Device and method for evaluating economic feasibility of power facility

Abstract

The present invention relates to a device and method for evaluating the economic feasibility of a power facility, the device comprising: a memory in which at least one algorithm for evaluating economic feasibility is stored; a control unit for executing the at least one algorithm; and a communication unit for collecting data necessary for evaluating the economic feasibility by accessing at least one server. The control unit calculates at least one of the supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, or environmental influence of the power facility, and evaluates the economic feasibility of the power facility on the basis of the calculated result.

Description

Device and method for evaluating the economic feasibility of power facilities

[0001] The present invention relates to an economic evaluation device and method for power equipment.

[0002] Manufacturers who own power equipment conduct economic evaluations of their power equipment to assess its economic viability by assuming the loss of productivity in the event of a power outage due to a failure of the power equipment.

[0003] This economic feasibility evaluation mainly evaluates the system including power facilities in four categories: system performance, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact. Among the four categories, system performance and financial impact account for a large portion of the actual economic feasibility evaluation.

[0004] However, these economic evaluation methods were devised by power companies, which supply electricity. They focus on losses based on electricity rates from the supplier's perspective. They rely on formulas that are inapplicable to single-manufacturing companies, such as the number of customers connected to the grid and switching times, when calculating system performance. Therefore, they are not suitable for economic evaluations of private companies that own only a small portion of the grid's power facilities.

[0005] Embodiments of the present invention for solving these conventional problems provide an economic evaluation device and method for power facilities, which can perform an economic evaluation based on the loss of productivity of unit production facilities managed by power facilities and damage to other production facilities due to a power outage at power facilities in a private company that only has power facilities.

[0006] In order to solve the above technical problem, an economic evaluation device for a power facility according to an embodiment of the present invention includes a memory storing at least one algorithm for economic evaluation; a control unit executing the at least one algorithm; and a communication unit connecting to at least one server to collect data necessary for economic evaluation; wherein the control unit calculates at least one of the supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact of the power facility, and can evaluate the economic efficiency of the power facility based on the calculated result.

[0007] In one embodiment of the present invention, the supply reliability can be calculated based on the annual factory production performance per minute, the expected power outage time in case of a power facility failure, the factory operation rate, the annual load of the power facility, and the annual load of the entire power facility within the factory.

[0008] In one embodiment of the present invention, the financial impact may be calculated based on the new asset price for the power facility and the asset demolition cost for the power facility.

[0009] In one embodiment of the present invention, the safety accident impact can be calculated based on the rate of occurrence of casualties and the average compensation amount for accidental deaths in the event of a power facility failure.

[0010] In one embodiment of the present invention, the environmental impact can be calculated based on the fire occurrence rate and fire damage estimate when the power facility fails.

[0011] In one embodiment of the present invention, the supply reliability is calculated by multiplying the annual factory production performance per minute, the expected power outage time in case of a power facility failure, the factory operation rate, and the ratio of the annual load of the power facility to the annual load of the entire power facility in the factory, and the financial impact is calculated by adding the new asset price of the power facility and the asset demolition cost of the power facility, and the safety accident impact is calculated by multiplying the average compensation amount for accidental deaths by the rate of human casualties in case of a power facility failure, and the environmental impact is calculated by multiplying the fire occurrence rate in case of a power facility failure by the estimated fire damage amount, and the economic feasibility of the power facility may be evaluated as lower as the value of the sum of all costs according to the calculated supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact is higher.

[0012] In one embodiment of the present invention, the server may include a server that manages data related to the power facility, a server for a manufacturer of the power facility, and a server that provides statistical data on casualties, average compensation for disaster deaths, fire occurrence rates, and fire damage estimates managed by a government agency.

[0013] In one embodiment of the present invention, the annual load of the power facility can be calculated based on the number of transformers supplying power to the power facility and the total number of facilities within the factory where the power facility is installed.

[0014] In addition, in order to solve the above technical problem, a method for evaluating the economic feasibility of a power facility according to an embodiment of the present invention may include a step of sequentially or in parallel calculating at least one of the supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact of the power facility by a control unit executing at least one algorithm recorded in a memory; and a step of evaluating the economic feasibility of the power facility based on the calculated result.

[0015] As described above, the economic evaluation device and method of power facilities according to the present invention can be used to determine priority investment priorities and cost estimates for establishing power facility maintenance and operation strategies in a private enterprise that only has power facilities by performing an economic evaluation based on the loss of productivity of the unit production facility managed by the power facility and damage to other production facilities due to a power outage of the power facility.

