Performance comparison of three trigeneration systems using organic

rankine cycles
Fahad A. Al-Sulaiman
a, b,
*
, Feridun Hamdullahpur
b
, Ibrahim Dincer
c
a
Mechanical Engineering Department, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
b
Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering Department, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
c
Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Ontario Institute of Technology Oshawa, ON, Canada
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 16 November 2010
Received in revised form
21 May 2011
Accepted 4 June 2011
Keywords:
Combined cooling heating and power
Trigeneration
Organic rankine cycle
Solid oxide fuel cell
Biomass
Solar energy
a b s t r a c t
In this paper, energetic performance comparison of three trigeneration systems is presented. The
systems considered are SOFC-trigeneration, biomass-trigeneration, and solar-trigeneration systems. This
study compares the performance of the systems considered when there is only electrical power and the
efciency improvement of these systems when there is trigeneration. Different key output parameters
are examined: energy efciency, net electrical power, electrical to heating and cooling ratios, and (GHG)
GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions. This study shows that the SOFC-trigeneration system has the highest
electrical efciency among the three systems. Alternatively, when trigeneration is used, the efciencies of
all three systems considered increase considerably. The maximum trigeneration efciency of the SOFC-
trigeneration system is around 76% while it is around 90% for the biomass-trigeneration system. On the
other hand, the maximum trigeneration efciencies of the solar-trigeneration system is around 90% for
the solar mode, 45% for storage and storage mode, and 41% for the storage mode. In addition, this study
shows that the emissions of CO
2
in kg per MWh of electrical power are high for the biomass-
trigeneration and SOFC-trigeneration systems. However, by considering the emissions per MWh of tri-
generation, their values drop to less than one fourth.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Most of conventional power plants with single prime movers
have an overall thermal efciency less than 39% [1]. That is, more
than 60% of the energy produced is lost as a waste heat, which is
considered a huge amount of energy. On the other hand, most of
the current power plants depend on fossil fuel as a source of energy.
Therefore, nding a more efcient systemis becoming more crucial
than ever, especially with the depletion of fossil fuel and increment
of the GHG emissions.
One of the potential efcient power plant technologies is a tri-
generation thermal system. A trigeneration system is dened as
combined cooling, heating, and power production simultaneously
from the same energy source [1]. In a trigeneration system, the
waste heat from, for instance, an internal combustion engine is
used for heating and cooling energy demands through a heat
exchanger and single-effect absorption chiller, respectively.
One of the potential prime movers for trigeneration plants
which has not received attention by researchers is (ORC) ORC
(organic Rankine cycle) [1]. The ORC is characterized by its ability to
utilize a low- or medium-temperature heat source through its
evaporator to produce electrical power. The waste heat from the
ORC is usually lost through its condenser. This heat can be utilized
by replacing the condenser with a heat exchanger to obtain heating
energy and with a single-effect absorption chiller to obtain cooling
energy. With the utilization of the waste heat, as in this case
described above, the systemis called trigeneration system. As it can
be noticed from this description and as discussed later, with the
utilizing of the waste heat, the thermal efciency of the systemwill
increase considerably.
Several studies have examined different prime mover for tri-
generation plants. A comprehensive review based on trigenera-
tion plants prime movers was conducted by Al-Sulaiman et al. [1].
In their study, it was observed that there are several studies that
used internal combustion engines as prime movers; however,
there are fewer studies on gas turbines and microturbines. Alter-
natively, there is less research on the other three prime movers:
fuel cells, Rankine cycles, and Stirling engines. In terms of analysis
type, most of the studies have been conducted using energy and
economic analyses. In contrast, less attention has been given to
* Corresponding author. Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering Depart-
ment, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada. Tel.: 1 613 8843322;
fax: 1 613 5260583.
E-mail addresses: fahadas@kfupm.edu.sa (F.A. Al-Sulaiman), fhamdullahpur@
uwaterloo.ca (F. Hamdullahpur), Ibrahim.Dincer@uoit.ca (I. Dincer).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Energy
j ournal homepage: www. el sevi er. com/ l ocat e/ energy
0360-5442/$ e see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.003
Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754
environmental, exergy, and exergoeconomic analyses of trigen-
eration plants.
Lai et al. [2] discussed different process modications to
enhance a trigeneration system feasibility and exibility, and
demonstrated some design considerations of a trigeneration
system such that it can satisfy the periodical demand variations. In
another study, Schicktanz et al. [3] conducted sensitivity analysis to
examine the inuence of some selected parameters on the primary
energy savings and economics of combined heating and power and
combined cooling and power system modes. The authors recom-
mended some minimumoperation hours for a trigeneration system
to be economic.
A few studies examined the feasibility of using trigeneration
plants based on ORC, e.g [4e6]. Al-Sulaiman et al. [4] examined the
feasibility of using trigeneration plant based on ORC and solid oxide
fuel cells. It was found that the maximumnet electrical efciency is
46% and when trigeneration is used the trigeneration efciency
increases to 74%. In another study, Rentizelas et al. [5] studied the
potential economic of using two trigeneration plants. The rst tri-
generation plant is based on an ORC and the second one is based on
a gasication subsystem. In their study, it was shown that the
gasication option is a better option since it has a higher electrical
efciency. In a different study, Al-Sulaiman et al. [6] studied a tri-
generation system using biomass combustor and ORC. The authors
found that the electrical energy efciency is around 13%; alterna-
tively, when trigeneration is used the efciency increases to
approximately 88%.
Inthe current study, a comparison of three potential trigeneration
systems, under thermoeconomic optimization conditions, is con-
ducted through energy analysis. That is, in this study, the energy
analysis is conducted after identifying thermoeconomic optimized
conditions of some selected operating parameters. The potential
trigeneration systems considered are SOFC-trigeneration, biomass-
trigeneration, and solar-trigeneration systems. These three systems
are distinguished by their heat input source as described later. The
systems considered are modeled to be able to produce 500 kW of
electricity. The SFOC-trigeneration and biomass-trigeneration
systems considered in this study are different from [4,6] by
considering the energy analysis of these two systems under ther-
moeconomic optimization conditions. This study compares the
performance of these three systems considering key output param-
eters: energy efciency, net electrical power, electrical to heating
ratio, electrical to cooling ratio, and GHG emissions. This study helps
in identifying which system under specic operating conditions has
a better energetic performance as comparedtothe other two systems
all under thermoeconomic optimization conditions.
2. Systems description
ORC can be used as a prime mover for a trigeneration plant or it
can be integrated with another prime mover. In this study, three
