Journals / International Journal of Thermodynamics / 2021 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 2

On the Allocation of Residues Cost using Conventional and Comprehensive Thermoeconomic Diagrams

Pages
134–149
Publication Date
2021-05-26
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)

It represents advantages since the equipment product/fuel ratio index is not affected, which is beneficial for thermoeconomic diagnosis application.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In a productive process, the achievement of products occurs simultaneously with residues generation.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Environmental impact of residues is an important issue in energy systems analysis due to environmental regulations and sustainability assessment.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It represents advantages since the equipment product/fuel ratio index is not affected, which is beneficial for thermoeconomic diagnosis application.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Allocation of residue/waste · comprehensive diagram · cost allocation

Abstract

In a productive process, the achievement of products occurs simultaneously with residues generation. Environmental impact of residues is an important issue in energy systems analysis due to environmental regulations and sustainability assessment. Many waste treatment methodologies have been proposed and applied in thermoeconomics. However, this is a complex problem and the solution depends on the residue nature and its formation process. Most conventional methodologies are based on productive diagrams, using productive flows only, and allocate the residues cost among the productive equipment. This work surveys the main conventional methodologies for treatment of waste and presents an improved/updated methodology based on a comprehensive diagram, in which both physical and productive flows are represented and their flows cost are assessed and the subsystems are connected using the same physical flows presented in the flowsheet of the plant. Both the CGAM system and a combined cycle are analyzed. Comparisons are made with literature results, considering the same case studies. The presented methodology obtains consistent results from the point of view of the cost allocation in thermoeconomics. The novelty of this updated approach concerns how the residue cost is allocated in the comprehensive diagram: it is reinternalized in the internal loop of physical flows, instead of in the productive unit. It represents advantages since the equipment product/fuel ratio index is not affected, which is beneficial for thermoeconomic diagnosis application.

🔖

Cite This Article

FARİA, P. R. D., SANTOS, R. G. D., SANTOS, J. J., BARONE, M. A., MİOTTO, B. M. (2021). On the Allocation of Residues Cost using Conventional and Comprehensive Thermoeconomic Diagrams. International Journal of Thermodynamics, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 2, 134–149. https://ajindex.com/articles/673425

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. C. Torres, A. Valero, V. Rangel, e A. Zaleta, “On the cost formation process of the residues”, Energy, vol. 33, no 2, p. 144–152, fev. 2008. C. Torres e A. Valero, “Curso de Doctorado Termoeconomía, Dpto. Ingenieria Mecánica”. Universidad de Zaragoza, 2000. S. A. A. G. Cerqueira, “Metodologias de Análise Termoeconômica de Sistemas [in Portuguese]”, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, Brazil, 1999. A. Lazzaretto e G. Tsatsaronis, “SPECO: A systematic and general methodology for calculating efficiencies and costs in thermal systems”, Energy, vol. 31, no 8–9, p. 1257–1289, jan. 2006. P. A. Arena e R. Borchiellini, “Application of different productive structures for thermoeconomic diagnosis of a combined cycle power plant”, Int. J. Therm. Sci., vol. 38, no 7, p. 601–612, jul. 1999.
  2. İ. Dincer e M. A. Rosen, Exergy: Energy, Environment, and Sustainable Development, 1o ed. Elsevier Science, 2007. M. A. Rosen e I. Dincer, “Exergy as the confluence of energy, environment and sustainable development”, Exergy, An Int. J., vol. 1, no 1, p. 3–13, jan. 2001. M. A. Rosen e I. Dincer, “On Exergy and Environmental Impact”, Int. J. Energy Res., vol. 21, no 7, p. 643–654, jun. 1997.
  3. H. Holmberg, M. Tuomaala, T. Haikonen, e P. Ahtila, “Allocation of fuel costs and CO2-emissions to heat and power in an industrial CHP plant: Case integrated pulp and paper mill”, Appl. Energy, vol. 93, p. 614–623, maio 2012.
  4. J. A. M. Silva, D. Flórez-Orrego, e S. Oliveira, “An exergy based approach to determine production cost and CO2 allocation for petroleum derived fuels”, Energy, vol. 67, p. 490–495, abr. 2014. D. Flórez-Orrego, J. A. M. Silva, e S. de Oliveira Jr., “Renewable and non-renewable exergy cost and specific CO2 emission of electricity generation: The Brazilian case”, Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 85, p. 619–629, set. 2014. D. Flórez-Orrego, J. A. M. da Silva, H. Velásquez, e S. de Oliveira, “Renewable and non-renewable exergy costs and CO2 emissions in the production of fuels for Brazilian transportation sector”, Energy, vol. 88, p. 18–36, ago. 2015.
  5. R. G. Santos, P. R. Faria, J. J. C. S. Santos, J. A. M. Silva, e D. Flórez-Orrego, “Thermoeconomic modeling for CO2 allocation in steam and gas turbine cogeneration systems”, Energy, vol. 117, p. 590–603, jan. 2016.
  6. R. G. dos Santos, J. J. C. S. Santos, e J. A. M. da Silva, “Application of Thermoeconomics for CO2 Allocation for Net Power and Useful Heat in a Gas Turbine Cogeneration System”, Appl. Mech. Mater., vol. 830, p. 95