4.6 Article

Energy optimization of a Sulfur-Iodine thermochemical nuclear hydrogen production cycle

Journal

NUCLEAR ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 53, Issue 6, Pages 2066-2073

Publisher

KOREAN NUCLEAR SOC
DOI: 10.1016/j.net.2020.12.014

Keywords

Nuclear hydrogen production; Energy integration; Heat exchanger network; Sulfur-iodine cycle

Funding

  1. Mexican Secretariat of Public Education SEP [12513383]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, thermal energy optimization of a Sulfur-Iodine nuclear hydrogen production cycle was conducted using a heuristic method, resulting in the proposal of four different heat exchanger networks. This optimization led to a significant reduction in energy requirements for cooling and heating, as well as an average 10% increase in the thermal efficiency of the cycle compared to the reference design.
The use of nuclear reactors is a large studied possible solution for thermochemical water splitting cycles. Nevertheless, there are several problems that have to be solved. One of them is to increase the efficiency of the cycles. Hence, in this paper, a thermal energy optimization of a Sulfur-Iodine nuclear hydrogen production cycle was performed by means a heuristic method with the aim of minimizing the energy targets of the heat exchanger network at different minimum temperature differences. With this method, four different heat exchanger networks are proposed. A reduction of the energy requirements for cooling ranges between 58.9-59.8% and 52.6-53.3% heating, compared to the reference design with no heat exchanger network. With this reduction, the thermal efficiency of the cycle increased in about 10% in average compared to the reference efficiency. This improves the use of thermal energy of the cycle.& nbsp; (c) 2020 Korean Nuclear Society, Published by Elsevier Korea LLC. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available