5.

Industrial cogeneration

5.2.1 Introduction
After a brief review of the physical bases, operating principles and the characteristic operating parameters of cogeneration systems, the following goes on to describe the technologies exploited in medium-to-large size industrial applications ( 1 MWe); for a description of the smaller sized applications, more widespread in residential and tertiary sector applications, see Chapter 5.3.
Physical bases

Operating principles

By the second law of thermodynamics, the generation of mechanical or electrical power via thermal processes is inevitably associated with the transfer of thermal power at medium to low temperatures. In plants designed to produce electrical energy alone, such heat transfer is not exploited in any way; the heat is simply lost into the surrounding environment, either directly (through the release of the products of combustion into the atmosphere) and/or indirectly (through a heat carrier fluid, generally air or water drawn from groundwater or rivers, lakes and seas). Although still one of the most widespread practices, the direct production of heat at low temperature in a boiler is one of the most improper uses in the thermodynamic sense of the chemical energy available in fuels. Cogeneration is the technique of combining the generation of both electricity and heat in a single series of processes. It enables, on the one hand, the exploitation of the heat that would otherwise be irretrievably lost through transfer to the environment, and on the other, avoids the (highly irreversible) direct conversion of the energy liberated by combustion into low-temperature heat.

There are numerous and varied designations for cogeneration systems, for example, Combined Heat and Power (CHP) or total energy systems. Apart from the terminology adopted, two fundamental features of the technology are alwais present: the joint production of electrical energy and heat, for the most part through a serial process; and primary energy savings over the separate production of electricity or heat alone. Of the various types of systems designs, two broad categories of cogeneration processes can be defined. By far the most widespread and important process is the topping cycle, which exploits a cycle that receives energy from a fuel (or some other high-temperature energy source) and converts part of it into mechanical work, and subsequently into electricity. A portion of the total energy not converted into work is recovered as usable low-to-medium temperature heat, while the remaining part is released into the environment. The fraction of unconverted energy that can be recovered depends on the type of plant and the temperatures at which the heat can be utilized. Topping cycles can be implemented in a wide range of different cogeneration plants, in terms of both prime mover (steam power plants, alternative prime movers or gas turbine systems, gas-steam combined cycles), and scale (from the few kWe of micro-cogeneration systems, to the hundreds of MWe of the large-scale combined gas-steam cycles adopted in industry). Although the bottoming cycle is less widespread in its application, it is also of practical interest. In this process, the generation of work (or electrical energy) is performed downstream, rather than upstream from where the heat is utilized. Such systems are generally applied in industrial production requiring high-temperature heat (for example, cement and glass works, tile and ceramic plants, etc.). A part of the heat

VOLUME III / NEW DEVELOPMENTS: ENERGY, TRANSPORT, SUSTAINABILITY

421

POWER GENERATION FROM FOSSIL RESOURCES

available at medium to high temperature is recovered via a cycle (using water steam, or organic fluids) that produces electrical energy and, at times, lower-temperature heat as needed for thermal process uses. Due to their far more widespread application, the following discussion will be limited to cogeneration systems of the first, topping-cycle, type.
Characteristic operating parameters

The technical literature furnishes a disparate variety of criteria for evaluating the thermodynamic quality of a cogeneration system. The simplest and most common criterion (though also the most approximate) makes reference to the first law of thermodynamics. It defines the first-law efficiency, hI (also known as the fuel utilization factor or total efficiency) of a cogeneration plant as the ratio between the sum total of a plants useful effects (electrical energy, E, and heat, Qu) and the energy released by the fuel, Ec, as a rule, taken to be the Lower Heat Value (LHV): hI (E Qu) Ec he ht

values of the ratio T0/TQ have very low corresponding values of the multiplicative heat coefficient, which tend to penalize cogeneration. Perhaps the most suitable criterion for expressing the quality of a cogeneration plant, in that it goes right to the crux of the matter, consists of comparing a cogeneration system with a corresponding unit without cogeneration, thereby providing a measure of the fuel savings afforded by cogeneration in comparison to the separate generation of the same quantities of electrical energy and heat. The fuel consumption Ec, s with separate generation of E and Qu is given by: Ec, s E he, s Qu ht, s where he, s and ht, s are respectively the reference electrical efficiency (for example, the mean efficiency of the pool of thermoelectric plants feeding the grid to which the cogeneration system is connected, including transmission and distribution losses), and the reference thermal efficiency (generally the typical efficiency of a boiler). The index of primary energy savings IPE is thereby defined as: IPE (Ec, s Ec)/Ec, s 1 1 {he he,s + + he [ht, s Iet /(1 Iet)]}

where the terms he E Ec and ht Qu Ec are respectively the electrical efficiency and the thermal efficiency of the cogeneration system. Another frequently used index, which stresses the production of electrical energy through cogeneration, is the electrical index: Iet E (Qu E) he (he ht)

which varies from 0 (for systems that produce heat alone) to 1 (for systems that produce solely electrical energy). However, there are drawbacks to defining efficiency in first-law terms. They stem from the fact that the same weight is attributed to the two terms (E and Qu), whose energetic and economic importance are actually very different. However, no universally accepted criterion exists for attributing the correct weight to the two terms; the most thermodynamically correct criterion would be to convert the term Qu into energy (electrical energy or mechanical work). To this end, Qu, considered to be available at medium temperature, TQ, is multiplied by the efficiency of a reversible cycle having Qu as the heat supplied and an environment with infinite thermal capacity as the heat well (conventionally assumed to be at temperature T0). Under such assumptions, we now instead refer to second-law efficiency, hII, equal to: hII [E Qu(1-T0 TQ)] Ec

