IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/renene/v222y2024ics0960148124000454.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the partial cooling and recompression cycles for a 50 MWe sCO2 CSP plant using detailed recuperator models

Author

Listed:
  • du Sart, Colin Francois
  • Rousseau, Pieter
  • Laubscher, Ryno

Abstract

Supercritical carbon dioxide (sCO2) power cycles are attractive for renewable energy technologies as they exhibit high thermal efficiencies, compact components, and reduced cycle complexity and levelized cost of energy (LCOE) relative to traditional steam power cycles. Consequently, numerous studies have investigated different layouts and operating parameters in search of an optimal cycle configuration. Two cycle layouts provide promising results, namely the partial cooling with reheating (PCRH) cycle, and the recompression with intercooling and reheating (RCICRH) cycle. Both cycles utilise recuperators with high heat transfer rates and literature suggests that the cost for the recuperators may account for a significant portion of the total plant capital expenditure. When modelling the recuperator, most cycle comparative studies employ simplified recuperator models where heat exchanger effectiveness or conductance is utilised to approximate heat transfer. These models do not consider the effect of recuperator size and geometry on heat transfer and pressure drop in detail. In this work, for a concentrated solar power (CSP) application, the performance and component size requirements of the cycles are evaluated parametrically for different cycle mass flow split ratios, pressure ratios, and ratio of pressure ratios across the compressors using detailed discretised one-dimensional (1D) recuperator models. Furthermore, the geometry of these models are optimised (by volume) for straight and zigzag channel printed circuit heat exchangers (PCHEs), widely accepted as the most suitable for this application. Finally, a high-level cost comparison is conducted. The results show that if appropriate pressure drop assumptions are made, a simplified model approach yields valid cycle level results when compared with the results obtained using detailed models which consider practical recuperator geometry. However, the pressures and temperatures within the recuperator may not be predicted to a sufficient level of accuracy. In addition to providing clarity regarding the interplay between key cycle process parameters and cycle performance, straight channel PCHEs provide better thermofluid performance than zigzag channel PCHEs. Furthermore, the RCICRH cycle requires larger turbomachinery and a marginally higher capital outlay for the power cycle, but offers superior thermal efficiencies and requires smaller heat exchangers. For sCO2-CSP applications employing dry cooling, this suggests that the RCICRH cycle requires a smaller solar field and cooling system, and may therefore offer increased revenue in adverse weather conditions where direct normal irradiance (DNI) is low and/or ambient temperatures are high. However, the PCRH cycle requires a smaller solar receiver system, a smaller thermal energy storage (TES) system, and smaller turbomachinery, the cost savings of which may outweigh the benefits of the RCICRH cycle.

