Low Carbon District Heating Using Combined Heat and Power in U.S

This document provides an overview of low carbon district heating using combined heat and power in the United States. It discusses the benefits of this approach, the current state of the technology, its impact on energy systems, barriers, opportunities, and technical developments. The document also explores the potential for implementation in different sectors and the role of utilities in supporting this technology.

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S 1
The Name of the Class (Course)
Professor (Tutor)
The Name of the School (University)
The City and State where it is located
Module code
The Date

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S 2
Executive summary
District heating is a framework for the distribution of heat meant for space and water
heating in commercial and residential areas as they can enhance high efficiencies and low
emission of carbons as compared to gas boilers. The most standard approach is the employment
of a CHP engine that generates electricity from a central point. The heat obtained from engine
cooling can be recycled to provide heat used to warm the family buildings. The method saves
energy and reduces the rate of emissions (Brutonet.al .2016).
Combined Heat and Power (CHP) is often considered as a fresh approach thus efficient in
the generation of thermal energy and electric power from a single source of fuel. In place of
electricity purchase from grids of distributions and burning fuel separately in a boiler or furnaces
in the respective sources, a facility that is commercial or industrial can be utilized to combine the
power and heat to provide the desired services in a single step that is often energy-efficient
(Knizley et.al 2013).
The method addresses different national priorities directly including improvement of the
competitiveness in the United States via a reduction of the costs of operation, increment of
energy effectiveness, reduction of Green House Emissions, development of resiliency and
security in the energy sector as well as leveraging the infrastructure of energy sectors. All these
factors contribute to the growth of the United States' economy (Basso et.al 2017). Stabilization
of the technique has been made possible through the emergence of market drivers including a
friendly environment for the growth of the approach, lower costs of operation hence easy
implementation, initiatives of mitigation developed towards low and zero carbon energy systems,
support from utilities and replicability of the projects (Li et.al 2016).

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S 3
Reports show that each CHP category exhibits approximately 240GW professional
potential within the US 291,000 areas. The paper having tackled the original content of CHP,
then discusses the current state of the method in the U.S, the impacts of its implementation to the
utilization of other fuels, the barriers towards its integration, the opportunities and the technical
developments advised to promote the system's functionality (Görgülü et.al 2016)
Table of contents
Contents
Executive summary.......................................................................................................................2
Table of contents........................................................................................................................3
Introduction............................................................................................................................4
Current state of the technology....................................................................................................7
Impact on the energy systems on other fuels...........................................................................9
Barriers, opportunities and technical developments.........................................................10
Conclusion....................................................................................................................................14
Bibliography.............................................................................................................................15

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S 4
Introduction
Combined heat power is also called cogeneration, and it involves simultaneous
production of electrical and heat energy from a single source of energy. This source can be
renewable or non-renewable in some of the cases. The method uses an absorption mode of
cooling called trigeneration making it possible to develop air coolers and conditioners necessary
in offices and homes to provide fresh air (Bridge et al. 2013).
The integration of trigeneration process covers a broad range of technologies, fuels, sizes,
and applications. The approach uses turbines in its purest form to run an alternator (Gibon et al.
2015). The electricity resulting from the process could be utilized wither partially or wholly
within site. The heat from the generation process is captured, in recovery boilers and used in
raising steam for different methods in the industries, provision of hot water necessary in the
heating of space.
The systems are installed technically in the required sites to provide energy that supplies
power and heat to the customers directly. As a result, the costs incurred in the transmission of
energy from large stabilized energy plants are reduced by the method (Evans et al. 2009).
Alternatively, the technique can be used to meet the energy requirements of a single home, large
industrial plants or the entire town/city. In homes, the system is installed to resemble a boiler
fired by a gas that can be used in the provision of heat for water and space warming aside from
the power to drive appliances and lights. The average effectiveness of generation of electricity in

