Exergoeconomic comparison and optimization of organic Rankine cycle,trilateral Rankine cycle and transcritical carbon dioxide cycle for heat recovery of low-temperature geothermal water
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 2019
Exergoeconomic comparison and optimization of organic Rankine cycle,trilateral Rankine cycle and transcritical carbon dioxide cycle for heat recovery of low-temperature geothermal water
Depleting fossil fuel resources and the horrible environmental impacts due to burning fossil fuels emphasize the importance of using renewable energy resources such as geothermal and solar energies. This paper compares performance of CO2 transcritical cycle, organic Rankine cycle, and trilateral Rankine cycle using a low-temperature geothermal heat source. Thermodynamic analysis, exergetic analysis, economic analysis, and exergoeconomic analysis are applied for each of the aforementioned cycles. In addition, a sensitivity analysis is performed on the system, and the effects of geothermal heat source temperature, evaporator pinch point temperature, and turbine inlet pressure on the cycle's performance are evaluated. Finally, the systems are optimized in order to minimize product cost ratio and maximize exergetic efficiency by using the genetic algorithm. Results indicate that the maximum thermal efficiency is approximately 13.03% which belongs to organic Rankine cycle with R123 as working fluid. CO2 cycle has the maximum exergetic efficiency, equals to 46.13%. The minimum product cost ratio refers to the organic Rankine cycle with R245fa as working fluid. Moreover, sensitivity analysis shows that increasing geothermal heat source temperature results in higher output power, product cost ratio, and exergy destruction ratio in all cycles.
AhmadiMHAhmadiMASadaghianiMS, et al.Ground source heat pump carbon emissions and ground-source heat pump systems for heating and cooling of buildings: a review. Environ Prog Sustain Energy2018; 37: 1241–1265.
2.
AminTERoghayehGFatemehR, et al.Evaluation of nanoparticle shape effect on a nanofluid based flat-plate solar collector efficiency. Energy Explor Exploit2015; 33: 659–76.
3.
Alhuyi NazariMAslaniAGhasempourR. Analysis of solar farm site selection based on TOPSIS approach. Int J Soc Ecol Sustain Dev2018, pp. 9: 12–25 .
4.
Alizadeh H, Ghasempour R, Razi Astaraei F, et al. Numerical modeling of PV cooling by using pulsating heat pipe. In: 3rd international conference and exhibition on solar energy ICESE-2016, Tehran, Iran, 5–6 September 2016.
5.
Alhuyi NazariMAhmadiMHGhasempourR, et al.A review on pulsating heat pipes: from solar to cryogenic applications. Appl Energy2018; 222: 475–484.
6.
KumarR. Thermodynamic modeling and validation of a 210-MW capacity coal-fired power plant. Iran J Sci Technol Trans Mech Eng2016; 40: 233–242.
7.
KumarRSharmaAKTewariPC. Thermal performance and economic analysis of 210 MWe coal-fired power plant. J Thermodyn 2014; 1–10. .
8.
KumarR. A critical review on energy, exergy, exergoeconomic and economic (4-E) analysis of thermal power plants. Eng Sci Technol Int J2017; 20: 283–292.
9.
FridleifssonIB. Status of geothermal energy amongst the world's energy sources. Geothermics2003; 32: 379–388.
10.
LundJWFreestonDH. World-wide direct uses of geothermal energy 2000. Geothermics2001; 30: 29–68.
11.
NareiHGhasempourRNoorollahiY. The effect of employing nanofluid on reducing the bore length of a vertical ground-source heat pump. Energy Convers Manag2016; 123: 581–591.
12.
HungTCShaiTYWangSK. A review of organic rankine cycles (ORCs) for the recovery of low-grade waste heat. Energy1997; 22: 661–667.
13.
MohammadiAKasaeianAPourfayazF, et al.Thermodynamic analysis of a combined gas turbine, ORC cycle and absorption refrigeration for a CCHP system. Appl Therm Eng2017; 111: 397–406.
