PROCEEDINGS OF ECOS 2012 - THE 25

TH
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCEON
E EE EFFICIENCY, C CC COST, O OO OPTIMIZATION, S SS SIMULATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF ENERGY SYSTEMS
JUNE 26-29, 2012, PERUGIA, ITALY
229 - 1

Thermoeconomic Analysis of Organic Rankine
Cycle Cogeneration for Isolated Regions in Brazil
Csar Adolfo Rodrguez Sotomonte
a
, Carlos Eymel Campos
b
, Marcio Leme
c
, Electo
Silva Lora
d
, Osvaldo Jose Venturine
e


a
UNIFEI, Itajub, Brazil, c.rodriguez32@unifei.edu.br
b
UNIFEI, Itajub, Brazil, eymel.campos@unifei.edu.br

c
UNIFEI, Itajub, Brazil, marcio.leme@unifei.edu.br
d
UNIFEI, Itajub, Brazil, electo@unifei.edu.br
e
UNIFEI, Itajub, Brazil, osvaldo@unifei.edu.br

Abstract:
The main goal of this investigation is to develop a calculation process in order to evaluate the potential of an
Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) cogeneration (electrical and cooling power) plant using biomass as fuel
through theuse of Thermoeconomic tools. Two different configurations and several organic working fluids are
presented and assessed. A mathematical model has been developed to find thermodynamically suitable
fluids for ORC in biomass cogeneration plants. According to the results, the alkylbenzenes family both with
and without a heat generator demonstrates lower energy production costs and higher exergetic efficiencies,
in spite of their lower cooling power capacity, which were found to be around 16%, up to 10% more efficient
than cycles which use siloxanes as working fluids. The results demonstrate that the cycle efficiency is more
dependent on working fluids thermodynamic properties rather than on system configuration.
Keywords:
Cogeneration, Thermoeconomic Analysis, Biomass, Organic Rankine Cycle
1. Introduction

During the last few years, both Brazil public and private institutions have been studying the
utilization of biomass as fuel for distributed generation systems with the goal of diversifying the
countrys energetic matrix as well as supplying electricity to small communities situated in isolated
regions. Currently, several prime movers such as: Micro-turbines, Internal Combustion Engines and
Stirling Engines are being proposed to generate electrical energy for small-scale applications.
However, the utilization of biomass with these technologies requires a previous stage of biomass
conversion into a liquid or gaseous fuel via a chemical, thermochemical or biochemical process.
Although feasible, most of these conversion technologies are not economically viable due to their
costs in comparison to more readily-available energy options. Thus, the most commonly-used
technology for energy conversion from biomass is direct combustion. In turn electricity generation
technologies such as steam turbines which, in spite of having low electrical efficiency, would have
a better performance due to their high level of development. In order to improve these thermal
systems, especially when they are related to efficiency gains, reducing energy conversion process
losses is mandatory. In that way, power and cooling cogeneration systems may become attractive
particularly for tropical regions such as the Brazilian Amazon, where large quantities of fish and
fruit pulp are exposed to high losses due to poor conservation by the lack of refrigerated
warehouses.
There are currently some Brazilian agrosilvicultural products gaining force on the national and even
international markets. Such is the case of the Assai, which is part of the traditional diet of the
Northern Brazilian population and now have come to be exported as a sustainable Amazonian
product.
229 - 2

Considering these scenarios, this paper presents a comparative study of a thermal cogeneration
system using turbines with several organic working fluids, based on Thermoeconomic analysis in
order to clarify which is the best cycle configuration from efficiency and economic viewpoints.
2. Biomass Cogeneration System Description