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S 5
the United States has experienced improvements by 3% points to 36% from 33% evaluated from
the 1960s to today.
The system utilizes the ordinary clean domestic wastes to generate thermal energy
required for the different stated functions hence reducing emissions and reducing the costs
associated with the use of energy from larger power plants. As stated in the executive summary
CHP is indeed a commercially available form of energy best suited for various purposes
depending on the scale of consumption. Irrespective of this, the sort of power remains to be an
underutilized asset in the current U.S set-up (Chu et al. 2017).
The approach accounts for almost 8% of the capacity of generation in the United States
as compared to other states like Finland, Denmark, and the Netherlands where the method covers
up to 30% of their generation potential. The recent years have been accompanied by limited use
of CHP due to non-market and market obstacles. However, for policymakers, the outlook of the
approach used is bright at state and federal levels. The reason behind this is the evaluation of the
system's ability to exert merits and contribute to a reliable, clean and energy services are cost-
friendly to be used in businesses and industries (Williams et al. 2012).
Aside from these, the incentives of the state and federal policies have profoundly
contributed to the integration of the system to then-current technologies meant to reduce carbon
emissions in the US. The drivers stipulated form a more significant part in fueling the growth of
CHP and also in the realization of merits posed to the users and the entire nation. (Li et al. 2016).
The approach is most efficient in reduction of the strain from electric grids and lowers the rate of
greenhouse emissions as one of the aspects necessary in mitigating climate change.

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S 6
Buildings designed for commercial use that coincident loads in their significant sites
include hospitals, military camps, colleges, multifamily apartments, plants for wastewater
treatment and universities. Besides business and industrial frameworks, CHP can as well be
engaged in systems of district energy management. Owing to this, the approach regards the
topping cycle, heating waste to power and the bottoming period thus suitable under different
circumstances (Chiesa et al. 2010). The topping cycle of CHP are commonly used, and it
involves the combustion of fuel to generate the desired electricity
The remaining portion of heat likely to have remained from the first step undergoes
conversion to release considerable thermal energy such as steam, hot water, and heating
necessary in various process in the industries. The bottoming cycle is also termed as WHP CHP.
It utilizes a reverse step where combustion is first conducted to obtain thermal input needed in
industrial equipment processes like a furnace and kiln (Yagli et al. 2016). The rejected heat from
the first process is captured and used for the production of power.
Current state of the technology
Currently, the technical potential of Combined Heat and Power in the United States is
primarily oriented in larger centers of population hence a significant increase in the amounts of
facilities commercially and a stronger presence of industries. An onsite potential of CHP is
attributed to by host enterprise' commercial, waste and industrial heat to power ratio. Potential of
exports involves all the electricity that the host entity can utilize in excess which could instead be
sold to the energy grid. This includes the potential of district CHP energy (Gibon et al. 2017).
The technology serves a valuable source of electric generation in the country. Reports
concerning its analysis show that over 82.7GW of the method's capacity is in existence among or

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S 7
over 4400 commercial and industrial enterprises across the state. The value adds up to 8% of the
total generation capacity of the US and 12% of power generations annually hence outlining the
operating hours of the method to be longer when weighed with the conventional forms of energy
generation (Pehl et al. 2017, pg.939). The systems have been installed in all of the states in the
US, but there exist significant differences in the distribution of capacity and sites of CHP within
the regions.
States like New York, Connecticut, and California have highly adopted measures,
incentives, and policies that enhance the growth of the method. Variations in the regional
distribution of CHP is based on changes in the price of electricity in different regions, the
structures of the energy market as well as the development rates of industries (Bickerstaff et al.
2015, pg.241-249). An area like the Gulf Coast estate is composed of refining and chemical
enterprises while the southeast holds a paper manufacture entity making their energy
consumption rates to differ depending on the operational activities. More power consumed
means higher distribution and implementation of the CHP to cater to energy requirements.
States that have higher demands of energy due to the dense population, presence of energy-
intensive industries have higher capacities of Combined Heat and Power installed (Santo et al.
2014). The flexibility of the approach in that it can be used in various facilities in industries and
commercial apartments with thermal and power loads that are coincident make it highly
distributed and integrated into newer developments that target to reduce their energy buying
costs to realize more benefits (Ohnishi et al. 2018). The majority of the CHP systems in the
country is seen to be dominant on the industrial fields narrowing down to refining, food, metals
and paper manufacturing.