This primary energy savings index is zero when he he, s and Iet 1, that is when the system produces only electrical energy with an efficiency equal to the reference value, or when Iet 0 and ht ht, s , that is, the system produces only heat with an efficiency ht ht, s . The index is positive when he he, s (that is when the cogeneration systems electrical efficiency is greater than the reference value) and/or when the contribution of heat generation (Iet 1) is able to compensate for the lower electrical efficiency. Another way to compare cogeneration systems with separate electrical generation is to consider the equivalent electrical efficiency, which calculates the electrical energy that can be generated from that part of the fuel remaining after having subtracted the fuel hypothetically consumed to produce heat Qu in an equivalent boiler. Thus, with the notations used in the foregoing, we have: hel, eq E (Ec Qu ht, s) he (1 ht ht, s)

which essentially corresponds to the exergy efficiency. However, it must be borne in mind that the usual

It should be noted that an equivalent electrical efficiency above the reference value he,s denotes primary energy savings, and therefore a positive value of IPE. However, it may also happen that very high values of hel,eq, yield low values of IPE, or vice versa; the first case indicates systems with low electrical indices, which, despite their high equivalent efficiencies, produce a modest quantity of electrical energy, while the second occurs in plants with high electrical indices producing large amounts of electrical energy.

422

ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF HYDROCARBONS

INDUSTRIAL COGENERATION

Evolution and current trends

The potential advantages of cogeneration, in terms of both energy production and environmental friendliness, are such that it would be desirable (and much legislation does in fact impose) that all plans for the construction of new thermoelectric plants include prior study of the technical-economic feasibility of recovering heat at low temperature through a cogeneration process. Vice versa, any application generating low temperature heat should also be evaluated for the possibility of simultaneously producing electricity. In reality, cogeneration is not always feasible, both for technical reasons (the demands for heat and electricity are separated in time and/or space, difficulties in accumulating and distributing heat over long distances), and for economic reasons (competition from large-scale thermoelectric plants, which enjoy the significant advantages offered by economy of scale and the use of cheaper energy sources), to which must be added legislative and pricing obstacles (associated to difficulties in connecting cogeneration plants to the electric grid, and the low market value attributed to electrical energy exported to the grid). Cogeneration plants are potentially applicable to a great number of sectors: industrial, civil and tertiary. Cogenerated heat can be, for example, used to feed heating networks (which generally use hot water as the heat carrier fluid, typically at temperatures of 120C for the outflow collector, and 60C for the return) to
Fig. 1. Schematic layout of external combustion systems for cogeneration. G, steam generator; P, pump; ST, steam turbine; HE, heat exchanger; CD, condenser.

supply domestic heating and hot water to entire districts or cities. Indeed, such applications are very widespread in northern Europe, where the heating season is long. The most significant and widespread applications of cogeneration, however, are in industry. Over the last few decades, industrial cogeneration has been based primarily on steam cycles: instead of producing steam (or warm water) under the conditions required by production processes (for the most part at relatively modest pressures), high-temperature, high-pressure steam generators have been developed that generate electricity by exploiting the difference in steam pressure between the boiler output and the pressures required by production. Such a strategy has been applied in many industrial processes (for instance, in the textile, paper, chemical, petrochemical, pharmaceutical, and food industries, etc.), whose heat requirements are high, and generally constant over time, for a large total number of hours yearly. It should be noted that such cycles are generally closed, though in some cases they may not be: if the steam is delivered directly from turbines to the industrial process, the condensate can be totally returned (closed cycle), or not (open cycle); if the specific use process requires warm water, the steam cycle is closed, which involves the presence of an exchanger. In the most traditional approach, the system is sized and managed according to the requirements of the thermal application, and the electrical energy

ST HE P thermal user back-pressure steam turbine

Qu

A E

ST HE P

ST

Qu

P A CD

D E

thermal user condensing/extraction steam turbine

VOLUME III / NEW DEVELOPMENTS: ENERGY, TRANSPORT, SUSTAINABILITY

423

POWER GENERATION FROM FOSSIL RESOURCES

Fig. 2. A, schematic layout of internal combustion systems for cogeneration; B, schematic layout of combined cycle systems for cogeneration. CC, combustion chamber; C, compressor; GT, gas turbine; TA, turboalternator; AB, afterburner.