systems are examined. These systems are combined SOFC with
ORC, combined biomass combustor with ORC, and combined solar
collectors with ORC. Schematic diagrams of these systems are
shown in Figs. 1e3. SOFC has a potential application in the future
since it has relatively high efciency and low air pollution as
compared with conventional fossil fuel systems. Therefore, a tri-
generation systembased on SOFC and ORC is selected. Biomass and
solar energy are renewable energy sources that can be integrated
with ORCs. Recent potential research that examines the feasibility
of these two renewable energy sources is on ongoing. Therefore,
trigeneration systems based on biomass and solar collectors are
selected in this study.
Fig. 1. Schematic of the SOFC-trigeneration system.
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5742
The three systems examined consist of an ORC as a prime mover
to produce the electrical power, a single-effect absorption chiller to
supply the cooling load, and a heat exchanger to supply the heating
load. It can be noticed that in these systems there are two cycles:
ORC and cooling chilling cycles. The ow stream in the ORC is
described rst and then the ow stream in the chilling cycle.
The ow in the ORC according to Fig. 1 is described as follows.
The uid exits the desorber (state 1) as saturated liquid. Next, the
pump increases the pressure of the saturated liquid (state 2). Then,
the working uid enters the evaporator in a liquid state and exits as
vapor (state 3). Next, the organic uid expands through the turbine
to produce the mechanical energy. The mechanical energy is used
to rotate the electrical generator which is connected to the turbine
shaft. Then, the working uid exits the turbine (state 4) and
supplies heat to the heating-process heat exchanger. The heating-
process heat exchanger rejects heat to supply the heating load.
After that, the organic uid enters the desorber (state 5) as satu-
rated vapor. The desorber absorbs heat to supply the cooling load
for the single-effect absorption chiller. Then, the organic uid exits
from the desorber again as saturated liquid (state 1).
The rejected heat to the desorber is the input energy to the
single-effect absorption chiller. The ow streams transport
between the components of this chilling cycle as either water or
a mixture of lithium-bromide (LieBr) and water. As a result of the
input heat into the desorber, water evaporates from the mixture of
the LieBr and water, and enters the condenser (state 6). In the
condenser, the heat is rejected. Therefore, the water cools down
and exits the condenser as saturated liquid (state 7). After that, the
water is throttled and enters the evaporator (state 8) at low
temperature. The evaporator supplies the cooling load. Next, water
exits the evaporator and enters the absorber (state 9). The water
mixes with the mixture of the LieBr and water. The mixture exits
the absorber (state 10) and is pumped to the heat exchanger (state
11). Then, the mixture exits fromthe heat exchanger and enters the
desorber (state 12). The mixture is heated in the desorber and part
of the water into the mixture evaporates and exits the desorber
(state 6). Next, as a result of the water evaporation, the mixture
exits the desorber with a higher LieBr concentration into the
mixture to enter the heat exchanger (state 13) to gain heat. After
that, it exits the heat exchanger (state 14) and is throttled to the
absorber (state 15). The input data for the ORC and single-effect
absorption chiller is given in Table 1.
Since there is a change in the solar radiation in 24 h of operation,
the solar-trigeneration system considered in this study is assumed
to operate in three modes. These three modes are selected based on
the change in solar radiation densities, as presented in [7] for full
tracking of the solar collectors for the sun. The rst mode is from
6 am to 8 am and from 4 pm to 6 pm. In this mode, only the solar
collectors are working and there is no energy storage. That is, all the
solar energy collected is used to operate the solar-trigeneration
system. This mode is called the solar mode. The second mode is
from 8 am to 4 pm. In this mode, part of the solar energy is used to
operate the solar-trigeneration system and the other part of the
solar energy is stored in the hot storage tank. This mode is called
the solar and storage mode. The third mode is from6 pmto 6 am. In
this mode, only the storage system is working. In this mode, the
Fig. 2. Schematic of the biomass-trigeneration system.
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5743
input energy into the solar-trigeneration system is from the energy
stored in the hot tank storage. This mode is called the storage mode.
3. Fluid selection for the organic rankine cycle
Many types of organic uids can be used for ORC. However, only
the organic uids that operate with a high temperature are efcient
for ORC. A typical working uid that has a high critical temperature
and, thus, high ORC efciency is n-octane. Therefore, this uid is
selected for the ORC [8,9]. The properties of n-octane are shown in
Table 2.
4. Model development
Several assumptions are made to carry out the analysis. It is
assumed that the system is at steady state and pressure change is
neglected except in the pumps, blowers, organic cycle turbine and
valves. Other assumptions are discussed below.
Fig. 3. Schematic of the solar-trigeneration system.
Table 1
Input data for the ORC and single-effect absorption chiller.
ORC Organic cycle turbine efciency 80%
Organic cycle pump efciency 80%
Effectiveness of the organic cycle evaporator 85%
Baseline turbine inlet pressure 2000 kPa
Organic pump inlet temperature 365 K
Electrical generator efciency 95%
Electrical motor efciency 95%
ORC turbine inlet temperature (baseline) 549 K
ORC pump inlet pressure (baseline) 36 kPa
Chilling cycle Overall heat transfer coefcient of the desorber 70 kW/K
Overall heat transfer coefcient of the condenser 80 kW/K
Overall heat transfer coefcient of the evaporator 95 kW/K
Overall heat transfer coefcient of the absorber 75 kW/K
Effectiveness of solution heat exchanger 70%
Table 2
Thermodynamic properties of n-octane.
Substance name n-octane
Mol. formula C8H18
Mol. weight 114.231
Freeze point (
o
C) 56.77
Boiling point (
o
C) 125.68
Crit. temp. (
o
C) 295.68
Crit. pressure (bar) 24.86
Crit. volume (cm
3
/mol) 492.1
Crit. density (g/cm
3
) 0.2322
Crit. compressibility 0.259
Accentric factor 0.396
Source: [23].
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5744
4.1. Single-effect absorption chiller modeling
The performance analysis applied to the single-effect absorption
chiller is similar to that used by Herold et al. [10]. The assumptions
used in the single-effect absorption chiller are
Pure water is used as a refrigerant (states 6e9).
The liquid states at states 7, 10, and 13 are considered saturated
liquid.
The water at state 9 is saturated vapor.
The pressures in the desorber and condenser are equivalent.
The pressures in the evaporator and the absorber are equivalent.
The analysis of the single-effect absorption chiller is validated
with Herold et al. [10], as shown in Fig. 4. The gure shows the
coefcient of performance and evaporator heat transfer versus the
desorber inlet temperature. The gure shows a very good agree-
ment between the current single-effect absorption chiller model
and the Herold et al. model.
4.2. SOFC modeling
In this subsection the SOFC modeling is presented. The
assumptions for this SOFC model are [11]
Both the air and fuel ows have the same temperature at the
inlet of the SOFC.
Both the air and fuel ows have the same temperature at the
exit of the SOFC.
The air that enters the SOFC consists of 79% N
2
and 21% O
2
.
The gas mixture at the exit of the fuel channel is at chemical
equilibrium.
The radiation heat transfer between gas channels and solid
structure is negligible.
Contact resistances are negligible.
The chemical equilibriumequations that occur within the anode
and cathode of the fuel cell are
CH
4
H
2
O4CO 3H
2
(1)
CO H
2
O4H
2
CO
2
(2)
The overall electrochemical equilibrium equation is
H
2