[0016] FIG. 1 is a drawing showing the main configuration of an electronic device that performs an economic evaluation of a power facility according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0017] FIG. 2 is a flowchart illustrating a method for performing an economic evaluation of a power facility according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0018] Figure 3 is an example screen showing the results of an economic evaluation of a power facility according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0019] Hereinafter, preferred embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. The detailed description set forth below, together with the accompanying drawings, is intended to explain exemplary embodiments of the present invention and is not intended to represent the only embodiments in which the present invention may be practiced. In the drawings, portions irrelevant to the description may be omitted for clarity in describing the present invention, and the same reference numerals may be used throughout the specification for identical or similar components.

[0020]

[0021] FIG. 1 is a drawing showing the main configuration of an electronic device that performs an economic evaluation of a power facility according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0022] Referring to FIG. 1, an electronic device (100) according to the present invention may include a communication unit (110), an input unit (120), a display unit (130), a memory (140), and a control unit (150).

[0023] The communication unit (110) collects data necessary for evaluating the economic feasibility of power facilities through communication with at least one server (not shown) located outside the electronic device (100). In this case, the externally located server may include a server that manages data related to power facilities when the power facilities are installed within the company's factory, a server of a power facility manufacturer, a server managed by a government agency, etc.

[0024] For this purpose, the communication unit (110) has at least one server and 5G (5 th It can perform communications such as LTE-A (long term evolution-advanced), LTE, and Wi-Fi (wireless fidelity).

[0025] The input unit (120) generates input data in response to user input of the electronic device (100). The input unit (120) includes at least one input means. For this purpose, the input unit (120) may include a keyboard, a mouse, a keypad, a dome switch, a touch panel, touch keys, and buttons.

[0026] The display unit (130) outputs output data according to the operation of the electronic device (100). To this end, the display unit (130) may include a liquid crystal display (LCD), a light emitting diode (LED) display, an organic light emitting diode (OLED) display, a micro electro mechanical systems (MEMS) display, and an electronic paper display. The display unit (130) may be implemented as a touch screen by being combined with the input unit (120).

[0027] The memory (140) stores the operating programs of the electronic device (100). In particular, the memory (140) can store multiple algorithms for economic evaluation in the event of a power facility failure. More specifically, the memory (140) can store algorithms for calculating the power facility's supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact, which are the basis for the economic evaluation, and an algorithm for performing the economic evaluation using the supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact.

[0028] The control unit (150) calculates the supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact of the power facility subject to the economic feasibility evaluation using an algorithm stored in the memory (140), and ultimately performs the economic feasibility evaluation of the power facility.

[0029] More specifically, the control unit (150) calculates the supply reliability by checking the annual factory production performance per minute, the expected power outage time when the equipment is fixed, the factory operation rate, the annual load of a single equipment, and the annual load of the entire equipment within the factory. To this end, the control unit (150) can check the annual factory production performance per minute and the factory operation rate from the factory operation rate included in the previous year's statistics or business report of the factory where the power equipment is installed operated by the company, and can check the expected power outage time in case of equipment failure from the power outage response scenario of the factory where the power equipment is installed. In addition, the control unit (150) can check the annual load of a single equipment and the annual load of the entire equipment within the factory from the previous year's records provided by the power monitoring and control system of the factory where the power equipment is installed.

[0030] The control unit (150) calculates the financial impact by verifying the new asset price and asset demolition cost. To this end, the control unit (150) can verify the price at which the power equipment manufacturer provides the power equipment as the new asset price. The control unit (150) can verify the asset demolition cost based on the demolition cost calculation method for demolishing power equipment on the market or by the manufacturer.

[0031] The control unit (150) calculates the impact of safety accidents by checking the rate of casualties and the average compensation amount for accidental deaths in the event of a power facility failure. It also calculates the impact of environmental accidents by checking the rate of fire occurrence and the estimated fire damage amount in the event of a power facility failure. To this end, the control unit (150) can access a server managed by a government agency, download statistical data and calculation formulas from the government agency, and utilize them.

[0032] Finally, the control unit (150) evaluates the economic feasibility of the power facility by adding the calculated supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact, and displays the evaluation results in the form of a graph on the display unit (130).

[0033]

[0034] FIG. 2 is a flowchart illustrating a method for performing an economic evaluation of a power facility according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0035] Referring to FIG. 2, in step 201, the control unit (150) checks whether a signal for evaluating the economic feasibility of at least one power facility is received from the input unit (120). As a result of the check in step 201, if a signal for evaluating the economic feasibility is received, the control unit (150) performs step 203, and if the signal is not received, the control unit (150) waits for the reception of a signal.

[0036] In step 203, the control unit (150) calculates the power facility's supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact, and then performs step 205. More specifically, the control unit (150) calculates the power facility's supply reliability using the following mathematical equation 1. At this time, the calculation of the supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact may be performed in parallel or sequentially in any order.

[0037]

[0038] At this time, the control unit (150) can check the annual factory production performance per minute and the factory operation rate from the previous year's statistics or the factory operation rate in the business report of the factory where the power equipment operated by the company is installed, and can check the expected power outage time in case of equipment failure from the power outage response scenario of the factory where the power equipment is installed. In addition, the control unit (150) can check the annual load of a single facility and the annual load of all facilities within the factory from the previous year's records provided by the power monitoring and control system of the factory where the power equipment is installed. To this end, the control unit (150) can access a server (not shown) that manages data related to power equipment in the company when installing power equipment within the company's factory and check the corresponding information.

[0039] For example, the supply reliability for three power facilities installed in the factory calculated by the control unit (150) is as shown in Table 1 below.

[0040] Power facility name Annual factory production per minute (KRW) Expected power outage time in case of facility failure (min) Factory operation rate Annual load of a single facility / Annual load of all facilities in the factory Supply reliability (KRW) Facilities 14,000,000 4800.80.88 1,351,680,000 Facilities 24,000,000 9600.80.08 245,760,000 Facilities 34,000,000 9600.80.09 276,480,000

[0041] At this time, if the annual load of a single facility cannot be confirmed in the power monitoring and control system of the factory where the power facility is installed, the control unit (150) can check the number of transformers supplying power to all facilities installed in the factory, and calculate the annual load of a single facility by evenly dividing the confirmed number by the number of all facilities installed in the factory. The control unit (150) calculates the financial impact of the power facility using the following mathematical expression 2. The financial impact may be an amount calculated based on the price and demolition cost of the power facility.

[0042]

[0043] At this time, the control unit (150) can confirm the price at which the power equipment manufacturer provides the power equipment as the new asset price. The control unit (150) can also confirm the asset demolition cost based on the demolition cost calculation method for demolishing the power equipment on the market or by the manufacturer. To this end, the control unit (150) can access the manufacturer's server (not shown) to confirm the new asset price and asset demolition cost of the power equipment in question.

[0044] For example, the financial impact on three power facilities installed in the factory calculated by the control unit (150) is as shown in Table 2 below.

[0045] Power Equipment NameNew Asset Price (KRW)Asset Demolition Cost (KRW)Financial Impact (KRW)Equipment 1,300,000,00025,000,000325,000,000Equipment 220,000,0001,500,00021,500,000Equipment 38,000,0001,250,0009,250,000

[0046] The control unit (150) calculates the safety accident impact of the power facility using the following mathematical formula 3. The safety accident impact may be an amount calculated based on the rate of human casualties caused by power facility failure and the average compensation amount for accidental deaths.

[0047]

[0048] At this time, the control unit (150) can calculate the impact of a safety accident by accessing a server (not shown) managed by a government agency and utilizing the government agency's statistical data and calculation formula.

[0049] For example, the safety accident impact on three power facilities installed in the factory calculated by the control unit (150) is as shown in Table 3 below.

[0050] Power facility name, human casualty rate in case of power facility failure, average compensation for accidental deaths (KRW), impact of safety accidents (KRW), facility 10.00 28 200,000,000 50 4,000 20.00 28 200,000,000 50 4,000 30.00 30 200,000,000 840,000

[0051] The control unit (150) calculates the environmental impact of the power facility using the following mathematical equation 4. The environmental impact may be an amount calculated based on the fire occurrence rate that may occur in the event of an accident, such as a breakdown, in the power facility and the estimated amount of damage caused by the fire.

[0052]

[0053] At this time, the control unit (150) can calculate the impact of a safety accident by accessing a server managed by a government agency and utilizing the government agency's statistical data and calculation formula.

[0054] For example, the environmental impacts on three power facilities installed in a factory calculated by the control unit (150) are as shown in Table 4 below.

[0055] Power facility name, fire occurrence rate in case of power facility accident, fire damage calculation amount (won), environmental impact (won), facility 10.003050,000,00090,000, facility 20.00301,500,0004,500, facility 30.0030800,0002,400

[0056] In step 205, the control unit (150) applies the supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact calculated in step 203 to the following mathematical expression 5 to perform an economic evaluation according to a failure of the power facility.

[0057]

[0058] For example, the economic evaluation results for each of the three power facilities installed in the factory produced by the control unit (150) are as shown in Table 5 below.

