Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Optimization of three power and desalination plants and exergy-based economic and CO2 emission cost allocation and comparison

  • 21 Accesses

Abstract

In this work, a multi-effect distillation with thermal vapor compression desalination unit is proposed to satisfy the freshwater demand of São Mateus, Espírito Santo, Brazil. The desalination unit is driven by saturated vapor produced by boiler or heat recovery steam generator. The goal and main contribution of this work are, respectively, to compare and evaluate the most feasible configuration among a steam power cycle, gas turbine and combined cycle power plant. To accomplish this objective, the first and second laws of thermodynamics are used, and economic analyses are carried out for each option. In consequence, an optimization using a genetic algorithm shows the optimal results. The usage of an exergy-based approach for cost allocation assists in the best judgment. For instance, the combined cycle power plant driving a desalination unit presents the highest net power generation of 51.7 MW and a total cost rate of 24,811 US$ h−1, which means a Leveled Cost of Energy of around 0.132 US$ kWh−1. In addition, it has the lowest exergetic and monetary costs of net power (2.316 kJ kJ−1 and 0.132 US$ kWh−1) and freshwater (17.9 kJ kJ−1 and 2.684 US$ kWh−1). However, it also has the highest environmental cost for net power (22.451 kgCO2 kWh−1) and the second highest one for freshwater (196.120 × 10−3 kgCO2 m−3).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Abbreviations

c:

Monetary unit cost [US$ kWh−1]

CRF:

Annual capital recovery factor

DTML:

Logarithmic mean temperature difference [°C]

E:

Exergy [kW]

h:

Specific enthalpy [kJ kg−1]

k:

Exergetic unit cost [kW kW−1]

\({\dot{m}}\) :

Mass flow rate [kg s−1]

N:

Hour of plant operation per year [h]

OF:

Objective function

P:

Pressure [kPa]

\({\dot{Q}}\) :

Heat transfer rate [kW]

RP:

Pressure relation

T:

Temperature [°C]

TCI:

Total cost of investment

\({\dot{W}}\) :

Power [kW]

x:

Mass fraction

Ż:

Cost rate [$ s−1]

AC:

Air compressor

APP:

Economizer approach

BO:

Boiler

br:

Brine

CC:

Combustion chamber

ec:

Economizer

ev:

Evaporator

F:

Fuel

fw:

Freshwater

GT:

Gas turbine

in:

Inlet

NET:

Net output

out:

Outlet

PM:

Pump and motor

PP:

Pinch point

rw:

Return water

SA:

Superheating

sh:

Superheater

ST:

Steam turbine

sw:

Sea water

TOT:

Total

α:

External fuel unit cost

η:

Isentropic efficiency

λ:

Specific CO2 emission [kgCO2 kWh−1]

φ:

Maintenance factor [–]

ΔT:

Temperature difference [°C]

AC:

Air compressor

BO:

Boiler

CC:

Combustion chamber

CCI:

Construction cost index

CCPP:

Combined cycle power plant

CEPCI:

Chemical engineering plant cost index

ENR:

Engineering News-Record

FI:

Installation factor

GOR:

Gain output ration

GT:

Gas turbine

HRS:

Heat recovery steam generator

MED:

Multi-effect distillation

MSF:

Multi stage flash

OF:

Objective function

PEC:

Purchase equipment cost

PM:

Pump and motor

RO:

Reverse osmosis

ST:

Steam turbine

TVC:

Thermal vapor compression

References

  1. ARSP - Public Services Regulation Agency of Espírito Santo (2019). Decisão ARSP/DE No 06/2018 [in Portuguese]. https://arsp.es.gov.br/Media/arsi/Legisla%C3%A7%C3%A3o/Resolu%C3%A7%C3%B5es%20G%C3%A1s%20Natural/ARSP/2018/DecisaoARSPn006_2018.pdf. Accessed 15 Jan 2019.

  2. Almutairi, A., Pilidis, P., Al-Mutawa, N., & Al-Weshahi, M. (2016). Energetic and exergetic analysis of cogeneration power combined cycle and ME-TVC-MED water desalination plant: Part-1 operation and performance. Applied Thermal Engineering,103, 77–91.

  3. Bejan, A., Tsatsaronis, G., & Moran, M. (1996). Thermal design and optimization. New York: Wiley.

  4. Catrini, P., Cipollina, A., Micale, G., Piacentino, A., & Tamburini, A. (2017). Exergy analysis and thermoeconomic cost accounting of a combined heat and power steam cycle integrated with a multi effect distillation-thermal vapour compression desalination plant. Energy Convers. Manag.,149, 950–965.

  5. Cavalcanti, E. J. C. (2017). Exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental analyses of an integrated solar combined cycle system. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,67, 507–519.

  6. EES (2017). Engineering Equation Solver - EES. http://fchartsoftware.com/ees/. Accessed 15 Oct 2017.

  7. Eldean, M. A. S., & Soliman, A. M. (2017). A novel study of using oil refinery plants waste gases for thermal desalination and electric power generation: energy, exergy & cost evaluations. Applied Energy,195, 453–477.

