Binary Power Cycles in Russia: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Jason Zhu and Version 1 by Vladimir Kindra.

The most effective and environmentally safe fossil fuel power production facilities are the combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) ones. Electric efficiency of advanced facilities is up to 58% in Russia and up to 64% abroad. The further improvement of thermal efficiency by increase of the gas turbine inlet temperature (TIT) is limited by performance of heat resistance alloys that are used for the hot gas path components and the cooling system efficiency. An alternative method for the CCGT efficiency improvement is utilization of low potential heat of the heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) exhaust gas in an additional cycle operating on a low-boiling heat carrier. 

  • Brayton cycle
  • Rankine cycle
  • combined cycle power plant

1. Decarbonizing the Power Sector

Currently, world industries experience a stable decarbonizing trend. The reduction of carbon dioxide emission by the power production industry is especially important because of its 39% contribution to emissions in 2017 [1].
The most effective method of emission mitigation in the power production industry is the transition to low-carbon electricity production technologies. These include renewable energy sources (RES), the share of which will continuously grow in the coming decades. Their relevance has only increased in the light of escalating global environmental problems [2,3][2][3].
It is worth mentioning that the wide introduction of RES and carbon dioxide capturing systems is limited by the high prices of “green” technology [4,5][4][5]. At the same time, today there are alternative ways to reduce anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions associated with the development of energy-saving technologies with relatively low cost [6,7,8,9][6][7][8][9]. This approach may be applied to the large combined-cycle gas turbines (CCGT) power facilities that are now the most efficient.