to stack HE Qu HE C GT HE HE A E

turbocharged internal combustion engine

CC

GT to stack HE thermal user

Qu

P A E

simple cycle gas turbine with recovering boiler

CC N Qu C GT to stack HE AB steam injection thermal user P A E D M O

steam-injected gas turbine A

CC HE thermal user

M Qu TA A AB to stack HE P E HE thermal user C GT ST N

back-pressure combined cycle

CC

GT

ST

ST TA

Qu

M N P

CD AB to stack HE

D E

condensing/extraction combined cycle B

424

ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF HYDROCARBONS

INDUSTRIAL COGENERATION

cogenerated used, for the most part, to satisfy the needs of the industrial process itself. Often, this has made production facilities almost self-sufficient hardly any electricity need be imported from the electric grid, usually only to cover peak demand, and any excess production can be fed into the distribution grid. Apart from the advantages in terms of energy balance and economy, cogeneration has always offered other significant, often strategically important benefits for many productive processes, such as the possibility to operate in isolation (that is, without being connected to the electric grid), immunity from grid blackouts, and improved quality of electrical service. Over the last two decades, also the cogeneration plants have undergone the particularly significant evolution already described for large-scale thermoelectric plants (see Chapter 5.1); apart from traditional technical solutions (external combustion steam cycle), industrial cogeneration has become ever more oriented towards internal combustion solutions based on alternative prime movers for small-scale systems (characteristically, 5-10 MWe), while for power outputs of up to 20-50 MWe the trend is towards simple recovery gas turbines. Lastly, an especially important trend is towards combined gas-steam cycles, often implemented by repowering already existing cogeneration steam plants. The reasons underlying this last solution are the same as those which have promoted the widespread adoption of combined-cycle plants for the generation of electricity, namely: a) the widespread availability of natural gas at competitive prices with respect to fuel oil; b) technological advances in internal combustion engines in terms of performance, specific costs and emissions; c) the great potential for energy savings and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions; d ) increased public ecological awareness, which has tended to favour environmentally-friendly solutions. Since internal combustion technologies, in contrast to external combustion, are characterized by very high electrical indices, in cogeneration applications, the electrical energy produced often greatly exceeds the requirements of the productive process. Thus, the ability to transfer surplus electricity (which may represent a significant fraction of total capacity) to the distribution grid at competitive rates becomes of fundamental importance.
Plant layouts

Figs. 1 and 2 schematically illustrate the most widespread layouts for plants based on external and internal combustion, which will be described in Sections 5.2.2 and 5.2.3, respectively. Each of the figures include indications on the plant operating ranges in terms of a plot of electrical energy vs. heat, E vs. Qu (also, electrical power output vs. thermal power utilized). Table 1. moreover, shows the operating parameters, in term of electrical power output and the typical values of the previously defined indices for each of the plant designs represented in Figs. 1 and 2. Some noteworthy conclusions can be drawn from the figures and table: The highest first-law efficiencies can be obtained with pure back-pressure steam cycles or with alternative total heat-recovery engines; in both cases, exhaust losses are relatively low because high excesses of air are unnecessary for the combustion process, in contrast to the gas turbine. Back-pressure steam power plants are characterized by very low values of the electrical index Iet; electrical energy production via extraction and condensation plants is greater, but at the expense of the energy savings index IPE, which may even become negative; in other words, cogeneration with steam extraction and condensation cycles may even involve greater fuel consumption than the separate generation of thermal or electrical energy via modern highperformance combined cycles. Alternative prime movers exhibit good thermodynamic characteristics for cogeneration applications, above all when it is possible to recover all the heat produced, that is, when the thermal process demand medium-to-low-temperature heat. Simple recovery gas turbines are characterized by high equivalent electrical efficiencies, which remain high even when afterburning is adopted; substituting simple heat recovery with a bottoming steam cycle (combined cycle) yields a significant increase in the electrical index value and also provides the maximum primary energy savings.

5.2.2 Plants with external combustion prime movers

The fundamental advantage of such plants is their great flexibility in terms of primary energy source: adopting a closed-cycle, external combustion engine (specifically, a water steam cycle), the nature of the fuel employed has no influence on system performance. Thus, solid, liquid or gaseous fuels, even

Industrial cogeneration plants can be grouped into two broad categories, depending on the type of prime mover on which plant operations are based: external combustion (steam turbines) and internal combustion (alternative prime movers, such as the Otto cycle or Diesel cycle, or the gas turbine).

VOLUME III / NEW DEVELOPMENTS: ENERGY, TRANSPORT, SUSTAINABILITY

425

POWER GENERATION FROM FOSSIL RESOURCES

Table 1. Power output ranges and characteristic indices (indicative mean values)

of the cogeneration plant designs illustrated in figs. 1 and 2

Pe Plant design MW % % % % % external combustion Back-pressure steam turbine Extraction-condensation steam turbine 1-25 10-500 88 65 15 30 73 35 38 41 0.17 0.46 79 49 9 5 hI he ht hII(1) Iet hel, eq(2) IPE(2)

internal combustion Alternative prime movers with full heat recovery Alternative prime movers with high-temp. heat recovery only Gas turbine with simple heat recovery Gas turbine with afterburning Gas turbine with full steam-injection Combined cycle with back-pressure steam turbine Combined cycle with condensation and extraction steam turbine
(1) (2)

0.1-10 0.1-10 1-100 1-100 5-60 20-50 50-400

86 65 80 83 50 80 70

40 40 30 25 45 45 50

46 25 50 58 5 35 20

55 48 46 44 47 56 56

0.47 0.62 0.38 0.30 0.90 0.56 0.71

82 55 68 71 48 74 64

21 3 11 11 11 19 14

Calculations of hII are based on assumed values T0 15C and TQ 150C Calculations of hel, eq and IPE are based on assumed values he, s 53% and ht, s 90%, representative of the annual mean outputs of a large-scale combined cycle for separate production of electrical energy and an industrial boiler, respectively

the waste by-products of other processes and low-quality fuels can be used interchangeably. In practice, however, certain low-quality fuels (e.g. heavy oils, tar, lignite, peat, etc.) are often avoided because of emissions regulations and the consequent investments involved in treating the combustion products. This ability to admit low-cost fuels, together with the proven reliability and intrinsically good characteristics of the technology, played a decisive role in plant design choices up to the late 1980s, during which, in fact, open-cycle solutions (gas turbine and alternative prime movers) were relegated to a marginal role. Even the low ratio between electrical energy and the thermal energy produced in these systems was considered an advantage in those years, given that electricity markets were often in the hands of monopolies, which limited or prohibited marketing the cogenerated electrical energy to third parties, and moreover applied tariff conditions fees for services, which discouraged the sale of electricity to the grid. Modern cogeneration technology often favours choices different from classical steam cycle solutions. This, however, has not affected the very important role that steam turbines continue to play in cogeneration: not only are they still present in many existing plants, but they are also being adopted in new plants. Indeed,

there are important niches in the market in which the demand for steam cycle systems is high; apart from situations in which natural gas is unavailable, there are also numerous industries that produce fuels as by-products of industrial processes. A further, particularly noteworthy aspect is the enormous potential offered by the techniques of repowering the existing pool of steam-based cogeneration plants.
Steam turbines for cogeneration