1
2
O
2
/H
2
O (3)
The cell voltage produced by the cell is the difference between
the reversible cell voltage and the sum of the voltage loss. It is
dened as
V
c
V
N
V
loss
(4)
where V
c,
V
N
and V
loss
are cell voltage, reversible cell voltage, and
voltage loss, respectively. The equation of the reversible cell voltage
is derived from Nernst equation and is dened as
V
N

DG
f
2$F
R$
T
FC;exit
2$F
$ln
_
x
H2O;27
x
H2;27
$

x
O2;19
p
_
(5)
where G
f
is the Gibbs free energy, R is the universal gas constant
(8.314 J/[mole-K]), and F is the Faraday constant (96,485 coulombs/
[g-mole]).
The V
loss
(voltage loss) is the sum of three voltage losses, which
include the ohmic, activation polarization, and concentration los-
ses. That is, the voltage loss is dened as
V
loss
V
ohm
V
act
V
cont
(6)
where V
ohm
is dened by Bossel [12] as follows:
V
ohm
R
contact
r
a
$L
a
r
c
$L
c
r
e
$L
e
r
int
$L
int
$j (7)
where R is resistivity contact, j is current density, r is the electrical
resistivity of cell components, and L is thickness of a cell compo-
nent. The activation polarization losses are dened by Kim [13] as
follows:
V
act
V
act;a
V
act;c
(8)
V
act;a

R$T
FC;exit
F
$
_
sin h
1
_
j
2$j
oa
__
(9)
V
act;c

R$T
FC;exit
F
$
_
sin h
1
_
j
2$j
oc
__
(10)
The concentration voltage loss is dened by Chan et al. [14] as
follows:
V
cont
V
cont;a
V
cont;c
(11)
V
cont;a

R$T
FC;exit
2$F
$ln1j=j
as

R$T
FC;exit
2$F
$ln
_
1
P
H2;27
$j
P
H2O;27
$j
as
_
(12)
V
cont;c

_
R$T
FC;exit
4$F
$ln1 j=j
cs

_
(13)
where j
as
is the exchange current density of anode and j
cs
is the
exchange current density of cathode and dened as
j
as

2$F$P
H2;27
$D
aeff
_
R$T
FC;exit
$L
a
_
1000000
_
cm
3
=m
3
(14)
Desorber inlet temperature (
o
C)
C
O
P
E
v
a
p
o
r
a
t
o
r
h
e
a
t
t
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
(
k
W
)
60 70 80 90 100 110 120
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
0.8
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
COP, model (Herold et al.)
COP, current study
.
Q
ev
, model (Herold et al.)
.
Q
ev
, current study
Fig. 4. Validation of the single-effect absorption chiller model as compared to Herold
et al. model; COP and evaporator heat rate versus desorber inlet temperature.
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5745
j
cs

4$F$P
O2;19
$D
ceff
__
P
00
P
O2;19
P
00
_
$R$T
FC;exit
$L
c
_
1000000
_
cm
3
=m
3
(15)
where the subscripts ohm, act. cont, a, c, e, and int indicate ohmic,
activation, concentration, anode, cathode, electrolyte, and inter-
connect, respectively. The symbol D
ceff
is the effective gaseous
diffusivity through the cathode and D
aeff
is the effective gaseous
diffusivity through the anode. The electrical sensitivities are
dened as [12]
r
e

