0

Full Content is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >

Thermo-Economic Analyses and Comparisons of Two S-CO2-Brayton-Cycle-Based Combined Power Cycles for Concentrated Solar Power Plants

[+] Author Affiliations
Yuegeng Ma, Xuwei Zhang, Ming Liu, Jiping Liu

Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China

Paper No. POWER2018-7177, pp. V001T06A003; 12 pages
doi:10.1115/POWER2018-7177
From:
  • ASME 2018 Power Conference collocated with the ASME 2018 12th International Conference on Energy Sustainability and the ASME 2018 Nuclear Forum
  • Volume 1: Fuels, Combustion, and Material Handling; Combustion Turbines Combined Cycles; Boilers and Heat Recovery Steam Generators; Virtual Plant and Cyber-Physical Systems; Plant Development and Construction; Renewable Energy Systems
  • Lake Buena Vista, Florida, USA, June 24–28, 2018
  • Conference Sponsors: Power Division, Advanced Energy Systems Division, Solar Energy Division, Nuclear Engineering Division
  • ISBN: 978-0-7918-5139-5
  • Copyright © 2018 by ASME

abstract

In order to pursue superior cycle efficiency and lower power generation cost for the CSP plants, two S-CO2–Brayton–cycle–based power cycles with different utilization methods of the residual heat recover of the top S-CO2 Brayton cycle (SCBC) are investigated to seek alternatives to the stand-alone S-CO2 cycle as the power block of concentrated solar power plants. The residual heat released by the top S-CO2 cycle are either utilized to drive a LiBr absorption chiller (AC) for further chilling of the CO2 fluids exiting the precooler before entering the main compressor inlet temperature or recovered by an organic rankine cycle (ORC) for generating electricity. Thermo-economic analysis and optimization are performed for the SCBC–AC and SCBC–ORC, respectively. The results show that the thermal and exergetic efficiencies of the SCBC–AC are comparable with those of the SCBC–ORC in low pressure ratio conditions (PR<2.7) but are apparently lower than SCBC–ORC when PR is over 2.7. The LCOE of the CSP plant integrated with SCBC–AC is more sensitive to the change of PR. The optimal PR to maximum the cycle efficiency or minimize the plant LCOE for the SCBC–ORC is higher than that for the SCBC–AC, while the optimal recuperator effectiveness to minimize the LCOE of CSP plant integrated with SCBC–ORC is lower than that of SCBC–AC. The optimization results show that the thermo-economic performance of the SCBC–AC is comparable to that of the SCBC–ORC. Significant ηex improvement and LCOE reduction can be obtained by both the two combined cycles relative to the stand-alone S-CO2 cycle. The maximal ηex improvements obtained by the SCBC–ORC and SCBC–AC are 6.83% and 4.12%, respectively. The maximal LCOE reduction obtained by the SCBC-ORC and SCBC–AC are 0.70 ȼ / (kW·h) and 0.60 ȼ / (kW·h), respectively.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME

Figures

Tables

Interactive Graphics

Video

Country-Specific Mortality and Growth Failure in Infancy and Yound Children and Association With Material Stature

Use interactive graphics and maps to view and sort country-specific infant and early dhildhood mortality and growth failure data and their association with maternal

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In