2. Increasing Efficiency of the Binary Power Cycles

Recently, the development of heat resistant alloys, hot gas path cooling systems and thermal barrier coatings has allowed a working flow temperature increase from 800 to 1650 °C [10,11][10][11]. Foreign advanced CCGT facilities have recently reached net efficiency of 63–64% [12,13][12][13]. CCGT facilities based on the 9HA02 or M701JAC Gas Turbines (GT) have electric net efficiency above 64% [11[11][14][15],14,15], which is the highest performance among the commercially available gas fuel power production technologies.
Over 100 years of binary technology development, numerous methods for efficiency improvement were proposed and some of them were introduced into practice. Table 1 summarizes the data on CCGT-accessible efficiency improvements and their problems for introduction.
Table 1. Comparison of CCGT facilities efficiency improvement methods.
Improvement Method Efficiency Increase, % Method Shortages Reference
100 °C initial temperature increase 0.9–1.5 Necessity to increase performance of heat-resistant alloys, thermal barrier coatings and turbine hot gas path cooling. [16,17][16][17]
Reheat of combustion products in additional combustors 3.3–3.6 Necessity to install additional combustors, higher cooling flow losses. [16]
Air compressor inter-cooling 0.7–1.3 Higher compressor cost and reduction of the GT maneuverability due to the higher risk of compressor stall. [18]
Regeneration of the GT exhausts heat with a regenerator. 1.0–3.5 Necessity to install a regenerator with remarkable mass and dimensions. [16,18][16][18]
Transition from 1P HRSG to 1P + RH 2.25–3.1 Additional HRSG surface and steam pipelines [19,20][19][20]
Transition from 1P HRSG to 2P 1.6–1.8 Additional equipment for the second steam circuit [19,20][19][20]
Transition from 2P HRSG to 2P + RH 0.19–0.5 Additional equipment for the third steam circuit [19,20][19][20]
Transition from 2P HRSG to 3P 0.3–0.5 Additional equipment for the third steam circuit [19,20,21][19][20][21]
Transition from 3P HRSG to 3P + RH 0.6–1.09 Additional HRSG surface and steam pipelines [19,20,21][19][20][21]
Most of the known methods provide an electrical net efficiency increase of 0.6–3.6%. Their application usually requires capital investment increase, and sometimes power facility maneuverability and reliability are compromised. Therefore, the use of various methods or their combinations is not always justified from an economic point of view.
The main method for CCGT efficiency improvement is the increase of GT cycle initial temperature. A 100 °C gas turbine inlet temperature (TIT) increase leads to a power unit efficiency increase of 0.9–1.5% [16,17][16][17]. It is worth mentioning that the available nickel alloys can operate at temperatures below 900 °C, and the cooling systems efficiencies are near to their limits [22]. In this regard, further increase in the net electrical efficiency of CCGTs by increasing the initial temperature of the gas turbine is troublesome.
Reduction of the GT exhausts heat recovery losses is an alternative approach to CCGT efficiency improvement. Traditionally, the exhaust gases at the exhaust of a gas turbine are sent to a waste heat boiler (HRSG), which generates water vapor to power the steam turbine. The HRSG may be of a single-, dual-, or triple-pressure type. The larger amount of HRSG pressure improves the recovery of GT exhaust heat and thus increases useful electricity production. It is also possible to use steam reheat to improve energy efficiency. Specific features of the CCGT steam cycles are due to the properties of the heat source that is the exhaust gas flow. Efficient heat transfer combined with the maximal heat potential is reached at the minimal surface of the figure between the heating and heated flows in Qt diagram of HRSG. Increase in pressure used and introduction of the reheat allows for reduction of heat potential losses. This limit is caused by the necessity to evaporate the heat carrier that is maintained at a constant temperature and produces maximal heat potential losses in a HRSG.
The introduction of the additional pressure in HRSG with lower parameters allows for efficient recovery of additional heat [23,24][23][24]. The maximum amount of heat recovered in this case is limited by the minimal exhaust temperature that is determined by the steam saturation condition and the low temperature corrosion of tail heating surfaces in the presence of sulfur in the fuel, and the perfection of the HRSG.
Therefore, one of the ways to increase the efficiency of steam–gas plants may be the creation of circuits with a low-boiling coolant, which will make it possible to realize the low-temperature potential of heating gases.
Galashov and Tsibulsky [25] considered the use of ammonia, butane, pentane, R236fa, and R245fa for utilizing the heat of condensate after the condensate pump and the latent heat of steam condensation after the steam turbine of a CCGT in an ORC with a regenerator. When using gas turbine NK-36ST and a single-pressure HRSG with initial parameters of 16 MPa and 440 °C, the use of ORC allows for efficiency higher than 60% at a condensing temperature in a low-potential cycle of less than 0 °C. The most effective is the use of pentane in ORC, followed by butane, R245fa, R236fa, and ammonia. The same reseauthorchers in [26] considered CCGT using 9HA.02 with low-potential cycle using pentane, butane, R365mfc, RC318, R236ea, R236fa, R123, R245ca, and R245fa. It was determined that the most promising were pentane and R365mfc. The use of low-potential cycles in CCGT with reheat with SGT5–8000H was considered in [27]. Butane was used as a low-boiling fluid.
Utilization of low-potential energy of gas turbine exhaust gases was considered by Bălănescu and Homutescua [28]. When using the gas turbine Orenda OGT1500, the gas temperature at the HRSG exhaust is 188 °C, which makes the use of ORC justified. The net electrical efficiency was 45.47% when using R134a in ORC and 45.56% when using R123, which is 1.1 and 1.19% higher than the efficiency of the prototype.
The unconventional approach was studied by Gafurov et al. [29]. The trinary cycle used NK-37 gas turbine as a heat source for two low-temperature cycles. The first one used single-pressure HRSG with benzol and the second one utilized the heat of stream from turbine and latent heat in condenser. The second cycle uses butane and has a regeneration. The use of trinary cycle allowed increase in efficiency of up to 62.6%.
Therefore, one of the methods for CCGT efficiency improvements may be creation of low-boiling heat carrier cycle that will allow utilization of the low-temperature heat of flue gases.

