4.7 Article

Effect of the ambient conditions on gas turbine combined cycle power plants with post-combustion CO2 capture

期刊

ENERGY
卷 134, 期 -, 页码 221-233

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2017.05.020

关键词

Ambient temperature; CO2 capture; Natural gas combined cycle; Supplementary firing

资金

  1. Mexican National Council for Science and Technology (CONACyT)
  2. National Institute of Electricity and Clean Energy (INEEL)
  3. GAS-FACTS project - UK EPSRC [EP/J020788/1]
  4. UK Royal Academy of Engineering Research Fellowship
  5. Catedras CONACYT project [3139]
  6. EPSRC [EP/J020788/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper evaluates the effect of ambient conditions on a natural gas combined cycle power plant (NGCC) with CO2 capture and proposes design options for effective integration and off-design operation. In particular, the study assesses the effect of ambient temperature in the context of the electricity system in Mexico and proposes supplementary firing in the heat recovery steam generator to mitigate reduction in power output. For ambient temperature varying from -5 degrees C to 45 degrees C, a typical temperature variation in the north of Mexico, the efficiency of the NGCC with CO2 capture reduces from 50.95% to 48.01% when the temperature increased from 15 degrees C (ISO design condition) to 45 degrees C, and reduces from 50.95% to 50.78% when the temperature decreased from 15 degrees C to -5 degrees C. The power generated decreases from 6763 MW at 15 degrees C to 530 MW at 45 degrees C. In order to compensate for the loss of output caused by seasonal changes in ambient temperature, supplementary firing in the heat recovery steam generator can be used to generate additional power and return the power output to 640 MW at 45 degrees C, at the expense of an increase in fuel costs and a drop in efficiency from 50.95% to 43.46%, without and with supplementary firing respectively. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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