_
C1
e
$exp
_
C2
e
=T
FC;exit
__
1
(16)
r
a

_
C1
a
=T
FC;exit
$exp
_
C2
a
=T
FC;exit
__
1
(17)
r
c

_
C1
c
=T
FC;exit
$exp
_
C2
c
=T
FC;exit
__
1
(18)
r
int

_
C1
int
=T
FC;exit
$exp
_
C2
int
=T
FC;exit
__
1
(19)
where C1
e
C2
int
are constants dened in [12]. The model used to
carry out the equilibrium equations of the SOFC is based on a vali-
dated model developed by Colpan et al. [11], assuming the methane
is fully converted as presented later in this subsection. The molar
conversion rates of Equation (1e3) are a, b, and c, respectively. The
molar ow rates of the gases are derived next. The molar owrates
of the reactions Equation (1e3) are given in Table 3. In this table, _ n,
_
U
f
, and
_
U
O2
are molar ow rate, fuel utilization ratio, and oxygen
utilization ratio, respectively.
4.2.1. Energy modeling of the SOFC-trigeneration system
In this subsection the energy modeling of the SOFC-
trigeneration system is presented. The input data for the SOFC
subsystem is given in Table 4. The total inlet heat energy of the
SOFC-trigeneration system is dened as
_
Q
in
N
FC
$ _ n
CH4;26
$LHV
CH4

_
Q
boiler
(20)
where N
FC
is the total number of the fuel cells, _ n
CH4;26
is the
methane molar ow rate, LHV
CH4
lower heating value of the
methane, and
_
Q
boiler
is heat input from the auxiliary boiler. The
stack AC power of the fuel cell is dened as
_
W
FC;stack;ac
h
inverter
$
_
W
FC;stack
(21)
The net overall electrical power is dened as
_
W
net

_
W
FC;stack;ac
h
motor
_
W
ot

_
W
op
=h
motor

_
W
sp
=h
motor

_
W
b1
=h
motor

_
W
b2
=h
motor

_
W
wp
=h
motor
22
where
_
W is the power and the subscripts g, ot, op, wp, b1, b2, and sp
indicate generator, ORC turbine, ORC pump, water pump, air
blower, methane blower, and solution pump, respectively.
4.2.2. Validation of the SOFC model
The experimental data with methane as fuel as presented by Tao
et al. [15] are used for validating the current model. The validation
is shown in Table 5. This table shows the variation of both the cell
voltage and power density with the current density. It can be
noticed that the model has a good agreement with the experi-
mental work with an error less than 7%.
4.3. Energy modeling of the biomass-trigeneration system
In this subsection energy modeling of the biomass-trigeneration
system is presented. The characteristic of the biomass fuel used is
given in Table 6. The total inlet heat rate energy of the biomass-
trigeneration system is dened as
_
Q
i
_ m
biomass
$LHV
biomass
(23)
where _ m
biomass
is the mass ow rate of the biomass fuel and
LHV
biomass
is the lower heating value of the biomass and dened as
[16]
LHV
biomass
HHV
biomass
226:04$W
H
25:82$M
w
(24)
where M
w
is the moisture content in the biomass fuel and
HHV
biomass
is the higher heating value of the biomass and dened,
using Dulongs formula [17], as
HHV
biomass
338:3$W
C
1443$W
H
W
O
=8 94:2$W
S
(25)
Table 3
Molar ow rates of the gases.
_ n
H2O;26
2:5$a
_ n
H2O;26
2:5$a
_ n
CH4;26
a
_ n
H2;27
3$a b c
_ n
CO;27
a b
_ n
CO2;27
b
_ n
H2O;27
1:5$a b c
_ n
O2;u
c=2
_ n
O2;18
_ n
O2;19
_ n
O2;u
_ n
O2;19
c=2$1=U
O2
1
_ n
N2;19
79=21$
c
2$U
O2
_ n
N22;18
_ n
N2;19
c 3$a b$U
f
_ n
anode;exit
_ n
H2;27
_ n
CO;27
_ n
CO2;27
_ n
H2O;27
_ n
cathode;exit
_ n
O2;19
_ n
N2;19
_ n
anode;inlet
_ n
H2O;26
_ n
CH4;26
_ n
cathode;inlet
_ n
O2;18
_ n
N2;18
Table 4
Input data for the SOFC-trigeneration system.
DCeAC converter efciency 95%
Fuel utilization factor 0.85
Active surface area 100 cm
2
Base current density 0.75 A/cm
2
Exchange current density of anode 0.65 A/cm
2
Exchange current density of cathode 0.25 A/cm
2
Effective gaseous diffusivity through the anode 0.2 cm
2
/s
Effective gaseous diffusivity through the cathode 0.05 cm
2
/s
Thickness of the anode 0.05 cm
Thickness of the cathode 0.005 cm
Thickness of the electrolyte 0.001 cm
Thickness of the interconnect 0.3 cm
Pressure of the cell 101. 3 kPa
Base inlet temperature to the SOFC 1000 K
Temperature difference between the inlet and the exit of the SOFC 100 K
Source: [11].
Table 5
Validation of the current SOFC model with the experimental data by Tao et al. [15].
Current
density
(A/cm
2
)
Cell voltage
(V) (model)
Cell voltage
(V) (Exp [15])
Power density
(W/m
2
) (model)
Power density
(W/m
2
) (Exp. [15])
0.2 0.788 0.76 0.158 0.15
0.3 0.714 0.68 0.214 0.21
0.4 0.642 0.62 0.257 0.26
0.5 0.57 0.57 0.285 0.295
0.6 0.50 0.52 0.299 0.315
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5746
where W
C,
W
H,
W
O
and W
S
are the dry-biomass weight percentages
of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and sulfur, respectively and their
values are listed in Table 6. The net electrical power of the biomass-
trigeneration system is dened as
_
W
net
h
g
$
_
W
ot