3. Binary Power Cycles in Russia

In the USSR, studies of combined thermodynamic cycles began in the 1930s of the 20th century, and practical implementation began in the 1960s. Despite this long investigation and development period, the combined cycle facilities were not widely used.
Currently in Russia, the CCGT direction is one of the power industry priorities. Transition to the carbon dioxide emission market system will result in a competition between the electric power production companies. Therefore, the main power production companies will be interested in development of highly efficient facilities.
In Russia, there are at present 68 power production companies which have 98 CCGT facilities with a total power of 25.7 GWt. The General Scheme for Power Production Facilities Locations by 2035 includes startup of 81 more facilities with 23.0 GW total power at 37 power generation companies. Therefore, the plan is to double the CCGT power in the oncoming decade. The domestic power industry is mostly equipped with CCGT facilities of 200–250 MW and 400–450 MW capacity. The most common are the single-block and double-block unit; the triple-block facilities are rare. More than 70% of Heat Recovery boilers (HRSG) are of twin-flow type [30].
Most of the Russian CCGT facilities have electrical net efficiency of 50–59%, which is lower than the 63–64% of the advanced foreign ones. This is mostly due to the remarkably lower level of the domestic GT technology. The CCGT facilities with about 39% of installed power are equipped with GT with TIT, which is the key parameter for the cycle efficiency below 1100 °C. High power GT with TIT above 1500 °C are absent. Large foreign power consortiums are developing GT with TIT about 1700 °C, so the prospects for domestic GT efficiency improvement are remarkable.
Reduction of this gap will require considerable time and investments. The CCGT power production efficiency and environmental safety improvement without excessive time and financial losses requires assessments of reasonable improvement directions for operational and prospective facilities.
It is possible to achieve a significant improvement in CCGT facility efficiency with low-boiling heat utilization cycle via introduction of steam turbine unit (STU) heat regeneration. This technical solution has a complex effect since its use not only leads to a significant reduction in losses in the condenser of a STU, but also allows higher heat carrier temperature in the low-temperature cycle due to the higher flue gas temperature related to the higher feed water temperature.