[0059] Power facility name: Economic efficiency due to power facility failure (won) Facilities 11,677,274,000 Facilities 2,267,768,500 Facilities 3,286,572,400

[0060] Next, in step 207, the control unit (150) can display the economic feasibility in case of a power facility failure according to the results of the economic feasibility evaluation performed on the display unit (130). At this time, the economic feasibility in case of a power facility failure displayed on the display unit (130) will be described in more detail using the following Figure 3. Figure 3 is an example screen diagram showing the results of the economic feasibility evaluation of a power facility according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0061] Referring to FIG. 3, reference numerals 301, 302, and 303 represent graphs showing economic feasibility when equipment 1 fails, graphs showing economic feasibility when equipment 2 fails, and graphs showing economic feasibility when equipment 3 fails, respectively. The control unit (150) performs the execution of steps 203 and 205 of FIG. 2 using an algorithm stored in the memory (140) without separately displaying the execution results on the display unit (130), and then displays a graph like FIG. 3 on the display unit (130) at step 207 so that the user can only check the economic feasibility when the power equipment fails.

[0062] Through Figure 3, the user can confirm that the economic feasibility of Facility 1 in the event of a failure is significantly lower than that of Facility 2 and Facility 3. Therefore, the user can prioritize Facility 1 when establishing maintenance and operation strategies for prioritizing investment priorities and cost estimation for power facilities.

[0063]

[0064] The embodiments of the present invention disclosed in this specification and drawings are merely specific examples intended to facilitate understanding and easily explain the technical content of the present invention, and are not intended to limit the scope of the present invention. Therefore, the scope of the present invention should be interpreted to include all modifications or variations derived based on the technical concept of the present invention, in addition to the embodiments disclosed herein.

Claims

1. Memory storing at least one algorithm for economic evaluation; a control unit for executing at least one of the above algorithms; and A communication unit that connects to at least one server and collects data necessary for economic evaluation; The above control unit is an economic evaluation device for a power facility that calculates at least one of the power facility's supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact, and evaluates the economic feasibility of the power facility based on the calculated result.

2. In paragraph 1, The above supply reliability is, An economic evaluation device for power facilities calculated based on the annual factory production performance per minute, the expected power outage time in case of a failure of the above power facilities, the factory operation rate, the annual load of the above power facilities, and the annual load of all power facilities within the factory.

3. In paragraph 1, The above financial impact is, An economic evaluation device for power facilities calculated based on the new asset price of the above power facilities and the asset demolition cost of the above power facilities.

4. In paragraph 1, The impact of the above safety accident is: An economic evaluation device for power facilities calculated based on the incidence of human casualties and the average compensation amount for accidental deaths in the event of a failure of the above power facilities.

5. In paragraph 1, The above environmental impacts are: A device for evaluating the economic feasibility of power facilities, calculated based on the fire occurrence rate and fire damage calculation amount in the event of a failure of the above power facilities.

6. In paragraph 1, The above supply reliability is calculated by multiplying the annual factory production performance per minute, the expected power outage time in case of a failure of the above power equipment, the factory operation rate, and the ratio of the annual load of the above power equipment to the annual load of all power equipment in the factory. The above financial impact is calculated by adding the new asset price for the above power facility and the asset demolition cost for the above power facility. The impact of the above safety accident is calculated by multiplying the average compensation amount for accidental deaths by the rate of human casualties in the event of a power facility failure. The above environmental impact is calculated by multiplying the fire damage calculation amount by the fire occurrence rate in the event of a power facility failure. The economic feasibility of the above power facility is evaluated as lower the higher the sum of the costs resulting from the calculated supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact.

7. In paragraph 1, The above server is an economic evaluation device for power facilities, including a server that manages data related to the above power facilities, a server of a manufacturer of the above power facilities, and a server that provides statistical data on human casualties, average compensation for disaster deaths, fire occurrence rates, and fire damage estimates managed by a government agency.

8. In paragraph 2, An economic evaluation device for power facilities, wherein the annual load of the above power facility is calculated based on the number of transformers supplying power to the above power facility and the total number of facilities within the factory where the above power facility is installed.

9. In a method for evaluating the economic feasibility of a power facility by executing at least one algorithm recorded in memory for the purpose of economic feasibility evaluation, A step of sequentially or in parallel calculating at least one of the supply reliability, financial impact, safety accident impact, and environmental impact of the above power facility; and A method for evaluating the economic feasibility of a power facility, comprising: a step of evaluating the economic feasibility of the power facility based on the above-described results.

Images