_
W
op
=h
motor

_
W
sp
=h
motor
(26)
4.3.1. Solar collectors
In this subsection, the energy analysis of the parabolic trough
solar collectors (PTSC) is presented. The energy analysis of the PTSC
in this section is based on the equations presented in [7,18]. This
energy analysis is validated with these two references and with the
experimental study by Dudley et al. [19]. The validation with [19] is
presented at the end of this section. The useful power from the
collector is dened as
_
Q
u
_ m
r
$
_
Cp
r;o
$T
r;o
Cp
r;i
$T
r;i
_
(27)
where the subscripts r, i, and o indicate receiver, inlet, and outlet,
respectively. The symbol
_
Q
u
is the useful power and; _ m
r
is the mass
owrate of the oil in the receiver (pipe). In addition, this power can
be calculated from
_
Q
u
A
ap
$F
R
$
_
S A
r
=A
ap
$U
L
$
_
T
r;i
T
0
__
(28)
where A
ap
is the collector aperture area, F
R
is the heat removal
factor, S is the absorbed radiation by the receiver, A
r
is the receiver
area, and U
L
is solar collector overall heat loss coefcient. The
aperture area is dened as
A
ap

_
wD
c;o
_
$L (29)
where w is the collector width, D
c,o
is the cover outer diameter, and
L is the collector length. The absorbed radiation by the receiver is
dened as
S G
b
$h
r
(30)
where G
b
is the solar radiation in W=m
2
and h
r
is the receiver
efciency. The heat removal factor is dened as
F
R

_ m
r
$Cp
r
A
r
$U
L
$
_
1 exp
_

A
r
$U
L
$F
1
_ m
r
$Cp
r
__
(31)
where Cp
r
is the specic heat of the oil in the receiver and F
1
is the
collector efciency factor and dened as
F
1
U
o
=U
L
(32)
The solar collector heat loss coefcient between the ambient
and receiver is dened as
U
L

_
A
r
_
h
c;ca
h
r;ca
_
$A
c
1=h
r;cr
_
1
(33)
where h
c,ca
is the convection heat coefcient between the cover and
the ambient and dened as
h
c;ca

_
Nus$k
air
=D
c;o
_
(34)
where Nus, K
air
, and D
c,o
are Nusselt number, thermal conductivity
of the air, and outer diameter of the cover, respectively. The radi-
ation heat coefcient is dened as
h
r;ca

_
3
cv
$s$T
c
T
a
$
_
T
2
c
T
2
a
__
(35)
The subscripts c and a indicate the cover and ambient, respectively.
The symbol T,3
cv,
and s are the temperature, emittance, and Ste-
faneBoltzmann constant, respectively. The radiation heat coef-
cient between the cover and receiver is
h
r;cr

_
s$
_
T
c
T
r;av
_
$
_
T
2
c
T
2
r;av
_
1=3
r
A
r
=A
c
$1=3
cv
1
_
(36)
The overall heat coefcient is dened as
U
o

_
1=U
L

D
r;o
h
c;r;in
$D
r;i

_
D
r;o
2$k
r
$ln
_
D
r;o
=D
r;i
_
_
_
1
(37)
where h
c,r,in
is dened as
h
c;r;in

Nus
r
$k
r
D
r;i
(38)
where the subscripts r indicates the receiver. The cover average
temperature can be calculated using this equation
T
c

h
r;cr
$T
r;av
A
c
=A
r
$
_
h
c;ca
h
r;ca
_
$T
0
h
r;cr
A
c
=A
r
$
_
h
c;ca
h
r;ca
_ (39)
The amount of the solar radiation that falls on the collector is
calculated using this equation
_
Q
solar
A
ap
$F
R
$S$Col
r
(40)
where Col
r
is the total number of the solar collectors rows.
4.3.2. Energy modeling of the solar-trigeneration system
The overall performance assessment equations of the solar-
trigeneration system considered are presented in this section. The
input data for the solar subsystemis given inTable 7. The input total
heat energy of this system is dened as
_
Q
in

_
Q
u
Table 6
Biomass fuel characteristics.
Type of biomass fuel Pine sawdust
Moisture content in biomass (%wt) 10%
Ultimate analysis (%wt dry basis)
W
C
50.54%
W
H
7.08%
W
O
41.11%
W
S
0.57%
Source: [24].
Table 7
Input data for the solar-trigeneration plant.
w 5.76 m [25]
L 12.27 m [25]
h
r
0.765 [25]
G
b
a
0.5 kW/m
2
[7]
G
b
b
0.85 kW/m
2
[7]
3
r
0.92 [26]
Col
n
c
50
Col
r
c
7
_ mr
c
8 kg/s
D
r,i
c
0.045 m
a
During low sun radiation.
b
During high sun radiation.
c
Based on the thermoeconomic optimization
results.
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5747
The net electrical power is dened as
_
W
net
h
g
$
_
W
ot

_
W
op
=h
motor

_
W
sp
=h
motor

_
W
sol;p
=h
motor

_
W
st1;p
=h
motor

_
W
st2;p
=h
motor
41
where the subscripts sol, p, st1, p, and st2, p indicate solar pump,
thermal storage pump 1, and thermal storage pump 2, respectively.
4.3.3. Validation of the solar collectors model
In this subsection the validation of the solar collectors model is
presented as shown in Table 8. The model is validated with Dudley
et al. [19]. The table shows the variation of the heat loss for both the
model and the experiment data under different absorber uid
temperature. The baseline simulation of the solar-trigeneration
system in this study has an absorber uid temperature of less
than200
o
C above ambient temperature. Thus, the model has a good
agreement with the experimental results by [19], as demonstrated
in this table.
4.4. Overall system equations
The net electrical efciency of the system is dened as
h
el

_
W
net
=
_
Q
i
(42)
The efciency of the heating cogeneration is dened as
h
cog;h

_
W
net

_
Q
h
_
Q
i
(43)
where
_
Q
h
is the heating power and the subscript cog, h indicates
the heating cogeneration. The heating power is dened as
_
Q
h
_ m
hp
$
_
h
hp;2
h
hp;1
_
(44)
where _ m
hp
is the mass ow rate of the heating process, and h
hp,1
and h
hp,2
are the specic enthalpy of the water at the inlet and exit
of the heating-process heat exchanger, respectively. The efciency
of the cooling cogeneration is dened as
h
cog;c

_
W
net

_
Q
ev
_
Q
i
(45)
where the subscripts cog, c and ev indicate the cooling cogeneration
and cooling energy produced by the system through the evapo-
rator, respectively. The cooling power of the evaporator is dened
as
_
Q
ev
_ m
8
$h
9
h
8
_ m
ev
$
_
h
ev;1
h
ev;2
_
(46)
where h
ev,1
and h
ev,1
are the specic enthalpy of the water at the
inlet and exit of the cooling evaporator, respectively. The CO
2
emissions when there is only electrical power is dened as
EmiCO
2
; el _ m
CO2
=
_
W
net
$3600 (47)
On the other hand, the emissions when there is trigeneration is
dened as
EmiCO
2
; tri _ m
CO2
=
_
_
W
net

_
Q
h

_
Q
ev
_
$3600 (48)
where CO
2
, el indicates the emissions when there is only electrical
power production in the system considered. That is, the emissions
of CO
2
in kg per MWh of the net electrical power produced. In
contrast, the subscript CO
2
, tri indicates the emissions when there
is trigeneration production in the system considered. That is, the
emissions of CO
2
in kg per MWh of the total trigeneration power
(cooling, heating and electrical).
The efciency of trigeneration is dened as
h
tri