References

  1. IEA. Global Energy Review 2019; IEA: Paris, France, 2020.
  2. Singh, S. Energy Crisis and Climate Change: Global Concerns and Their Solutions. In Energy; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2021; Volume 1, pp. 1–17.
  3. Chofreh, A.G.; Goni, F.A.; Klemeš, J.J.; Moosavi, S.M.S.; Davoudi, M.; Zeinalnezhad, M. COVID-19 Shock: Development of Strategic Management Framework for Global Energy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 139, 110643.
  4. Chen, W.-H.; Ong, H.C.; Ho, S.-H.; Show, P.L. Green Energy Technology. Energies 2021, 14, 6842.
  5. Jabeen, G.; Ahmad, M.; Zhang, Q. Factors Influencing Consumers’ Willingness to Buy Green Energy Technologies in a Green Perceived Value Framework. Energy Sources Part B Econ. Plan. Policy 2021, 16, 669–685.
  6. Wang, C.-H.; Zhao, D.; Tsutsumi, A.; You, S. Sustainable Energy Technologies for Energy Saving and Carbon Emission Reduction. Appl. Energy 2017, 194, 223–224.
  7. Chowdhury, J.I.; Hu, Y.; Haltas, I.; Balta-Ozkan, N.; Matthewb, G.J.; Varga, L. Reducing Industrial Energy Demand in the UK: A Review of Energy Efficiency Technologies and Energy Saving Potential in Selected Sectors. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 94, 1153–1178.
  8. Rogalev, A.; Rogalev, N.; Kindra, V.; Komarov, I.; Zlyvko, O. Research and Development of the Oxy-Fuel Combustion Power Cycles with CO2 Recirculation. Energies 2021, 14, 2927.
  9. Kindra, V.; Rogalev, A.; Lisin, E.; Osipov, S.; Zlyvko, O. Techno-Economic Analysis of the Oxy-Fuel Combustion Power Cycles with Near-Zero Emissions. Energies 2021, 14, 5358.
  10. Morimoto, K.; Matsumura, Y.; Suzuki, K.; Wakazono, S.; Kataoka, M.; Yuri, M. Operation Status of 1650 °C Class M501JAC Gas Turbine at T-Point 2 Power Plant Demonstration Facility. Mitsubishi Heavy Ind. Tech. Rev. 2021, 58, 10.
  11. Ol’khovskii, G.G. The Most Powerful Power-Generating GTUs (A Review). Therm. Eng. 2021, 68, 490–495.
  12. Morimoto, K.; Matsumura, Y.; Iijima, T.; Wakazono, S.; Kataoka, M.; Yuri, M. Validation Results of 1650 °C Class JAC Gas Turbine at T-Point 2 Demonstration Plant. Mitsubishi Heavy Ind. Tech. Rev. 2021, 58, 12.
  13. Okajima, Y.; Torigoe, T.; Mega, M.; Kuwabara, M.; Okaya, N. Development of Advanced TBC for 1650 °C Class Gas Turbine. In Proceedings of the ITSC2021, Indianapolis, IN, USA, 19–22 September 2021; pp. 695–699.
  14. Zaryankin, A.; Mager, A.; Rogalev, A.; Komarov, I. Superpowerful Combined Cycle Power Units with One Gas Turbine. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 2014, 190, 10.
  15. Mitsubishi. GTCC Gas Turbine Combined Cycle Power Plants; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries: Kanagawa, Japan, 2021; p. 12.
  16. Bassily, A. Enhancing the Efficiency and Power of the Triple-Pressure Reheat Combined Cycle by Means of Gas Reheat, Gas Recuperation, and Reduction of the Irreversibility in the Heat Recovery Steam Generator. Appl. Energy 2008, 85, 1141–1162.
  17. Bassily, A. Modeling, Numerical Optimization, and Irreversibility Reduction of a Dual-Pressure Reheat Combined-Cycle. Appl. Energy 2005, 81, 127–151.
  18. Kwon, H.M.; Moon, S.W.; Kim, T.S.; Kang, D.W. Performance Enhancement of the Gas Turbine Combined Cycle by Simultaneous Reheating, Recuperation, and Coolant Inter-Cooling. Energy 2020, 207, 118271.
  19. Grinchuk, A. Improving the Efficiency of Waste CCGTs Through the Application of Intermediate Steam Reheating. Energy News High. Educ. Inst. Energy Assoc. CIS 2008, 5, 78–86.
  20. Elmasri, M. Triple-Pressure and Reheat Combined Cycles: Design-Point Thermodynamics. In Design of Gas Turbine Combined Cycles and Cogeneration Systems; Thermoflow: Jacksonville, FL, USA, 2007; Volume 12.1.
  21. Tajik Mansouri, M.; Ahmadi, P.; Ganjeh Kaviri, A.; Jaafar, M.N.M. Exergetic and Economic Evaluation of the Effect of HRSG Configurations on the Performance of Combined Cycle Power Plants. Energy Convers. Manag. 2012, 58, 47–58.
  22. Hada, S.; Yuri, M.; Masada, J.; Ito, E.; Tsukagoshi, K. Evolution and future trend of large frame gas turbines: A new 1600 degree c, j class gas turbine. In Turbo Expo: Power for Land, Sea, and Air; American Society of Mechanical Engineers: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2012; pp. 599–606.
  23. Rogalev, A.; Rogalev, N.; Kindra, V.; Zlyvko, O.; Vegera, A. A Study of Low-Potential Heat Utilization Methods for Oxy-Fuel Combustion Power Cycles. Energies 2021, 14, 3364.
  24. Rogalev, N.; Kindra, V.; Komarov, I.; Osipov, S.; Zlyvko, O.; Lvov, D. Comparative Analysis of Low-Grade Heat Utilization Methods for Thermal Power Plants with Back-Pressure Steam Turbines. Energies 2021, 14, 8519.
  25. Galashov, N.; Tsibulskiy, S.; Serova, T. Analysis of the Properties of Working Substances for the Organic Rankine Cycle Based Database “REFPROP”. EPJ Web Conf. 2016, 110, 01068.
  26. Galashov, N.; Tsibulskiy, S. Parametric Analysis of the Diagram of the Combined-Cycle Gas Turbine with a Combination of Three Cycles for Improving Efficiency When Operating in Northern Gas Producing Areas. Bull. Tomsk. Polytech. Univ. 2019, 330, 44–55.
  27. Galashov, N. Analysis of Influence of Steam/Turbine Cycle Basic Parameters on the Efficiency of Triple Combined/Cycle Plants. Bull. Tomsk. Polytech. Univ. 2013, 323, 15–21.
  28. Bălănescu, D.-T.; Homutescu, V.-M. Performance Analysis of a Gas Turbine Combined Cycle Power Plant with Waste Heat Recovery in Organic Rankine Cycle. Procedia Manuf. 2019, 32, 520–528.
  29. Gafurov, A.; Uskov, D.; Shubina, A. Power Plant Based on GTU NK-37 with Two Heat Recovery Working Circuits. Energy Tatarstan 2012, 3, 35–41.
  30. Tugov, A.; Maidanik, M. Steam recovery boilers behind gas turbines with a capacity of more than 25 MW, installed at thermal power plants in Russia. Gas Turbine Technol. 2018, 3, 12–15.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback