Post on 19-Jan-2016
description
Power cycle development
• Steam cycles dominant for
>300 yrs, mostly Rankine
• Gas Brayton cycles –
catching up last 50 years
• Organic Rankine Cycles
(ORC) relatively recent
2
Why a new power cycle?
• Steam
– Good efficiency at lower turbine inlet
temperature
• Low compression work (pumping incompressible liquid)
• High expansion ratio (large work extraction / unit mass
of fluid)
– 2-phase heat addition limits turbine inlet
temperature
– Expansion into 2-phase region = blade erosion
– Corrosion, water treatment issues3
Why a new power cycle?
• Gas Brayton cycles
– Good fuel-power conversion efficiency
– Require high (combustion) turbine inlet temperatures for efficient operation
– Compression work large fraction of developed power
• ORC
– Best solution at low temperatures, dry expansion
– Working fluids are more difficult to handle – generally require secondary transfer loop, limits turbine inlet temperature
4
Characteristics of an ideal power cycle
• Good utilization of available heat
– High expansion, low compression work
– Direct coupling to heat source
• Benign working fluid
– Non-corrosive, non-toxic, thermally stable
– Dry expansion to avoid erosion
• Low capital cost
• Low operation & maintenance (O&M) costs
5
Supercritical CO2 meets these characteristics
sCO2 cycle history
• 1960’s – Feher proposes use of a recuperated closed-loop sCO2 based power cycle– Recognized that CO2 properties allow for Brayton-style cycle,
but with Rankine-like compression work
• 2000’s – MIT, Sandia, others consider sCO2 nuclear power cycle– Three “Supercritical CO2 Power Cycle” Symposia
– 2008, Sandia builds small sCO2 test loop for turbomachinery (simple and recompression cycles)
• 2007 – Echogen founded with vision of commercializing a sCO2 waste heat recovery heat engine– 2009, builds ~ 250kWe demonstration simple cycle system
– 2011, begins construction of 7.5MWe commercial system
6
sCO2 cycles – Simple recuperated cycle
Good heat utilization at low heat source
temperature
Compact equipment set
2-phase
Supercritical fluid
Superheated
vapor
Subcooled
liquid
7
High density fluid = compact equipment:
Heat exchangers
8
>15MW
>300m² heat transfer area
~13000kg
Core ~ 1.5 x 1.5 x 0.5 m
Comparable S&T:
>850m²
~50000kg
Shell ~ 1.2m diameter x 12m length
High density fluid = compact equipment:
Turbomachinery
9
10MW sCO2 turbine
10MW steam turbine
Non-condensing expansion
Condensing expansion
Simple single-phase exhaust heat exchangers
• Boiling process in steam systems limits maximum fluid temperature, requires
multiple pressures to achieve close approach to exhaust temperature
• ORC systems require intermediate heat transfer loop, plus boiling heat transfer
Constant temperature
boiling process
Continuous
temperature increase
10
CO2 cycles – The challenge with a simple
recuperated architecture
11
Heat addition
Expansion workCompression work
Low pressure ratio cycle => recuperation => can limit ∆T of heat addition
CO2 cycles – Simple cycle limitations
Highly recuperated cycle limits performance
at higher heat source temperature12
Heat addition
CO2 cycles – Cascading can increase
available ∆T
Heat extraction limitations of simple
recuperated cycle mitigated
13
Heat addition
CO2 cycles – recompression yields high heat
to power efficiency, but very low ∆T
14
Heat addition
Recompression cycle specifically designed
for low ∆T applications (nuclear, CSP)
Applications of the sCO2 cycle
Geothermal (Low T, thermosiphon)
Concentrated Solar Thermal (CSP)
(High T, low DT)
Exhaust & waste heat recovery (Moderate T, high DT)
Topping cycle (High T, low DT)
250 kW demonstration system: initial field tests
completed at American Electric Power (AEP)
16
Designed for full access
and ease of maintenance
Shop packaged / modular design
for ease of installation
Commercial size demonstration
unit at AEP’s test facility
Measured performance in line with cycle model
predictions – 140 hours, 93 turbine starts
250 kW demonstration system: long-term tests
at Akron Energy Systems (AES) during 2012
17
Hardware transferred and delivered by truck Cooling tower installation
Heat engine delivery and placement System installation now underway
First “commercial-scale” system at
~7.5MW, utilizes commercial technology
18
From Sandia National Laboratory report
First 7.5MW system is currently in fabrication
19
Subsystem and component testing planned for 3Q through 4Q 2012
Full system installation and testing in early 2013
System installation comparison:
7.5MW steam vs. sCO2
20
Smaller installation footprint compared to a HRSG/steam system for
gas turbine bottom cycling
Gas turbine Steam sCO2
sCO2 = Higher power at lower CAPEX for
CCGT applications
21
• High output power + low cost + low O&M = low LCOE
• sCO2 the clear solution for gas turbine heat recovery
DP HRSG sCO2
sCO2 + LM2500
DP-HRSG + LM2500
LM2500 Simple Cycle
SP-HRSG + LM2500
Inst
all
ed
co
st
Ne
t p
ow
er
(kW
e)
Ambient temperature (°C)
Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) ─
The Key Performance Metric
• Lower capex of sCO2 system provides major advantage
• Faster startup times (~20min vs 45-90 min for steam) = higher average output in peaking applications
• Lower footprint, zero water usage in dry-cooled applications
22
Summary
• sCO2 cycles have significant advantages in several
applications over steam
– Good thermodynamic performance
– Low installed capex
– Favorable LCOE
• Broad range of applications under consideration
• Waste heat recovery first commercial application
– Demonstration system proved feasibility
– First full-scale application in 2013
23