_
W
net

_
Q
ev

_
Q
h
_
Q
i
(49)
The electrical to heating ratio is dened as
r
el;h

_
W
net
=
_
Q
h
(50)
The electrical to cooling ratio is dened as
r
el;c

_
W
net
=
_
Q
ev
(51)
5. Results and discussion
This section discusses the results of the energy modeling of the
three systems considered under thermoeconomic optimization
conditions. That is, the thermoeconomic optimization was con-
ducted rst, where the thermoeconomic optimized values of some
selected parameters are identied. Then the energy analysis, as
presented in this study, is conducted considering these optimized
values. The objective of the optimization was to minimize the
exergetic cost of the nal product (combined cooling, heating and
power).
5.1. Effect of the ORC pump inlet temperature
The effects of the ORC pump inlet temperature variation on the
efciency, electrical power, electrical to cooling ratio, electrical to
heating ratio, and GHG emissions are illustrated in Figs. 5e10. The
subscripts of the parameters used in these gures are explained
next. The subscript SOFC indicates the trigeneration system based
on the solid oxide fuel cells. The subscript BM refers to the tri-
generation system based on the biomass combustor. The subscript
So indicates the trigeneration systembased on the solar subsystem.
The subscripts so, so-st, and st refer to the solar, solar and storage,
and storage modes for the solar-trigeneration system, respectively.
The subscripts el and tri indicate electrical and trigeneration,
respectively.
Fig. 5 presents the electrical efciencies of the three systems
considered. This gure demonstrates that as the ORC pump inlet
temperature increases, the electrical efciency decreases. This
decrement is owing to the decrease in the temperature difference
between the maximum and minimum temperatures in the ORC.
This gure illustrates that the electrical efciency of the SOFC-
trigeneration system is the highest because it has another
subsystem that has high efciency, e.g. the SOFC subsystem. The
efciency of this system drops from almost 19% at 345 K to 17% at
380 K. In contrast, the electrical efciency of the biomass-
trigeneration system drops from almost 15% at 345 K to around
11% at 380 K. On the other hand, the electrical efciency of the
solar-trigeneration system for the solar mode is close to the
Table 8
Validation of the current model as compared with Dudley et al. [19]: heat losses
change with the average temperature above the ambient of the uid inside the
absorber.
T
aam
(K) Heat loss (Model) Heat loss (Exp. [19])
100.6 8.7 10.6
149.1 19.3 19.3
196.7 34.2 30.6
245.8 53.0 45.4
293.3 75.5 62.9
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5748
electrical efciency of the biomass-trigeneration system. However,
the electrical efciencies of the solar and storage, and storage
modes of the solar-trigeneration system are noticeably lower. This
drop is owing to the decrease in the amount of the heat input to the
ORC during these two modes. During the solar and storage mode
a major portion of the collected energy from the solar collectors is
stored in the storage tank. Therefore, during this mode the ef-
ciency is lower as compared to the solar mode. The electrical ef-
ciency of the solar and storage mode drops from7% at 345 K to 6% at
380 K. The efciency of the storage mode drops from 6% at 345 K to
5% at 380 K.
The electrical-trigeneration efciency is presented in Fig. 6. This
gure demonstrates that the efciency improves signicantly
when trigeneration is used. This gure also shows that the
biomass-trigeneration and solar mode of the solar-trigeneration
system have the highest trigeneration efciency, which is around
90%, whereas the SOFC-trigeneration system has a lower trigener-
ation efciency, 76%. The SOFC-trigeneration system has two
devices that produce electrical power, the SOFC and the electrical
generator, where most of the electricity is produced by the SOFC;
because of this, less energy is needed for the ORC to produce the
remaining portion of the electricity as compared to the other two
systems. Thus, the amount of the heat that enters the ORC is lower.
As a result of the lower heat, lower waste heat is available for
heating and cooling. Thus, the trigeneration efciency for the
SOFC is lower than the other two systems. The trigeneration ef-
ciencies of the solar and storage, and storage modes of the solar-
trigeneration system are less than that of the solar mode, since
Fig. 6. Effect of the ORC pump inlet temperature on the trigeneration efciency.
Fig. 7. Effect of the ORC pump inlet temperature on the net electrical power.
Fig. 8. Effect of the ORC pump inlet temperature on the electrical to cooling ratio.
Fig. 5. Effect of the ORC pump inlet temperature on the electrical efciency.
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5749
less energy is available for these two modes, as discussed above.
The trigeneration efciency of the solar and storage mode is around
45% and for the storage mode is around 41%.
Fig. 7 illustrates the variation of the net electrical power as the
ORC inlet temperature changes. The electrical power decreases as
this temperature increases because the operating temperature
range in the ORC is reduced and, thus, less power can be obtained
from the turbine. It can be observed that the electrical power
during the solar mode for the solar-trigeneration system is the
highest. This power can be reduced by storing part of the collected
energy during the operation of this mode. The electrical power in
this mode changes from 830 kW at 345 K to 600 kW at 380 K. The
electrical power during the solar and storage mode is 645 kW at
345 K and decreases to 510 kWat 380 K. The electrical power of the
storage mode decreases from 575 kWat 345 K to 420 kWat 380 K.
Alternatively, the electrical power of the biomass-trigeneration
system decreases from 640 kW at 345 K to 440 kW at 380 K. It
can be noticed that the electrical power of the SOFC-trigeneration
system is less sensitive to the change in this temperature as
compared to the other two systems. The reason of this reduced
sensitivity is because major part of the electrical power is produced
from the SOFC subsystem. Hence, less power is produced by the
ORC where the change in this temperature has a direct effect on the
electrical power produced.
Fig. 8 presents the electrical to cooling ratio of the three systems
considered. This gure shows that the electrical to cooling ratio is
sensitive to the change in the ORC pump inlet temperature for the
three systems. The degree of sensitivity is related mainly to the
sensitivity of the electrical power produced by these three systems
as this temperature varies. The electrical to cooling ratio of the solar
mode of the solar-trigeneration system is the highest while the
electrical to cooling ratio of the SOFC-trigeneration system is the
lowest. For the SOFC-trigeneration system, this ratio varies from6.3
at 345 K to 2.7 at 380 K. However, for the biomass-trigeneration
system, this ratio varies from 6.7 at 345 K to 2.2 at 380 K. Alter-
natively, for the solar-trigeneration system, this ratio varies from
8.7 at 345 k to 3.1 at 380 K for the solar mode, from 6.7 at 345 K to
2.6 at 380 K for the solar and storage mode, and from 6 at 345 K to
2.1 at 380 K for the storage mode.
Fig. 9 shows the electrical to heating ratio of the three systems
considered. This gure illustrates that as the ORC pump inlet
temperature increases, this ratio decreases. This decrement is
attributed to the decrease in electrical power as this temperature
decreases. This gure shows that this ratio is the highest for the
SOFC-trigeneration system. This high ratio is obtained since most of
the electrical power is produced from the SOFC subsystem for this
trigeneration system. Thus, less electrical power is produced by the
ORC and, hence, less heating energy is available from this system.
This ratio varies from 0.34 at 345 K to 0.33 at 380 K for the SOFC-
trigeneration system. On the other hand, for the other cases this
ratio varies from around 0.19 at 345 K to 0.16 at 380 K.
Fig. 10 demonstrates the emissions of CO
2
in kg per MWh of
electrical and trigeneration powers. This gure presents the emis-
sions for the SOFC and biomass-trigeneration system. This gure
shows that the emissions per MWh of electrical power are signif-
icantly high. Alternatively, when trigeneration is used, the emis-
sions per MWh of trigeneration drop signicantly. This gure
reveals that the emissions of CO
2
per MWh of electrical power for
both systems increase as the ORC pump inlet temperature