The cycles proposed in this paper include two different configurations of the Organic Rankine
Cycle (ORC) associated an absorption chiller, with and without a heat regenerator. The absorption
unit is an NH
3
-H
2
O single effect, which is installed to increase the efficiency of the thermodynamic
cycle using part of the energy contained in the exhaust vapor flow in the turbine, which is generally
released into the environment through the condenser.These cycles were modeled to produce 300
kW of net electric power (W
n
) and up to 210 kW of cooling power (C), which is the average
consumption of a community of 200 300 residents which has a sawmill and a refrigeration unit to
sell ice and to keep fruit pulp and fish.
The cycle considered (Fig. 1a) is ORC associated with an absorption chiller, consisting of a pump,
evaporator, turbine and condenser. The principle of energy generation by an ORC process is similar
to the conventional Rankine cycle process. The main difference is that the ORC process uses an
organic working fluidwith favorable thermodynamic properties instead of water. Another difference
is that the boiler does not heat the working fluid directly, but rather uses a thermal oil, which
exchanges heat with the organic fluid in the evaporator. Consequently, when the efficiency of the
system is calculated, the efficiency (
b
) of the thermal oil boiler has to be taken into consideration;
the maximum thermal oil temperature is limited to about 673 K[1].

(a)

(b)


Fig. 1(a) Organic Rankine cycle cogeneration (b) A typical T-S process diagram for the
investigated ORC
The pressurized organic working fluid, saturated vapor, expands in the turbine to produce useful
work; the vapor exhaust, after passing through the chiller, is cooled in the condenser and passes
through the pump, returning to the evaporator at the desired pressure. It is still possible to use a heat
regenerator which uses the flow in the turbine outlet to preheat the flow which enters the
evaporator, in order to increase the cycle efficiency.
Pump (
p
) and turbine (
t
) efficiency were assumed as 80%, while electric generator efficiency (
g
)
was kept at 98%. The minimum pressure accepted in the condenser was 10 kPa, which isa pressure
accepted for a commercial condenser. If required, the condenser pressure could be raised to make
the vapor temperature equal to 393.15 K, the lowest heat source temperature accepted for a single
effect NH
3
-H
2
O absorption unit.
229 - 3


The minimum approach temperature of 15 K in the condenser is assumed. To reduce expenses with
safety measures and material, the maximal pressure accepted of the cycle (P
1
) was 3500kPa or 80%
of the critical pressure. The solution of the energy and mass balances determines the mass flow rate
of the working fluid (m), biomass consumption (m
B
), efficiencies and temperature at each point.
In this thermodynamic analysis, the following general assumptions are made: 1) The kinetic and
potential energy are neglected; 2) The reference state temperature (T
0
) and pressure (P
0
) are 298.15
K, and 101.325 kPa; 3) The temperature and pressure of fuel and air inlets are 298.15 K and
101.325 kPa; 4) Steady state operation; and 5) Load condition is 100%. The main operating
parameters are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1Operating conditions of the cogeneration plant
Maximum Turbine Inlet Vapor Pressure 3500 kPa
Thermal Oil Boiler Efficiency 80 %
Turbine Isentropic Efficiency 80 %
Electric Generator Efficiency 98 %
Regenerator Effectiveness 0.5
Minimum Chiller Heat Source Temperature 393.15 K
COP 0.5
Pump Isentropic Efficiency 80 %
Biomass Lower Heating Value* 12500 kJ/kg
*Wasted wood (moisture content 20%)

With the purpose of evaluating the most suitable organic working fluid which can increase the
efficiency of biomass ORC power plant, detailed analyses for typical fluids have been carried out.
Seven organic working fluids; four siloxanes, the most widely used fluids currently in the ORC
plants; and three alkylbenzenes that showed higher cycle efficiencywere selected[1].
Besides the thermodynamics parameters, environmental and safety characteristics will be taken into
account. The safety and environmental parameters analyzed in the organic fluid selection are: global
warming potential (GWP), ozone depletion potential (ODP) and the ASHRAE 34 toxicity and
flammability classification (Table 2).