In contrast to the other prime movers used for cogeneration (gas turbine and alternative prime movers), which are available in a range of commercial models whose technical characteristics and performance (capacity, pressure, temperature, power output, efficiency) are well-defined and generally not subject to modification for specific application requirements, steam turbines are normally custom-designed, although they generally use standard, modular components. It is therefore possible to design all the functional characteristics of such machines, in particular, the number of turbine steam inlets and outlets, the nominal steam flow rate through the various turbine sections, the steam pressures and temperatures at the turbine inflow points, the steam pressure at outflow. It

426

ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF HYDROCARBONS

INDUSTRIAL COGENERATION

should be recalled that in modern, advanced cycles, apart from the inflow of live steam, a reheater may be present. In fact, combined-cycle applications normally have two, or even three, steam inlets, as the better exploitation of the discharge gases implies the adoption of multi-level evaporative recovery boilers. It should also be recalled that the outflow temperature of the steam is determined by its expansion curve, and that if the degree of overheating the steam is greater than that required for thermal process use, tempering is required. The market offers an extremely wide and diversified range of products, both in terms of technological complexity and sophistication and electrical power output (from single-stage turbines with outputs of tens of kWe, to large, highly complex multiple-flow and multiple-unit assemblies, whose maximum capacities can exceed one million kWe).
Main plant designs

The most common cogeneration applications normally adopt the plant types illustrated in Fig. 1, which for the sake of simplicity can be classified into two categories. The first category is back-pressure turbines, simple and relatively compact units, due to the absence of the low-pressure section, whose main applications are in small-to-medium power outputs ( 25 MWe). The discharge steam from the turbine can be sent directly to the industrial process, which can return it, wholly or partly, to the cogeneration plant in the form of condensate. Alternatively, the steam can be made to transfer its heat to another fluid via a condenser. Such units may be pure back-pressure systems, in which case, the entire flow required by thermal process use traverses the entire series of turbine blading, or there may be an intermediate stage of steam extraction, in which case, the flow rates up- and down-stream of the
Fig. 3. Typical inlet steam conditions with varying plant capacities.

extraction point are different. In both cases, a strict, well-defined link exists between the thermal energy utilized to drive production processes and the electrical power generated, which means that operators of such cogeneration plants cannot vary the generation of electrical energy at their discretion, but must accept the value imposed by the thermal processes. This is shown by the straight line AP in Fig. 1 (top right), where point A represents the technical minimum, point P the condition of maximum load and the intermediate points the various operating conditions possible. The second category is made up of turbines with extraction (or bleeds) and condensation, units generally adopted in larger-scale plants (tens and possibly even hundreds of MWe), as opposed to back-pressure turbines. These allow for the possibility to tap steam and divert it to thermal uses (at the expense of electricity generation), as is shown by the line PD in Fig. 1 (lower right), which describes full load operations with varying degrees of flow extraction; point D represents no extraction at all, while at point P extraction is at a maximum. Therefore, the entire area underlying the discontinuous line APD represents the possible operating regimes. Going into more detail, apart from one or more steam extraction points, the unit also includes a low pressure section in which a fraction of the steam flow expands down to the pressure of condensation; while, on the one hand, this involves lower total efficiency and a greater complexity of the unit, on the other, it makes it possible to regulate systems operations over a broad range, which allows plant managers to optimize the plants economic (and/or energy) efficiency at all times.
Steam extraction methods

Tapping steam from the turbine can be carried out in two main ways, either controlled or uncontrolled.
steam turbine flow rate F
0 45 91 136

inlet steam conditions bar C psig

t/h
182 227 273

129 / 538 101 / 510 87.2 / 482 59.7 / 440 42.4 / 399 28.6 / 343 17.5 / 260

1,800 / 1,000 1,450 / 950 1,250 / 900 850 / 825 600 / 750 400 / 650 250 / 500

100

200

300

400

500

600

1,000 lb/h

VOLUME III / NEW DEVELOPMENTS: ENERGY, TRANSPORT, SUSTAINABILITY

427

POWER GENERATION FROM FOSSIL RESOURCES

Controlled extraction is required when the steam pressure must be maintained at certain values dictated by process use, which moreover exhibits varying flow requirements. In such cases, it is necessary to fit a valve between the stages up- and down-stream of each controlled extraction. The valve serves to regulate steam flow area of the control stage downstream of the extraction. Of course, this adds greater complexity and expense to the unit, but the choice may an obligatory one, if, as is often the case in industrial applications, the process use cannot tolerate pressure variations. In uncontrolled extraction, the steam is tapped at a specific point between two stages. Naturally, the flow rate of the extracted steam can be regulated via a valve fitted on the collecting tubes, but the conditions of the extracted steam, in particular its pressure, depend entirely on its expansion and cannot thus be varied for the process use. Whether controlled or not, more than one steam extraction can be carried out, since cogeneration plants often feed two (or more) steam circuits at different pressures. Moreover, it is common practice to extract steam for use by the deaerator and, in plants of a certain size, other (uncontrolled) bleeds are used to feed surface exchangers in the feed-water preheating line, both at low pressure (upstream from the deaerator) and at high pressure (downstream of the deaerator).
Steam-turbine operating conditions

As already mentioned, the conditions under which steam turbines operate vary widely; in turbines fed by conventional steam generators, the conditions of the steam at the inlet are chosen so as to optimize the systems technical-economic efficiency, which leads to the indicative values shown in Fig. 3; pressures and temperatures increase with the size of the unit. Although a number of promising proposals have been advanced to push steam conditions to hypercritical pressures and extremely high temperatures, to date, none have found practical application.