  8. Esfahani, I. J., Kim, J. T., & Yoo, C. K. (2013). A cost approach for optimization of a combined power and thermal desalination system through exergy and environmental analysis. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research,52, 11099–11110.

  9. Ghaebi, H., & Abbaspour, G. (2018). Thermoeconomic analysis of an integrated multi-effect desalination thermal vapor compression (MED-TVC) system with a trigeneration system using triple-pressure HRSG. Heat Mass Transf. und Stoffuebertragung,54, 1337–1357.

  10. Hafdhi, F., Khir, T., Ben Yahia, A., & Ben Brahim, A. (2018). Exergoeconomic optimization of a double effect desalination unit used in an industrial steam power plant. Desalination,438, 63–82.

  11. Incaper (2018). Sistema de Informações Meteorológicas [in Portuguese]. https://meteorologia.incaper.es.gov.br/graficos-da-serie-historicasao_mateus. Accessed 01 Nov 2018.

  12. Jamil, M. A., Qureshi, B. A., & Zubair, S. M. (2017). Exergo-economic analysis of a seawater reverse osmosis desalination plant with various retrofit options. Desalination,401, 88–98.

  13. Janalizadeh, H., Khoshgoftar Manesh, M. H., & Amidpour, M. (2015). Exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental evaluation of Integration of desalinations with a total site utility system. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy,17, 103–117.

  14. Kotas, T. J. (1985). The exergy method of thermal plant analysis (1st ed.). London, England: Butterworths.

  15. Lazzaretto, A., & Tsatsaronis, G. (2006). SPECO: a systematic and general methodology for calculating efficiencies and costs in thermal systems. Energy,31, 1257–1289.

  16. Lourenço, A. B., Nebra, S. A., Santos, J. J. C. S., & Donatelli, J. L. M. (2015). Application of an alternative thermoeconomic approach to a two-stage vapour compression refrigeration cascade cycle. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering,37, 903–913.

  17. Lozano, M. A., & Valero, A. (1993). Theory of the exergetic cost. Energy,18, 939–960.

  18. McGivney, W., & Kawamura, S. (2008). Cost estimating manual for water treatment facilities. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

  19. Moghimi, M., Emadi, M., Mirzazade Akbarpoor, A., & Mollaei, M. (2018). Energy and exergy investigation of a combined cooling, heating, power generation, and seawater desalination system. Applied Thermal Engineering,140, 814–827.

  20. Mohammadi, A., & Mehrpooya, M. (2017). Energy and exergy analyses of a combined desalination and CCHP system driven by geothermal energy. Applied Thermal Engineering,116, 685–694.

  21. Moran, M. J., Shapiro, H. N., Boettner, D. D., & Bailey, M. B. (2011). Fundamentals of engineering thermodynamics (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley.

  22. Nafey, A. S., & Sharaf, M. A. (2010). Combined solar organic Rankine cycle with reverse osmosis desalination process: energy, exergy, and cost evaluations. Renewable Energy,35, 2571–2580.

  23. Nayar, K. G., Sharqawy, M. H., Banchik, L. D., & Lienhard, J. H. (2016). Thermophysical properties of seawater: a review and new correlations that include pressure dependence. Desalination,390, 1–24.

  24. Sadri, S., Khoshkhoo, R. H., & Ameri, M. (2018). Optimum exergoeconomic modeling of novel hybrid desalination system (MEDAD + RO). Energy,149, 74–83.

  25. Santos, R. G., Faria, P. R., Santos, J. J. C. S., Silva, J. A. M., & Flórez-Orrego, D. (2016). Thermoeconomic modeling for CO2 allocation in steam and gas turbine cogeneration systems. Energy,117, 590–603.

  26. Sharqawy, M. H., Lienhard, J. H., & Zubair, S. M. (2010). Thermophysical properties of seawater: a review of existing correlations and data. Desalination and Water Treatment,16, 354–380.

  27. Smith, R. (2005). Chemical process: design and integration. Chichester, West Sussex, England: Wiley.

  28. SNIS. (2019). Diagnóstico dos Serviços de Água e Esgotos - 2017 [in Portuguese]. http://www.snis.gov.br/diagnostico-agua-e-esgotos/diagnostico-ae-2017. Accessed 15 Feb 2019.

  29. Tchanche, B. F., Lambrinos, G., Frangoudakis, A., & Papadakis, G. (2010). Exergy analysis of micro-organic Rankine power cycles for a small scale solar driven reverse osmosis desalination system. Applied Energy,87, 1295–1306.

  30. Wellmann, J., Meyer-Kahlen, B., & Morosuk, T. (2018). Exergoeconomic evaluation of a CSP plant in combination with a desalination unit. Renewable Energy,128, 586–602.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Professor Márcio Coelho de Mattos, Head of DEM/Ufes, for his support.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Correspondence to A. B. Lourenço.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chun, A., Barone, M.A. & Lourenço, A.B. Optimization of three power and desalination plants and exergy-based economic and CO2 emission cost allocation and comparison. Int J Energ Water Res 4, 13–25 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42108-019-00047-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Combined cycle
  • Exergoeconomics
  • Gas turbine
  • Genetic algorithm
  • Multi-effect distillation
  • Steam cycle