Table 2 Physical, safety and environmental data of the working fluids.
Fluid
T
b

(K)
T
c

(K)
P
c

(kPa)
w k
1
ODP GWP
(a)

ASHRAE
34
Toluene (C
7
H
8
) 384 591,8 4106 0,26323 0,03849 0 - B3
Ethylbenzene (C
8
H
10
) 409 617,2 3606 0,3027 0,03994 0 - B3
Propylbenzene (C
9
H
12
) 432 638,32 3200 0,34513 0,02715 0 - B2
Octamethyltrisiloxane (MDM) 425 564,09 1415 0,5297 0,12634 0 - A2
Decamethyltetrasiloxane (MD
2
M) 467 599,4 1227 0,668 0,03079 0 - A2
Dodecamethylpentasiloxane (MD
3
M) 503 628,36 945 0,7218 0,16431 0 - A2
Dodecamethylcyclohexasiloxane (D
6
) 518 645,78 961 0,7361 0,09627 0 - A2
(a) Apparently these fluids do not have a direct influence on global warming. However, they may
have an indirect effect to trigger the formation of photochemical oxidants in the atmosphere.

229 - 4

3. Mathematical Model
3.1. Thermodynamic Properties
In order to study the ORC, one must evaluatethe thermodynamic properties of organic working
fluids. These properties can be obtained through the Standard Cubic Equations of State (EoS), using
critical point properties (T
C
and P
C
) and the acentric factor (w) as fluid parameters. Peng-Robinson
(PR) and Peng-Robinson modified by Stryjek and Vera (PRSV) are documented examples of the use
of these EoS in the analysis of organic fluids in thermal systems [1-3]. According to references [1-
2], the PR and PRSV EoS provides, aside from the critical point, relative discrepancies less than
3% for calculated gas and liquid heat capacity, and below 1.5% for cycle efficiency [1]; accurate
estimates of the saturation pressures can be used together with modern mixing rules to estimate the
properties of mixtures with different fluids[2]. These models have limitations[4], namely: (a)
incorrect functional form at high subcritical reduced temperatures (TR) and pressures (PR) and in
the superheated region close to the critical point (0.7P
R
1 and 0.95T
R
1.01), (b) low accuracy
of saturated and sub-cooled liquid densities. In the following paper, the PRSV EoS (1) proposed by
Stryjek and Vera [4]was used to evaluate the thermodynamic properties of the different working
fluids analyzed.

2 2
( 2 )
V a V
Z
V b R T V b b

=
+ V

(1)
0, 077796
c
c
R T
b
P

= (2)
2 2
0, 457235
c
c
R T
a
P

= (3)
2
0 1
1 (1 ) (1 ) (0, 7 )
R R R
k T k T T
(
= + +

(4)
2 3
0
0,378893 1, 489715 0,1713848 0, 0196544 k w w w = + + (5)
Where (k
1
) is obtained from experimental data or from fitting values to an accurate (1). Values of k
1

parameter for the selected fluids are reported in [6-7].
All the thermodynamic properties of interest of any substance can be calculated from volumetric
data and thermal measurements [8]. Maxwell's relations and the P-v-T relation (1) provide the
necessary information for the calculation of the properties of enthalpy (H) and entropy (S) (6-7)
used in this study. Utilizing the following thermodynamic relationship:

1
ig
V
V
H H Z dV
T Z
R T T V

(
| |
= +
(
|

\

(6)
| | 1 ln
ig
V V
V
S S Z dV dV
T Z Z
R T V V

(
| |
=
(
|

\


(7)

Where (Hig) and (Sig) are the respective enthalpy and entropy at the hypothetical ideal gas
reference state. A description of the mathematical development (6-7) are reported in [8-9].
229 - 5

3.2. Exergy Analysis
The equations of mass and energy balance for each subsystem which composes the power
cogeneration cycle take into consideration the assumptions already presented, are reported in [10].
To evaluate the efficiency of a cogeneration system that produces cold and electric power; the first
law of thermodynamics, states that this is quantified as the ratio of useful energy output and total
input energy in the system and is calculated by (8). Where is the net electrical power generated in
the cycle; is the cooling power of the chiller; and is the total energy supplied to the
thermodynamic cycle. However, this analysis is not enough to identify energy losses and
efficiencies of these systems. It should be highlighted here that this principle only takes into account
the quantity of energy - but not its qualityresulting in an overvaluation of the thermal efficiency of
the system.
n
c
T
W C
Q

