4.5 Article

Exergoeconomic and Thermodynamic Analyses of Solar Power Tower Based Novel Combined Helium Brayton Cycle-Transcritical CO2 Cycle for Carbon Free Power Generation

Journal

GLOBAL CHALLENGES
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/gch2.202300191

Keywords

exergoeconomic analysis; Exergy analysis; helium Brayton cycle; solar power tower; transcritical CO2 cycle

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, a novel combined power cycle for solar power tower system is proposed and compared with the basic cycle. The optimized cycle shows improved thermal and exergy efficiency, as well as reduced electricity cost, making it superior to other existing systems.
In the present study, a novel combined power cycle for solar power tower (SPT) system consisting of helium Brayton cycle (HBC) and transcritical CO2 (TCO2) for waste heat recovery is being studied for carbon-free generation. The performance of the proposed SPT based combined cycle (SPT-HBC-TCO2 cycle) is compared with SPT based basic cycle (SPT-HBC) based on exergoeconomic and thermodynamic analyses. It is concluded that the SPT-based combined cycle (SPT-HBC-TCO2 cycle) produces a thermal efficiency of 32.39% and exergy efficiency of 34.68% with an electricity cost of 1.613 UScent kWh(-1). The exergy and thermal efficiency of the SPT-based combined cycle are enhanced by 13.18% and 13.21% respectively, while electricity cost is reduced by around 2% as compared to the SPT-based basic cycle (SPT-HBC) configuration at base conditions. A notable finding is that, despite the additional expenditures related to the bottoming cycle, the cost of electricity is lesser for the proposed combined cycle. Additionally, a comparison with the related prior published research exhibits that the performance of the current novel system is superior to that of the systems based on steam rankine cycle and supercritical CO2 cycles.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available