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S 8
Buildings constructed for institutional or commercial purposes make up for the remaining
capacity that is in existence. CHP frameworks intended for commercial use in the country have
been installed in larger entities such as universities, colleges, water treatment sectors, military
campuses and hospitals (Zhang et al. 2016). Nevertheless, the systems have not been restricted to
only commercial use but also the production of power for hotels, homes, offices, buildings,
nursing homes, k-12 schools, recreational centers and retail stores (Geels et al. 2016).
The commercial installations in the area account for 58% of the total sites in the country and
14% of the overall capacity of the technique. The reason is that the facilities are way smaller
compared to industrial sectors that have higher levels of consumption of energy. The united
states view the types of commercial buildings in area of services as a potential platform for the
growth of the technology. The energy department and the manufactures of the CHP design
focused on the improvements of the technology to suit small enterprises to increase efficacy
levels (Tettey et al. 2016). The advancements involved incorporation of designs that are
thermally activated to provide cooling and heating services as well as engage controls and
components into packages that are cost effective.

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S 9
Figure 1: diagram of combined heat and power (arsalis 2019)
Impact on the energy systems on other fuels
Introduction of CHP in the United States had a profound effect on the use of other fuels.
First, it displaced the use of naval approach that uses pipes to transfer heat making it costly to
install the pipes as well as the coal mining processes, declined to some level as a result of
regulations that targeted on limiting the number of carbon emissions within the state. In most
cases, coal mining contributes to the discharge of carbon that acts as the primary cause of climate
change via global warming (Hertwich et al. 2015).
Secondly, the realization of the lower cost energy source that is Combined Heat and
Power, led to the significant reduction in the use of sources like national grids for homes as the
technology met the energy requirements for the multifamily apartments. At the same time, the
method led to competition for the market with other fuel sources serving the same purposes. As a
result, there was a reduction in market scales with the most suitable energy source gaining
control over the other (Ahmadi et al. 2012)

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
10
Barriers, opportunities and technical developments
The obstacles towards effective integration of systems of CHP in the United States include:
i. The unclear proposition of Utility Value whereby many of the electric utilities owned
investors view CHP sited by customers as a source of erosion of revenue. This is due to
the ancient models of businesses and measures that link recovery of cost and revenue of
utilities to sales of electricity. Several entities that implement the method often rely on
the grids of electricity to obtain their servicing for needs in supplemental power beyond
the capacity of self-generation (Harris et al. 2017). The same extends in cases of back-up
and standby during maintenance and outages. From these, it is clear that the action and
policies of utilities can break or make the economic stability of the CHP system.
ii. Uncertainties in non-market and market scales. Integration of the technology calls the
need to invest the right capital amounts to realize benefits. This aspect makes it crucial to
generate an action network for local and state energy efficacy. Some of the uncertainties
that alter the economy of the project include growth in market sectors, regulation of the
market for the power, the prices of electricity and fuel as well as the economic conditions
of national and regional areas. (Li et al. 2016). The decisions of investment currently
made by the US energy department exhibits a rapid change in the economic environment
and policies.
iii. Awareness of end-user and decision making concerning economic stands. This aspect is a
barrier when CHP is neglected as a significant business focus for most of the end users.
As a result, it is subject to hurdle rates of higher investments rather than competing for
options internally. Additionally, most of the possible hosts of the project lack full