+
=
(8)
To overcome this problem, exergy ( can be used as a qualitative and quantitative measure of
energy which involves the first and second thermodynamic laws, so that an exergetic analysis is
useful to identify and quantify the thermodynamic efficiencies of a combined cooling and power
system. Thus, exergy efficiency () of the cogeneration system being defined as follows:
chiller +
=
& &
&
n
T
W E

E
(9)
Where is the exergy variation of the working fluid (NH
3
/H
2
O) in the chiller evaporator; and
the is the total exergy supplied to the thermal system. Resources (F) are flows that act as exergy
sources, necessary for the manufacturing of a certain product (P). Consequently, the
equipmentsexergy efficiency(
n
) is given by [11]:
(10)
Using the concept of resources (F) and products (P), if the system operates in steady state, and
neglecting the equipments heat losses, the exergy balance for calculation of irreversibilities (I) in
the equipment can be written as follows:
(11)
The parameter presented by exergy analysis provides a clear criterion for evaluating the
performance of each thermal system and its components. A good description of the concepts used to
evaluate the exergy flows are reported in [12-14].
3.3. Exergoeconomic Analysis
3.3.1. Economic Analysis
The economic analysis of each thermodynamic cycle was performed according to the purchased-
equipment cost (PEC). These costs were obtained with the cost correlations proposed by [15]using
data from equipment manufacturers and the mathematical cost function which has been used by
[16]. Based on the purchased-equipment cost, one may estimate direct costs, indirect cost and
maintenance costs. Table 3shows the distribution of fixed capital investment (FCI) and operation
using the methodology proposed by Bejan[17].
An acceptable estimate of the heat exchangers side can be assessed using the LMTD methods (Log
Mean Temperature Difference)[18]. The total heat transfer rate per unit time (Q) can be expressed
in the following form:
229 - 6



(12)

The determination of the overall heat transfer coefficient (U) is often tedious and needs data not yet
available in the preliminary stages of the design. Therefore, typical values of U are useful for
quickly estimating the required surface area. Thus, U is used as a typical value for U=0.3 kW/m2 K
to estimate the size of the heat regenerator. Values 0.4 and 0.3 kW/m2 K were used for size
estimation of the evaporator and the condenser.
For a useful life of 20 years (N) and an annual interest rate (i) of 12%, the total cost of annuities (A)
is obtained by (13). Thus, assuming a plant operation of 7000 h per year, the cogeneration cycles
were assessed and the total cost of maintenance and investment (Z) in each equipment calculated
for the different operating conditions.
The price of biomass varies significantly for different varieties, harvesting methods and treatments
needed. In addition, distance and transportation also affect the cost. In this study, the fuel used is
waste from pulp processing; for that reason, the total cost of this resource is only associated with
loading cost to the transportation vehicles and storage, assuming a total value of $30/t.

( )
( )
1
1 1
N
N
i i
A FCI
j
(
+
( =
( +

(13)

Table 3.Distribution fixed capital investment and operation
Installation 25% PEC
Piping 15% PEC
Instrumentation and control 10% PEC
Electric parts 13% PEC
Civil building 15% PEC
Total direct cost (TDC) 78% PEC
Total indirect cost (TIC) 13% TDC
Annual maintenance (M) 05% PEC

3.3.2. Structural Theory of Thermoeconomics
Production processes require a capital investment for the purchase, installation, operation and
maintenance of plant equipment.Furthermore, decision-makers must deal with the cost of resources
required for the process. Due to the fact that no real process is 100% efficient, that is, not all
resources are transformed into useful products, it is mandatory to ensure that, the final products pay
the costs of all related expenditures. Thermoeconomic analysis through appropriate mathematical
relationships, based on the second law of thermodynamics and concepts of economics, can quantify
the exergy losses (exergy cost) and how much these losses affect the cost of the products "monetary
cost".
In that way, an exergoeconomic analysis based on structural theory of thermoeconomics was
performed to evaluate the monetary costs of products generated by the cogeneration system.
229 - 7

