Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy and Buildings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enbuild

Method for energy optimization with reliability analysis of a

trigeneration and teleheating system on urban scale: A case study
Ferdinando Salata a,∗ , Andrea de Lieto Vollaro a,1 , Roberto de LietoVollaro b,2 ,
Lorenzo Mancieri a,b,2
a
DIAEE, Area Fisica Tecnica, Università degli Studi di Roma “Sapienza”, via Eudossiana, 18, 00184 Rome, Italy
b
DIMI, Università degli Studi “Roma Tre”, via Vito Volterra, 62, 00146, Rome, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Understanding if a technologic solution satisfies the energy demands of a residential neighbourhood,
Received 30 July 2014 and whether it is financially a benefit or not, cannot be determined by the only amount of energy that
Received in revised form can be saved. Technologies such as CCHP could represent the perfect answer to this problem, on one
19 September 2014
condition though: it must be taken into consideration the reliability parameter as well. The plant config-
Accepted 29 September 2014
uration should guarantee a service without any interruptions. Redundancies must be evaluated and the
Available online 8 October 2014
consequences of the installation costs they imply.
This study presents a method to make the right choice about an energy system characterized by: energy,
Keywords:
Trigeneration
reliability and economic services which satisfy power supplying to a polygeneration grid in a residential
Teleheating context. The case study is the area of Arci, near Rome, Italy.
Reliability Our purpose is to realize a teleheating network and create a system able to satisfy the electric demands
Energy optimization of the area. The first step is an accurate estimation of the electrical and thermal demands. Then we
Urban scale compare the optimized energy solutions with the traditional ones. Some changes have been introduced
Design methodology to improve the system’s availability. All these steps take to an economic evaluation able to give some
H.O.M.E.R. useful information about the feasibility of the technical choices previously made.
© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction house gases), development of the energy market and by an always

In the past few years the energy industry has been charac-
terized by several innovations, determined by different factors: a
fast technologic development, higher demands and the constant
problem represented by the supplying furnished by traditional
sources. This force pushing towards the propagation of new energy
systems is caused by the development of technologies that are
efficient both economically and energetically; together with the
stimulus of the regulations controlling the energy production, the
necessity to exploit renewable resources, more sustainable solu-
tions for the environment (with lower levels of emissions of green
∗ Corresponding author at: via Eudossiana, 18, 00184, Rome, Italy.
Tel.: +39 0644585661.
E-mail addresses: ferdinando.salata@uniroma1.it (F. Salata),
andrea.delietovollaro@uniroma1.it (A. de Lieto Vollaro),
roberto.delietovollaro@uniroma3.it (R. de LietoVollaro),
lorenzo mancieri@hotmail.it (L. Mancieri).
1
Postal address: via Eudossiana, 18, 00184, Rome, Italy. Tel.: +39 0644585720.
2
Postal address: via Vito Volterra, 62, 00146, Rome, Italy. Tel.: +39 0657333505.
increasing necessity of safety for what concerns the supplying (in
order to reduce the vulnerability of the energy system). There is no
doubt that facing the threat of a climatic change and the need to
respect the agreements reached by several countries, through the
Kyoto Protocol (and the agreements that followed), represent other
important factors determining the change of the energy industry
[1].
A decentralized and distributed energy planning (DEP, decen-
tralized energy planning) is meant for an efficient use of the
resources. Obviously the traditional centralized production of
energy cannot catch up with the changes of the socio-economic
and ecological factors of developed countries or countries whose
growth is booming. The introduction of energy supply and demand
of new settlements in the current energy system must be reported
at the same map scale [2]. A higher efficiency cannot be determined
by an increase of the generative capacity any more, but rather by
smaller units arranged near the areas where energy is required [3].
Distributed generation systems are smaller, less subjected to the
area where they are placed and mass-produced (profiting by the
economy of scale).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.09.056
0378-7788/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136
The distributed generation of electric energy, that is the pro-
duction of electricity in self-generating/self-producing small units,
spread and decentralized in several spots of the territory and
directly connected to the electric distribution network, is an engi-
neering solution that allows a better exploitation of the traditional
energy resources, in this way satisfying simultaneously the thermal
needs of the final user, connecting the units directly to the distri-
bution system [4]. The local energy regulations imply the planning
and design of efficient solutions for the community. The polygen-
eration [5,6] is a promising concept, whether if we are dealing with
a single building or a whole district [7,8], especially when we have
at the same time different types of energy demands. For what con-
cerns the district, an adequate energy consumption in the territory
explains smart grids investments, district heating and refrigeration
networks [9,10]. This is the sort of challenge that the energy indus-
try must face in the future: such paradigm goes beyond the one
characterizing the “Thermoelectric and centralized production”,
and “Efficient renewable” meant for the decarbonisation which is
already executing the distributed generation.
The distributed generation paradigm is recognized as the energy
paradigm for the future [4,11,12] and is a benefit for the fields of:
finance, engineering and environment. Such change of the energy
systems must be supported, globally and locally, with a strict set of
rules helping the development of modern technological infrastruc-
tures, of new financial strategies and a different “energy education”
of the final user [13].
The European Union is deeply involved in this “Third Industrial
Revolution” [14] with the main goal to expand infrastructures able
to increase enormously both in efficiency and productivity, creating
new companies and new jobs [15].
The development of smart grids is one of the pillars of this Euro-
pean project and they are considered the evolution of the electrical
grid able to solve many problems affecting the energy systems of
today since they can manage the production, the transmission and
distribution of the electricity furnished by modern technologies
[16].
A smart electrical grid should be able to integrate all the
parties involved, whether producers or users, in order to sup-
ply energy in an efficient, sustainable way which is safer and
economically profitable. The main goal of a smart grid is to
promote the active participation and the decision-making pro-
cess of the consumer to facilitate the creation of an operating
environment where public services and users of electric energy
present a mutual influence on each other. As a matter of fact
users can affect managers by adding sources of distributed
generation. Public services are able to improve the reliability
level with question-answering programs, by adding distributed
generation or energy storage in substations and furnishing an
automatic control to the grid [17]. High reliability standards and
service continuity are the elements that make a grid, a smart one.
Urban areas present a limited diffusion of multi-generation sys-
tems, even though they could be exploited in a better way, probably
because of the regulatory restrictions for local emissions of spe-
cific pollutants causing the deterioration of air quality. It cannot be
stated without absolute certainty that the distributed generation,
applied on urban areas, represent a danger in terms of pollution
[1]. Some studies show that such technologies can furnish a reliable
electric energy [18–20].
What we want to stress is that all those uncertainties con-
cerning the reliability of these technologies could represent
one of the causes delaying the development of these energy
systems. In a specific type of context, the preliminary evaluation
of the good quality of energy of these systems, hence of the possi-
ble savings as well, cannot be the only problem to be solved during
the decisional phase concerning their feasibility (from a financial
and engineering point of view) [21]. The reliability parameters of
119
Fig. 1. Division of the examined area into allotments. Zone A and B: residential,
Zone C: services. The part with a dark grey colour represents buildings that are not
constructed yet; light grey colour represents buildings already constructed.
these energy systems must be always calculated and compared
with availability and service continuity values characterizing more
traditional systems. The final users, especially in industrialized
countries, will hardly accept an interrupted service, even if it is
more ecological and less expensive.
This last consideration represents the starting point to deal with
the problematic aspect of making choices about the exploitation
of traditional energy resources which energetically could seem the
most convenient (both economically and ecologically), but actually
they could cause problems of service continuity and reliability [22].
Our purpose is to use a method able to melt energy analysis (for
financial savings) and a probabilistic study based on the analytic
evaluation of the main reliability factors (together with all the costs
determined by the exertion and the management/maintenance of
the system) [23]. When both these aspects are satisfied it can be
possible to perform a global financial analysis which takes into
consideration every aspect (from energy savings to management
and maintenance expenses). Then it will be possible to make an
evaluation of the feasibility of some plant-engineering choices [24].
2. The case study
The present study is part of the regeneration plan for the district
of Arci, in Tivoli. Tivoli is placed not far from Rome, with a housing
population density of 773.2 inhab./km2 and it is located at 235 ms
above sea level. Arci (Tivoli) is the area examined in this case study
and it stands on the left bank of the river Aniene, about 4 km South-
East from the centre of Tivoli.
Our starting point is the urban texture and the new urban
framework to realize, we take into consideration the new energy
demands (determined by the growth of the resident population)
that must be fulfilled in the future.
Fig. 1 shows how the area is divided and this configuration will
be our point of reference to study all the polygenerative solutions
here examined.
The surface of the area is about 3 km2 . The three zones have an
estimated population of about 2523 inhabitants. 35% of the build-
ings are not constructed yet (Table 1). 90% of the inner surfaces
of the buildings is formed by residential buildings (Table 2). This
120 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136

