Chemical looping combustion integrated Organic Rankine Cycled biomass-fired power plant – Energy and exergy analyses

Sikarwar, Shailesh Singh; Surywanshi, Gajanan Dattarao; Patnaikuni, Venkata Suresh; Kakunuri, Manohar; Vooradi, Ramsagar

doi:10.1016/j.renene.2020.03.114

Cited by 42 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The performance of a combined system of bio-CLC and an organic Rankine cycle were studied by two different research groups. 123,124 Both works evaluated a net energy efficiency of about 19% that is higher than the average electrical efficiency of small-scale biomass-based CHP (17%) reported by Intelligent Energy Europe. 125 Moreover, the overall thermal efficiency was reported to reach 21% at 30 MPa for a bio-CLC/supercritical CO 2 Brayton cycle system for power generation.…”

Section: Evaluation System Integration and Techno-economic Analysismentioning

confidence: 98%

Chemical Looping for Combustion of Solid Biomass: A Review

Coppola¹,

Scala

2021

Energy Fuels

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chemical looping combustion of solid biomass has the unique potential to generate energy with negative carbon emissions, while entailing an energy penalty compared to traditional combustion that is lower than that of the competing carbon capture technologies. In spite of these attractive features, research is still needed to bring the technology to a fully commercial level. The reason relies on a number of technological challenges mostly related to the oxygen carrier performance, its possible detrimental interaction with the biomass ash components, and the efficiency of the gas–solid contact with the biomass volatiles. This review is focused on these specific challenges which are particularly relevant when firing biomass rather than coal in a solid-based chemical looping combustion process. Special attention will be given to the most recent findings published on these aspects. Related performance evaluation by modeling, system integration, and techno-economic analysis will also be briefly reviewed.

show abstract

Section: Evaluation System Integration and Techno-economic Analysismentioning

confidence: 98%

Chemical Looping for Combustion of Solid Biomass: A Review

Coppola¹,

Scala

2021

Energy Fuels

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is because the power generation efficiencies calculated from the literature are 24.2% for the SRC and 11.4% for the ORC. 35,40 This suggests that the difference in power generation efficiency is the main reason for the difference in RtE and costs.…”

Section: Influence Of Fluidized Bed Volume Bed Height/diameter Ratio ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy Efficiency and Techno-Economic Analysis of a Thermochemical Energy Storage System by Using a Fluidized Bed Reactor Integrated with a Steam Rankine Cycle of a Biomass Power Plant

Yasui,

Aoki,

Uchino

et al. 2023

ACS Eng. Au

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A thermochemical heat storage system using Ca(OH)2/CaO in a fluidized bed reactor (FBR) is integrated with a biomass power plant of a steam Rankine cycle (SRC) as one of the Carnot battery systems that are expected to provide renewable electricity highly flexibly. This study utilizes the proposed fluidized bed model under the nonsteady state operation to evaluate the energy efficiency and cost by varying the fluidized bed configuration and the power generation capacities. In addition, the performances of the SRC and those of the organic Rankine cycle (ORC) were compared, and the fuel cost reduction by the biomass savings was considered. The levelized cost of storage (LCOS) of the SRC in the base case (6.25 MWe, bed volume = 100 m3, bed height/diameter ratio = 4, FBR inlet gas velocity = 0.087 m/s) was 0.804 and 0.197 USD/kWhe when the charging electricity cost was 0.100 and 0 USD/kWhe, respectively. The charging electricity cost has a dominant effect on the LCOS. The stored energy efficiency and the round-trip efficiency were 58.2 and 13.7% (without biomass saving), respectively, and the net power generation was 1247.3 MWhe/year. The effect of fluidized bed volume, bed height/diameter ratio, and power generation capacity of the SRC has a slight influence on the energy efficiency and LCOS. However, the gas velocity in the FBR has a substantial influence on the net energy generation and LCOS. In the case that power generation capacity is 3 MWe and the charging electricity cost is 0 USD/kWhe, the LCOS is 0.204 USD/kWhe (SRC) and 0.520 USD/kWhe (ORC), respectively, indicating that SRC has a cost advantage for a 3 MWe-class power plant. This is because SRC has higher power generation efficiencies (24.3%) than that of the ORC (11.4%), generating more electricity from the stored heat. The effect of biomass saving on LCOS was 0.026–0.053 USD/kWhe (SRC) and 0.096 USD/kWhe (ORC). Increase of power generation efficiency and/or effective utilization of exhaust heat from the turbine is important to increase energy efficiency and decrease LCOS.

show abstract

“…Therefore, it is imperative to find a carbon capture technology with low energy consumption for power plants to gain high electricity generation efficiency. Chemical looping combustion (CLC) presents itself as a promising technology due to its low energy penalty which is associated with its inherent CO2 capture process [18,19]. Therefore, coal-based CLC power plants with CO2 capture could be suggested as an alternative power generation technology compared to USC power plants with CO2 capture (Amine-based), IGCC power plants with CO2 capture (chemical/physical processes such as MEA, Selexol and Rectisol, etc.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, most evaluations and comparisons (energy efficiency, economic, and environmental aspects) of the CLC power plant generally were focused on the power plant operation stage. For example, the efficiency performance of chemical looping combustion power generation systems is estimated by using energy and exergy analysis approaches [27][28][29],…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%