The structural theory proposed by Valero [19], is a practical method to determine the monetary
costs (C) in a system with m flows (mass, heat or power) through a system resolution of (m x m)
equations (14):

. .
0 P F
P F k
c E c E Z + =

(14)
Where (c) is the monetary cost per unit of a product (P) or a resource (F), and represents the amount
of external monetary resources spent to produce one unit of this exergy flow.
Fig. 2 shows the productive structure of the analyzed cycles using total exergy flows. The
productive structures are represented with fewer units, since the condenser joins the chiller and the
boiler joins the evaporator to form a single subsystem.


(a) Simple Organic Rankine Cycle

(b) Regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle
Fig. 2Productive structure of the ORC cogenerations cycles
4. Results and Discussion

The thermodynamic analysis presented in this paper introduces the exergetic efficiency and exergy
destruction as evaluation parameters of the real performance. In that way, the irreversibility (I) and
exergetic efficiency () in the thermal system and each subsystem for the different working fluids
are determined. The results are reported at different evaporator pressure while keeping the turbine
inlet temperature at saturated conditions. According to the information already presented, the
absorption cooling systems have an optimal operation temperature. Hence, the use of alkylbenzenes
like a working fluid, does not allow the use of a heat regenerator without raising the pressure in the
condenser; due to the lower temperature in the fluid flow at the outlet of the turbine.
Fig. 3demonstrates that for all the fluids used, with and without heat regenerator, the system exergy
efficiency increases with the increment of the turbine inlet pressure. Lower inlet turbine pressure
increases both the evaporator heat flow and the working fluid mass flow which leads to a decrease
in the system efficiency for a fixed electrical net power. However, the temperature at the turbine
inlet could not exceed the critical temperature of the working fluid to prevent its decomposition and
deterioration. The cycles working with alkylbenzenes, even without heat regenerator, have the best
performance among the organic fluids.
Fig. 3ashows that, for simple ORC working with alkylbenzenes, 16%, 15% and 14% for Toluene,
Ethylbenzene, and Propylbenzene, respectively, the resources that enter in system are transformed
into electricity and cold. While, cycles that use the siloxanes have less exergetic efficiency, this is,
9%, 7%, 6% and 5% for MDM, MD2M, MD3M and D6 respectively.
On the other hand, in the regenerative ORC (Fig. 3b), the Propylbenzene shows highest exergy
efficiency around 15%, barely 1 percent higher efficiency than the simple ORC. While the
229 - 8

regenerative cycles that use siloxanes as working fluids have higher exergetic efficiencies, found to
be around 3% higher efficiency than simple ORC cycles.
These results clearly demonstrate that efficiency is more dependent on the thermodynamic
properties of fluids than on system configuration. Hence, the use of regenerative ORC is not
justified for all fluids from the exergy efficiency point of view; however, others parameters have to
be considered in this analysis, such as biomass consumption, cooling power generation and energy
generation cost.
Biomass consumption (Fig. 4) is consistent for all working fluids. This parameter is a direct
measure of the heat flow required by the evaporator. Thus, for a fixed electric power output, the
cycles with lower biomass consumption have higher exergy efficiency. This is due to the decrease
in the working fluid mass flow as a result of the increase in the turbine inlet pressure.
In simple ORC, some fluids did not reach the maximum cooling power production (Fig.5). This is
due to the smaller mass flows and the lower temperature at the turbine outlet for Toluene and
Ethylbenzene when compared to the others working fluids. In that way, the condensation pressure
was increased to attain the required cooling power production. However, without the heat
regenerator, the energy rejected throw the condenser will increase, and the systems exergy
efficiency drastically decreases. As a result, the simple ORC operates at minimum condenser
pressure for all working fluids, even if it does not reachthe desired cooling power.