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
11
awareness of the merits or are too cautious about the risks associated with an investment
in CHP.
iv. Issues related to local sitting and permit. The installation of CHP should comply with the
host of environmental, health and safety as well as local zoning requirements at the area.
This involves regulations related to the quality of water and water, prevention of fires,
storage of fuel, harmful disposal of waste and the standards for the safety of workers and
construction of buildings (Basso et al. 2017). Navigating the stipulated measures call for
associations with local agencies such as air districts, fire districts, and planning
cooperation and water districts. Many of the agencies do not have experiences with the
project and illiterate about the systems and technologies required.
The drivers of the market also considered as opportunities that enhance the function of
this mode of power generation include.
i. Lower cost of operation than other conventional techniques used to generate
power. The fact that the method can impart required energy efficacy makes it
most preferred thus highly implemented in most of the sectors that it can suit (Li
et al. 2016). At the same time, the high effectiveness of operation makes the
system to consume less fuel during the production of more or the same amount of
power and thermal energy separately as power and heat set-up. Alternatively,
forecasts stemming propelled by a good supply of natural gas at a lower cost
established from shale gas development productions aid in boosting the country’s
economy
ii. Regulations of the environment. The existing rules related to the environment
have facilitated the creation of opportunities for the approach to aid in the

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
12
accomplishment of the objectives. An example of this policy is the Clean Power
Plan that generates targets based on the state to help in the reduction of carbon
quantity from power plants. As a result, it encourages the use of zero-emission
power generating methods like CHP under a wider aegis of measures regarding
energy efficacy (Bruton et al. 2016). The Boiler MACT, a standard for national
emissions of harmful pollutants recommends the need for commercial and
industrial boilers to meet the new limits of emissions. The most reasonable
approach to meet the target is the conversion of the boilers to natural gas CHP
thus help to achieve the mitigation plan.
iii. Resiliency in the case of natural or human-made disasters that cause an outage in
electrical grids adhere configuration of CHP serves as the most reliable and
resilient remedy rather than traditional methods like generators. An example of
such incident is the recent hurricane sandy that led to most of the infrastructural
units to utilize systems of CHP due to an outage in their grids due to the natural
occurrence. Currently, the energy and environmental protection department
provided guidelines concerning the relevance of the method in protecting critical
units and the best approach to size the entities (Vogelin et al. 2017). The agency
launched new advancement of the technique to enhance more resiliency levels in
2016 and allow collaboration with cities, states, and utilities.
iv. Support by policies. Incentives to fund integration of the system as well as state
and federal policies have contributed to the establishment of the market for CHP.
10% investment tax has been put in place as credit for the approach in the USA.
In 2012, an executive order was released by the white house targeting the addition

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
13
of 40GW of new capacity of the technique. Also, most of the energy and climate
plan engage CHP in suggestions of methods that promote clean energy production
(Chenet.al 2015).
v. Due to an increase in awareness to customers regarding distribution generation of
CHP, utility interest have increased. In most cases, several utilities engage with
stakeholders to find ways in which the system could be incorporated into
programs and plans for a new generation. An example of the same is the
Baltimore Gas and Electric (BG&E), a program that emphasizes smart energy
saving (Knizley et al. 2013).
In the 1970s when CHP was invented, the dominant cogeneration system involved boilers
that formed steam used to turn turbines to generate electricity. This made the systems to be
oriented on frameworks of over 50MW thus being avoided in most of the manufacturing entities.
Recent advancements based on the efficiency of electricity and generation methods that are cost-
effective led to the improvement of the turbines for combustion and the reciprocating systems.
(Tettey et al. 2016). As a result, new set-ups have been configured thus expanding the
opportunities for the systems and increased the level of electricity produced. The technical
advancements are now available in various configurations including satisfaction of requirements
of compressed air via bleeding off of the high-pressure air within the compressor step of the
combustion turbine. Furthermore, new turbines have been installed up to over 500kw and
reciprocating frameworks ranging to 50kw thus expanding the number of areas that the system
could be installed. At the same time, many of the boilers that are currently existing are capable of
being re-powered by equipment for advanced generation that work on behalf of the fuel burners

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
14
thus enhancing generation of electricity with regards to reduction of emission of pollutants
(Tettey et al. 2016).
Figure 2: diagram of the current CHP configuration system (Arsalis 2019)