5.2.3 Plants with internal combustion prime movers

Alternative prime movers

Alternative prime movers are the most widespread combustion engines in small power-output applications, from a few kWe up to several MWe. As in the case of gas turbines, recent developments in these technologies have made great strides forward in terms of performance and reliability. Their initial field of application was vehicle drive systems, whence only subsequently was it extended to stationary applications.

The classification of such engines depends on the type of thermodynamic cycle exploited: the Otto cycle, or controlled ignition engine, in which combustion takes place at approximately constant volume following an initiating spark (by a spark plug); and the Diesel cycle, or spontaneous ignition engine, in which combustion occurs at approximately constant pressure without the need for initiation by a separate device. To this end, the temperature of the comburent (air) within the cylinder must be particularly high, which is obtainable by virtue of the higher compression ratios of Diesel engines compared to Otto cycle engines, in which, on the other hand, high compression ratios are to be avoided, so as not to provoke the phenomenon of uncontrolled spontaneous detonation (engine knocking). As far as utilizable fuels are concerned, whereas mainly liquid fuels are used in drive applications, in stationary units, natural gas has earned widespread adoption by virtue of its inherently clean characteristics, which enable a significant reduction of emissions, as well as maintenance costs, and promote long engine lifetimes. Adapting existing Otto cycle engines to use natural gas does not call for any significant structural modifications, apart from the obvious changes necessary to the feed system. Adapting Diesel engines, on the other hand, calls for rather more substantial changes because the very low flammability of methane (the main constituent of natural gas) makes it quite difficult to trigger self-ignition. Thus, it is often necessary to resort to dual fuel solutions, that is, injecting a small amount (typically 5-10%) of diesel, together with the natural gas to help initiate combustion. The major advantage of alternative prime movers for stationary applications is the high electrical efficiencies attainable (ranging from 35% for capacities of a few hundred kWe to 45% and beyond for several MWe Diesel-based designs), which are clearly superior to those obtainable with steam or gas turbines of equal power. Some further positive features of stationary applications of this technology are: a) operating flexibility (rapid start-up, ability to regulate the load in a wide range of power output); b) high reliability, mostly due to the great deal of past experience with drive applications; c) modularity of constituent components; the number of cylinders can be varied as a function of the desired power capacity, making the specific cost (euro/kWe) of these machines relatively independent of the nominal power output; d ) widespread availability of maintenance services and personnel, thanks to the large number of automotive and naval versions requiring similar upkeep procedures. On the other hand, some of the negative aspects to be taken into account are:

428

ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF HYDROCARBONS

INDUSTRIAL COGENERATION

Higher maintenance costs than other stationary technologies; indeed, the rather high maintenance requirements are one of the main reasons that often make other technologies based on turbines preferable for power outputs over a few MWe . Rather high emissions of all the major pollutants regulated by law (CO, HC, NOx and, for Diesels, particulate matter); in recent years significant advances have been made in this field involving modifying the combustion process (lean mixtures, stratified charges, etc.), as well as fitting pollution control devices to the cylinder exhaust system (three-way catalytic converters, oxidizing reactors, particulate filters, etc.). For years, the drive towards ever-lower emissions has been the main stimulus for the technological evolution of these machines; in applications that call for NOx emissions comparable to those of the cleanest gas turbines, processes of catalytic denitrification (SCR, Selective Catalytic Reduction) are adopted. Fig. 2 A (top) shows the layout of a simplified cogeneration plant utilizing an alternative prime mover. A positive feature of all plants with internal combustion engines (with the exception of combinedcycle plants with a steam section) is that heat recovery does not, in any way, compromise the generation of electricity: in fact, heat that would otherwise be dissipated is put to good use. There are four potential sources of heat for cogeneration: Exhaust gases, which represent the thermodynamically most valuable source in that it is available at relatively high temperatures, ranging from approximately 400 to 500C. In contrast to all other heat recovery methods, heat from exhaust gases enables steam to be produced at medium pressures. Moreover, combustion products account for 30-35% of the heat contained in the fuel. As a result of the absence of sulphur, the use of natural gas, permits maximum possible recovery, cooling the exhaust gases down to 100-110C, without the formation of corrosive acid condensates. Cooling water, which accounts for 10-20% of the total fuel heat content, a fraction that is, however, made available at temperatures below 100 C (to avoid pressurizing the cooling circuit). Its recovery clearly cannot be exploited to produce steam, but the heat is instead used to produce warm water. Lubricating oil also supplies low temperature heat, at 75-90C, and accounts for 4 to 7% of the heat input. Supercharger air is available only in the case of turbochargers engines, which, however, are used in all high-power applications. To reduce the work necessary for compression in the cylinder, the air

from the supercharger system is normally cooled to 60-80C; the quantity of heat recoupable through this cooling process is in the same order of magnitude as for lubrication oil. In conclusion, a substantial fraction of the recoupable heat is available at relatively low temperatures. However, this is not a disadvantage for applications that require water at relatively contained temperatures (for example, distributed heating networks). On the other hand, it can significantly compromise the energy performance of alternative prime movers in many industrial applications, in which production processes usually require steam alone and not warm water. With regards to operating range, alternative prime movers belong to the class of so-called single-degree-of-freedom systems, by which the only regulation possible is on the electrical power output; once the power output has been fixed, the useful heat produced can only be varied negatively by dissipating into the environment a part of the heat otherwise recoupable. This situation is shown in Fig. 2 A (top right) by the line AP (A, at the technical minimum; P, at full load), a situation analogous to gas turbines.
Gas turbine plants