(a) Simple Organic Rankine Cycle

(b) Regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle
Fig. 3Variation of the global exergy efficiency with the turbine inlet pressure.


(a) Simple Organic Rankine Cycle

(b) Regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle
Fig. 4Variation of the biomass consumption with the turbine inlet pressure.
229 - 9

Fig. 6 shows the variation of system mass flow rate with increased evaporator pressure. The
minimum system mass flow rate has been attained at the maximum inlet evaporator pressure. It is
due to the fact that enthalpy variation of the fluid flow in the turbine increases along with an
increase in the operational pressure. The difference on the mass flow rate in the cycles that use
alkylbenzenes and MDM as working fluid is caused by the increase of condensing pressure to reach
the desired cooling power production. Apparently, the heat exchanger surface and the energy
production cost of ORC are directly proportional to mass flow rate of the thermal system for the
same work output.
The difference in exergetic efficiencies is due to the greater exergy destruction. ORCs that use
alkylbenzenes as working fluid, the irreversibilities are among 30% - 60% lower when compared to
cycle that use siloxanes. Fig.7shows that exergy destruction decreases with the increment of the
turbine inlet pressure under a fixed condensing pressure for each fluid.
The boiler and the condenser, both with and without heat regenerator, are the main responsible for
the irreversibility rise in the cycle. This is attributable to high biomass consumption in the boiler
and higher quantity of heat rejected in the condenser. It is observed, in Fig.8, that these devices
together are responsible for more than 90% of irreversibilities.


Fig.5 Variation of the cooling power production with the turbine inlet pressure

(a)
Simple Organic Rankine Cycle
(b)
Regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle
Fig. 6 System mass flow rate variationwith the turbine inlet pressure
229 - 10

(a)
Simple Organic Rankine Cycle
(b)
Regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle
Fig.7 Exergy destruction of the ORC cogenerations cycles


(a) Simple Organic Rankine Cycle

(b) Regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle

Fig.8 Exergy destruction by equipment

229 - 11

In the boiler (Fig.8), the exergy destruction is caused mainly by the combustion process and the low
rates of heat transfer between the combustion gases and the organic working fluid. Results show
that, both with and without heat regenerator, working fluids with higher normal boiling point (T
b
),
even with a lower average temperaturedifference between the organic working fluid and the
combustion gases, have higher irreversibility in the equipment. It is important to remark, that, in the
exergy analysis in this paper, the boiler joins the evaporator to form a single subsystem.
In the condenser for the simple Rankine cycle, the working fluids with higher density have higher
condensing temperatures. This ranges from 45
o
C for Toluene with the lowest condenser
irreversibility up to 165
o
C for D
6
with the highest condenser irreversibility at the same condensing
pressure (10 kPa). In other words, fluids with higher densities, such as siloxanes, have higher
average temperature difference with the cooling water, thus increasing the exergy destruction rate in
this device. On the other hand, the regenerative ORC has less irreversibilities. In this cycle the
condenser rejected less heat to the environment as a consequence of the energy recovered in the
regenerator. Nevertheless, this cycle has a higher condensing temperature,from 120
o
C for
alkylbenzenes up to 165
o
C for D
6
. This heat may be exploited, if there is a commercial or industrial
district in a close distance to the cogeneration plant.
The rest of exergetic losses are concentrated in the vapor expansion system and cooling production.
In the turbine the ratio of exergy destruction is around 3% for all alkylbenzenes and MDM, while
for the remaining working fluids this ratio is around 1,5%. Results show that cycles which use
alkylbenzenes as working fluid have higher exergy destruction even with lower mass flow rates.
Therefore those fluids have a higher specific entropy generation during vapor expansion.
Depending on which fluid is used, in this case Alkylbenzenes, this difference can be up to 2-6 times
higher than a siloxanes specific entropy generation in the turbine.
In the chiller, the cycle with and without heat regenerator, Toluene, Propylbenzene and
Ethylbenzene which are fluids with lesscapacity toproduce cooling power, have lower exergy
destruction respectively if compared to the other fluids. Those fluids have lower operating
temperatures, lower specific entropy generation and lower mass flow rate between points 3 and 7
(Fig. 1), the combination of these parameters leads to reduce the irreversibilities in this equipment.
Fig.9 shows a distribution of the total heat exchange area between the different heat exchangers of
ORC operating at different evaporator pressures. Based on the analysis, both with and without heat
regenerator, the ORC cycles that use siloxanes as working fluids have the largest heat exchange
surface. The results show that Propylbenzene requires less total heat exchange surface than the
other fluids and the minimum value has been attained at an evaporator pressure of 2000 kPa.


