
200
200

qc
(kW)
4
3.2
1.34
8.54

Percentage used (%)

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

Percentage used (%)

Implementation of Spreadsheet Modeling to Compare the Annual Energy

Performance and Cost of Microgeneration Systems

830

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

Hour of day (h)

Hour of day (h)

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

Percentage used (%)

Percentage used (%)

(a)
Fig. 2 House hourly load schedule on the weekday (a) and (b) weekend.

(b)

100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

Hour of day (h)

Hour of day (h)

(a)
Fig. 3 Office hourly load schedule on the (a) weekday and (b) weekend.

(b)

3.5 Equipment
The boiler was modeled as a device with
variablepartial load efficiency (TRNSYS Type 751) [6,
7]. Its thermal efficiency is assumed as 0.8. The boiler
capacities of Case-1, Case-2, Case-3, and Case-4 are 20
kW, 20 kW, (20 + 20) kW and 35 kW, respectively. It
uses a simple efficiency equation to predict the energy
requirement of heating a liquid to its set point
temperature. In a way, the boiler capacity is modulated
and the required energy input is limited by the device
maximum capacity. On the other hand, the chiller was
modeled as air cooled chiller referring to TRNSYS
Type 655. Its COP is assumed as 3. The chiller
capacities of Case-1, Case-2, Case-3 and Case-4 are 15
kW, 20 kW, (15 + 20) kW, and 30 kW respectively. The
boiler and chiller PLR (part load ratio) vs. EIR (energy
input ratio) characteristics are presented in Fig. 4.
Furthermore, the heat pump was modeled based on
the TRNSYS type 668 water-to-water heat pump . It
has capacities of 20 kW heating and 10 kW cooling.

The COPs of heat pump, either heating or cooling, are

the function of PLR (part load ratio) and the power
consumptions are the function of the COPs. These
functions and equations can be seen in Fig. 5.
Besides that, the fuel cell was modeled based on a
PEMFC (1 kWe and 1.5 kW thermal) which was
installed and commissioned at the Canmet Energy
eCOGEN Laboratory in Ottawa, Canada. The electrical
and thermal efficiencies are the function of water inlet
temperature with the gas consumption is assumed 2.65
kWh/h. These functions and equations can be seen in
the following graphs in Fig. 6.
The last equipment is PVT which was modeled
based on TRNSYS type 563. It is assumed to have the
capacity of 350 W/panel, the area of 3.5 m2/panel, and
the panel number employed is 30 panels. The
characteristics are presented in Fig. 7.
3.6 Energy Consumption Calculation
Calculation was done by completing several steps.
First of all, the Ottawa temperature data were grouped

Implementation of Spreadsheet Modeling to Compare the Annual Energy

Performance and Cost of Microgeneration Systems

Boiler output ratio (PLR)

Output ratio (PLR)

1.50

y = 0.8x 0.16
R = 1

PLR

PLR

1.5

0.5
0.5

1.5

y = -1.8195x 2 + 3.5986x 0.7966

R = 0.9517

1.00
0.50

0
0

831

0.50

1.00

EIR

EIR

(a)

(b)

1.50

Fig. 4 Equipments characteristic : (a) Boiler and (b) Chiller.

7

COP

Power consumption (kW)

y = 5.280x + 0.633
R = 0.993

6
4
3
2
1
0
0

0.5

1.5

5.3
5.2
5.1
5
4.9
4.8
4.7
4.6

y = 0.097x2 0.658x + 5.774

R = 0.945

COP

PLR

8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

y = 27.10x 14.78
R = 0.983

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Power consumption (kW)

Cooling COP

(a)
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

y = 1.787x2 - 10.24x + 17.46

R = 0.997
0

COP

PLR

(b)
Fig. 5 Equipment characteristic of heat pump: (a) in heating mode and (b) in cooling mode.
Thermal efficiency

0.5

y = 9E-05x2 0.003x + 0.357

R = 0.990

0.4
0.3

Thermal efficiency

Electric efficiency

Electrical efficiency

0.2
0.1
0
0

20

40

Water inlet temperature ( C )

(a)

60

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

y = -0.0001x2 + 0.014x + 0.484

R = 0.999
0

20

40

Water inlet temperature ( C )

(b)

Fig. 6 Equipment characteristic of fuel cell: (a) electrical efficiency and (b) thermal efficiency.