Simple-cycle gas turbines, whether industrial or aeroderivative, are clearly well-suited to cogeneration applications; heat from the exhaust gases is technically easy to recover and use in industrial processes (or for other thermal applications), either via a recovery boiler or, in particular cases, through direct utilization of the exhaust itself (for example, in high-temperature industrial furnaces). In the case of steam production, the recovery boiler has characteristics similar to those used in combined

drum bypass

turbogas

fresh-air firing (optional) afterburner thermal user

Fig. 4. Schematic illustration

of a simple recovery gas turbine cogeneration plant, with systems for regulating heat output (exhaust bypass and boiler afterburner).

VOLUME III / NEW DEVELOPMENTS: ENERGY, TRANSPORT, SUSTAINABILITY

429

POWER GENERATION FROM FOSSIL RESOURCES

cycles. Due to the high temperature of the exhaust gases, gas turbines enable production of steam with highly desirable characteristics. It must, however, be borne in mind that the quantity of steam produced (and as a result, plant performance) falls, albeit moderately, with an increase in pressure (and therefore evaporation temperature). This is because such an increase is accompanied by a corresponding increase in the temperature of the flue gases and therefore a greater loss of heat into the atmosphere. In this situation, it should be recalled that the heat lost with the exhaust gases is particularly high in gas turbines, which operate with a large excess of air to limit the inflow temperature to the turbine. Depending on specific usage needs, the steam can be generated at different pressure levels, producing a thermal exchange that enables the exhaust gas temperatures to be lowered. In the event that the adopted heat carrier fluids do not undergo a phase change, such as water or diathermic oil (less frequent in industrial processes), the configuration is even simpler, consisting of a single bank of tubes running counter to the gas flow. Just as in the case of plants with alternative prime movers, the recovery of heat does not alter the performance of gas turbine systems, in terms of electrical energy production, with the exception of a pressure drop in the recovery boiler, which leads to a modest back-pressure at the turbine exhaust.

sdes Qu engine regulation line with full afterburning smin

des afterburning zone

The simpler plant layout (gas turbine-recovery boiler) involves a strict coupling of the electrical and thermal energy outputs (see again Fig. 2 A, centre right). Such systems are therefore not amenable to the flexible management required of cogeneration plants, which are often called upon to satisfy variable demands for electrical and thermal power over time. However, it is possible to adopt more complex designs, which provide increased operating flexibility; one example is represented in Fig. 4, which includes the following additions compared to the simplified layout in Fig. 2 A: A diverter, inserted into the exhaust gas duct connecting the gas turbine to the recovery boiler. As its name implies, the diverter can direct a part of, or even all, the gases directly to the external environment through a bypass flue, thereby regulating the quantity of heat transmitted to the steam. Afterburning system, capable of producing an additional quantity of heat above that available from the gas turbine exhaust gases. Afterburning, which is only possible due to the high oxygen content of the gases discharged from the turbine, yields greater thermal efficiencies and lowers investment costs (by exploiting the structure and exchange surfaces of the recovery boiler itself). Moreover, such systems have much more rapid response times than conventional steam generators. Fresh air firing fan that drives fresh air to the afterburning nozzles, with the purpose of maintaining thermal production in the event of gas turbine outages. Such modifications yield the operating range shown in Fig. 5 in the plot of electrical energy vs. heat, in which the following curves are shown: Normal operating line, which joins points des and min; the first point indicates the units nominal operation (full power), the second, the technical

drum

min

engine regulation line without afterburning

turbogas

zone with heat waste E

Fig. 5. Operating range, in the plane of electricity vs. heat, of a gas turbine cogeneration plant with afterburning.

afterburner steam injection line feed water Fig. 6. Schematic illustration of a gas turbine thermal user

cogeneration plant with steam injection.

430

ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF HYDROCARBONS

INDUSTRIAL COGENERATION

Qu

line with full afterburning

line with full afterburning sdes full load line at variable steam injection

smin afterburning zone des

smax min operating line without steam injection

operating zone

max E

Fig. 7. Operating range, in the plane of electricity

vs. heat, of a gas turbine cogeneration plant with steam injection and afterburning.

minimum. As the electrical power output falls, there is a corresponding decrease in the useful heat extracted by the recovery boiler, independent of any regulation of the gas turbine. Even though gas turbines could operate normally even at null net electrical output, modern gas turbines fitted with low-emissions burners are subject to regulations on specific emissions, which limit their operating range to the minimum output at which stable conditions of premixed combustion can be ensured. For powers below the technical minimum (or in the event of gas turbine outages), the heat supply can be ensured by the fresh-air system, which is operated with the diverter completely isolated from the gas turbine. Line of maximum afterburning, which joins points sdes and smin and represents the technical limits of the system, due to the limitations imposed on afterburner outflow gas temperatures by the structural characteristics of the recovery boiler (HRSG, Heat Recovery Steam Generator), which cannot normally sustain the high flame temperatures typical of conventional boilers. This limit is usually reached before complete combustion of the oxygen present in the turbine exhaust gases (short of a margin for O2 content, which must, however, always be maintained to avoid significant production of CO). The two lines described above define the area in the plane of electrical energy vs. heat (or electrical power vs. thermal power) in which the cogeneration