14.
MirzaeiMAhmadiMHMobinM, et al.Energy, exergy and economics analysis of an ORC working with several fluids and utilizes smelting furnace gases as heat source. Therm Sci Eng Prog2018; 5: 230–237.
15.
BartelaŁ, et al.Thermodynamic and economical analysis of the ORC module application to an existing combined heat and power unit with the backpressure turbine. Proc IMechE, Part A: J Power and Energy2015; 229: 613–627.
16.
GluyasJG, et al.Keeping warm: a review of deep geothermal potential of the UK. Proc IMechE, Part A: J Power and Energy2018; 232: 115–126.
17.
GrollEKimJ-H. Review article: review of recent advances toward transcritical CO2 cycle technology. HVAC&R Res2007; 13: 499–520.
18.
NaseriABidiMAhmadiMH, et al.Exergy analysis of a hydrogen and water production process by a solar-driven transcritical CO2 power cycle with Stirling engine. J Clean Prod2017; 158: 165–181.
19.
NaseriABidiMAhmadiMH. Thermodynamic and exergy analysis of a hydrogen and permeate water production process by a solar-driven transcritical CO2 power cycle with liquefied natural gas heat sink. Renew Energy2017; 113: 1215–1228.
20.
ZhangXHeMZhangY. A review of research on the Kalina cycle. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2012; 16: 5309–5318.
21.
ChenHGoswamiDYStefanakosEK. A review of thermodynamic cycles and working fluids for the conversion of low-grade heat. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2010; 14: 3059–3067.
22.
QuoilinSVan Den BroekMDeclayeS, et al.Techno-economic survey of organic Rankine cycle (ORC) systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2013; 22: 168–186.
23.
HeberleFBrüggemannD. Exergy based fluid selection for a geothermal organic Rankine cycle for combined heat and power generation. Appl Therm Eng2010; 30: 1326–1332.
24.
YueCHanDPuW, et al.Thermal matching performance of a geothermal ORC system using zeotropic working fluids. Renew Energy2015; 80: 746–754.
25.
AstolfiMRomanoMCBombardaP, et al.Binary ORC (organic Rankine cycles) power plants for the exploitation of medium–low temperature geothermal sources – part B: techno-economic optimization. Energy2014; 66: 435–446.
26.
AstolfiMRomanoMCBombardaP, et al.Binary ORC (organic Rankine cycles) power plants for the exploitation of medium–low temperature geothermal sources – part A: thermodynamic optimization. Energy2014; 66: 423–434.
27.
Guo T, Wang H and Zhang S. Fluid selection for a low-temperature geothermal organic Rankine cycle by energy and exergy. In: 2010 Asia-Pacific power energy engineering conference, Chengdu, China, 28–31 March 2010, pp.1–5. Piscataway: IEEE.
28.
KarellasSSchusterA. Supercritical fluid parameters in organic Rankine cycle applications. Int J Thermodyn2008; 11: 101–108.
29.
LiuQDuanYYangZ. Performance analyses of geothermal organic Rankine cycles with selected hydrocarbon working fluids. Energy2013; 63: 123–132.
30.
ZhaiHShiLAnQ. Influence of working fluid properties on system performance and screen evaluation indicators for geothermal ORC (organic Rankine cycle) system. Energy2014; 74: 2–11.
31.
SarkarJ. Review and future trends of supercritical CO2 Rankine cycle for low-grade heat conversion. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2015; 48: 434–451.
32.
GuoTWangHZhangS. Comparative analysis of natural and conventional working fluids for use in transcritical Rankine cycle using low-temperature geothermal source. Int J Energy Res2011; 35: 530–544.
33.
CayerEGalanisNDesiletsM, et al.Analysis of a carbon dioxide transcritical power cycle using a low temperature source. Appl Energy2009; 86: 1055–1063.
34.