60

Implementation of Spreadsheet Modeling to Compare the Annual Energy

Performance and Cost of Microgeneration Systems

832

250

0.7

Linear (TRNSYS model)

Linear (IEA-SHC)

0.5

200

DC Power (W)

Thermal Efficiency

0.6

IEA-SHC
TRNSYS model
Linear (TRNSYS model)
Linear (IEA-SHC)

IEA-SHC
TRNSYS model

y = -10.228x + 0.7184

y = -7.3729x + 0.6027
0.4
0.3

150
y = 0.23x - 10.027

y = 0.2378x - 4.7585
100

0.2

50

0.1
0
0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

(T m-T am)/G

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

G (W/m )

(a)

(b)

Fig. 7 Equipment characteristic of PVT: (a) thermal efficiency and (b) electrical efficiency.

inputting the outdoor temperature into that slope

PLR equation to get the COP. COP value was then

inserted into power consumption vs. COP equation to
get the power consumption.
On the other hand, water inlet temperature for fuel
cells input is linearly assumed in the range of 5 C to
40 C. Furthermore, there are two curves presenting the
thermal efficiency of PVT and the DC Power generated
by PVT. PVT Thermal Efficiency is the function of
inlet water temperature, ambient temperature, and solar
radiation ((Tm-Tam)/G), whereas DC Power is the
function of solar radiation (G). The results of these
calculations in terms of annual energy consumption
and energy saving are presented in Tables 8-10,
respectively.

equation. The heating mode was in the range of -26 C

3.7 Cost Analysis

by implementing bin method, in the range of -26 C to

28 C with 2 C increment. After that, the information
about the days frequency which occurs in one year on
every particular temperature could be known. Besides
that, the number of either weekday or weekend in each
bin was also counted. There is the daily load difference
between weekday and weekend. Moreover, the heating
slope and cooling slope were also linearly determined
by using four points which are (-24.21, 25.86), (21, 0),
(23, 0), (26.62) for house case and (-24.21, 25.86), (21,
0), (23.0), (26.62, 20.23) for office case, where the x
axis is outdoor temperature and y axis is the thermal
load for one hour. The thermal load was then got by

to 20 C, while the cooling mode was in the range of

24 C to 28 C. The total thermal load in one year was
calculated by multiplying thermal load due to
particular outdoor temperature and frequency.
Afterwards, that particular thermal load was divided
by equipment capacity to get the EIR (energy input to
cooling output ratio). The EIR was then inserted to
equipment equation to know the PLR (part load ratio).
Hereafter, the PLR was multiplied by the equipment
capacity to get the actual thermal energy supplied by
equipment. And finally, that value was multiplied by
equipment COP to get the gas or electricity consumption.
The same method was used to get the PLR in the
GSHP case. This PLR value was inserted into COP vs.

It is necessary to know the price of each main

component. They can be known from some references.
They are summarized in following Table 11.
Table 8 Annual energy consumptions.
kWh/m2yr
Space
heating
Space
Cooling
Gas
consumed
Electricity
Consumed
Electricity
Generated
Energy
Saving

Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5 Case 6 Case7

193.7 136.4 165.1 165.1 165.1 165.1 165.1
9.1

8.6

8.8

9.3

9.3

9.3

9.3

122.2 85.8

103.9 97.3

26.1

1.4

1.5

1.4

1.6

68.6

64.4

37.8

3.4

23.3

0.1

0.4

0.1

0.6

Implementation of Spreadsheet Modeling to Compare the Annual Energy

Performance and Cost of Microgeneration Systems
Table 9 Annual energy consumptions.
Energy consumption
(kWh/m2yr)
123.6
87.3
105.4
98.9
68.6
90.5
37.8