Table 1
Division of the surfaces of the buildings in the examined area.
Surfaces [m2 ]
Already constructed 44,975
Not constructed yet 24,349
Total 69,324
Table 2
Intended use and surfaces of the building.
Total (amount) of the surfaces
Intended Use Area [m2 ]
Residential 62,712
Other 6612
is a factor that will affect deeply the daily trend of thermal and
electrical demands.
3. Valuation of the specific powers demanded
In order to reconstruct the electrical and thermal requirements
of the area, we must determine the electric power demanded from
the buildings and the outside lighting, together with the thermal
power necessary for heating, cooling and the energy needed for
sanitary hot water production.
We decide to produce, through cogeneration systems, the entire
electrical requirements and part of the heat necessary to the area.
According to the type of technology characterizing the machiner-
ies, used for the refrigeration production, the refrigeration load
will be added either to the electrical or thermal load. If the cool-
ing is produced through a compression cycle, the power needed
for its production will be added to the electric demand. If we use
absorption machines that exploit heat to generate “cool”, the ther-
mal requirements increase. For compression cycles we consider a
coefficient of performance (COP) of 3.2, whereas for the absorption
cycles we assume a COP of 0.7.
Depending on the intended use of the buildings, we take into
consideration all the values showed in Fig. 2 [25].
Values characterizing the thermal load for every surface
unit are calculated by taking into consideration a temperature
difference of 25 ◦ C between the inside and outside, with 0.6 W/m2 K
for thermal transmittance of the walls, 1.9 W/m2 K for the trans-
mittance of windows, and a minimum amount of air changes (in
65%
accordance with EN 13779:2004) and heat recovery if the ventila-
35% tion airflow exceeds 10,000 m3 /h. The refrigeration is calculated by
taking into consideration an outside temperature of 35 ◦ C and an
100%
inside temperature of 26 ◦ C, a relative indoor humidity of 50% and
an air change of 20 m3 /h per person. The electric power showed in
the table takes into consideration the whole amount of power used
simultaneously (lighting load as well).
The evaluation of the peak demand for electricity takes into con-
sideration the lighting of the spaces outside the properties, streets
%
and public spaces, in accordance with UNI 10439 (about the streets
90 lighting requisites regulating streets with motorized traffic) and
10
UNI 10819 regulation. Those values are included in Table 2 in the
sections “public spaces” and “streets”.
Table 3 shows the size of the surfaces characterizing the exam-
ined area and divided according to their intended use and the
specific powers evaluated.
Hot water demands change according to the number of users.
We assume that for the residential area, there is a 55 L daily con-
sumption of sanitary hot water (SHW) for every person with a
typical life standard. For what concerns different types of intended
use characterizing the examined area, the consumption of hot
water in other environments is represented in Table 3. Energy
demands are not satisfied immediately, because the SHW required
every day is produced when there is a thermal energy surplus pro-
duced by cogenerators. This surplus will be stored.
Table 4 shows the valued power to produce sanitary hot water in
every building. The choice is to produce sanitary hot water by using
the heat recovered from cogeneration systems. The kW required for
this production will be added during winter to those characterizing
the thermal load, and during summer to those of the refrigeration
load (only if it is produced by an absorption refrigerator).
3.1. Outlines of daily load
An accurate estimation of the thermal and electrical demands is
vital for a right sizing of the cogeneration systems that will supply
the studied area. In the future, thanks to an always better imple-
mentation of the smart counters for the users, the data collection

Table 3
Required powers and sanitary hot water demands according to the surface and the intended use.

Intended use Surface [m2 ] Electric power [W/m2 ] Thermal power [W/m2 ] Refrigerant SHW (ACS) [litres per
power [W/m2 ] day for each
inhabitant]

Residential 62,712 30 78.5 100 55

Schools 2546 40 120 160 10
Extraresidential 2270 25 100 160 25
Church 618 20 0 0 20
Senior centres 213 40 100 160 40
Library 430 20 110 160 20
Multipurpose centre 535 40 150 180 40
Public spaces 572,768 0.2 0 0 0
Streets 69,594 0.12 0 0 0

Table 4
Estimation of the required power to produce hot water.

Production of sanitary hot water

Intended use Number of users Liters/day per inhabitant Energy [W h] Power required [kW]

Residential 2523 55 6776,820 1129,470

Schools 570 10 278,369 46,395
Commercial 54 30 79,115 13,186
Senior centres 40 55 107,441 17,907
Multipurpose centre 120 10 58,604 9767
Sports centre 50 100 244,183 40,697
 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136 121

Fig. 2. Daily load outlines: A. Electrical; B. Thermal; C. Refrigeration.

phase will be more specific and accurate, thus allowing a more
truthful estimation of electrical and thermal power demands. The
trends are estimated thanks to the data furnished by the CESI (Cen-
tro Elettrotecnico Sperimentale Italiano), [26], the department of
Electrical Engineering of Università di Bologna, the department
of Industrial Engineering of Perugia [27–29] and from REMOD-
ECE (Residential Monitoring to Decrease Energy Use and Carbon
Emissions in Europe), an European database about residential con-
sumptions [30].
A valuation of electrical and thermal demands of the area,
according to the typology of the building, the values reported
in Table 2 are multiplied by the relative lengths metra-
ture.
90% of the buildings of the interested area are residential: the
outlines of the daily load are typical for these kind of users. Fig. 2
shows the qualitative trends of the daily requirements of electrical,
thermal and refrigeration power standardized respect the maxi-
mum value. The time interval chosen to represent the tables of the
122 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136
Table 5
Price of the electric energy purchased.
Electric Energy Price (net of VAT) [D /kW h]
Domestic user buying from the grid (single hourly) free market
System manager selling to Until the expenses to
the grid withdraw energy are
covered
Surplus
daily load is of an hour (it coincides with the one required by the
software HOMER for the input data).
The trend of the daily electricity load is reported assuming that
the trend changes during the weekdays and the holidays with
different peaks in every month of the year. By substituting the max-
imum value showed in Fig. 2A, the total of the values reported in
Table 2, of the electric power multiplied by the relative lengths,
we can reconstruct the outline of the daily electricity load. The
maximum power required is of 2214 kW.
The thermal load required changes with the changing of months
and tend to reduce during summertime. Considering January as the
coldest month of the year, in the examined areas [26,31], where the
thermal power is higher, we reproduce the “typical” daily trend of
the thermal load with a peak in the morning and maximum val-
ues during the night. Once passed the month of January, which is
when the peak of thermal consumption reaches 5604 kW, the col-
dest months are February, December, November, March, October
and April whose peak demand decreases until reaching 1602 kW.
From the month of May to September thermal power demands for
heating is almost equal to zero. These consumptions are considered
to have the same values during every day of the week.
The refrigeration load will be added to the electrical or thermal
load depending on the way the “cool” is produced (absorption or
compression machines). We assume that the “cool” is required dur-
ing the summer months only from June to September, with peak
demands from July to August. The difference between weekdays
and holidays is not taken into consideration.
We assume that the sanitary hot water, necessary for the every-
day use, is produced in a time interval of 6 h. The thermal power
needed to produce such amount of water is of 1257 kW, and will be
added to the one of the thermal load previously examined. The idea,
for what concerns hot water production, is trying not to increase
the thermal loads when we have a peak demand. We choose the
time interval to produce hot water according to the month, to be
conformed with thermal and electrical load curves.
3.2. Examined scenarios
The plant solutions suggested to satisfy the energy demands of
an entire area, need to self-produce completely the amount of elec-
tric energy demanded. For what concerns thermal demands, every
building is connected to the teleheating net (specially realized). For
the cooling during the summer we suggest six scenarios, where the
refrigeration demands are satisfied as showed:
(1) Zone A, B and C: compression machines;
(2) Zone A, B and C: absorption machines;
(3) Zone A and B: compression machines + Zone C absorption
machines;
(4) Zone A: compression machines + Zona B and C absorption
machines;
(5) Zone B: compression machines + Zona A and C absorption
machines;
(6) Zone A and B: existing buildings: compression machines,
buildings not constructed yet: absorption machines + Zone C:
absorption machines.
While studying the scenarios we have the possibility to under-
stand the distribution of all the different demands in the area and
the typology of “cool” produced which is more compatible with
electrical and thermal outputs of the cogeneration system (thus
0.140
0.116 optimizing gas consumption). In particular, Scenario 6 suggests the
use of systems supplying electricity, that is a less invasive action
to avoid a heavy intervention on the existing buildings. Whereas
0.039
for the new buildings it is possible to produce cool with absorption
machines located in the single building (supplied by the teleheating
net) and supplied by a hydronic grid placed in every single building.
3.3. Costs of electric energy and fuel
3.3.1. Cost of the electric energy sold
In Italy authorities promote self-production of electric energy
through cogeneration processes. Hence it is important to keep up to
date with the current legislative and regulatory framework, paying
attention to those rules concerning net metering.
In a liberalized energy market, the final consumer is free to chose
their own electric energy supplier (Grid Manager). The Net Meter-
ing, regulated from resolution ARG/elt 74/08, is meant for a better
exploitation of electric energy allowing the system manager to real-
ize a typology of private self-consumption strategy by injecting
into the grid the electric energy produced, not directly consumed
though, and then use it when necessary [32–34].
In Italy the GSE (Gestore dei Servizi Energetici), as stated in
Resolution ARG/elt 74/08, manages all those activities connected
to net metering and the net metering contribution (CS ) supplying,
a mechanism guaranteeing a repayment (“solace”) of part of the
user’s expenses due to the electric energy withdrawn from the grid.
The GSE has an important role and it takes into consideration every
characteristic of the system and the contractual conditions between
the single user and his supplier and everything is calculated accord-
ing to the data, the grid operators and suppliers are required to
report periodically.
The net metering contribution (in euros) is:
reti
CS = min[OE ; CEI ] + CUSf × ES (1)
CEI is the equivalent of electric energy injected, equal to the
hourly summation of the quantitative of electric energy injected
into the grid every year in the year “a” multiplied by different prices
according to the zone and the hour (Art. 30, paragraph 30.4, letter
b), of the resolution n. 111/06 filed in the same year.
Hence the electric energy injected will be multiplied by the
price (determined by the zone and the hour), that is the guaran-
teed minimum price for 2014, in accordance with the resolution of
the Authority for electric energy and gas on November 6th, 2007,
n. 280/07. The higher is the amount of energy injected into the
grid, through/“precious” sources, the more this energy will have
higher values from a financial point of view. CEI here is determined
by the product of the electric energy injected into the grid for the
guaranteed minimum cost multiplied by “other sources”, that is
38.9 D /MW h.
OEl represents the user’s expenses (expressed in euros) to pay
for the electric energy withdrawn, and it is the electric energy with-
drawn multiplied by the PUN (National Single Price). As a matter
of fact in the electricity market, during every hour of the day, on
every day of the year, the price of the energy gets defined. In the
examined scenarios, this cost is of 65 D /MW h.
Common net-metering fixed contribution, or CUSf reti , of highly-
efficient cogeneration systems is exclusively the one concerning
the grids, that is the algebraic addition rounded off to the third dec-
imal according to the commercial principle of variable cost per unit,
expressed in cD /kW h, of the prices of: transmission, distribution of
 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136
the dispatching equivalents and of UC3 and UC6 components. Such
value is of 7.1742 cD /kW h.
Finally the electric energy exchanged ES has the lowest value
among the values of the energy withdrawn and injected into the
grid. Basically GSE wants to repay the user with an equivalent of
the price he paid to withdraw energy from the grid.
Moreover there is a valorization of the surpluses that will be
given back during the future solar years (“on credit”), or in the form
of a “payment”. The possible credit which can be settled CRL,j for
the generic year “j”, that is the amount paid out from the GSE to the
producer is:
 