VélezFSegoviaJChejneF, et al.Low temperature heat source for power generation: exhaustive analysis of a carbon dioxide transcritical power cycle. Energy2011; 36: 5497–5507.
35.
YangM-HYehR-H. Economic performances optimization of the transcritical Rankine cycle systems in geothermal application. Energy Convers Manag2015; 95: 20–31.
36.
SmithIK. Development of the trilateral flash cycle system: part 1: fundamental considerations. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part A J Power Energy1993; 207: 179–194.
37.
Bryson M, Akbarzadeh A and Dixon C. Applying the trilateral flash cycle to the Portland geothermal resource to produce power. In: Conference of the Australian and New Zealand Solar Energy Society, Melbourne, Australia, 26–29 November 2003.
38.
AjimotokanHASherI. Thermodynamic performance simulation and design optimisation of trilateral-cycle engines for waste heat recovery-to-power generation. Appl Energy2015; 154: 26–34.
39.
ChoiBCKimYM. Thermodynamic analysis of a dual loop heat recovery system with trilateral cycle applied to exhaust gases of internal combustion engine for propulsion of the 6800 TEU container ship. Energy2013; 58: 404–416.
40.
GargPSrinivasanKDuttaP, et al.Comparison of CO2 and steam in transcritical Rankine cycles for concentrated solar power. Energy Procedia2014; 49: 1138–1146.
41.
FischerJ. Comparison of trilateral cycles and organic Rankine cycles. Energy2011; 36: 6208–6219.
42.
LiMWangJLiS, et al.Thermo-economic analysis and comparison of a CO2 transcritical power cycle and an organic Rankine cycle. Geothermics2014; 50: 101–111.
43.
YariMMehrASZareV, et al.Exergoeconomic comparison of TLC (trilateral Rankine cycle), ORC (organic Rankine cycle) and Kalina cycle using a low grade heat source. Energy2015; 83: 712–722.
44.
CengelYABolesMA. Thermodynamics: an engineering approach. Sea2002; 1000: 8862.
45.
KotasTJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis, London: Butterworths, 1985.
46.
OyedepoSOFagbenleROAdefilaSS, et al.Thermoeconomic and thermoenvironomic modeling and analysis of selected gas turbine power plants in Nigeria. Energy Sci Eng2015; 3: 423–442.
47.
JafarmadarSZehniA. Numerical investigation of the effects of dwell time duration in a two-stage injection scheme on exergy terms in an IDI diesel engine by three-dimensional modeling. Energy Sci Eng2014; 2: 1–13.
48.
LuyaoZChengXGangX, et al.Exergy analysis and economic evaluation of the steam superheat utilization using regenerative turbine in ultra-supercritical power plants under design/off-design conditions. Energy Sci Eng2017; 5: 156–166.
49.
TaghavifarHKhalilaryaSJafarmadarS. Three-dimensional energetic and exergetic analysis of the injection orientation of DI diesel engine under different engine speeds. Energy Sci Eng2015; 3: 360–370.
50.
MohammadiAAhmadiMHBidiM, et al.Exergy and economic analyses of replacing feedwater heaters in a Rankine cycle with parabolic trough collectors. Energy Rep2018; 4: 243–251.
51.
VandaniAMKBidiMAhmadiF. Exergy analysis and evolutionary optimization of boiler blowdown heat recovery in steam power plants. Energy Convers Manag2015; 106: 1–9.
52.
DincerICengelY. Energy, entropy and exergy concepts and their roles in thermal engineering. Entropy2001; 3: 116–149.
53.
BalliOArasHHepbasliA. Exergoeconomic analysis of a combined heat and power (CHP) system. Int J Energy Res2008; 32: 273–289.
54.
BoyaghchiFAHeidarnejadP. Thermoeconomic assessment and multi objective optimization of a solar micro CCHP based on organic Rankine cycle for domestic application. Energy Convers Manag2015; 97: 224–234.
55.
