Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2020 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
Texto Completo: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/31616 |
Resumo: | Two emissions mitigation systems, as CO2 capture and storage (CCS) and concentrated solar power (CSP) have been investigated to a power plant based on exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses. A base plant of natural gas combined cycle for power production is taken as case study. The CSP technology used is parabolic trough collector (PTC) with two storage tanks. The environmental impact indicator used is the eco-indicator 99. The outcomes indicate that the natural gas heater exchanger should have its exergy destruction reduced to improve the performance of all system. The CCS plant reduced the net power and the PTC plant increased slightly the net power in relation to the base plant. The specific environmental impact of CCS plant was increased and of PTC plant was slightly decreased. The environmental impact of fuel production is the main environmental burden in the environmental performance. Therefore, the PTC system is the best case of mitigation system. Discussions about further improvements have been proposed |
id |
UFRN_9f3dd1f6b37254e5c4efc8b068144ce9 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:https://repositorio.ufrn.br:123456789/31616 |
network_acronym_str |
UFRN |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Cavalcanti, Eduardo José CidadeLima, Matheus Seabra RodriguesSouza, Gabriel F. de2021-03-01T23:50:00Z2021-03-01T23:50:00Z2020-08CAVALCANTI, Eduardo J.C.; LIMA, Matheus S.R.; SOUZA, Gabriel F. de. Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses. Renewable Energy, [S.L.], v. 156, p. 1336-1347, ago. 2020. Disponível em: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960148119318555. Acesso em: 22 dez. 2020.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.11.153.0960-14811879-0682https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/3161610.1016/j.renene.2019.11.153ElsevierAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Brazilhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/br/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessExergoenvironmental analysisEco-indicator 99Solar collectorCarbon capture and storagePower plantComparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analysesinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleTwo emissions mitigation systems, as CO2 capture and storage (CCS) and concentrated solar power (CSP) have been investigated to a power plant based on exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses. A base plant of natural gas combined cycle for power production is taken as case study. The CSP technology used is parabolic trough collector (PTC) with two storage tanks. The environmental impact indicator used is the eco-indicator 99. The outcomes indicate that the natural gas heater exchanger should have its exergy destruction reduced to improve the performance of all system. The CCS plant reduced the net power and the PTC plant increased slightly the net power in relation to the base plant. The specific environmental impact of CCS plant was increased and of PTC plant was slightly decreased. The environmental impact of fuel production is the main environmental burden in the environmental performance. Therefore, the PTC system is the best case of mitigation system. Discussions about further improvements have been proposedengreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRNinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)instacron:UFRNORIGINALComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdfComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdfapplication/pdf2655874https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/31616/1/ComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdf814e59f73045d3e89b5808d4f059c2bbMD51CC-LICENSElicense_rdflicense_rdfapplication/rdf+xml; charset=utf-8811https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/31616/2/license_rdfe39d27027a6cc9cb039ad269a5db8e34MD52LICENSElicense.txtlicense.txttext/plain; charset=utf-81484https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/31616/3/license.txte9597aa2854d128fd968be5edc8a28d9MD53TEXTComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdf.txtComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain47460https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/31616/4/ComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdf.txtfc25814c4fe3e8a4775e0260d3ba1726MD54THUMBNAILComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdf.jpgComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdf.jpgGenerated Thumbnailimage/jpeg1702https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/31616/5/ComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdf.jpg14894ad6f01618c358226171a3f4efe9MD55123456789/316162021-03-07 05:49:06.781oai:https://repositorio.ufrn.br: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Repositório de PublicaçõesPUBhttp://repositorio.ufrn.br/oai/opendoar:2021-03-07T08:49:06Repositório Institucional da UFRN - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)false |
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses |
title |
Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses |
spellingShingle |
Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses Cavalcanti, Eduardo José Cidade Exergoenvironmental analysis Eco-indicator 99 Solar collector Carbon capture and storage Power plant |
title_short |
Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses |
title_full |
Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses |
title_fullStr |
Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses |
title_sort |
Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses |
author |
Cavalcanti, Eduardo José Cidade |
author_facet |
Cavalcanti, Eduardo José Cidade Lima, Matheus Seabra Rodrigues Souza, Gabriel F. de |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Lima, Matheus Seabra Rodrigues Souza, Gabriel F. de |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Cavalcanti, Eduardo José Cidade Lima, Matheus Seabra Rodrigues Souza, Gabriel F. de |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Exergoenvironmental analysis Eco-indicator 99 Solar collector Carbon capture and storage Power plant |
topic |
Exergoenvironmental analysis Eco-indicator 99 Solar collector Carbon capture and storage Power plant |
description |
Two emissions mitigation systems, as CO2 capture and storage (CCS) and concentrated solar power (CSP) have been investigated to a power plant based on exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses. A base plant of natural gas combined cycle for power production is taken as case study. The CSP technology used is parabolic trough collector (PTC) with two storage tanks. The environmental impact indicator used is the eco-indicator 99. The outcomes indicate that the natural gas heater exchanger should have its exergy destruction reduced to improve the performance of all system. The CCS plant reduced the net power and the PTC plant increased slightly the net power in relation to the base plant. The specific environmental impact of CCS plant was increased and of PTC plant was slightly decreased. The environmental impact of fuel production is the main environmental burden in the environmental performance. Therefore, the PTC system is the best case of mitigation system. Discussions about further improvements have been proposed |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2020-08 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2021-03-01T23:50:00Z |
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv |
2021-03-01T23:50:00Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.citation.fl_str_mv |
CAVALCANTI, Eduardo J.C.; LIMA, Matheus S.R.; SOUZA, Gabriel F. de. Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses. Renewable Energy, [S.L.], v. 156, p. 1336-1347, ago. 2020. Disponível em: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960148119318555. Acesso em: 22 dez. 2020.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.11.153. |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/31616 |
dc.identifier.issn.none.fl_str_mv |
0960-1481 1879-0682 |
dc.identifier.doi.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1016/j.renene.2019.11.153 |
identifier_str_mv |
CAVALCANTI, Eduardo J.C.; LIMA, Matheus S.R.; SOUZA, Gabriel F. de. Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses. Renewable Energy, [S.L.], v. 156, p. 1336-1347, ago. 2020. Disponível em: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960148119318555. Acesso em: 22 dez. 2020.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.11.153. 0960-1481 1879-0682 10.1016/j.renene.2019.11.153 |
url |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/31616 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Brazil http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/br/ info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Brazil http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/br/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRN instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) instacron:UFRN |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) |
instacron_str |
UFRN |
institution |
UFRN |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/31616/1/ComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdf https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/31616/2/license_rdf https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/31616/3/license.txt https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/31616/4/ComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdf.txt https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/31616/5/ComparisonCarbonCaptureSystem_Cavalcanti_2019.pdf.jpg |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
814e59f73045d3e89b5808d4f059c2bb e39d27027a6cc9cb039ad269a5db8e34 e9597aa2854d128fd968be5edc8a28d9 fc25814c4fe3e8a4775e0260d3ba1726 14894ad6f01618c358226171a3f4efe9 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1802117910376742912 |