CRL,j = max 0; CEI,j − OE,j (2)
In other words, if there is a surplus having the same value of the
difference between the energy injected into the grid multiplied by
the guaranteed minimum price (previously seen), and the expenses
of the user to withdraw the same amount of energy of the energy
withdrawn for the National Single Price.
The energy injected back into the grid, through the net-metering
mechanism, is less than the one possibly withdrawn (because the
main purpose is trying to track the electrical load without pro-
ducing an unused surplus of electricity) it will be sold back at the
price of 0.071742 D /kW h. Such value will be added to the guaran-
teed minimum price previously said of 0.0389 D /kW h, for the total
amount of 0.11642 D /kW h.
Moreover, if while selling energy to the grid there is a surplus of
the money spent to withdraw energy, the manager of the system
receives an income of 0.0389 D /kW h.
3.3.2. Cost of the electric energy purchased
The price of the electric energy purchased from the grid must
be defined in order to make an evaluation of the repayment of the
suggested scenarios respect to the classic way of consuming energy
(that is by purchasing it from the electric national grid).
Besides the fixed quota, that is the fixed annual prices to pay
for the connection (a minimum portion of the final price), the costs
of the “Energy quota” (that is the cost of every kW h consumed)
involves:
• Retail services: energy (PE), dispatching (PD), commercialization
sales price (PCV), equalization (PPE) and dispatching (DISPbt)
components;
• Grid services: distribution, transportation and measurement (1,
2, 3);
• General expenses.
Price categories are:
• Weekday daytime slot: from 8 am to 7 pm, from Monday to Friday,
except national holidays;
• Weekday nighttime slot and weekend: from 7 pm to 8 am, from
Monday to Friday and every hour on Saturday and Sunday, and
national holidays.
Otherwise it will be a single-hourly rate. Thanks to the compar-
ison between different retailers’ offers, it is possible to notice that
the competitive average price of energy for domestic users is about
0.14 D /kW h for a single-hourly rate (Table 5).
3.3.3. Cost of the gas purchased
We choose to supply with natural gas the cogeneration system
and a possible backup boiler for heat production.
The energy Authority provides different data of gas price during
a three-month period. Our starting point: the first three-months
in 2014. The gas necessary to supply the cogenerators is about
more than a million cubic metres per year. Every three months
123
Table 6
Price of the gas purchased.
Natural gas price (net of VAT)—D /Sm3
To the average consumer (domestic users) 0.673
To the manager of the suggested system 0.423
the Authority reports the gas price for the location-based protec-
tion service. The net of VAT establishes a gas price of 0.4226 D /Sm3 .
In order to fully understand this concept, we can say that for the
average domestic user (a family with an independent heating and
an annual gas consumption of 1400 m3 ) the financial conditions for
energy supply expects a total cost of 0.6729 D /Sm3 [35–39].
The price is determined by the grand total of the following frac-
tions:
• Retail services: raw natural gas, retailing commercialization,
additional expenses, GRAD component;
• Grid services: distribution and measurement, expenses, trans-
portation.
Table 6 sums up the values that we will be used as input data
during the simulations.
4. Machineries and maintenance costs
In order to make an evaluation of the energy demands and
the specific consumptions of the whole polygeneration system,
we collect some data from some European producers. A particular
attention is paid to the costs of every single component.
We set the localization of the spaces hosting the cogeneration
plant and the teleheating net layout, to calculate and optimize the
total cost of the grid.
We choose to use superheated hot water production systems.
On the other hand, a configuration with steam systems would be
even more complex and expensive. It can produce water until 140◦
and this is why it is possible to connect and activate the absorption
refrigerator systems necessary to produce cool.
For what concerns the installation cost, that takes into consid-
eration all the necessary components (control panel, transformer
room, silencer, flue, NOx demolisher, container, etc. . .), the smaller
the plants are, the higher the generated power kW for the plant
installation will be. Table 7 shows the specific costs for plants
ranging from 500 kW to 4000 kW. Table 8 shows the average fuel
consumption of the cogeneration system.
Service life of the components refers to those machines with an
uninterrupted service. It is difficult to have an uninterrupted service
in a teleheating net, hence we can say that the life service of the
components we are taking into consideration reaches a maximum
value of 30,000 h.
The cogenerator needs a standard maintenance service for its
right functioning. This has a cost of 150–200 D /kW. Once the cogen-
erator service life reaches its end, a “maxi overhauling”, that is the
replacement of some important parts of the machine. The cost is
4/5 of the initial cost (Table 9).
Table 7
Cogenerator installation and maintenance costs.
Cogeneration system costs
Installation (D /kW) Machine replacement Maintenance and
(D /kW) operations (D /h)
900–1100 150–200 30–35
700–850 (End-of-life
replacement)
124 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136
Fig. 3. Example of cogenerator efficiency curve.
5. Energy analysis
The energy is analyzed thanks to the software HOMER Energy.
What is evaluated is the best configuration possible of a cogenera-
tion system able to self-produce electric energy necessary to satisfy
the demands of the examined area.
We enter, in the simulation software, the hourly and monthly
trend of electrical and thermals load profile typical of that specific
type of users. Electrical and thermal demands are simulated every
day of the month through an implemented Random variability of
the software. For what concerns this specific case, we set a 10% of
standard curvature in the daily sequences and a 10% of standard
curvature in the difference between the hour and the average of
the daily profile.
All the technical characteristics and the costs of the cogeneration
system are inserted into the software, as follows:
• The service life of the cogeneration system, before demolish-
ing/scrapping, is set at 60,000 h (a reachable value thanks to
ordinary and extraordinary maintenance);
• The cost of all the overhaulings will be added to the machinery
installation cost;
• The cogenerators heat recovery ratio is 77%;
• The output of the backup boiler is set at a value of 90%.
Cogeneration efficiency curves, generated by the software once
the output data are inserted, can be analyzed in Fig. 3.
Here is how the simulations are set:
• The time-step for the analysis is of 1 h;
• The software tries to find a better solution from an energetic point
of view and with as many cogenerators working simultaneously
as possible;
• All the solutions where the production system efficiency is not at
least the same as the peak load must be excluded.
It is important to manage the daily load profiles in a way that
the ratio between thermal load and electrical load is constant in
time, and able to smooth the energy peaks when unnecessary. It
is possible to manage sanitary hot water production; the system
manager can control its generation. Since it can be cumulated in
boiler/water-heater. We can decide to have a production based on
the most convenient hours of the day, by heating the water with-
drawn from the waterworks/aqueduct when there is not a high
exertion of the heat generated by the engines previously involved
in the tracking of the electrical load (Table 10). The purpose is to
reduce the heat surplus or the possible overproduction of electric
energy.
After taking into consideration a heat power lower than the
natural gas, 9.875 kW h/m3 , we make an evaluation of the most
advantageous combinations between powers and number of the
cogenerators at the users’ service.
The simulations show how (if the total nominal power is the
same) it is better having more cogenerators with different powers
than just one cogenerator with a higher power. In this way it is
easier to track the electrical load and let the cogenerators operate at
their maximum speed. For example, during the night, when there
is the minimum electrical load, the only cogenerator that will be
functioning is the smallest one, the others will be switched off.
In every scenario we examined, the heat production produced
by cogeneration systems fit for tracking the electrical load, is never
enough to cover completely the thermal load of an entire year.
Thus, to cover every thermal demand of the area during the hardest
periods of the year, it is necessary to arrange boilers together with
cogeneration systems and size their maximum power (Table 11).
The perfect situation, for the functioning of the entire cogener-
ation system, is when the thermal load is slightly higher than the
electrical load demanded. In this way, cogenerators produce the
electrical load required by the area and the whole amount of heat
produced during the generation of electric power is exploited in
the teleheating net. As far as possible, the perfect situation is when
we have a constant ratio between thermal load and electrical load
during the whole year. Obviously, it is hard that such circumstance
occurs because of the daily variability of heat and cool demands, and
because of the instability determined by the changing of the sea-
sons. Anyway it can be possible to make some plant-engineering
decisions to come close as much as possible to this “ideal” situation.
Scenarios 1 and 2 do not satisfy this necessity. While analyzing
the different solutions concerning the production of cool (Scenar-
ios from 3 to 6) we notice that it can be possible to have a slight
improvement of the exploitation of the cogeneration during the
summer, thus helping during the decision-making phase. In Sce-
nario 6, as showed in the picture below, during the months of July
and August, the trend of thermal load follows properly the one
of the electrical load. In this way the cogeneration can be better
exploited during the two hottest months, without an extra high
heat demand to satisfy the peaks.
The most convenient solution, in order to optimize energy, is
Scenario 6 which suggests the exploitation of absorption refrig-
erators in all the buildings (not constructed yet) because of the
redevelopment of the area examined, and the exertion of condi-
tioning compressors in all the existent buildings. The ratio, between
the lengths of the buildings requiring a service involving absorption
and compression machines and a higher electric demand (due to
compression machines) determine a heat recovery which has the
same value of the heat necessary to cover all the heat demands of
the absorption machines.
This is how we minimize the surplus of heat production of the
cogenerators, by reusing as much as possible the heat produced by
the machines involved in the production of electricity.
Hence, the best solution is the one with a system formed by three
cogenerators with different nominal power values (respectively:
 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136 125