(a) Simple Organic Rankine Cycle

(b) Regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle
Fig.9 Heat exchange surface variation with the turbine inlet pressure
The fixed capital investment was assessed for different operating conditions of the cogeneration
plant. As can be observed, for all fluids analysed, in the regenerative and simple ORC, the
229 - 12

investment cost decreases proportionately with the increase evaporating pressure and attains its
minimum value at optimal pressure and, increases proportionately after this value. Results show
that regenerative ORCwhich uses D6, MD3M and MD2M as working fluid, even with more
devices, have a lower investment cost. This is attributable to higher quantity of heat rejected in the
condenser. Therefore, a larger heat exchange surface is required, which in turn increases the
devices total costs.


(a) Simple Organic Rankine Cycle
(b)
Regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle
Fig. 10 Fixed capital investment variation with the turbine inlet pressure
(a)
Simple Organic Rankine Cycle
(b)
Regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle

(a) Simple Organic Rankine Cycle
(b)
Regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle

Fig.11Cost Production of electricity a cooling power
229 - 13

Results obtained by the exergoeconomic analysis allow estimating the necessary cost to produce
each flow in the system. The costs of the main product in each cycle are presented in
Fig.11.
Results show that, the organic Rankine cogeneration cycles that use alkylbenzenes as a working
fluid have the lowestproduction cost of electric energy found to be around 157 178 US$/MWh
and 165 210 US$/MWh for simple ORC and regenerative ORC respectively. The uses of
siloxanes as working fluids have lower cost production of electricity in regenerative ORC found to
be around 180 220 US$/MWh, almost 10 percent lower than the simple ORC that use siloxanes as
working fluids.
A similar tendency is observed for the cost production of cooling power, as organic Rankine
cogeneration cycles that use alkylbenzenes as working fluids have the lowest cost production of
cooling power found to be around 670 3690US$/MWh and 1030 3243US$/MW for simple ORC
and regenerative ORC respectively. It is important to remark, that alkylbenzenes as working fluids
did not reach the maximum cooling power production. The uses of siloxanes as working fluids have
lower production costsfor cooling power in regenerative ORC, found to be around 1480 3380
US$/MW almost 50 percent lower than simple ORC using siloxanes as working fluids.
5. Conclusions

The aim of exergoeconomic analysis for cogeneration power plants is usually to identify and
quantify the exergy destruction. Once used, it makes it easier to determine its irreversibility, thus
identifying the devices that cause more exergy destruction in the plant. For that reason, it provides a
real view of the productive process and offers information related to production costs and
interactions between differentthermal system components.
This information may be used to improve the performance of the system in order to have an
effective use of the energy resources and to decide about improvement measures. In general, the
values of irreversibilities, exergy efficiencies and energy production cost depend on the working
fluid that is being used. The results show that alkylbenzenes, even without heat regenerator, have
the highest cycle exergy efficiency, lower cost production of electricity and the lowest exergy
destruction.
Although those fluids show themselves to be more efficient, they have higher toxicity and
flammability levels. For that reason, it becomes important to thoroughly research the use of such
fluids in these energy systems.
Acknowledgments