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
15
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is vividly clear that indeed the use of CHP could be the best choice
towards low carbon district heating as well as in the fight against climate change resulting from
emissions in the energy sectors. Despite the limitations of the technique, it is highly
recommended in climate and environmental plans that target to attain zero carbon emissions in
different countries (Fujii, 2018). Its flexibility also proves that the technology could be applied in
a broader range of operations aside from its reliability in cases where natural or other artificial
disasters have led to the alterations in the normal functioning of larger electricity generating
plants.
The utilization of the supply of local natural gas in cogeneration engines allow the
provision of a stable electrical power supply. The heat produced from the process could be
produced in form of steam or hot water. The heat can be fed in an absorption chiller that
facilitates production of cold water. Such systems that provide cooling, heating and electricity
are called trigeneration systems (Fujii, 2018).

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
16
Bibliography
Arsalis, A., 2019. A comprehensive review of fuel cell-based micro-combined-heat-and-power
systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 105, pp.391-414.
Arvesen, A., Bergesen, J.D., Bouman, E.A., Gibbon, T., Heath, G.A., Hertwich, E.G., Ramirez,
A., Suh, S., Shi, L., and Vega, M.I. 2015. Integrated life-cycle assessment of electricity-supply
scenarios confirms the global environmental benefit of low-carbon technologies — proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(20), pp.6277-6282.
Berkhout, F., Geels, F.W., and van Vuuren, D.P., 2016. Bridging analytical approaches for low-
carbon transitions. Nature Climate Change, 6(6), p.576.

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
17
Fujii, M., Fujita, T., Ohnishi, Rokuta, I. and SOhata, M., 2018. Efficient energy recovery
through a combination of waste-to-energy systems for a low-carbon city. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, 128, pp.394-405.
Andersen, R., Bjørn-Thygesen, F., Vainorius, A., Schirach, O.M. Sovacool, B.K., Sorensen, K.,
Sorensen, S., and Tienda, V., 2016. Balancing safety with sustainability: assessing the risk of
accidents for modern low-carbon energy systems. Journal of cleaner production, 112, pp.3952-
3965.
Bickerstaff, K., Butler, C., and Devine-Wright, P. 2015. Living with low carbon technologies:
An agenda for sharing and comparing qualitative energy research. Energy Policy, 84, pp.241-
249.
DeBenedictis, A., Ghanadan, R., Mahone, A., Morrow, W.R., Moore, J., Price, S. Torn, M.S.,
and Williams, J.H., 2012. The technology path to deep greenhouse gas emissions cuts by 2050:
the pivotal role of electricity. Science, 335(6064), pp.53-59.
Arvesen, A., Gibbon, T., and Hertwich, E.G., 2017. Life cycle assessment demonstrates
environmental co-benefits and trade-offs of low-carbon electricity supply options — renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 76, pp.1283-1290.
Arvesen, A., Hertwich, E.G., Humpenöder, F., Luderer, G Pehl, M., and. Popp, A., 2017.
Understanding future emissions from low-carbon power systems by integration of life-cycle
assessment and integrated energy modeling. Nature Energy, 2(12), p.939.
Arvesen, A., Bergesen, J.D., Gibbon, T., Hertwich, E.G., Suh, S. and Wood, R 2015. A
methodology for integrated, multiregional life cycle assessment scenarios under large-scale
technological change. Environmental science & technology, 49(18), pp.11218-11226.