Table 8
Average fuel consumption of the cogeneration system.
Average fuel consumption of the cogeneration system [m3 /h]
Maximum power 75% of the 50% of the Minimum of
(per kW) maximum maximum the generated
power (per power (per power (per
kW) kW) kW)
0.253 0.190 0.133 0.051
Cog 1 = 1500 kW, Cog 2 = 2000 kW, Cog 3 = 750 kW) and backup
boilers to cover the thermal demand with a total power of 5670 kW
(when the cogenerators are not enough) and both are connected to
a teleheating net with a circular shape whose length is of 10,350 m
and that is able to give its service to all the users in the area. The
suggested system must be connected to the electrical grid, with the
possibility to collect a maximum of 2000 kW of electric power.
Table 12 shows in detail how the electrical and thermal pro-
duction are divided. We can notice that the suggested system is
able to self-produce the entire annual electricity demand required
by the area. The production obeys the requirements, and thanks to
the buying and selling mechanisms of energy (net-metering) the
amount of electricity wasted is minimum. When the heat demand
is lower (the month of May in particular, followed then by June
and September), thanks to the simulations, we can notice how it is
better to exploit even more the electric grid and the energy with-
drawn in order to avoid heat surplus that will inevitably increase
the heat waste and how using the cogeneration process is more
advantageous (Table 13).
While observing the data obtained from the simulations, for
the monthly average of heat produced, we can notice that the
use of boilers is really important during the coldest months. The
boilers are not used frequently during the summer months. In
conclusion, in one year 43% of the thermal energy produced is fur-
nished by boilers, and less than 9% of the recovered heat, thanks to
the cogeneration, is not valorised by the trigeneration process.
If we take a closer look to the way the three cogenerators work,
we can see how Cog. 2 (with a higher power, 2000 kW) is more
used, about 2000 h per year. The minimum power generated by
this cogenerator is of 1377 kW: this means that this machine works
often at the maximum speed, and it is exploited, as much as pos-
sible, once it starts working. The average output of Cog. 2 is of
1836 kW.
Cog. 3 (750 kW) is the only one working during the night: in this
way the big machines do not work at low speed (in other words,
they do not work at their full capacity) and the energy resource is
exploited as much as possible. In the simulations this cogenerator is
used for almost 4000 h per year: its function is to cover every min-
imum demand of electric power of the area; it is used less during
the daily peaks. Cog. 1 (1500 kW) covers all the average daily loads.
The cogenerators total efficiency, thanks to these three different
amount of power, is about 87%.
As we expected, while observing the graph in Fig. 4, the highest
amount of electric energy purchased from the grid is during spring
and summer months (in the morning in particular), when the ther-
mal load has the lowest values per year and the cogenerators do
not work, in this way the recovered heat will not be wasted.
While examining the simulations we can notice how, from an
energetic point of view, is more advantageous to use a cogenera-
tion system for the self-production of electric energy working with
parallel processes respect to the electric grid.
In the simulations backup boilers are used for 5896 h per year
(Fig. 5). In May, June and September the boiler is almost always
inactive/idle, whereas from March to October its exertion is for
supplying an average power of 2000 kW. During winter months its
exertion is vital to cover the thermal demands of the area, to fulfil

Table 9
Costs of the components of the cogeneration system.

Costs of the polygeneration grid

Item Unit price Quantity Total cost

Teleheating net 119 D /m 10,350 m 1231,650 D

Digging and backfill 8.23 D /m3 5175 m3 42,590 D
Energy transfer stations MT/BT 75,000 D /each 3 units 225,000 D
Backup boilers 11,145.47 D /plant + 36.26 D /kW 3 plants of 2800 kW 338,020 D
Operators specialized in maintenance services 33.50 D /h per operator 2 operators 12 h/d–6 d/w 231552 D /year

Table 10
Energy fluxes of the scenarios examined.

Scenario Electric energy [MW h/yr] Thermal energy [MW h/yr] Boiler

Produced Consumed % Retail Produced Consumed % Disposed kW

1 11,159 10,779 3 18,917 14,697 27.7 5488

2 9600 8834 8 22,590 22,590 4.4 11,019
3 10,601 10,382 2 18,721 18,721 16.2 5670
4 9989 9729 3 19,808 19,808 7.4 5515
5 9754 9487 3 20,511 20,511 6.2 5660
6 10,296 10,048 2 18,978 18,978 9.7 5670

Table 11
Power of the cogenerators used, used resources and costs of the scenarios examined.

Scenario Cog 1 Cog 2 Cog 3 Initial capital Operational cost Total NPC Natural gas Grid
3
kW h/yr kW h/yr kW h/yr kD kD kD m kW

1 1500 2367 2500 2261 1000 3622 7734 1725 32,051 34,42,471 2500
2 1250 5200 2000 2554 – – 6025 1817 31,650 36,74,573 2000
3 1500 3075 2250 2302 750 3513 7225 1697 31,152 33,67,875 2250
4 1250 2972 1750 2556 750 4237 6478 1714 30,663 34,25,994 1750
5 1000 4684 2000 2069 500 4543 6259 1740 30,792 34,80,692 2000
6 1.500 3447 2.000 1928 750 3913 6987 1686 30,750 33,51,804 2000
126 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136

Table 12
Recapitulatory outline of the energy.

Production Thermal production Electrical production

MW h/yr % MW h/yr %

Cog. 1 4681 25 4463 43

Cog. 2 3692 20 3539 34
Cog. 3 2297 12 2157 21
Boiler 8174 43 – –
Excess thermal 1538 8.89 – –
Grid purchases – – 133.4 1.3
Excess electricity – – 2.31 0.02

Total 18,846 100 10,293 100

Table 13
Fuel saved in the suggested solution and a traditional supplying of electric and thermal energy from a grid.

kW h Production method Production Fuel used (m3 )

Electric energy required 10047,718 National grid 41% 2464,994

Thermal energy required 17308,286 Boilers 90% 1947,486
Tot. 4412,481
Fuel saved while using Scenario 6 24%

those demands that the cogenerators did not cover. The average
thermal power supplied in one year is of 1386 kW.
Such considerations must be analyzed keeping in mind the envi-
ronment as well. Examining the amount of natural gas/methane
saved we can understand how green house gas emissions are
reduced in the atmosphere due to combustion phenomena. Then
follows a comparison between the saved fuel by exploiting the
trigeneration respect to the electric energy withdrawn from the
national grid added to the methane/natural gas consumption to
satisfy the same thermal demands and burning methane/natural
gas in boilers placed in the buildings. The average production of
the Italian national energy system: the Institute for Environmental
Protection and Research (ISPRA) [40] analyzing the data furnished
by the Terna, states that in the Italian system the net production
for energy content of fuel per unit is 44.1%. Once deducted the
value of the grid losses, due to transmission and distribution of
electric energy, of 6.4% [41], the result is a total production, until
the consignment, of 41%. And we also assume a heat generation
with boilers with an output of 90%.
Through the simulations it can be noticed that the exertion of
the suggested solution (Scenario 6) guarantees a better exploitation
of the energy resource respect to the case we just described, saving
the 24% of fuel (Table 13).
The analysis carried out, which is connected to the suggested
case study, can be considered valid for residential urban con-
texts characterized by buildings with a similar total volumetry and
similar energy requirements for what concerns heating and cool-
ing. The analysis started with the hypothesis of buildings with a

