Heat transport analysis in a district heating and snow melting system in Sapporo and Ishikari, Hokkaido applying waste heat from GTHTR300

札幌、石狩における地域暖房、融雪を想定した高温ガス炉GTHTR300廃熱利用システムの熱輸送解析

笠原 清司  ; 村田 哲也*; 上地 優; 寺田 敦彦  ; Yan, X. ; 稲垣 嘉之; 森 治嗣*

Kasahara, Seiji; Murata, Tetsuya*; Kamiji, Yu; Terada, Atsuhiko; Yan, X.; Inagaki, Yoshiyuki; Mori, Michitsugu*

豪雪地帯である札幌と石狩を想定した、高温ガス炉GTHTR300の廃熱を利用した地域熱供給・融雪システムの熱輸送解析を行った。GTHTR300と熱利用地域間で熱水を循環させる給熱配管と、給熱配管から熱利用地域内の熱供給配管へ熱を伝える熱交換器の解析を行った。給熱配管において、二重管はアニュラス流路の圧力損失が大きいため、単管と比べて水循環のためのポンプ動力は2.74倍になった。一方、内側管からの熱ロスをアニュラス流路で回収できるため、管全体の熱ロスが単管より33%小さく、1本の管で水循環が可能であるため、埋設のための掘削面積も23%小さい点で有利であった。給熱配管に二重管を用いた時、GTHTR300から熱供給配管への熱輸送に伴う熱ロスは4.2%、GTHTR300の発電量に占めるポンプ動力の割合は0.8%であった。GTHTR300を2基用いることで、年間で最大となる1月の熱需要の97.0%をまかなうことができた。GTHTR300と熱利用地域間の距離を40kmから20kmに削減できれば、熱供給システムの設置コストを22%削減できることが見込まれた。

A heat transport analysis of a district heating and snow melting system in Sapporo and Ishikari, Hokkaido was carried out assuming application of waste heat from GTHTR300, a design of high temperature gas-cooled reactor. The following components in the system were modeled; pipelines of the water loops between GTHTR300 and heat demand district and heat exchangers to transport the heat from the water loops to water loops in the district. Double pipes for the pipeline has disadvantage that pumping electricity consumption was 2.74 times to that of single pipes due to pressure loss in annulus channel. On the other hand, the double pipe was advantageous in less heat loss and excavation load. Heat loss was 33% smaller because heat loss from inner tube was recovered in annulus channel. Excavation area was 23% smaller because water loop was made by one double pipe. Total heat loss from the GTHTR300s to the water loop in the district was 4.2% and ratio of pump electricity to power generation from the GTHTR300s was 0.8%. In January, the maximum heat demand in a year, 97.0% of the heat demand was supplied by 2 GTHTRs. Less distance between GTHTR300 and heat demand district from 40 km to 20 km would make cost of the heat transfer system 22% smaller.