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
18
Chiesa, P., Consonni, S., Kreutz, T. and Williams, R., 2010. Co-production of hydrogen,
electricity, and CO2 from coal with commercially ready technology. Part A: Performance and
emissions. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 30(7), pp.747-767.
Kleijn, R., Kramer, G.J., Van der Giesen Van der Voet, E., and Van Oers, L 2011. Metal
requirements of low-carbon power generation. Energy, 36(9), pp.5640-5648.
Eyre, N., Bradshaw, M. Bridge, G. and, Bouzarovski, S., 2013. Geographies of energy transition:
Space, place and the low-carbon economy. Energy policy, 53, pp.331-340.
Evans, A., Evans, T.J., Strezov, V. and 2009. Assessment of sustainability indicators for
renewable energy technologies. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 13(5), pp.1082-
1088.
Cui, Y. Chu, S., and Liu, N., 2017. The path towards sustainable energy. Nature
Materials, 16(1), p.16.
Berkhout, F., Geels, F.W., and van Vuuren, D.P., 2016. Bridging analytical approaches for low-
carbon transitions. Nature Climate Change, 6(6), p.576.
Görgülü, A. Koç, A., Koç, Y., Tandiroğlu, A., and Yağlı, H 2016. Parametric optimization and
energetic analysis comparison of subcritical and supercritical organic Rankine cycle (ORC) for
biogas fuelled combined heat and power (CHP) engine exhaust gas waste heat. Energy, 111,
pp.923-932.
Cho, H. Knizley, A., and Zhang, J., 2016. Evaluation of financial incentives for combined heat
and power (CHP) systems in US regions. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 59,
pp.738-762.

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
19
Abapour, S. Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B., and Nazari-Harris, M., 2017. Optimal economic dispatch
of FC-CHP based heat and power micro-grids. Applied Thermal Engineering, 114, pp.756-769.
Li, Z., Shahidehpour, M., Wang, J. Wu, W and Zhang, B., 2016. Combined heat and power
dispatch considering pipeline energy storage of district heating network. IEEE Transactions on
Sustainable Energy, 7(1), pp.12-22.
Basso, G.L., Glass, I., Nastasi, B., and Salata, F. 2017. Energy retrofitting of residential
buildings—How to couple Combined Heat and Power (CHP) and Heat Pump (HP) for thermal
management and off-design operation. Energy and Buildings, 151, pp.293-305.
Bruton, K., óg Cusack, D., O’Donovan, P. O'Sullivan, D.T., and Walsh, B.P 2016. Enabling
effective operational decision making on a combined heat and power system using the 5C
architecture. Procedia CIRP, 55, pp.296-301.
Boulouchos, K., Georges, G. Koch, B., and Vögelin, P., 2017. A heuristic approach for the
economic optimization of combined heat and power (CHP) plants Operating strategy, heat
storage, and power. Energy, 121, pp.66-77.
Bai, J., Chen, X., Kang, C., Liu, C., Li, H., O'Malley, M., Sun, R., Wang, W. and Xia, Q., 2015.
Increasing the flexibility of combined heat and power for wind power integration in China:
Modeling and implications. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 30(4), pp.1848-1857.
Knizley, A. and Mago, P.J., 2013. Evaluation of combined heat and power (CHP) systems
performance with dual power generation units for different building
configurations. International Journal of Energy Research, 37(12), pp.1529-1538.

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
20
Knizley, A Luck, R. and., Mago, P.J., 2014. Combined heat and power systems with dual power
generation units and thermal storage. International Journal of Energy Research, 38(7), pp.896-
907.
Brandon, N., Liao, V. Yang, W., and Zhao, Y., 2014. Optimal design and operation of a syngas-
fuelled SOFC micro-CHP system for residential applications in different climate zones in
China. Energy and Buildings, 80, pp.613-622.
Ahmadi, P., Almasi, A., Dincer, I. And Shahriyari, M 2012. Multi‐objective optimization of a
combined heat and power (CHP) system for heating purpose in a paper mill using an
evolutionary algorithm. International Journal of Energy Research, 36(1), pp.46-63.
Do Espirito Santo, D.B., 2014. An energy and exergy analysis of a high-efficiency engine
trigeneration system for a hospital: A case study methodology based on annual energy demand
profiles. Energy and Buildings, 76, pp.185-198.
Tettey, U.Y.A., Dodoo, A. and Gustavsson, L., 2016. Primary energy implications of different
design strategies for an apartment building. Energy, 104, pp.132-148.

LOW CARBON DISTRICT HEATING USING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER IN U.S
21