Energy and exergy analysis of MSW-based IGCC power/polygeneration systems
Creators
- 1. Department of Chemical Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 70101 (China)
- 2. Department of Chemical Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070 (China)
- 3. Process and Energy Department, Faculty of 3mE, Delft University of Technology, Leeghwaterstraat 39, 2628, CB, Delft (Netherlands)
Description
Highlights: • Three designs of MSW-based IGCC power/polygeneration systems are addressed. • The CaLG process promotes the DME yield and enhances outlet CO2 concentration. • The net energy efficiencies of three designs are estimated about 14.1%~25.5%. • The overall exergy efficiencies of three designs are estimated about 45.79%~ 50.95%. • The MSW gasification is diagnosed to improve the overall exergy efficiency. Since municipal solid waste (MSW) is a negatively priced, abundant, and essentially renewable feedstock, energy recovered from MSW is a useful technology to reduce the consumption of fossil fuels, and also reduces the expenses needed to dispose of MSW. Three configurations of MSW-based IGCC power system (Design 1), MSW-based IGCC polygeneration system (Design 2), and CaO-based IGCC polygeneration system (Design 3) are proposed. Design 1 uses a combination of an identified MSW gasifier, an integrated intermittent chemical-loop air separation (IICLAS), and Rankine and Brayton cycles to generate electricity and achieve the high concentration of CO2 emissions around 93.3%~94.7%. The process for co-production of DME and MeOH in Design 2, which replaces the Rankine cycle in Design 1, could increase the net energy efficiency of Design 1 by 71.6%, but the total CO2 emissions from Design 2 are merely 7.97% of Design 1. The calcium looping gasification (CaLG) process in Design 3, which replaces the MSW gasifier in Design 2, could increase the production rate of DME of Design 2 by 12.5%. The CO2 concentration from the calcinator in Design 3 is higher than CO2 concentration in flue gas from Designs 1 and 2 by 2.0%~3.5%. Through exergy analysis, the overall exergy efficiency of Design 3 is lower than Designs 1 and 2 by 3.2%~10.1% due to the exergy destruction rate and ratio in the gasification zone of Design 3 higher than other designs. The GaLG process could increase the DME yield as well as the outlet CO2 concentration, but this approach design induces a higher exergy loss.
Availability note (English)
Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114119Additional details
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114119;
- PII
- S0196890421002958;
Publishing Information
- Journal Title
- Energy Conversion and Management
- Journal Volume
- 238
- Journal Page Range
- vp.
- ISSN
- 0196-8904
- CODEN
- ECMADL
INIS
- Country of Publication
- United Kingdom
- Country of Input or Organization
- International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
- INIS RN
- 54031461
- Subject category
- S42: ENGINEERING;
- Descriptors DEI
- BRAYTON CYCLE; CARBON DIOXIDE; ELECTRICITY; EMISSION; ENERGY EFFICIENCY; EXERGY; FLUE GAS; POWER SYSTEMS; RANKINE CYCLE
- Descriptors DEC
- CARBON COMPOUNDS; CARBON OXIDES; CHALCOGENIDES; EFFICIENCY; ENERGY; ENERGY SYSTEMS; GASEOUS WASTES; OXIDES; OXYGEN COMPOUNDS; THERMODYNAMIC CYCLES; WASTES
Optional Information
- Copyright
- Copyright (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.