system can operate without heat dissipation whereas the area below the normal operating line represents the operating conditions attainable by discharging some heat into the environment. A gas turbine with steam injection (Fig. 6) is a further possible modification to the layout of a simple recovery gas turbine plant which provides a further degree of operational freedom; instead of being sent for thermal process use, a part (or all, if technically feasible) of the steam produced in the recovery boiler can be injected into the combustor, depending on whether priority is to be given to the production of heat or electrical energy. This allows for far greater flexibility in operations compared to the preceding case, as shown in Fig. 7, which refers back to the system illustrated in Fig. 2 A (lower right). The normal operating line extends into the line des-max, which represents the operation of the gas turbine maintained at maximum power, with varying degrees of steam injection, from zero to the maximum (in the example, assumed to coincide with the entire flow produced by the HRSG). Point max represents operations in the case of production of electrical energy alone (all the steam produced is injected into the combustors and there is therefore no production of heat), while the point des indicates when the entire steam flow is directed to thermal usage, and the gas turbine functions as a simple cycle. The line joining the two points represents all the intermediate solutions. The line min-des now represents gas turbine operations in the absence of steam injection; the area under the line

line with maximum afterburning with ST due to line with full steam flow rate increase afterburning sdes smin afterburning zone des

Qu

line with GT at full load and variable steam extraction

min

operating line GT ST with maximum steam extraction operating zone max E smax

Fig. 8. Operating range, in the plane of electricity

vs. heat, of a combined cycle cogeneration plant with gas turbine and extraction-condensation steam turbine with afterburning.

VOLUME III / NEW DEVELOPMENTS: ENERGY, TRANSPORT, SUSTAINABILITY

431

POWER GENERATION FROM FOSSIL RESOURCES

Fig. 9. Heat balance consequent to repowering a pure back-pressure steam cogeneration plant via conversion to combined cycle operations. F, available power; G, mass flow; p, pressure; T, temperature.

F 36,345 kW (h 0.9)

G 12.6 kg/s p 48 bar T 420C

G 12.6 kg/s p 54 bar T 153C

G 1.7 kg/s p 4.9 bar

total electricity produced 4,631 kW net electricity produced 4,404 kW G 12.45 kg/s p 5 bar T 187C thermal users G 10.75 kg/s 27,040 (0) kW G 10.9 kg/s make-up T 75C

existing back-pressure plant A

total electricity produced 21,134 kW net electricity produced F 61,065 kW 20,934 kW

p 40 bar

p 5.1 bar

T 121C

gas turbine LM2500

G 69.9 kg/s p 1.04 bar T 536C

total electricity produced 3,050 kW net electricity produced 2,842 kW

G 9.35 kg/s p 37 bar T 420C

make-up thermal users 27,040 (0) kW G 10.6 kg/s T 206C

G 9.19 kg/s p 5 bar T 213C

G 1.41 kg/s p 5 bar T 160C

repowering: combined cycle with back-pressure B

total electricity produced 26,350 kW net electricity produced 26,150 kW p 50 bar p 5.1 bar T 106C

F 76,506 kW

gas turbine LM2500

G 86.9 kg/s p 1.04 bar T 533C G 214 kg/s p 5 bar T 200C G (G p T 2.45 kg/s 12.9 kg/s) 0.11 bar 47.7C

total electricity produced 5,840 (11,145) kW net electricity produced 5,716 (11,030) kW

G 10.97 kg/s p 46 bar T 480C

make-up

G 10.76 kg/s p 5 bar T 226C

thermal users 27,040 (0) kW G 10.45 (0) kg/s p 5 bar T 222C

repowering: combined cycle with condensation and extraction C

432

ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF HYDROCARBONS

INDUSTRIAL COGENERATION

min-des-max is no longer characterized by any thermal dissipation, but its points can be obtained by suitable regulation of the unit, both in terms of fuel flow and injected steam; the system therefore becomes considerably more efficient at low thermal loads. The injection of steam, which enables low emissions to be achieved with diffusion combustion systems, offers the further advantage of extending the field of operations into the zones of low electrical power output. Similar to the preceding case, the line of maximum afterburning is extended into the sdes-smax, that is, from no steam injection to maximum injection. If, on the one hand, the injection of steam introduces the above-mentioned operational advantages, it should also be recalled that it significantly penalizes the potential energy advantages of cogeneration. In fact, releasing the reinjected steam into the atmosphere significantly increases the loss of heat to the stack. The effective ability to achieve significant energy savings over the course of a year therefore depends on resorting to steam injection only during limited periods of the year, when low thermal demand is accompanied by high need for electrical energy.
Combined-cycle plants

Combined cycles are finding ever more widespread application in large-scale plants (electrical, though not necessarily thermal); combined gas-steam cycle plants, in fact, can be managed as cogeneration systems if some hot fluid (steam, or less frequently water) is extracted for other uses from the steam turbine and/or the recovery boiler. Although there is no reason that the steam cycle cannot be simply a modified back-pressure turbine (see again Fig. 2 B, top), a more widespread solution is the adoption of an extraction and condensation system (see again Fig. 2 B, bottom), which guarantees greater operational flexibility; the possibility to adjust the degree of condensation (partial or total) allows the plant to produce electrical energy economically, by virtue of the high efficiencies typical of combined cycles, even during periods of low or zero thermal demand.

