PDF Publication Title:
Text from PDF Page: 013
Table 6 The effect of pipeline length on the optimal size of system components and cost of electricity of the DCAES configuration at an emission tax of $50/tCO2e (cross-over point for the DCAES system with 100 km long pipeline). H. Safaei et al. / Applied Energy 103 (2013) 165–179 177 $80 $70 $60 $50 $40 $30 $20 $10 $0 0% $10.3 $9.6 $9.0 $8.3 $7.6 $7.0 $6.3 $5.7 $5.0 DCAES, 100 km DCAES, 50 km DCAES, 25 km DCAES, 0 km CAES 15% Emission reduction compared to the base case 30% 45% 60% 75% Fig. 11. Emission taxes and corresponding effective fuel prices required to reduce the carbon intensity of the electricity generation fleet compared to the base case of no emission tax ($5.0/GJ effective fuel price and an average emission intensity of 507 kg CO2e/MWh). L (km) SizeCCGT (MW) SizeSCGT (MW) SizeWind (MW) SizeExp (MW) SizeComp (MW) SizeCav (MWh) D (mm) SizeHRU (MW) SizeHOB (MW) Table 7 50 100 411 416 97 107 899 887 353 339 81 70 7316 6362 575 520 56 49 138 138 The effect of pipeline length on the optimal size of system components and cost of electricity of the DCAES configuration at an emission tax of $30/tCO2e (cross-over point for DCAES with 25 km long pipeline). L (km) SizeCCGT (MW) SizeSCGT (MW) SizeWind (MW) SizeExp (MW) SizeComp (MW) SizeCav (MWh) D (mm) SizeHRU (MW) SizeHOB (MW) gas price of $5.0/GJ (and no emission tax) where the generation fleet is only composed of gas turbines is 507 kg CO2e/MWh. As higher emission taxes are introduced and the effective price of nat- ural gas increases accordingly, this value declines while the aver- age cost of electricity increases. Fig. 11 illustrates the minimum emission tax (vertical axis on the left) required to lower the emission intensity from the base case value of 507 kg CO2e/MWh in the conventional CAES scenario as well as DCAES scenario with 25, 50, and 100 km long pipelines. This graph also shows the results for an unrealistic scenario of co- located underground storage facility and heat load for the DCAES system (0 km pipeline), as the most favorable scenario (‘‘free heat’’ due to the possibility of waste heat recovery at no additional cap- ital costs compared to the CAES system). Although this scenario is unrealistic, it is presented for the sake of argument and to show the maximum benefits from heat recovery in the DCAES configuration (ideal conditions for the economic superiority of the DCAES config- uration, i.e. a pipeline length of 0 km). Moreover, the effective price of fuel at each level of emission tax (based on a fixed market fuel price of $5.0/GJ) is demonstrated on the vertical axis on the right hand side. These values are calculated according to Eq. (2) and rep- resent the total price paid by the plant owner for each GJ of natural gas consumed (summation of actual market price and the associ- ated emission taxes). The GHG intensity of all systems is the same at emission tax of $0 and $10/tCO2e (absolute values of 507 and 503 kg CO2e/MWh, respectively) since fuel costs are not high enough to justify invest- ing in neither CAES nor DCAES. However, at an emission tax of $20/ tCO2e, DCAES with 0 km pipeline enters the generation fleet and consequently lowers the GHG intensity of electricity generation (a value of 468 compared to a value of 491 kg CO2e/MWh for all other scenarios). Similarly, DCAES with 25km pipeline, CAES, DCAES with 50 km pipeline, and DCAES with 100 km pipeline enter the electricity market at an emission tax of $30, $40, $40, and $50/ tCO2e, respectively. As expected, the DCAES system with a longer pipeline has a higher emission intensity compared to the DCAES 50 25 684 618 249 114 192 273 0 193 0 23 system with a shorter pipeline but lower than the CAES scenario. In other words, the same level of emission reduction would be achieved with the aim of a lower emission tax for the system with a shorter pipeline compared to a system with a longer pipeline (or CAES system). Interestingly, the emission intensity of all DCAES systems become similar at very aggressive emission tax measures so that the difference between GHG intensity of DCAES systems with 0 km and 100 km pipeline becomes less than 2 kg CO2e/ MWh at an emission tax of $80/tCO2e (values of 149 and 151 kg CO2e/MWh, respectively). This can be explained by the fact that the capital costs associated with wind farm, expander, compressor, and cavern become much higher compared to the capital cost of the pipeline at such high emission taxes and thus the total cost and emission intensities are similar for different pipeline lengths. In other words, the optimal configuration and dispatch of the gen- eration fleet with the DCAES system for 0, 25, 50, and 100 km pipe- lines are less affected by the capital cost of the pipelines at aggressive taxes on GHG emissions. 