Suggested Citation

  • du Sart, Colin Francois & Rousseau, Pieter & Laubscher, Ryno, 2024. "Comparing the partial cooling and recompression cycles for a 50 MWe sCO2 CSP plant using detailed recuperator models," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:renene:v:222:y:2024:i:c:s0960148124000454
    DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2024.119980
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960148124000454
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.renene.2024.119980?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Binotti, Marco & Astolfi, Marco & Campanari, Stefano & Manzolini, Giampaolo & Silva, Paolo, 2017. "Preliminary assessment of sCO2 cycles for power generation in CSP solar tower plants," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 1007-1017.
    2. Crespi, Francesco & Gavagnin, Giacomo & Sánchez, David & Martínez, Gonzalo S., 2017. "Supercritical carbon dioxide cycles for power generation: A review," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 152-183.
    3. Crespi, Francesco & Sánchez, David & Rodríguez, José M. & Gavagnin, Giacomo, 2020. "A thermo-economic methodology to select sCO2 power cycles for CSP applications," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(P3), pages 2905-2912.
    4. Correa, Faustino & Barraza, Rodrigo & Soo Too, Yen Chean & Vasquez Padilla, Ricardo & Cardemil, José M., 2021. "Optimized operation of recompression sCO2 Brayton cycle based on adjustable recompression fraction under variable conditions," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    5. Jiang, Yuan & Liese, Eric & Zitney, Stephen E. & Bhattacharyya, Debangsu, 2018. "Design and dynamic modeling of printed circuit heat exchangers for supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton power cycles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C), pages 1019-1032.
    6. Padilla, Ricardo Vasquez & Soo Too, Yen Chean & Benito, Regano & Stein, Wes, 2015. "Exergetic analysis of supercritical CO2 Brayton cycles integrated with solar central receivers," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 348-365.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yang, Jingze & Yang, Zhen & Duan, Yuanyuan, 2022. "A review on integrated design and off-design operation of solar power tower system with S–CO2 Brayton cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    2. Yang, Jingze & Yang, Zhen & Duan, Yuanyuan, 2020. "Off-design performance of a supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle integrated with a solar power tower system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    3. Xu, Zhen & Liu, Xinxin & Xie, Yingchun, 2023. "Off-design performances of a dry-cooled supercritical recompression Brayton cycle using CO2–H2S as working fluid," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    4. He, Ya-Ling & Qiu, Yu & Wang, Kun & Yuan, Fan & Wang, Wen-Qi & Li, Ming-Jia & Guo, Jia-Qi, 2020. "Perspective of concentrating solar power," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    5. Xu, Jinliang & Sun, Enhui & Li, Mingjia & Liu, Huan & Zhu, Bingguo, 2018. "Key issues and solution strategies for supercritical carbon dioxide coal fired power plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 227-246.
    6. Aofang Yu & Wen Su & Li Zhao & Xinxing Lin & Naijun Zhou, 2020. "New Knowledge on the Performance of Supercritical Brayton Cycle with CO 2 -Based Mixtures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-23, April.
    7. Ma, Ning & Meng, Fugui & Hong, Wenpeng & Li, Haoran & Niu, Xiaojuan, 2023. "Thermodynamic assessment of the dry-cooling supercritical Brayton cycle in a direct-heated solar power tower plant enabled by CO2-propane mixture," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 649-663.
    8. Thanganadar, Dhinesh & Fornarelli, Francesco & Camporeale, Sergio & Asfand, Faisal & Patchigolla, Kumar, 2021. "Off-design and annual performance analysis of supercritical carbon dioxide cycle with thermal storage for CSP application," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(PA).
    9. Duniam, Sam & Veeraragavan, Ananthanarayanan, 2019. "Off-design performance of the supercritical carbon dioxide recompression Brayton cycle with NDDCT cooling for concentrating solar power," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    10. Marchionni, Matteo & Bianchi, Giuseppe & Tassou, Savvas A., 2018. "Techno-economic assessment of Joule-Brayton cycle architectures for heat to power conversion from high-grade heat sources using CO2 in the supercritical state," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 1140-1152.
    11. Arias, I. & Cardemil, J. & Zarza, E. & Valenzuela, L. & Escobar, R., 2022. "Latest developments, assessments and research trends for next generation of concentrated solar power plants using liquid heat transfer fluids," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    12. Yao, Lichao & Zou, Zhengping, 2020. "A one-dimensional design methodology for supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycles: Integration of cycle conceptual design and components preliminary design," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    13. Xiao, Tingyu & Liu, Chao & Wang, Xurong & Wang, Shukun & Xu, Xiaoxiao & Li, Qibin & Li, Xiaoxiao, 2022. "Life cycle assessment of the solar thermal power plant integrated with air-cooled supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 119-133.
    14. Wang, Xurong & Li, Xiaoxiao & Li, Qibin & Liu, Lang & Liu, Chao, 2020. "Performance of a solar thermal power plant with direct air-cooled supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycle under off-design conditions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).
    15. Fallah, M. & Mohammadi, Z. & Mahmoudi, S.M. Seyed, 2022. "Advanced exergy analysis of the combined S–CO2/ORC system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    16. Battisti, F.G. & de Araujo Passos, L.A. & da Silva, A.K., 2022. "Economic and environmental assessment of a CO2 solar-powered plant with packed-bed thermal energy storage," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    17. Sleiti, Ahmad K. & Al-Ammari, Wahib & Ahmed, Samer & Kapat, Jayanta, 2021. "Direct-fired oxy-combustion supercritical-CO2 power cycle with novel preheating configurations -thermodynamic and exergoeconomic analyses," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    18. Ehsan, M. Monjurul & Guan, Zhiqiang & Gurgenci, Hal & Klimenko, Alexander, 2020. "Feasibility of dry cooling in supercritical CO2 power cycle in concentrated solar power application: Review and a case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    19. Xu, Cheng & Zhang, Qiang & Yang, Zhiping & Li, Xiaosa & Xu, Gang & Yang, Yongping, 2018. "An improved supercritical coal-fired power generation system incorporating a supplementary supercritical CO2 cycle," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C), pages 1319-1329.
    20. Li, Xinyu & Qin, Zheng & Dong, Keyong & Wang, Lintao & Lin, Zhimin, 2023. "Experimental study of the startup of a supercritical CO2 recompression power system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 284(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:renene:v:222:y:2024:i:c:s0960148124000454. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/renewable-energy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.