Case study
Case 1
Case 2
Case 3
Case 4
Case 5
Case 6
Case 7

annual energy consumed cost, annual operation and

maintenance cost. Case 3 is the reference case, the
other cases are compared to Case 3. All of these
values can be summarized in Table 12.
To find out the value of annual total cost spent,
annual cost saving achieved, and return of investment
achieved for each case compare to reference case
(Case 3), these following formulas are used.
year Total Cost

Table 10 Energy saving results.

Case study
Case 4
Case 5
Case 6
Case 7

Energy saving compared to Case 3 (%)

6%
35%
14%
64%

Table 11 The unit initial cost of each component.

Items
Main
Boiler
Chiller
GSHP
Fuel cell
PVT
LNG
Electrical
Building area
Annual O & M cost
Supporting equipment and
Installation

Unit initial cost

160
155
500
4000
1000
0.05
0.086
400
3%
10%

$/kW
$/kW
$/kW
$/kW
$/kW
$/kWh
$/kWh
m2
of initial cost
of total main
Equipment

year Cost Saving

m2 of office. Annual operation and maintenance cost

is assumed as 3% of initial cost. Furthermore, the
price of supporting equipment which are like fan coil
unit, pump, and tank including installation cost are
assumed as 10% of total main equipment.
Furthermore, annual inflation rate is assumed as 5%.
The prices above are used to get the total initial cost,

1
100%
year

(6)
year

(7)
Table 12 The cost comparison table of microgeneration
systems.
Case system
3

The price of boiler, chiller, and GSHP refer to

RETScreen international example project analysis.
The price of fuel cell refers to horizon quotation.
Moreover, the price of LNG and electrical refer to
statistics from IEA (International Energy Agency) and
U.S. EIA, respectively.
On the other hand, building area is assumed as 400
2
m consisting 200 m2 of residential (house) and 200

833

Load sharing house and

office (dimple dum)
Boiler
Chiller
Supporting rquipment &
Installation vost
Total
Load sharing house and
office with microgeneration
Boiler
Chiller
Supporting equipment &
Installation cost
Total
GSHP system
GSHP heating capacity
GSHP cooling capacity
Supporting equipment &
Installation cost
Total
GSHP & FC systems
FC system
GSHP heating capacity
GSHP cooling capacity
Supporting equipment &
Installation cost
Total
PVT & GSHP system
PVT system
GSHP heating capacity
GSHP cooling capacity
Supporting equipment &
Installation cost
Total

Total initial annual Total

cost ($)
cost ($)

9,600
4,650

4,951.21

1,425
15,675

7,200
3,100

4,691.82

1,030
11,330
10,000
3,906.40
1,000
11,000
4,000
10,000
4,964.40
1,400
15,400
10,500
10,000
3,331.65
2,050
22,550

Implementation of Spreadsheet Modeling to Compare the Annual Energy

Performance and Cost of Microgeneration Systems

834

present value which has formula as described on the

following equation:
PV

Fig. 8 Return of investments graph for each case.

Present value of cost saving for 20 years
$20,000.00
$15,000.00
$10,000.00
$5,000.00
$0.00
($5,000.00)

$17,592.16

$14,782.60
$4,870.16
($60.73)
Case 4

Case 5

Case 6

Case 7

Present value of installation + operation cost for

20 years
$62,740.61 $52,828.16 $67,671.50 $50,018.61

Case 4

Case 5

Case 6

Case 7

Fig. 10 Present value of installation and operation cost for

20 years.
1

Resulting a present value in Figs. 9 and 10.

