4.7 Article

Analysis of the performance of an electricity generation system using the CO2 hydrate formation and dissociation process for heat recover

期刊

ENERGY
卷 218, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.119412

关键词

CO2 hydrate; Gas hydrate power cycle; Electricity generation; Small difference in temperature; Low-temperature waste heat

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposed the utilization of a gas hydrate power cycle to harness a small temperature difference heat source and a new electric generator system. By setting the waste heat and cold environment as low and high temperature heat sources, the high-temperature heat source is converted into electric power efficiently.
In Japan, approximately 70% of the primary energy supply is converted into low-temperature (lower than 200 degrees C) waste heat, which represents a small energy density; therefore, its utilization is limited to applications such as heat pumps, organic Rankine cycle, etc. In this paper, therefore, work from the heat source with a small difference in temperature is obtained using a gas hydrate power cycle. Furthermore, a new electric generator system is proposed. In the gas hydrate power cycle, gas hydrate is produced due to a low-temperature heat source (environment of a cold area), and then dissociated, resulting in high-pressure gas, due to a high-temperature heat source. In this cycle, the temperatures of the heat sources were set at -5 degrees C and 15 degrees C; therefore, in the proposed system, cold environment and waste heat can be considered as the low and high temperature heat source, respectively. With this system, the dissociation efficiency of CO2 hydrate when using a generation catalyst was at 42.5%, and the instant power conversion percentage of the actuator and generator was at 40.2%. Finally, 17.1% of the heat provided by the high-temperature heat source was converted into electric power by CO2 hydrate power cycle. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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