SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences / 2013 / Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 1

Exergetic evaluation of an integrated gasification combined cycle power plant simulated by seven different types of Turkish lignite

Ehsan AMIRABEDIN
MUSTAFA ZEKİ YILMAZOĞLU
ŞENOL BAŞKAYA
Pages
42–55
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Exergy destruction of each component and exergetic performance of the overall plant was also investigated.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, exergy analysis of an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) operating with 7 different types of low rank Turkish lignite was performed.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The purpose was to determine and compare the performance of each type of lignite in the same gasifier.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Exergy destruction of each component and exergetic performance of the overall plant was also investigated.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Integrated gasification combined cycle · exergy analysis · low rank Turkish lignite

Abstract

In this study, exergy analysis of an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) operating with 7 different types of low rank Turkish lignite was performed. The purpose was to determine and compare the performance of each type of lignite in the same gasifier. Exergy destruction of each component and exergetic performance of the overall plant was also investigated. In addition, CO2 emissions of each type of lignite were calculated. The results showed that Yeniköy lignite had the best performance among the different types of lignite, with 491 MW net power and 37.88% net exergy efficiency (without acid gas). It also had the minimum amount of CO2 emission at 726 kg/MWh. Therefore, Yeniköy lignite was chosen as a case study fuel and a detailed exergy analysis of its components was applied. The results showed that the major exergy destructions took place in the gasifier and the combustion chamber at 46.15% and 22.74%, respectively.

Özet

In this study, exergy analysis of an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) operating with 7 different types of low rank Turkish lignite was performed. The purpose was to determine and compare the performance of each type of lignite in the same gasifier. Exergy destruction of each component and exergetic performance of the overall plant was also investigated. In addition, CO2 emissions of each type of lignite were calculated. The results showed that Yeniköy lignite had the best performance among the different types of lignite, with 491 MW net power and 37.88% net exergy efficiency (without acid gas). It also had the minimum amount of CO2 emission at 726 kg/MWh. Therefore, Yeniköy lignite was chosen as a case study fuel and a detailed exergy analysis of its components was applied. The results showed that the major exergy destructions took place in the gasifier and the combustion chamber at 46.15% and 22.74%, respectively.

🔖

Cite This Article

AMIRABEDIN, E., YILMAZOĞLU, M. Z., BAŞKAYA, Ş. (2013). Exergetic evaluation of an integrated gasification combined cycle power plant simulated by seven different types of Turkish lignite. Turkish Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences, Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 1, 42–55. https://ajindex.com/articles/369005

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Ari, I. and Koksal, M.A., “Carbon Dioxide Emission from Turkish Electricity Sector and Its Mitigation Options, Energy Policy”, 39, 6120–6135, 2011.
  2. Bejan, A., Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1988.
  3. Bejan, A., Tsatsaronis, G. and Moran, M., Thermal Design and Optimization, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 19 Chen, C. and Rubin, E., “CO 2 Control Technology Effects on IGCC Plant Performance and Cost”, Energy Policy, 37, 915–924, 2009.
  4. Coskun, C., Oktay, Z. and Din¸cer, ˙I., “Investigation of Some Renewable Energy and Exergy Destruction Parameters for Two Geothermal District Heating Systems”, International Journal of Exergy, 8, 1–15, 2011.
  5. Decamps, C., Bouallou, C. and Kanniche, M., “Efficiency of an IGCC Power Plant Including CO 2 Removal”, Energy, 33, 874–881, 2008.
  6. Dincer, I. and Al-Muslim, H., “Energy and Exergy Efficiencies of Reheat Cycle Steam Power Plant”, Proceedings of ECOS’01, ˙Istanbul, 2001.
  7. Duan, L., Lin, R., Deng, S., Jin, H. and Cai, R., “A Novel IGCC System with Steam Injected H 2 /O 2 Cycle and CO 2 Recovery”, Energy Conversion and Management, 45, 797–809, 2004.
  8. Fortes, M., Bojarski, A.D., Velo, E., Nougues, J.M. and Puigjaner, L., “Conceptual Model and Evaluation of Generated Power and Emissions in an IGCC Plant”, Energy, 34, 1721–1732, 2009.
  9. Guillermo Ordorica-Garcia, G., Douglas, P., Croiset, E. and Zheng, L., “Technoeconomic Evaluation of IGCC Power Plants for CO 2 Avoidance”, Energy Conversion and Management, 47, 2250–2259, 2006.
  10. Huang, Y., Rezvani, S., Wright, D., Minchener, A. and Hewitt, N., “Techno-economic CO 2 Capture and Storage in Coal Fired Oxygen Fed Entrained Flow IGCC Power Plants”, Fuel Processing Technology, 89, 916–925, 2008.
  11. Jiang, L., Lin, R., Jin, H., Cai, R. and Liu, Z., “Study on Thermodynamic Characteristic and Optimization of Steam Cycle System in IGCC”, Energy Conversion and Management, 43, 1339–1348, 2002.
  12. Jimenez, L., Gadalla, M., Boer, D. and Majozi, T., “IGCC Process Simulation and Optimization”, Computers and Chemical Engineering, 34, 331–338, 2010.
  13. Kotas, T.J., The Exergy Method of Thermal Plant Analysis, Anchor Brendon Ltd., Tiptree, Essex, 1985.
  14. Mondol, J.D., Wright, D., Rezvani, S., Huang, Y. and Hewitt, N., “Techno-economic Evaluation of Advanced IGCC Lignite Coal Fuelled Power Plants with CO 2 Capture”, Fuel, 88, 2495–2506, 2009.
  15. Oktay, Z., “Investigation of Coal-fired Power Plants in Turkey and a Case Study: Can Plant”, Applied Thermal Engineering 29, 550–557, 2009. R