Fig. 4. Daily trend (monthly average) of the electricity withdrawn from the grid.
 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136
Fig. 5. Daily trend (monthly average) of the exertion of the backup boiler.
certain type of constructional characteristics, that is with high
energy classes (class A for new buildings, class C for existing build-
ings that must be redeveloped). This hypothesis, together with the
hypothesis of electrical consumptions similar to those examined
(typical of an European country), leads to considerations which can
be used in other similar situations as well. The whole Mediter-
ranean coast presents energy requirements expressed through
precise and real numbers. Different energy realities can be exam-
ined by using the same evaluation method (see Section 9), but
together with numerical data of the realities taken into consider-
ation.
6. Reliability analysis
The reliability theory of the mechanical components is based
on the concept of a chain whose strength is represented by its
weakest link [42,43]. Hence, according to the total-quality prin-
ciple, all the components with a low reliability must be reduced to
the minimum. The complex systems quality is determined by sev-
eral properties, and these qualities, which in turn are defined by a
certain number of quantitative indexes. With the time passing by
properties and quality level of the system change, and they usu-
ally tend to have lower values than the initial ones. When we talk
about the reliability of a system we are referring to the capacity of
the system to keep in time and in the expected conditions of exer-
tion the initial qualities. Thus the reliability is strictly connected to
the capacity that the system had once installed, before its exertion
[44,45].
Nowadays the problem derived from the improvement of the
quality and the increasing of reliability is even more important and
existing because of an always higher mechanization and autom-
atization of the systems used. What derives is one of the main
contradictions concerning the development of modern technique:
on one hand, the complexity of the systems determines a decrease
of their reliability [46]; on the other hand the demands connected
to their right functioning are always more compelling [47]. The
127
importance of such problem is given from the fact that an insuf-
ficient reliability implies higher maintenance costs and more
frequent breakdowns, and also a low security level for the users.
If the most efficient energy systems are less reliable, we should not
take for granted that the amount of energy saved is enough to cover
the higher maintenance expenses [21].
While keeping in mind all those information about the energy
optimization of the examined systems, we go on by analyzing
the reliability of the system suggested in Scenario 6. In order to
reconstruct the reliability of the suggested systems we use the
reliability parameters (MTBF and MTTR) of the system compo-
nents, combining the components according to their arrangements,
whether in parallel or in series [48]. The data required are taken
from the previous works [23] and the exploitation of the data,
already present in the maintenance database of energy plant-
engineering (of big structures such as: hospitals, office districts
and residential complexes) grids, allow a statistical analysis of
the data of breakdown and reactivation of the system compo-
nents.
Hence we reconstruct the reliability block diagram (RBD) of the
systems, where the components are represented through blocks
properly connected with one another according to the dependence
logic between the system breakdowns and the breakdowns of a
subsystem or present component.
Through the case study examined it was possible to explain a
useful method for the numerical evaluation of the MTBF and MTTR,
typical parameters of the reliability analysis concerning trigener-
ation plants used in residential urban areas. It was carried out a
numerical evaluation of the best plant configuration useful for the
optimization of the reliability system and the minimization of the
time intervals of out of service plants characterized by accidental
damages. The results provided by this analysis can be decontex-
tualized and examined through a general perspective if we have
the same energy requirements, on one condition: the hypothesis
assumed during the study must be considered valid in other case
studies as well.
128 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136
If we generalize it can be stated that a right distribution of the
total of the energy requirements on more productive units leads
to an increase of both the global energy efficiency of the systems,
thus always working at their best, and the reliability system, since
it presents parallel machines with an adequate redundancy. If the
evaluation is made according to combination of the energy opti-
mization meeting the general control of the system reliability, the
number of the calculated redundancies implies benefits that can be
bearable from an economic point of view.
The method here used can be certainly applied to different
plants with different service requirements, on one condition: a
database with numerical data of the reliability parameters must be
considered valid for every single component of the plant examined
(see Section 9).
6.1. Reliability theory
The reliability theory is used: in plans elaboration, in the def-
inition of productive processes and in methods for the exertion
and maintenance of the components of a system (meant to guar-
antee the highest efficiency) [49]. It finds an engineering solution
to the problems determined by an unexpected random breakdown
in complex systems requiring an uninterrupted service.
To increase the reliability of a complex system:
• Improve the quality of every single component of the complex
system;
• Develop different methods meant for reliable systems planning
and optimized maintenance methods for the systems during the
exertion.
The procedure to get the system more efficient reliabilistically
must determine what can go wrong, how a breakdown can be
avoided, and if a breakdown occurs what kind of intervention
should be performed to restore/re-activate the system [50,51]. The
model used for these purposes is the Markov process which states
that the condition of the system at a certain time “t” depends on
the latest condition considered [52].
The result is that the reliability estimated numerically is a
probability and not a deterministic quantity whose value can be
anticipated only through statistical considerations.
Even though we do not have the certainty whether a breakdown
will occur or not, the reliability theory, applied in a systematic way
to a system, has more useful results that can help making important
choices about the different methods to make a system work, for
example choices concerning the security [23].
The reliability theory defines the MTTR (Mean Time to Repair)
parameter as the value of expected time of reactivation, that is the
time interval characterized by the unavailability of the system, and
it is an important parameter for the evaluation of the efficacy of the
maintenance service, in particular for what concerns the logistic
organization [53].
The evaluation of the reliability of the existing systems can be
obtained by using an evaluation model based on the essential block
schemes generated from the general layouts of the working sys-
tems. The failure rate values of every single block and the repairing
time interval are available in the historical data.
Once the solutions for energy saving are assumed, system after
system we can calculate reliability/availability parameters of the
modified system.
The MTBF (Mean time between failure) is the time interval
between breakdowns for those components whose failures follow
a Poisson distribution.
In this context the difference between the average service life
of an actual component and the MTBF is important, that is the time
interval between the breakdowns affecting components which are
part of a set of components that have a constant failure rate.
The average service life of a component depends primarily on
phenomena of wear and aging. While evaluating the average life,
the accidental failures are not that relevant; it can range from ten
to hundreds of thousands hours. The MTBF is a statistical feature of
the set of components whose aging phenomena are excluded (the
substitution will occur once it worked for the 80–90% of its average
life).
The mean time between failures, depending on the accidental
breakdowns which do not occur very often [54], can reach higher
values than the average service life of the system from which
the single component was separated; what we usually have is
a MTBF of hundreds of thousands hours and sometimes of mil-
lion of hours. Moreover knowing the MTBF does not mean that
we can activate a component and find a failure after MTBF hours.
The statistical nature of the failures can determine a higher num-
ber of failures in a short time interval of the service life followed
then by a long period without the occurrence of any damage or
failure [47].
If the components are repairable the parameter indicating the
average time interval between the failure and the repairing time is
important; it is called “mean time to repair” (MTTR). In the com-
plex systems, that can be divisible in components, as for example
the systems producing energy, the low costs of exertion is based on
the evaluation of the unavailability of the system, once the unavail-
ability of the components are known.
If the systems/components are repairable their reliability and
another function called availability, A(t), are defined.
The availability is a function which takes into consideration the
reliability of the system and the maintenance factors; those prob-
lems determined by the reliability can be managed as peculiar
availability events that once the failure occurs it is impossible to
get back to the state of right functioning.
The availability is the probability that the system is able to work
at a certain time from a starting point T0 . It can be defined as the
ratio between the functioning time (uptime) and the total time
(Uptime + Downtime):
MTBF
A= (3)
MTBF + MTTR
The evaluation of the reliability of the system can be determined
by the analysis of the distribution of the failure probabil-
ity for every single component of the system and through
the identification of the procedures to make it function at
its best. The reliability parameters of the components, evalu-
ated in series or in parallel, determine the reliability of the
whole system. Some examples of these relations are showed in
Table 14.
The reliability analysis examined in this article is meant to
guarantee to the suggested systems an uninterrupted service in
accordance with the prerequisites defined by the authority for
electric energy and gas. For what concerns the Italian normat-
ive, Resolution ARG/elt 198/11 (Consolidated text of the quality if
the distribution services and electric energy measurement for the
regulation period 2012–2015) [35,37], defines the whole annual
duration of the breakdowns without warning for electric energy
supplying; those highly concentrated territories (the district we
are examining) is of 25 min/user. Operators unable to respect these
annual goals are obliged to pay economic sanctions which are
directly proportional to the difference between the effective level
and the required standard. The cogeneration solution must respect
these parameters as well.
In this work, we are going to compare the availability param-
eters obtained through the reliability analysis with the service
continuity standards required by the regulation, transforming the
“availability” into uninterrupted hours of service.
 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136
Table 14
Relations for in series/parallel components.
Series
n
␭ S = i
i=1
n n   n
␮ S = i / i /i (Series of n elements)
i=1 i=1
6.2. Electric power system
For what concerns the electric power system, we already spec-
ified that Resolution ARG/elt 198/11 defines it as the entire annual
duration of the interruptions without warning for the low voltage
user, corresponding to 25 min.
What we want to analyze is the availability of the suggested sys-
tem transforming it into the total of hours service in order to make a
comparison with the maximum total duration of the interruptions
estimated by the regulation.
The system suggested in Scenario 6 is schematized as in Fig. 6.
The reliability chain is formed by three cogenerators supplied by
the gas net, which through the alternators transforms the mechan-
ical energy produced into electric energy. In the transformation
stations the electricity is converted into low tension and once it
passed through the electrical panel reaches the final users.
Generally two cogenerators out of three are used for the pro-
duction of electricity and heat and only during the hardest times
of the year (summer months) the three cogenerators work simul-
taneously. The 3/4 parallel placed between the cogenerators and
the connection to the electrical grid is such only if it is possible to
withdraw from the electrical grid an amount of power able to make
up for the deficiencies of the most powerful cogenerator.
The connection to the grid is more expensive, but it gives the
possibility to reach a high reliability level of the system.
The presence of three cogenerators guarantees a good reliability
level. If the demands of the area depended on one machine only,
the availability of the suggested system would collapse.
While comparing the suggested system with the traditional one,
(for domestic users) formed by the power grid distribution con-
nected to the low tension panel, it can be noticed an improvement
determined by the suggested solution.
Fig. 6. Reliability chain of the suggested electrical system.
129
Parallel
        
12 = 1 2 1/1 + 1/2 / 1+ 1 /1 + 2 /2 (Parallel 1 of 2)
P = i
i=1
Table 15 shows the recapitulation of the results obtained
from the simulations performed to reach the final solution here
suggested, formed by three cogenerators (Cog 1 = 1500 kW, Cog
2 = 2000 kW, Cog 3 = 750 kW) with a connection to a medium volt-
age electrical grid with a collectable amount of power of 2000 kW.
With such configuration it is very easy to organize and manage
both ordinary maintenance and the possible extraordinary main-
tenance of the machines: the only thing to do is to operate while
the cogenerator is not working and the energy is supplied by the
other two cogenerators and the electrical grid.
6.3. Thermal system, winter air conditioning and sanitary hot
water
Cogenerators, during the summer and winter, function in two
different ways. In winter, through the energy simulations per-
formed, we can notice that even during the hardest situations, two
cogenerators out of three are used together with a “boilers block”.
During the phase of energy optimization we are able to evaluate
the total power necessary to the boilers and make an estimation
of the energy generated every year, without taking into consider-
ation their actual number and the system redundancy. Thanks to
the reliability analysis we can examine their best configuration by
distributing the total power to several units and furnishing the sys-
tem with a redundancy that can modulate their functioning and
manage the maintenance issues.
What we want to analyze first is the system reliability with
reliability chain showed in Fig. 7.
In order to optimize the system management instead of using
just one big boiler, we prefer to install 3 of them with a redundancy
of 2/3 (simultaneous functioning of two boilers out of three). Thus
now it is possible to take care of the maintenance, both ordinary and
130 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136

Fig. 7. Reliability chain of the suggested thermal system.

extraordinary, for what concerns boilers and cogenerators, without
provoking a service interruption. The final configuration is a ther-
mal system with three boilers (each one of 2800 kW) with a mutual
ratio of 2/3 set in parallel with three cogenerators of 1500 kW,
2000 kW and 750 kW. The following picture shows a block diagram
of the suggested system.
The availability of the system must be compared with the tra-
ditional thermal system which is formed by the gas grid connected
to the boilers of the final user. Table 16 shows the results of such
comparisons. The teleheating net suggested has a high reliability
level, which in hours of interrupted service means that it doubles
respect to the values characterizing the reliability of a traditional
system.
6.4. Summer cooling systems
heat pumps are connected to the domestic electrical grid to produce
cool.
These two configurations are going to be compared with a tra-
ditional electrical system formed by the electric grid connected to
low voltage panels and a split heat pump.
Reporting the results of the analysis summed up in the following
table we can notice a different reliability level between the sug-
gested systems and the one we are using as a point of reference.
As we expected the cooling system, with a compression chiller,
presents a higher availability than the traditional one, because the
availability of the block for the electric production is higher than
the one of the electric grid. For what concerns the cool produced
by the absorbers we can notice that the level of the availability
characterizing the system is slightly lower than the traditional one,
comparable though (Table 17).

For what concerns the system for the cooling process in the sum-
mer, we must distinguish two cases, whether if the cool is obtained
through absorption machines (Fig. 8) or a compression cycle (Fig. 9).
In the first case the absorbers are placed at the end of the thermal
system, to exploit the heat to produce cool. In the second case the
7. Financial sustainability
HOMER software compares the different energy scenarios sim-
ulated and classifies them according to the NPC (Net Present Cost,
or NPW Net Present Worth that is the total of the present value

Table 15
Availability and time intervals of inefficiency due to unexpected breakdowns for electric energy supplying.

Electric system MTBF [h] MTTR [h] A Interruption [min]

Reference – – 0.999934486 25.00

Traditional 116,756 3.34 0.999971436 15.01
Suggested 169,328 1.00 0.999994069 3.12

Table 16
Availability and inefficiency time intervals due to unexpected breakdowns for the supplying of thermal energy.

Thermal system in winter MTBF [h] MTTR [hours] A Interruption [min]

Traditional 22,035 8.22 0.999627145 3.27

Suggested (3 boilers) 62,316 12.14 0.999805157 1.71
 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136 131

Fig. 8. Reliability chain of the suggested cooling system during summer—absorption machines (new buildings).

Fig. 9. Reliability chain of the suggested cooling system during summer—compression machines (existing buildings).

of all costs during the examined period) which sums up all costs
and benefits characterizing the life cycle of the project in one fixed
sum, whose value is expressed in money of the investment (in year
zero), with future cash flows updated through the discount rate.
We take into consideration the cost of every macro component
of the cogeneration grid examined and besides the cogenerators
we calculate as well: the used boilers, teleheating net with all the
diggings and the necessary work, the transformation stations
MT/BT of the electric energy produced at a medium voltage by the
cogenerators. We assume that the expenses of the machines for the
cooling process (both compression and absorption) are not charged
on the production system costs: they are charged on the system
manager, but they are paid by the final users.
The management cost takes into consideration the expenses
of the fuel and management and maintenance costs of the sug-
gested systems. Buying and selling electricity respect the regulation

Table 17
Availability and inefficiency time intervals due to unexpected breakdowns for supplying cooling during summer.

