4.7 Article

Performance comparison of three trigeneration systems using organic rankine cycles

Journal

ENERGY
Volume 36, Issue 9, Pages 5741-5754

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.003

Keywords

Combined cooling heating and power; Trigeneration; Organic rankine cycle; Solid oxide fuel cell; Biomass; Solar energy

Funding

  1. King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
  2. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper, energetic performance comparison of three trigeneration systems is presented. The systems considered are SOFC-trigeneration, biomass-trigeneration, and solar-trigeneration systems. This study compares the performance of the systems considered when there is only electrical power and the efficiency improvement of these systems when there is trigeneration. Different key output parameters are examined: energy efficiency, net electrical power, electrical to heating and cooling ratios, and (GHG) GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions. This study shows that the SOFC-trigeneration system has the highest electrical efficiency among the three systems. Alternatively, when trigeneration is used, the efficiencies of all three systems considered increase considerably. The maximum trigeneration efficiency of the SOFC-trigeneration system is around 76% while it is around 90% for the biomass-trigeneration system. On the other hand, the maximum trigeneration efficiencies of the solar-trigeneration system is around 90% for the solar mode, 45% for storage and storage mode, and 41% for the storage mode. In addition, this study shows that the emissions of CO2 in kg per MWh of electrical power are high for the biomass-trigeneration and SOFC-trigeneration systems. However, by considering the emissions per MWh of trigeneration, their values drop to less than one fourth. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available