2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.07.116
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exergy destruction analysis of solar tower aided coal-fired power generation system using exergy and advanced exergetic methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
30
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 67 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
2
30
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Its results showed that the maximum exergy and energy efficiencies for optimum flow rate values of 2.76% and 48.1%, respectively. In 2016, Zhu et al performed studies on exergy analysis of a solar tower coupled with a fossil fuel power generator. In this study, exergy performance and exergy losses analysis were done for each component.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Its results showed that the maximum exergy and energy efficiencies for optimum flow rate values of 2.76% and 48.1%, respectively. In 2016, Zhu et al performed studies on exergy analysis of a solar tower coupled with a fossil fuel power generator. In this study, exergy performance and exergy losses analysis were done for each component.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In practical applications, the introduction of solar energy into coal‐fired power plants will bring transient heat flow changes, which will bring great challenges for the control and operation of boilers, steam turbines, and thermal systems. Research on the dynamic characteristics of SAPG is of great significance for coupling renewable energy with traditional coal‐fired generating units …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to reduce the distances between CPG and STCG technologies, partial or total price difference should be covered by the introduction of solar subsidies. Apart from the cost of electricity generation on STCG plants, there is another aspect to be considered, and it is about the CO 2 emissions, for the case of the CPG reference plant, these are of 110 million tons per year, while for the case of STCG plant they are reduced to 97 million tons per year (calculated considering real coal [29]). Resulting in a saved 13 million tons of CO 2 emissions which translates into an important reduction on carbon capture costs [54][55][56] for the STCG of 0.48 cents USD/kWh compared to the CPG plant.…”
Section: Policy-making Proposalsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…reduction of about 13,125,410 t (107.7 g/kWh in a whole life cycle). When calculating CO2 emission, a kind of real coal is used [29].…”
Section: Financial Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%