Cooling system during summer MTBF [h] MTTR [h] A Interruption [min]

Traditional 28,384 13.95 0.999508743 4.30

Suggested (absorption) 16,207 8.84 0.999454651 4.78
Suggested (compression) 30,701 14.39 0.999531355 4.11
132 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136
Table 18
Energy prices/costs.
Domestic user (cost of System manager
purchase) (production costs)
Electric kW h 0.14 D /kW h 0.102 D /kW h
Thermal kW h 0.076 D /kW h 0.023 D /kW h
controlling the net-metering, observing the legislation that the
profit obtained from selling energy to the grid must not be higher
than the price for purchasing energy from the grid. The ordinary
maintenance cost of the systems coincides with the wages expenses
determined by the constant presence of two skilled workers for 12 h
per day, 6 days per week and 4 weeks per month. Cogeneration sys-
tems are always located in a single technical space (to optimize the
management and labour and to perform the ordinary maintenance
of the systems).
We assume a 5% interest rate, determined by the service life of
the project (of 25 years) and the return of the Italian Treasury long-
term bonds (BTP: “Buoni del Tesoro Poliennali”) with a deadline of
25 years have a net profit of 3.75% [55].
If we take into consideration the cost of one cubic metre of natu-
ral gas, we know that for the system manager to produce electricity
will have a cost of 0.102 D /kW h. To make an evaluation of the final
price of the thermal kW h produced we make an estimation of the
costs for heat production through boilers, keeping in mind that all
the heat produced from the cogeneration system is free of charge.
The heat produced for the system manager will cost 0.023 D /kW h.
For what concerns the final user we can say that if they have
a normal national electrical net connection and buy natural gas to
burn it up in a boiler, the cost of the electric kW h for a hourly tariff
of a domestic user would be of 0.14 D /kW h, whereas the thermal
kW h would be of 0.076 D /kW h (Table 18).
If we want to know the cash flow of the suggested system, we
need to choose the prices for selling the produced energy, update
them and sum them up to the annual costs. Thus we evaluate the
financial advantage of the suggested system from the point of view
of the manager whose purpose is to have the largest margin of
income between the selling price of the energy and the expenditure.
The final user living in the district does not want to pay for a
higher price than the one he would have paid if he had been an
ordinary user of the national electric and gas grid. Hence the cogen-
eration system manager of the district will sell at these costs both
electrical and thermal energy.
Moreover it is important for the final user that in order to
produce “cool” there are not cost differences whether we use
absorption machines (supplied with thermal energy) or compres-
sion machines (supplied with electric energy). Hence the system
manager must calculate a price balance, in this way the final user
does not face a price difference. If we decided to act in a different
way, the risk would be that the user decides to stop any connection
to the teleheating net to supply the compression machines through
a compression chiller installation to reduce the expenses on sum-
mer conditioning: this situation would change once again every
prediction about energy consumptions in the area and nullify the
economy management of the whole cogeneration system.
We have to make a distinction between the price of the thermal
kW h used for heating and sanitary hot water production respect
to the prices of thermal kW h for air conditioning during summer.
Especially for the thermal kW h for the refrigeration production, it
is important to assign a price lower than the price that the refrig-
eration kW h would cost if we used compression cycles.
What follows is a summary of the selling prices of every different
type of energy that the system manager conjectured for the final
user:
Table 19
How the inaccuracy of the input data affects the plan feasibility.
Input data Data variability NPC [%] Breakpoint
[%] [%]
Installation, maintenance +10 3.48 13.79
and replacement costs −10 −3.47 −10.34
Fuel costs +10 6.51 19.31
−10 −6.50 −13.79
Selling and buying of +10 0.09 1.03
the electrical grid −10 −0.08 −0.69
Electrical and thermal 0 −1.96 −10.34
load variability 20 1.27 10.34
• Electric energy selling price of 0.14 D /kW h;
• Thermal energy selling price of 0.076 D /kW h;
• Selling price of thermal energy used for cooling of 0.031 D /kW h;
• An interest rate of 5%.
Every cost is net of VAT.
Besides the financial benefit experienced by the manager, we
must take into consideration that in the suggested scenario every
final user will be relieved from any kind of extra payment for
maintenance, heating systems managing and sanitary hot water
production.
After all these assumptions, Fig. 10 shows that Scenario 6, thanks
to energy optimization, allows a costs of capital recovering in the
14th year thus experiencing financial profits until the end of the
systems service life and keeping the reliability level of the sys-
tems higher than the traditional one whose energy requirements
are supplied directly by the net.
The good quality of the inputs furnished to simulate the scenar-
ios analyzed depend on how accurately the study of the feasibility
(energy, reliability, economic) of an energy system can calculate
the input data required. In the previous paragraphs a wide bibliog-
raphy stressed the importance of defining, with as much accuracy
as possible, data such as: electrical and thermal loads required by
the users, the prices of the installation and maintenance of the
technological systems examined, the costs of energy sources and
the economical data concerning the buying and selling of electric
energy process involving the grid. Every data provided implies the
possibility to insert a certain type of error (due to errors and inac-
curacies) in the analysis carried out, thus affecting the reliability
of the output results. This is why in the analysis, all the estimation
of the input data took a long time to be determined and needed
accurate sources for their calculation (see Section 3).
Hence what it is examined is how a numerical uncertainty of
±10% (with a maximum deviation range analyzed by taking into
consideration the single data provided) on the input data can vary
the output data examined. Table 19 shows the variation, expressed
in percentage, of the costs estimated and the return on investment
(breakpoint).
We can notice how, the variations in percentage of the buying
and selling prices of the electric grid affect about 1% of the reliabil-
ity characterizing the output data. The variation of the installation,
maintenance and replacement costs imply a higher incidence (a
maximum of 14%), whereas a 10% variation of the fuel cost affects
the output results with percentage values that can reach 20% of
the return on investment and thus furnishing the reliability of the
evaluation of the economic feasibility of the systems examined. In
order to have a correct valuation it is necessary to concentrate on
the right numerical estimation of these input data.
For what concerns the calculation of the electrical and thermal
load and their fluctuation during a period of time, the software sim-
ulates randomly their variability. The simulations carried out take
into consideration a 10% variation of these values. If such variability
 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136 133

Fig. 10. Cash flow for Scenario 6.

fluctuates between 0% and 20%, the output results would be subject
to a 10% variation of the return period.”
It should be kept in mind that the financial benefit of a polygen-
erative system like this, cannot be applied to every situation, but it
is strictly connected to the market prices of electricity and gas net
and their mutual relation.
For this case study we compare the financial sustainability
which varies everytime the costs of electric energy and gas change.
By taking into consideration, for several European Community
Countries, the costs of electric kW h and natural gas we make a
list of those Countries where the suggested solution is financially a
sustainable choice.
The energy prices are different according to the different
national energy markets in Europe, keeping in mind though that
the main purpose is to cover the demands of our case study; thanks
to the data furnished by Eurostat [56] about electricity and gas costs
in 25 different countries of the EU. We study the payback period of
the investment of Scenario 6.
The result is a list of nations based on payback periods of the
cogeneration system.
While analyzing Fig. 11, we can notice how in every European
country, where the energy price has a competitive cost respect to
the gas price (such data are deeply affected by the energy policies
adopted by every nation), the cogeneration system here suggested
is not so advantageous after all. The gas price must be low and
the exertion of electric energy must be less advantageous for the
final user, in this way we make the cogeneration systems more
advantageous despite their high installation costs.
8. Influence of the political environment
In Italy, the effects of the directive 2009/29/EC [57] to improve
and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading scheme
of the Community are observed through the trade of “white cer-
tificates” for the energy streamlining (TEE—“Titoli di Efficienza
Energetica”, in English “energy efficiency credits”). These docu-
ments certify that a certain reduction of energy consumption has
been attained. The white certificates are given to the producers
whenever an amount of energy is saved whereupon the producer
can use the certificate for their own target compliance or can be