A qualitative illustration of the operating range of a combined-cycle cogeneration system in the plane of electrical energy vs. heat is presented in Fig. 8, which refers back to the system shown in Fig. 2 B (lower right); the line min-des now represents the production of useful energy with maximum steam extraction at varying gas turbine loads; the electrical energy produced also includes the contribution of the steam turbine, whose power output varies with the steam flow rate from the recovery boiler. The line des-max represents the operating conditions with the gas turbine at full load, with varying steam extraction, which goes to zero at point max, where the plant operates at full condensation. The points below these two lines represent varying combinations of gas turbine load and steam extraction, which, as in the preceding case, do not involve any dissipation of heat discharge from the gas turbine through the bypass flue. Fig. 8 shows the operating range achievable with afterburning; apart from the increase in useful heat, afterburning yields an increase in the production of electrical energy by virtue of the greater steam flow to the turbine. In contrast to simple-recovery gas turbine plants, the pressure at which the steam is required influences the generation of electrical energy because the steam subtracted from the expansion yields power that varies with the extraction pressure. The fundamental reason underlying the advantages for cogeneration of combined-cycle plants over its steam-cycle alternatives is their high electrical efficiency, which provides significant energy savings and cost reductions, even when there is limited demand for thermal energy. These advantages are particularly evident if one compares the performance of a combined-cycle cogeneration plant with that of an existing steam plant that has been repowered. Consider the example in Fig. 9, which shows the heat balances attainable by transforming a smallsize, back-pressure steam plant (fig. 9 A, Pe 4.4 MWe) into a combined-cycle system, under two different hypotheses: maintaining the back-pressure

Table 2. Power output ranges and characteristic indices (indicative mean values) of the cogeneration

plant designs illustrated in Fig. 9

Pe, TG Case A B C MW 0 20.93 26.10 Pe, TV MW 4.404 2.84 5.72 Pe, tot MW 4.40 23.78 31.82 Pc MW 36.34 61.06 76.51 Qu MW 27.04 27.04 27.04 hI % 86.53 83.22 76.93 he % 12.12 38.94 41.59 ht % 74.41 44.28 35.34 hII % 35.86 53.07 52.86 0.14 0.47 0.54 Iet hel,eq % 69.95 76.66 68.48 5.25 18.48 15.06 IPE

VOLUME III / NEW DEVELOPMENTS: ENERGY, TRANSPORT, SUSTAINABILITY

433

POWER GENERATION FROM FOSSIL RESOURCES

steam cycle with the same steam turbine, and adding an aeroderivate gas turbine of about 20 MWe capacity (Fig. 9 B); adopting an extractioncondensation steam cycle, which allows for more flexible management of the plant according to varying thermal demand; this involves fitting a different steam turbine and a larger gas turbine (Fig. 9 C, about 26 MWe). Comparing the various energy indices under the same hypotheses adopted in Table 1 leads to the results shown in Table 2. Given equal thermal output for process use, the results are that: both the combined-cycle solutions increase the plant overall net power output (by a factor of 5.4 and 7.2, respectively); the combined-cycle solution with a pure back-pressure steam turbine yields the maximum energy savings index, which is nonetheless very high even for the extractioncondensation system; the total and equivalent electrical efficiencies, whose values are high even for the initial arrangements, are also very high in the combined-cycle solutions. While the advantages of combined-cycle solutions in terms of energy efficiency are indisputable, the economy of repowering operations depends on many factors, in particular, on the availability of high-quality fuel to feed the gas turbine and the possibility of profitably marketing the electrical energy produced.

Bibliography
Boyce M.P. (2002) Handbook for cogeneration and combined cycle power plants, New York, ASME. Church E.F. (1950) Steam turbines, New York, McGraw-Hill. Consonni S. et al. (1989) Optimization of cogeneration systems operation. Part A: Prime movers modelization, in: Proceedings of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Cogen-Turbo international symposium on turbomachinery, combined-cycle technologies and cogeneration, Nice (France), 30 August-1 September, 313322. Consonni S. et al. (1989) Optimization of cogeneration systems operation. Part B: Solution algorithm and examples of

optimum operating strategies, in: Proceedings of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Cogen-Turbo international symposium on turbomachinery, combinedcycle technologies and cogeneration, Nice (France), 30 August-1 September, 323-331. EC (European Community) (2004) Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the promotion of cogeneration based on a useful heat demand in the internal energy market and amending, Directive 92/42/EEC, 2004/8/EC. Horlock J.H. (1987) Cogeneration. Combined Heat and Power (CHP), Oxford, Pergamon Press. Kehlhofer R. et al. (1999) Combined-cycle gas & steam turbine power plants, Tulsa (OK), PennWell. Klimstra J., Hattar C. (2006) Performance of natural gas. Fueled engine heading towards their optimum, in: Proceedings of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Internal Combustion Engine division. Spring technical conference, Aachen (Germany), 7-11 May, ASME ICES2006-1379. Lozza G. (2006) Turbine a gas e cicli combinati, Bologna, Progetto Leonardo. Macchi E. (1993) Power generation (including cogeneration), in: Emerging natural gas technologies: implications and applications. Proceedings of the international conference, Lisbon (Portugal), October, 85-104. Macchi E. (1997) Autoproduzione e cogenerazione industriale: storia e prospettive, Energia, 3, 50-61. Orlando J.A. (1984) Cogeneration technology handbook, Rockville (MD), Government Institutes. Petchers N. (2003) Combined heating, cooling & power handbook. Technologies & applications. An integrated approach to energy resources optimization, Liburn (GA), The Fairmont. Roncato J.P., Macchi E. (2000) Report of study group 7.2: comparison of medium or large scale CHP and combined cycles, in various countries, in: Proceedings of World Gas Conference 2000, Nice (France), June, 55-82. Sirchis J. (1990) Combined production of heat and power (cogeneration), London, Elsevier.

Ennio Macchi Giovanni Lozza

Dipartimento di Energetica Politecnico di Milano Milano, Italy

434

ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF HYDROCARBONS