AnsarinasabHMehrpooyaMMohammadiA. Advanced exergy and exergoeconomic analyses of a hydrogen liquefaction plant equipped with mixed refrigerant system. J Clean Prod2017; 144: 248–259.
56.
AshouriMAhmadiMHPourkiaeiSM, et al.Exergy and exergo-economic analysis and optimization of a solar double pressure organic Rankine cycle. Therm Sci Eng Prog2018; 6: 72–86.
57.
Khoshkar VandaniAMJodaFAhmadiF, et al.Exergoeconomic effect of adding a new feedwater heater to a steam power plant. Mech Ind2017; 18: 224.
58.
MehrpooyaMAshouriMMohammadiA. Thermoeconomic analysis and optimization of a regenerative two-stage organic Rankine cycle coupled with liquefied natural gas and solar energy. Energy2017; 126: 899–914.
59.
AhmadiMHMohammadiAPourfayazF, et al.Thermodynamic analysis and optimization of a waste heat recovery system for proton exchange membrane fuel cell using transcritical carbon dioxide cycle and cold energy of liquefied natural gas. J Nat Gas Sci Eng2016; 34: 428–438.
60.
SadeghiMNematiAYariM. Thermodynamic analysis and multi-objective optimization of various ORC (organic Rankine cycle) configurations using zeotropic mixtures. Energy2016; 109: 791–802.
61.
Lemmon EW, Huber ML and McLinden MO. NIST reference fluid thermodynamic and transport properties – REFPROP. NIST Standard Reference Database 23, August 2002. Boulder: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
62.
AhmadiMHAhmadiM-AAboukazempourE, et al.Exergetic sustainability evaluation and optimization of an irreversible Brayton cycle performance. Front Energy. Epub ahead of print 2 March 2017. DOI: 10.1007/s11708-017-0445-y.
63.
AhmadiMAAshouriMSadatsakkakSA, et al.Optimization performance of irreversible refrigerators base on evolutionary algorithm. Mech Ind2016; 17: 209.
64.
AhmadiMHAfsharMANaseriA, et al.Modeling and PSO optimization of Humidifier-Dehumidifier desalination. Int J Renew Energy Dev2017; 7: 59.
65.
AhmadiMHAhmadiMAPourfayazF, et al.Thermodynamic analysis and optimization of an irreversible nano scale dual cycle operating with Maxwell–Boltzmann gas. Mech Ind2017; 18: 212.
66.
JokarMAAhmadiMHSharifpurM, et al.Thermodynamic evaluation and multi-objective optimization of molten carbonate fuel cell-supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle hybrid system. Energy Convers Manag2017; 153: 538–556.
67.
AhmadiMHAmin NabakhtehMAhmadiM-A, et al.Investigation and optimization of performance of nano-scale Stirling refrigerator using working fluid as Maxwell–Boltzmann gases. Phys A Stat Mech Its Appl2017; 483: 337–350.
68.
AhmadiMHAhmadiMAPourfayazF, et al.Entransy analysis and optimization of performance of nano-scale irreversible Otto cycle operating with Maxwell–Boltzmann ideal gas. Chem Phys Lett2016; 658: 293–302.
69.
AhmadiMHJokarMAMingT, et al.Multi-objective performance optimization of irreversible molten carbonate fuel cell–Braysson heat engine and thermodynamic analysis with ecological objective approach. Energy2018; 144: 707–722.
70.
AçıkkalpEAhmadiMH. Performance analysis and ecological optimization of an irreversible quantum heat engine with spin-1/2 system. Therm Sci Eng Prog2018; 5: 466–470.
71.
AhmadiMHAlhuyi NazariMFeidtM. Thermodynamic analysis and multi-objective optimisation of endoreversible Lenoir heat engine cycle based on the thermo-economic performance criterion. Int J Ambient Energy. Epub ahead of print 17 January 2018. DOI: 10.1080/01430750.2017.1423386.