Fig. 11. Comparison of investment payback periods according to the electricity and gas tariff in different European countries.
134 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136
Table 20
CO2 emissions: economic incentive.
CO2 [kg/yr]
Standard case Suggested plant
9094,702 6443,267
sold to (other) unable to meet their targets. White certificates con-
sist in purchasable stocks that can be sold in the future. The original
value of these certificates was fixed at 100 D /TOE.
In our study, we compared the suggested plant with the case
where all the electricity is supplied by the electrical grid, and where
the heating system is formed by residential gas boilers. As emis-
sion factor for the grid power, 529 g/kW h of carbon dioxide [58]
has been put as input in HOMER. For what concerns the boilers,
0.05 g/m3 of fuel of carbon monoxide has been inserted. This values
are in compliance with the Italian legislation 311/06 concerning the
maintenance, the certification and the emissions of boilers. More-
over a carbon monoxide rate of 0.5 g/m3 of fuel is the emission
factor for the cogeneration, furnished by the technical papers of
the analyzed CHP plants.
Comparing the two different scenarios (as it can be seen in
Table 20) 2651 t of CO2 are saved with the teleheating system
suggested, bringing an economic benefit of about 94,000 D /year
whether converted into white certificates. This benefit would
switch the breakpoint of our financial valuation to about 13 years.
9. Conclusions
We studied the financial feasibility of a plant-engineering
solution based on the trigeneration process for the area of Arci
(extent/size of 3 km2 ) in Tivoli, north of Rome, characterized by a
predominant residential use of the new building cubature expected
for the territory.
The best configuration suggested from the simulations per-
formed through the HOMER software is formed by three
cogenerators with three different nominal powers (750 kW,
1500 kW and 2000 kW) tracking the electrical load assisted by
three backup boilers (each of 2800 kW) to cover the peak ther-
mal demand. The thermal energy is distributed on the whole area
thanks to a teleheating net of 10,350 m. The most convenient solu-
tions, among those suggested, to satisfy the cool demands of the
buildings during the summer, is the one with absorption machines
for the buildings still unconstructed and compression refrigeration
machines for the buildings already present on the area.
To optimize the fuel consumption of the cogeneration we put
side by side the electrical requirements of the users living in the
area together with a certain thermal demand able to minimize the
waste of heat during the generation process of electric energy. That
is why the daily sanitary hot water was properly produced and
stored during the time intervals when the electrical demand was
higher than the thermal one.
The trigeneration process must be applied (use heat to sat-
isfy the air conditioning requirements during the summer as well)
only when we have a heat surplus that we can recover in a time
interval originating from the cogenerators used to furnish electric
energy [59,60]. As a matter of fact it would be counter-productive
if, in a cogeneration context, we increased heavily the thermal load
demand without an increase of the electrical demand, because
of the tax discourages purchasing quota of energy exceeding the
requirements of the electrical national grid.
In the urban context we studied (characterized by a residential
use), for the production of the cogeneration used to keep a constant
ratio between the electrical and thermal demand during the sum-
mer, we tried to balance the energy requirements for: every three
buildings that had to be cooled, one used absorption machines and
CO2 White certificates incentive
[kg/yr] [TOE/yr] [D /yr]
2651,435 941 94,126
two compression machines. In this way, thanks to the production
of a certain amount of electricity, the thermal requirement is the
same of the heat recovered from the cogenerators.
By applying the reliability theory, the configuration chosen for
the system, thanks to its redundancies, do not damage the service
continuity respect to more traditional solutions, despite the fact
that a more complex system can lead to availability problems.
For the production of electricity, the presence of the electric
grid as a backup to the self-production system furnishes an extra
security for what concerns the availability of the system; for the
thermal system, the suggested 2/3 parallel, both for cogenera-
tors and boilers, is a successful solution permitting to perform
extraordinary maintenance without damaging the service conti-
nuity. For what concerns the cool production during the summer,
the solutions we showed are in line with the reliability of a tra-
ditional system, emphasizing how the cool production systems
with absorbers are slightly less reliable than those exploiting heat
pumps.
Financially speaking we can notice how the realization of a
suggested system of distributed generation is an advantageous
investment, since it allows the production of low electrical and
thermal energy cost to sell to the users living in the urban area
examined. With an initial expense of about 7 millions D , the pay-
back period valued is of 14 years with a total net profit of about is of
50,00,000 D after 25 years. These economic flows allow an invest-
ment in new technologies to optimize the demand, thus having the
possibility to store electric energy or smooth electric energy peaks
through the exertion of renewable energy resources such as solar
thermal or photovoltaic.
For what concerns the environment, we showed how the real-
ization of the suggested grid guarantees a better exploitation of the
energy resource with a 24% of fuel (natural gas) saved respect to an
ordinary centralized production.
In order to suggest proper plant-engineering solutions giving
the possibility to the cogeneration to be applied, on an urban scale,
with positive results, we specify the importance of data collection.
It is complicated though to identify the actual demands. Apply some
aspects of the “smart grid” can help the design engineers/planners
while making choices about energy on an urban scale. The substi-
tution of old gas or electric energy meters with electronic models
able to monitor gas and electricity consumption and report the
data to the managers every hour could be helpful to anticipate his-
torical data for the trend of the demand and organize the energy
production to adapt it to the conditions required by the users.
In conclusion, a cogenerative smart grid on an urban scale must
be able to manage automatically the energy production, manag-
ing energy flows in a bidirectional way with the grid, purchasing
electricity from the grid rather than producing it and choosing
randomly how to produce the energy necessary and managing
the demands in a dynamic way. Anyway it is not less important
gathering tickets of the breakdown of the machines and the com-
ponents of the cogeneration grid: it is possible to evaluate the weak
points of the energy system, organizing the managing and ordi-
nary/extraordinary maintenance of the cogeneration system in a
way that it will observe the reliability standards required. The sug-
gested grid must be a smart one: one of the main points is the use of
digital technologies integrated with electric grids, and the manage-
ment of information flow of the processes and systems in service.
The addition of a “digital shell” typical of a smart grid and the
 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136
optimization of business processes are necessary for the financial
return of the technological investments.
It is also important the exertion of technologies which are able
to improve the identification of the damages and allow a self-
diagnosis of the net to guarantee an energy supplying which is more
reliable, thus reducing the service vulnerability. The redundancy of
its components reduces the risk of a service interruption.
Thus the suggestion involving the cogeneration process is more
advantageous than a traditional centralized production. This solu-
tion is valid as far as the cost of the Italian energy resources are
concerned [61]. The energy issue needs new and more efficient
solutions and energy and reliability optimization. We noticed how
the distributed generation, the cogeneration in particular, in an
urban context which is mostly residential can be a solution to this
problem.
Generalizing this case study, we can stress how a right evalu-
ation of the financial feasibility of such project cannot be limited
to financial returns which are the result of a better exploitation
of the energy resources only. The savings obtained, without a reli-
ability analysis of the energy systems suggested could be absorbed
by higher maintenance demands. Hence what follows is the a way
of thinking that an energy manager should have in order to face
properly the problem of making the right energy choices:
• Step 1: analysis of energy requirements in relation to the type of
users and cost items estimation;
• Step 2: energy analysis of the most performative technical solu-
tions and considered more innovative than traditional solutions;
• Step 3: identification of the necessities of uninterrupted service
of the users involved;
• Step 4: a critic analysis of the solution reliability is better from an
energetic point of view.
• Step 5: comparison between energy and reliability necessities,
preferring those solutions assuring an uninterrupted service not
inferior to the requirements or with reliability performances
lower than more traditional energy systems;
• Step 6: financial analysis of the energy solution and optimal
reliability, that takes into consideration the installation costs
(redundancies included), achievable energy savings and the man-
agement costs for the ordinary and extraordinary maintenance
required.
We need to stress the fact that it is hard to make generaliza-
tions, even in cases which apparently are technically similar, about
this kind of analysis when we have a number of variables which
is so high. A study concerning the economic feasibility of plants
based on the energetic optimization and the reliability of its com-
ponents must be examined every time as a specific study in order
not to compromise the validity of the results. Even for what con-
cerns other similar situations, some data variations determined by
energy requirements and/or specific techniques of the plant com-
ponents can affect both the energy and reliability analysis and this
can lead to conflicting results for what concerns the economic fea-
sibility of the plan. As showed through the graph in Fig. 11, in the
same case study (hence with similar technical conditions), if the
economical parameters vary, as for example the energy costs of the
resources used, the return on investment is, economically speaking,
highly variable.”
In those urban situations (residential/commercial) where the
study concerning the feasibility has a positive response, creating
local energy systems placed in a specific area able to exploit non-
renewable resources, through technologies such as trigeneration
together with teleheating systems, represents the best choice to
face the energy problem in way which is economically feasible
(as World Energy Outlook [62] showed, the energy requirement
is destined to increase in the next ten years and the availability
135
of traditional low-costs energy resources will always decrease)
without compromising the safety and the continuity of the service
demanded by modern energy grids.
We want to conclude our case by paying attention to the future
studies that can derive from it. Here our purpose was to face the
problem of the return on investment for what concerns trigener-
ation plants improving on an urban scale, relying on the energy
optimization of the resources (”objective function”) and how sav-
ing energy, thanks to the exertion of new technology systems, can
affect the service continuity (hence the system reliability, that is the
“control function”). In this study we did not take into consideration
the environmental sustainability of these decisions concerning
plants from the perspective of greenhouse gases. Such a perspec-
tive affects deeply the idea of the plant feasibility going beyond the
mere economic analysis, also facing ethical and ecological issues
that nowadays, not only a design engineer, but the “society” as
well cannot ignore [63]. Many first industrialized Countries, at an
international level, signed an agreement for the respect of the envi-
ronment which led to taxation policies to reduce CO2 emissions
(the so called Carbon Tax [64]). Every Country, in an autonomous
way, decided to start a distinctive taxation policy which inevitably