4. Conclusions The potential financial and GHG emission savings through waste heat recovery in CAES plants to meet heating loads were evaluated in this study. The major additions to the compressed air energy storage facility equipped with waste heat recovery (a DCAES plant) compared to a conventional CAES plant are a heat recovery unit and a pipeline to transport the generated compressed air from the heat load site to the storage site. A series of hypothet- ical scenarios with an electricity generation fleet composed of con- ventional gas turbines (CCGT and SCGT), a wind farm, a conventional CAES or a new DCAES plant were analyzed. The elec- tricity generation fleet were optimally sized and dispatched at minimal levelized cost (or maximized social welfare) over a period of 1year at an hourly resolution. A district heating network equipped with conventional boilers and the heat recovery unit of the DCAES plant was used to meet a concentrated heat load over the same 1 year period. The distance between the heat load (com- pression unit of the DCAES system) and the underground air stor- age facility was set as 50 km in the base case. At emission tax levels below 40 $/tCO2e, the optimal size of the wind farm and compressed air storage facility were small com- pared to the size of conventional gas turbines in both CAES and DCAES configurations. However, both their size and share of an- 0 0 357 0 16 2314 145 134 Emission tax ($/tCO2e) Effective price of gas ($/GJ)PDF Image | 20 kW ORC Turbine Off-Design Performance Analysis
PDF Search Title:
20 kW ORC Turbine Off-Design Performance AnalysisOriginal File Name Searched:
156.Safaei.Keith.Hugo.CAES.e.pdfDIY PDF Search: Google It | Yahoo | Bing
NFT (Non Fungible Token): Buy our tech, design, development or system NFT and become part of our tech NFT network... More Info
IT XR Project Redstone NFT Available for Sale: NFT for high tech turbine design with one part 3D printed counter-rotating energy turbine. Be part of the future with this NFT. Can be bought and sold but only one design NFT exists. Royalties go to the developer (Infinity) to keep enhancing design and applications... More Info
Infinity Turbine IT XR Project Redstone Design: NFT for sale... NFT for high tech turbine design with one part 3D printed counter-rotating energy turbine. Includes all rights to this turbine design, including license for Fluid Handling Block I and II for the turbine assembly and housing. The NFT includes the blueprints (cad/cam), revenue streams, and all future development of the IT XR Project Redstone... More Info
Infinity Turbine ROT Radial Outflow Turbine 24 Design and Worldwide Rights: NFT for sale... NFT for the ROT 24 energy turbine. Be part of the future with this NFT. This design can be bought and sold but only one design NFT exists. You may manufacture the unit, or get the revenues from its sale from Infinity Turbine. Royalties go to the developer (Infinity) to keep enhancing design and applications... More Info
Infinity Supercritical CO2 10 Liter Extractor Design and Worldwide Rights: The Infinity Supercritical 10L CO2 extractor is for botanical oil extraction, which is rich in terpenes and can produce shelf ready full spectrum oil. With over 5 years of development, this industry leader mature extractor machine has been sold since 2015 and is part of many profitable businesses. The process can also be used for electrowinning, e-waste recycling, and lithium battery recycling, gold mining electronic wastes, precious metals. CO2 can also be used in a reverse fuel cell with nafion to make a gas-to-liquids fuel, such as methanol, ethanol and butanol or ethylene. Supercritical CO2 has also been used for treating nafion to make it more effective catalyst. This NFT is for the purchase of worldwide rights which includes the design. More Info
NFT (Non Fungible Token): Buy our tech, design, development or system NFT and become part of our tech NFT network... More Info
Infinity Turbine Products: Special for this month, any plans are $10,000 for complete Cad/Cam blueprints. License is for one build. Try before you buy a production license. May pay by Bitcoin or other Crypto. Products Page... More Info
CONTACT TEL: 608-238-6001 Email: greg@infinityturbine.com (Standard Web Page)