4.7 Article

Proposal and assessment of a novel combined heat and power system: Energy, exergy, environmental and economic analysis

期刊

ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT
卷 204, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2019.112307

关键词

Gas turbine cycle; Kalina cycle; Waste heat recovery; Combined heat and power (CHP); 4E analysis; Net present value (NPV)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This research aims at developing a small-scale novel cogeneration system to satisfy all of the electrical and heating demands of a typical residential complex. The proposed system is integrated of a gas turbine cycle (GTC) and a Kalina cycle (KC). A comprehensive parametric study is presented for evaluating the proposed system from energy, exergy, environmental and economic (4E) points of view. The system's governing equations are solved and validated through developing a high-accuracy computational code in Engineering Equation Solver (EES) software. The effects of some important design parameters (including compressor pressure ratio, base ammonia concentration, generator pressure and condenser pinch point temperature difference) are investigated on four appropriate criteria of energy efficiency (eta(th)), exergy efficiency (eta(ex)), levelized total emissions (LTE) and levelized total costs (LTC). Furthermore, two economic methods, payback period (PP) and net present value (NPV), are also investigated. The results show that, the simulation outputs at base design conditions are as eta(th) = 69.43%, eta(ex) = 37.90%, LTE = 87998 kg/kW, LTC = 8958 $/kW, PP = 3.34 years and NPV = 878679 $. The results of parametric analysis reveal that there is an optimal compressor pressure ratio which leads to maximum eta(th) and eta(ex) and minimum LTE and LTC. The combustion chamber of GTC has the maximum share in system's total exergy destruction (with 55.95% of total exergy destruction). Also, the entire KC has a low contribution of 3.396% in total exergy destruction.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据