Thermoeconomic analysis for hybrid solar Brayton cycles operating with different working fluids

被引:0
|
作者
Moreno-Gamboa F. [1 ]
Nieto-Londoño C. [2 ]
Sanin-Villa D. [3 ]
机构
[1] Engineering School, Fluid and Thermal Team, Francisco de Paula Santander University, Cucuta
[2] Escuela de Ingenierías, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellin
[3] Engineering School, Automation, Electronics, and Information Technology, Instituto Tecnológico Metropolitano, Medellin
来源
关键词
Energy; Exergy; Hybrid Brayton cycle; Power plant; Solar power plant;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijft.2024.100693
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
A Brayton cycle analysis with regeneration fed by heat input from a central concentration solar energy tower and a combustion chamber that uses natural gas is presented. The thermodynamic model includes the irreversibility of the different components of a conventional Brayton cycle system and a solar concentration system through energy and exergy considerations. The environmental conditions of Barranquilla are used for the plant analysis using different working fluids throughout the day, where the carbon dioxide cycle presents an overall efficiency of 28.8 %, the cycle with air efficiency is 26.6 %, and the Helium cycle is 20.2 %. The model considers the energy flows within the plant and the exergy destruction. In this sense, the solar concentration system contributes an energy fraction of 0.209 when operating with air, while the exergy destruction fraction is 0.189 when operating with carbon dioxide when solar radiation is maximum. Finally, an estimation of the Levelized Cost of Energy is presented. © 2024
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Performance comparison of different supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycles integrated with a solar power tower
    Al-Sulaiman, Fahad A.
    Atif, Maimoon
    ENERGY, 2015, 82 : 61 - 71
  • [32] Analysis of organic Rankine cycles using zeotropic mixtures as working fluids under different restrictive conditions
    Lu, Jinling
    Zhang, Jie
    Chen, Senlin
    Pu, Yaming
    ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT, 2016, 126 : 704 - 716
  • [33] A Different Way to Approach Enthalpy Loss in Supercritical Regenerative Closed Brayton Cycles: The Solar Heater
    Gonzalez-Portillo, Luis F.
    Munoz-Anton, Javier
    Martinez-Val, Jose M.
    SOLARPACES 2018: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONCENTRATING SOLAR POWER AND CHEMICAL ENERGY SYSTEMS, 2019, 2126
  • [34] Assessing the potential of hybrid fossil-solar thermal plants for energy policy making: Brayton cycles
    Bernardos, Eva
    Lopez, Ignacio
    Rodriguez, Javier
    Abanades, Alberto
    ENERGY POLICY, 2013, 62 : 99 - 106
  • [35] Small-Scale Solar-Bio-Hybrid Power Generation Using Brayton and Rankine Cycles
    Bustamante, Mauricio
    Engeda, Abraham
    Liao, Wei
    ENERGIES, 2021, 14 (02)
  • [36] AIR COOLED TWO-STAGE RANKINE CYCLES FOR LARGE POWER PLANTS OPERATING WITH DIFFERENT WORKING FLUIDS: PERFORMANCE, SIZE AND COST
    Liu, Bo
    David, Franck
    Riviere, Philippe
    Coquelet, Christophe
    Gicquel, Renaud
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASME POWER CONFERENCE, 2013, VOL 2, 2014,
  • [37] An Enhanced Solar Hybrid Brayton and Rankine Cycles with Integrated Magnetohydrodynamic Conversion System for Electrical Power Generation
    Ayeleso, Ayokunle Oluwaseun
    Raji, Atanda Kamoru
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT-IJRED, 2021, 10 (04): : 755 - 767
  • [38] Thermoeconomic comparison between pure and mixture working fluids of organic Rankine cycles (ORCs) for low temperature waste heat recovery
    Feng, Yongqiang
    Hung, TzuChen
    Greg, Kowalski
    Zhang, Yaning
    Li, Bingxi
    Yang, Jinfu
    ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT, 2015, 106 : 859 - 872
  • [39] Exergy analysis of zeotropic mixtures as working fluids in Organic Rankine Cycles
    Lecompte, S.
    Ameel, B.
    Ziviani, D.
    van den Broek, M.
    De Paepe, M.
    ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT, 2014, 85 : 727 - 739
  • [40] Analysis of isentropic mixtures for their use as working fluids in organic Rankine cycles
    Mondejar, Maria E.
    Thern, Marcus
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRESS & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, 2017, 36 (03) : 921 - 935