{"title":"三边循环发电机余热回收发电的热经济可行性分析","authors":"H. A. Ajimotokan, Isiaka Ayuba, H. K. Ibrahim","doi":"10.18186/thermal.1198852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The trilateral cycle (TLC), a promising alternative waste heat recovery-to-power cycle, is receiving increasing attention due to feats such as the high thermal match between the exergy of the heat source temperature profiles and its working fluid. Although the TLC has neither been broadly applied nor commercialised because of its thermo-economic feasibility considerations. This study examined the thermo-economic analysis of different TLC power generator configurations; i.e., the saturated subcritical simple (non-recuperative) and recuperative cycles using n-pentane as the working fluid for low-grade waste heat recovery-to-power generation. Based on the thermodynamic and economic analyses, the feasibility analysis models of the cycles were established using Aspen Plus, considering efficiency, cost, and expected operating and capacity factors. Furthermore, the capacity factor, specific investment cost (SIC), and payback period (PBP), among other, were used to evaluate the cycle design configurations and sizes. The SICs of the simple and recuperative TLCs were 3,683.88 $/kW and 4,220.41 $/kW, and their PBPs were 8.43 years and 8.55 years, respectively. The simple TLC had a lower investment ratio of 0.24 compared to an investment ratio of 0.28 for the recuperative TLC. These economic values suggest that the simple TLC is more cost-effective when compared with the recuperative TLC because the recuperation process does not recompense the associated cost, making it unattractive.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Thermo-economic feasibility analysis of trilateral-cycle power generators for waste heat recovery-to-power applications\",\"authors\":\"H. A. Ajimotokan, Isiaka Ayuba, H. K. Ibrahim\",\"doi\":\"10.18186/thermal.1198852\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The trilateral cycle (TLC), a promising alternative waste heat recovery-to-power cycle, is receiving increasing attention due to feats such as the high thermal match between the exergy of the heat source temperature profiles and its working fluid. Although the TLC has neither been broadly applied nor commercialised because of its thermo-economic feasibility considerations. This study examined the thermo-economic analysis of different TLC power generator configurations; i.e., the saturated subcritical simple (non-recuperative) and recuperative cycles using n-pentane as the working fluid for low-grade waste heat recovery-to-power generation. Based on the thermodynamic and economic analyses, the feasibility analysis models of the cycles were established using Aspen Plus, considering efficiency, cost, and expected operating and capacity factors. Furthermore, the capacity factor, specific investment cost (SIC), and payback period (PBP), among other, were used to evaluate the cycle design configurations and sizes. The SICs of the simple and recuperative TLCs were 3,683.88 $/kW and 4,220.41 $/kW, and their PBPs were 8.43 years and 8.55 years, respectively. The simple TLC had a lower investment ratio of 0.24 compared to an investment ratio of 0.28 for the recuperative TLC. These economic values suggest that the simple TLC is more cost-effective when compared with the recuperative TLC because the recuperation process does not recompense the associated cost, making it unattractive.\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18186/thermal.1198852\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18186/thermal.1198852","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Thermo-economic feasibility analysis of trilateral-cycle power generators for waste heat recovery-to-power applications
The trilateral cycle (TLC), a promising alternative waste heat recovery-to-power cycle, is receiving increasing attention due to feats such as the high thermal match between the exergy of the heat source temperature profiles and its working fluid. Although the TLC has neither been broadly applied nor commercialised because of its thermo-economic feasibility considerations. This study examined the thermo-economic analysis of different TLC power generator configurations; i.e., the saturated subcritical simple (non-recuperative) and recuperative cycles using n-pentane as the working fluid for low-grade waste heat recovery-to-power generation. Based on the thermodynamic and economic analyses, the feasibility analysis models of the cycles were established using Aspen Plus, considering efficiency, cost, and expected operating and capacity factors. Furthermore, the capacity factor, specific investment cost (SIC), and payback period (PBP), among other, were used to evaluate the cycle design configurations and sizes. The SICs of the simple and recuperative TLCs were 3,683.88 $/kW and 4,220.41 $/kW, and their PBPs were 8.43 years and 8.55 years, respectively. The simple TLC had a lower investment ratio of 0.24 compared to an investment ratio of 0.28 for the recuperative TLC. These economic values suggest that the simple TLC is more cost-effective when compared with the recuperative TLC because the recuperation process does not recompense the associated cost, making it unattractive.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.