The authors want to thank to the Coordination of Improvement of Higher Education (CAPES),
National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq), and Foundation for
Research Support of Minas Gerais State (FAPEMIG) for their collaboration and financial support in
the development of this work.
References

[1] Drescher U., Brggemann D., Fluid selection for the Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) in biomass
power and heat plants. Applied Thermal Engineering 2007; 27:223-228.
[2] Angelino G., Colonna P., Multicomponent working fluids for organic Rankine cycle (ORCs).
Energy 1998; 23:449-463.
229 - 14

[3] Bombarda P., Invernizzi C. M., Pietra C., Heat recovery from Diesel engines: A
thermodynamic comparison betweenKalina and ORC cycles. Applied Thermal Engineering
2010; 30: 212-219.
[4] Colonna P., Nannana N.R., Guardone A., Lemmon, E.W., Multiparameter equations of state for
selected siloxanes. Fluid Phase Equilibria 2006; 244:193-211.
[5] Stryjek R., Vera J. H., PRSV: An Improved Peng-Robinson Equation of State for Pure
Compounds and Mixtures. The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 1986; 64:323-333.
[6] Colonna P., Nannana N.R., Guardone A., Multiparameter equations of state for siloxanes:
[(CH
3
)
3
-Si-O
1/2
]
2
-[O-Si-(CH
3
)
2
]
i=1
,,
3
, and [O-Si-(CH
3
)
2
]
6
. Fluid Phase Equilibria 2008, 263:
115-130.
[7] Proust P., Vera J. H., PRSV: The Stryjek-Vera Modification of the Peng-Robinson Equation of
State. Parameters for Other Pure Compounds of Industrial Interest. The Canadian Journal of
Chemical Engineering 1989; 67:170-173.
[8] Poling B.E., Prausnitz J. M., Oconnell J. P., The properties of gases and liquids. New York,
United States: Ed. McGraw-Hill, fifth edition; 2004.
[9] Smith R., Chemical process design and Integration. University of Manchester, England: Ed
Wiley, second edition; 2005.
[10] Sotomonte C. A. R., Ribeiro S., Oliveira E., Silva, E. E. L., Venturini O. J., Organic
Rankine cycle associated with an absorption chiller for biomass applications, Proceedings of
21
st
Brazilian Congress of Mechanical Engineering; Natal, RN, Brazil, 2011.
[11] Tsatsaronis G., Thermoeconomic Analysis and Optimization of Energy Systems. Progress in
Energy and Combustion Systems1993; 19:227-257.
[12] Kotas T. J.,The Exergy Method of Thermal Plant Analysis. Queen Mary College: University
of London Butterwonths, 1985.
[13] Szargut J., Morris D.R., Steward F.R., Exergy analysis of thermal, chemical and
metallurgical processes. New York: Hemisphere Publ. Corp; 1988.
[14] Zaleta A.A., Correas U.L., Kubiak S.J., Sierra E.F.Z., Concept on Thermoeconomic
Evaluation of Steam Turbines. Applied Thermal Engineering 2007; 27: 457-466.
[15] Peters, M. S.; Timmerhaus, K. D., Plantdesign and economics for chemical engineers. New
York, United States. Ed. McGraw-Hill, fourth edition; 1991.
[16] Lian, Z.T., Chua K.J., Chou S.K., A Thermoeconomic Analysis of Biomass Energy for
Trigeneration. Applied Energy2010, 87: 84-95.
[17] Bejan, A., Tsatsaronis, G., Moran M., Thermal Desing and Optimization. New York, United
States. Ed.Jonh Wiley & Sons, 1995.
[18] J.P. Holman, Heat transfer. McGraw-Hill Companies, 665 pp. 2002.
[19] Valero A., Serra L., Lozano M.A.,Structural Theory of Thermoeconomics. International
Symposium on Thermodynamics and the Design, Analysis and Improvement of Energy
System: (ASME Book H00874); New Orleans, USA, 1993, 189-512.