It can be observed from the bar charts above that
present values of cost saving for 20 years period for
Case 4, Case 5, Case 6 and Case 7 comparing to
reference case (Case 3) are 4,870.16 USD; 14,782.6
USD; -60.73 USD; and 17,592.1 USD respectively.
Besides that, present values of installation and
operation cost for 20 years are 62,740.61 USD;
52,826.16 USD; 67,671.5 USD; and 50,018.5 USD
respectively. It means that Case 7 is the most efficient
system in terms of cost saving and return on
investment.

4. Conclusions

Fig. 9 Present value of cost saving for 20 years.

$80,000.00
$60,000.00
$40,000.00
$20,000.00
$0.00

(9)

(8)

Resulting this following graph in Fig. 8, showing

that Case 7 will give the highest value of return of
investment among the others. It is about 47,000 USD
for 20 years period, while Case 4 is only about 12,000
USD. On the other hand, Case 6 is worse than
reference case which is around -160 USD for 20 years
period. The disadvantage of Case 6 is caused by the
higher cost of annual operation and maintenance
including energy consumed.
Furthermore, it is also necessary to know how much
those values are worth in the present day. It is called

This study involves several microgeneration cases

which are Case-1- a house with a boiler and a chiller,
Case-2- an office with a boiler and a chiller, Case-3- a
simple sum of Case-1 and Case-2, Case-4-load
sharing between a house and an office with one boiler
and one chiller, Case-5-load sharing between a house
and an office with GSHP Case-6-load sharing
between a house and an office with FC-GSHP and
(Case-7-load sharing between a house and an office
with PVT-GSHP. In addition, this study has shown
the methods to calculate the energy consumption,
energy saving, and cost analysis of each
microgeneration system by using the spreadsheet
program. As shown on the previous sections, the most
efficient
microgeneration
configuration
is
PVT-GSHP which consumes energy only 37.8
kWh/m2yr, save the energy up to 64% compared to
Case 3 (reference case). Even though initial cost of
Case 7 is the highest one among the others, however it
can achieve the return on investment around 47,000
USD for 20 years period. For future work, an analysis
using different method will be applied on these case
studies to improve the validity of this result. Another

Implementation of Spreadsheet Modeling to Compare the Annual Energy

Performance and Cost of Microgeneration Systems

approach to enhance the system such as smart control

would likely to be analysed.

Acknowledgments

[5]

This work was conducted under the framework of

Research and Development Program of the Korea
Institute of Energy Research (KIER) (B3-8609).

References
[1]

[2]
[3]
[4]

Today in Energy, U.S. EIA (Energy Information

Administration)
Web
site,
May
12,
2014,
http://www.eia.gov.
Prediction of Worldwide Energy Resource Home Page,
http://power.larc.nasa.gov.
M.S. Owen, ASHRAE Fundamentals Handbook,
ASHRAE Publication, Atlantam, Canada, 2013.
E. Entchev, L.B. Yang, M. Ghorab, Fuel Cell-Ground

[6]

[7]

835

Source Heat Pump Simulation Study, First year progress

report, Report#:AC523-12, Canmet Energy Research
Centre, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, Mar. 2012.
E.J. Lee, E.C. Kang, S.Y. Cho, E. Entchev, L. Yang, M.
Ghorab, Performance Assessment and Integral Effect Test
of Fuel Cell-Ground Source Heat Pump and Photovoltaic
Thermal-Ground Source Heat Pump, Annex54-KIERsubtask
B
report
[Online],
http://www.annex-54.sharepoint-live.de.
E. Entchev, L. Yang, M. Ghorab, Photovoltaic
Thermal-Ground Source Heat Pump Simulation Study,
Second year report, Canmet Ernergy, Natural Resources,
Canada, 2013.
E.J. Lee, E.C. Kang, S.Y. Cho, E. Entchev, L. Yang, M.
Ghorab, Performance Assessment and Integral Effect Test
of Fuel Cell-Ground Source Heat Pump and Photovoltaic
Thermal-Ground Source Heat Pump, Annex54-KIERsubtask
C
report
[Online],
http://www.annex-54.sharepoint-live.de.