affects the economic feasibility of plants producing energy, penal-
izing (by taxing) those countries with the highest pollution values
and rewarding with “green certificates” (by lifting taxes) those
showing more respect for the environment. In a future case study,
characterized by a more extended analysis, we would like to intro-
duce a second “control function” based on both the emissions
considered harmful to the environment and all the economic issues
deriving from that.
Acknowledgements
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency
in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
A special thanks to Mrs. Flavia Franco for the help she provided
in the preparation of this paper.
References
[1] G. Chicco, P. Mancarella, Distributed multi-generation: a comprehensive view,
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 13 (2009) 535–551.
[2] R.B. Hirematha, S. Shikhab, N.H. Ravindranath, Decentralized energy plan-
ning, modeling and application—a review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews 11 (2007) 729–752.
[3] K. Takahashi, S. Baker, L. Kurdgelashvili, Options to Support Distributed
Resources, University of Delaware, Center for Energy & Environmental Policy,
Delaware, 2005.
[4] T. Ackermann, G. Andersson, L. Soder, Distributed generation: a definition,
Electric Power Systems Research 57 (2001) 195–204.
[5] K. Alanne, A. Saari, Distributed energy generation and sustainable development,
Renewable Sustainable Energy Reviews 10 (2006) 539–558.
[6] W. Clark, W. Isherwood, Distributed generation: remote power systems with
advanced storage technologies, Energy Policy 32 (2004) 1573–1589.
[7] J. Ortiga, J.C. Bruno, A. Coronas, I.E. Grossman, Review of optimization
models for the design of polygeneration systems in district heating and cool-
ing networks, in: 17th European symposium on computer aided process
engineering—ESCAPE17, 2007.
[8] P. Liu, E.N. Pistikopoulos, An energy system engineering approach to poly-
generation and hydrogen infrastructure system analysis & design, Chemical
Engineering Transactions 18 (2009) 373–378.
[9] M. Sakawa, K. Kato, S. Ushiro, M. Inaoka, Operation planning of district heating
and cooling plants using genetic algorithms for mixed integer programming,
Applied Soft Computing 1 (2001) 139–150.
[10] R. Aringhieri, M. Federico, Optimal operations management and network plan-
ning of a district heating system with a combined heat and power plant, Annals
of Operations Research 120 (2003) 173–199.
[11] A.M. Borbely, J.F. Kreider, Distributed Generation the Power Paradigm of the
New Millennium, CRC Press, London, 2001.
[12] G.M. Masters, Renewable and Efficient Electric Power Systems, John Wiley &
Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2004.
[13] M. Manfren, P. Caputo, G. Costa, Paradigm shift in urban energy systems
through distributed generation: methods and models, Applied Energy 88
(2011) 1032–1048.
136 F. Salata et al. / Energy and Buildings 86 (2015) 118–136
[14] M. Jänicke, K. Jacob, A Third Industrial Revolution? Solutions to the cri-
sis of resource-intensive growth, in: Forschungsstelle für Umweltpolitik
FFU—Report, 02-2009.
[15] J. Rifkin, Economia all’idrogeno. La creazione del Worldwide Energy Web e la
redistribuzione del potere sulla Terra, Mondadori, Milano, 2002.
[16] M. Fadaeenejad, A.M. Saberian, Mohd. Fadaee, M.A.M. Radzi, H. Hizam, M.Z.A.
AbKadir, The present and future of smart power grid in developing countries,
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 29 (2014) 828–834.
[17] N. Phuangpornpitaka, S. Tiab, Opportunities and challenges of integrating
renewable energy in smart grid system, Energy Procedia 34 (2013) 282–290.
[18] V. Cosentino, S. Favuzza, G. Graditi, M.G. Ippolito, F. Massaro, E. Riva Sansev-
erino, G. Zizzo, Smart renewable generation for an islanded system. Technical
and economic issues of future scenarios, Energy 39 (2012) 196–204.
[19] M. Alonso, H. Amaris, C. Alvarez-Ortega, Integration of renewable energy
sources in smart grids by means of evolutionary optimization algorithms,
Expert Systems with Applications 39 (2012) 5513–5522.
[20] A.R. Al-Ali, A. El-Hag, M. Bahadiri, M. Harbaji, Y. Ali El Haj, Smart home renew-
able energy management system, Energy Procedia 12 (2012) 120–126.
[21] L. Peruzzi, F. Salata, A. de Lieto Vollaro, R. de Lieto Vollaro, The reliability of tech-
nological systems with high energy efficiency in residential buildings, Energy
and Buildings 68 (2014) 19–24.
[22] F. Salata, A. de Lieto Vollaro, R. de Lieto Vollaro, A case study of technical and eco-
nomic comparison among energy production systems in a complex of historic
buildings in Rome, Energy Procedia 45 (2014) 482–491.
[23] F. Salata, A. de Lieto Vollaro, R. de Lieto Vollaro, M. Davoli, Plant reliability in
hospital facilities, Energy Procedia 45 (2014) 1195–1204.
[24] F. Salata, A. de Lieto Vollaro, A. Ferraro, An economic perspective on the reli-
ability of lighting systems in building with highly efficient energy: a case study,
Energy Conversion and Management 84 (August) (2014) 623–632.
[25] AICARR, Manuale d’ausilio alla progettazione termotecnica, Associazione Ital-
iana Condizionamento dell’Aria Riscaldamento e Refrigerazione, 1998.
[26] CESI, Definizione del modello di carico elettrico e termico di tipiche utenze
civili e industriali, Università di Bologna, 2000.
[27] G.M. Lo Giudice, F. Asdrubali, A. Rotili, Influence of new factors on global energy
prospects in the medium term: Compar ison among the 2010, 2011 and 2012
editions of the IEA’s world energy outlook reports, Economics and Policy of
Energy and the Environment 3 (2013) 67–89.
[28] F. Asdrubali, M. Bonaut, M. Battisti, M. Venegas, Comparative study of energy
regulations for buildings in Italy and Spain, Energy and Buildings 40 (2008)
1805–1815.
[29] A.L. Pisello, F. Cotana, A. Nicolini, C. Buratti, Effect of dynamic characteristics
of building envelope on thermal-energy performance in winter conditions: In
field experiment, Energy and Buildings 80 (2014) 218–230.
[30] European database on residential consumption, http://www.remodece.
isr.uc.pt/ (last access March 2014).
[31] A. Piacentino, F. Cardona, An original multi-objective criterion for the design
of small-scale polygeneration systems based on realistic operating conditions,
Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (2008) 2391–2404.
[32] Disciplina dello scambio sul posto - regole tecniche. http://www.gse.it/GSE
UltimiDocumenti/Ritiro%20e%20scambio/Scambio%20sul%20posto/02
%20Documenti/Regole tecniche I edizione delibera%20570.pdf (last access
March 2014).
[33] GSE, On-site exchange, http://www.gse.it/it/Ritiro%20e%20scambio/Scambio
%20sul%20posto/Pages/default.aspx (last access March 2014).
[34] Dedicated withdrawal: application of the guaranteed minimum prices,
http://www.gse.it/it/salastampa/news/Pages/Ritiro-Dedicato-applicazione-dei
-Prezzi-Minimi-Garantiti.aspx (last access March 2014).
[35] Text of the integrated control of quality of service of distribution and extent
of electricity [Testo integrato della regolazione della qualità dei servizi di dis-
tribuzione e misura dell’energia elettrica - Allegato A], http://www.autorita.
energia.it/allegati/docs/11/198-11argtiqe new.pdf (last access March 2014).
[36] Technical economic terms and conditions for the withdrawal of elec-
trical energy [Allegato A alla delibera 280/07 - Modalità e condizioni
tecnico economiche per il ritiro dell’energia elettrica], http://www.autorita.
energia.it/allegati/docs/07/280-07ex107-08.pdf (last access March 2014).
[37] Conditions for the delivery of public service of dispatch of electricity [Allegato
A alla deliberazione 9 giugno 2006, n 111/06 - Condizioni per l’erogazione
del pubblico servizio di dispacciamento dell’energia elettrica sul territorio
nazionale per l’approvvigionamento delle relative risorse su base di merito eco-
nomico], http://www.autorita.energia.it/allegati/docs/06/111-06allnew.pdf
(last access March 2014).
[38] Public debate on the reform of the method of procurement of resources for
dispatching services, http://www.autorita.energia.it/it/docs/dc/13/354-13.jsp
(last access March 2014).
[39] Distribution rates - electricity, http://www.autorita.energia.it/it/elettricita/
distr.htm (last access March 2014).
[40] Factors of CO2 emissions in the electricity sector [Fattori di emissione di CO2 nel
settore elettrico e analisi della decomposizione delle emissioni. n. 172/2012],
http://www.isprambiente.gov.it/it/pubblicazioni/rapporti/fattori-di-
emissione-di-co2-nel-settore-elettrico-e-analisi-della-decomposizione-delle
-emissioni (last access March 2014).
[41] Terna, General data for italian electricity sector, http://www.terna.it/LinkClick.
aspx?fileticket=YlYvJ381G1Q%3d&tabid=418&mid=2501 (last access March
2014).
[42] J. Finn, J. Moltoft, Reliability indicators, Quality and Reliability Engineering
International 2 (1986) 39–44.
[43] M. Shooman, Probabilistic Reliability: An Engineering Approach, Mc Graw Hill,
New York, 1968.
[44] E.E. Lewis, Introduction to Reliability Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, New York,
1987.
[45] P.D.T. O’Connor, Practical Reliability Engineering, third ed., John Wiley & Sons,
New York, 1994.
[46] G. Levitin, A. Lisnianski, A new approach to solving problems of multi-state sys-
tem reliability, Quality and Reliability Engineering International optimization
17 (2001) 93–104.
[47] M. Xie, T.N. Goh, System reliability growth analysis using component failure
data, International Journal of Reliability Quality and Safety Engineering (IJRQSE)
1 (1994) 71–83.
[48] SRC System Reliability Center, Reliability Toolkit: Commercial Practices Edition,
RAC Publication, London, 2001.
[49] J.E. Ramirez-Marquez, D.W. Coit, Optimization of system reliability in the pres-
ence of common cause failures, Reliability Engineering and System Safety 92
(2007) 1421–1434.
[50] A. Monga, M.J. Zuo, R.W. Toogood, Reliability-based design of systems consid-
ering preventive maintenance and minimal repair, International Journal of
Reliability Quality and Safety Engineering (IJRQSE) 4 (1997) 55–71.
[51] W. John Kraus, Maintainability and reliability, in: W.G. Ireson, C.F. Coombs
(Eds.), Handbook of Reliability Engineering and Management, McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1988.
[52] D. Chen, K.S. Trivedi, Optimization for condition-based maintenance with semi-
Markov decision process, Reliability Engineering and System Safety 90 (2005)
25–29.
[53] ASHRAE, Operation and maintenance management, in: ASHRAE Handbook
Applications, ASHRAE, 1791 Tullie Circle, 1999.
[54] M.T. Todinov, Reliability analysis of complex systems based on the losses from
failures, International Journal of Reliability, Quality and Safety Engineering
(IJRQSE) 13 (2006) 127–148.
[55] Net performance, price and volume of Italian BTP, http://www.
rendimentobtp.it (last access March 2014).
[56] European Commission, Eurostat, http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/
page/portal/statistics/search database (last access March 2014).
[56] Directive 2009/29/EC, Improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission
allowance trading scheme of the Community, European Parliament and Coun-
cil, Official Journal of the European Union, L 140/63, 2009.
[58] Emission factors for the production and consumption of electricity in
Italy, SINAnet, Rete del Sistema Informativo Nazionale Ambientale
http://www.sinanet.isprambiente.it/it/sia-ispra/serie-storiche-emissioni/
fattori-di-emissione-per-la-produzione-ed-il-consumo-di-energia-elettrica-
in-italia/view (last access September 2014).
[59] L. de Santoli, G. Lo Basso, D. Bruschi, Energy characterization of CHP (combined
heat and power) fuelled with hydrogen enriched natural gas blends, Energy 60
(2013) 13–22.
[60] L. de Santoli, G. Lo Basso, D. Bruschi, Hybrid system with an integrated CHP
plant fueled by H2NG blends: theoretical energy-environmental analysis and
foreseeable optimizations, Energy and Buildings 71 (2014) 88–94.
[61] L. de Santoli, G. Lo Basso, D. Bruschi, A small scale H2NG production
plant in Italy: techno-economic feasibility analysis and costs associated
with carbon avoidance, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 39 (2014)
6497–6517.
[62] World Energy Outlook, World Energy Outlook, International Energy Agency,
Paris, France, 2010, ISBN 9789264086241.
[63] Kyoto, Kyoto Protocol Reference Manual on Accounting of Emissions and
Assigned Amount, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,
Bonn, 2008, ISBN 9292190555.
[64] European Parliament and of the Council, Directive 2003/87/EC of the Euro-
pean Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003, EUR-Lex—32003L0087,
Official Journal L 275 (2003) 32–46 (25/10/2003).