increases. This increase is attributed to the drop in the electrical
efciencies of these two systems as this temperature increases. The
CO
2
emissions per MWh of electrical power from the biomass-
trigeneration system increases from 2500 kg/MWh at 345 K to
3200 kg/MWh at 380 K. In contrast, the emissions for the SOFC-
trigeneration system increase from 1750 kg/MWh at 345 K to
1900 kg/MWh at 380 K for the electrical power production. Alter-
natively, when trigeneration is used, the emissions drop signi-
cantly to around 400 kg/MWh for these two systems.
5.2. Effect of the turbine inlet pressure
The effect of the turbine inlet pressure variation on the perfor-
mance of the three systems is shown in Figs. 11e16. The range of
turbine inlet pressure [20e22] considered here are taken from the
literature. The upper values of the pressure selected are relatively
higher than the values available in the literature because of the
potential improvements in the ORC design. Fig. 11 presents the
effect of the pressure variation on the electrical efciency. It can be
noticed that the electrical efciency of the SOFC-trigeneration
system is more sensitive to the pressure variation as compared to
Fig. 9. Effect of the ORC pump inlet temperature on the electrical to heating ratio.
Fig. 10. Effect of the ORC pump inlet temperature on the CO
2
emissions.
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5750
the other two systems. The SOFC-trigeneration system is sensitive
to the pressure variation since the size of the ORC where the power
produced by the turbine and mass ow rate of the working uid is
smaller than the other two systems. The electrical efciency of the
SOFC-trigeneration system increases from 18% at 345 K to 19.5% at
380 K. Alternatively, the electrical efciency of the biomass-
trigeneration system is around 12.5%. On the other hand, the
electrical efciency of the solar-trigeneration system is around 13%
for the solar mode, 6.5% for the solar and storage mode, and 5.5% for
the storage mode.
Fig. 12 presents the effect of the turbine inlet pressure on the
trigeneration efciency of the systems considered. It can be noticed
that the effect of varying this pressure is negligible on the trigen-
eration efciencies of all three systems. Therefore, these systems
could be operated at low pressure, since this will result in cost
savings. It is observed that the trigeneration efciency of the SOFC-
trigeneration system is lower than the biomass and solar (solar
mode) systems; unlike the electrical efciency of the SOFC which
was the highest. The reason for that was discussed above. The tri-
generation efciency of the biomass-trigeneration system is
approximately 90% while this efciency is around 76% for the SOFC-
trigeneration system. The trigeneration efciencies of the solar-
trigeneration system are around 90% for the solar mode, 46% for
the solar and storage mode, and 41% for the storage mode.
Fig. 13 illustrates the effect of the turbine inlet pressure variation
on the net electrical power. This gure shows that as the pressure
increases, the electrical power of the SOFC-trigeneration system
increases. It increases from 560 kW at 2000 kPa to 610 kW at
7000 kPa. Nevertheless, the electrical power of the biomass-
trigeneration system decreases from 530 kW at 2000 kPa k to
Fig. 11. Effect of the turbine inlet pressure on the electrical efciency.
Fig. 12. Effect of the turbine inlet pressure on the trigeneration efciency.
Fig. 13. Effect of the turbine inlet pressure on the net electrical power.
Fig. 14. Effect of the turbine inlet pressure on the electrical to cooling ratio.
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5751
480 kWat 7000 kPa. Alternatively, the electrical power of the solar-
trigeneration systemincreases from700 kWat 2000 kPa to 730 kW
at 7000 kPa for the solar mode. The electrical power of the solar and
storage mode is around 520 kW, whereas it is around 470 kW for
the storage mode.
Fig. 14 illustrates the electrical to cooling ratio variation as the
pressure varies. This gure reveals that the effect of the pressure
variation on this ratio is insignicant. This electrical to cooling ratio
is around 3.7 for the SOFC-trigeneration system and 3.1 for the
biomass-trigeneration system. Regarding the solar-trigeneration
system, this ratio is around 4.5 for the solar mode, 3.5 for the
solar and storage mode, and 3 for the storage mode.
Fig. 15 presents the effect of pressure on the electrical to heating
ratio. This gure shows that as the pressure increases this ratio
increases noticeably only for the SOFC-trigeneration system. This
increase is attributed to the relative small size of the ORC and the
mass owrate of the working uid in the ORC, as mentioned above.
This ratio increases from 0.33 at 2000 kPa to 0.38 at 7000 kPa. The
electrical to heating ratio for the other two systems is around 0.18.
Fig. 16 illustrates the effect of pressure variation on the emis-
sions of CO
2
in kg/MWh. This gure reveals that the emission of CO
2
is insignicant to the pressure change. This gure also shows that
the emissions, when there is only electrical power production, are
signicantly high. However, when trigeneration is used, the emis-
sions drop signicantly. The emissions of the biomass-trigeneration
system increase from 2900 kg/MWh at 2000 kPa to 3050 kg/MWh
at 7000 kPa for the electrical power production. Conversely, when
trigeneration is used, the emissions drop considerably to around
400 kg per MWh of trigeneration power. In contrast, the emissions
for the SOFC-trigeneration system are around 1700 kg/MWh while,
when trigeneration is used, the emissions drop signicantly to
around 400 kg/MWh. Note that the emissions of the SOFC-
trigeneration system are relatively high since it has an auxiliary
biomass boiler to heat up the inlet uids of the SOFC subsystem.
6. Conclusion
In this study, energetic performance comparisons of the three
trigeneration systems considered are conducted. The three systems
are SOFC, biomass, and solar-trigeneration systems. The main
ndings from this comparative study are summarized below.
The SOFC-trigeneration system has the highest electrical ef-
ciency among the three systems. However, the trigeneration
efciencies of the biomass-trigeneration system and solar
mode of the solar-trigeneration system are higher than the
trigeneration efciency of the SOFC-trigeneration system.
The maximum electrical efciency for the SOFC-trigeneration
system is 19% while it is 15% for the biomass-trigeneration
system. On the other hand, the maximum electrical efciency
for the solar-trigeneration system is around 15% for the solar
mode, 7% for the storage and solar mode, and 6% for the storage
mode.
The efciency increases considerably when trigeneration is
used. The maximum trigeneration efciency of the SOFC-
trigeneration system is around 76% and it is around 90% for
the biomass-trigeneration system. The maximumtrigeneration
efciencies of the solar-trigeneration system is around 90% for
the solar mode, 45% for storage and storage mode, and 41% for
the storage mode.
The electrical to cooling ratio is sensitive to the variation of the
ORC pump inlet temperature. Therefore, when it is needed to
increase or decrease the cooling power, it can be controlled
through the variation of this temperature. This ratio is the
highest and most sensitive for the solar mode, where it could
vary from8.8 to 3.1. For the other two modes and the other two
trigeneration systems, this ratio varies from approximately 6.5
to 2.5 as this temperature increases.
The solar-trigeneration system has zero CO
2
emissions. Alter-
natively, the other two systems have signicant CO
2
emissions
per MWh of electrical power. When trigeneration is used, the
emissions per MWh of these two systems drop signicantly.
The emissions per MWh of trigeneration for these two systems
are reasonable, around 400 kg/MWh of trigeneration power.
However, the biomass-trigeneration system is not recom-
mended for electrical production only. Regarding the SOFC-
trigeneration system, the emissions are high per MWh of
electricity since the hot streams at the exit of SOFC subsystem
are partially used to heat the ORC. Therefore, more heat
(biomass fuel) is needed from the auxiliary biomass boiler to
Fig. 15. Effect of the turbine inlet pressure on the electrical to heating ratio.
Fig. 16. Effect of the turbine inlet pressure on the CO
2
emissions.
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5752
heat the stream inlets of the SOFC and, thus, there are
considerable emissions per MWh of electricity for the SOFC-
trigeneration system.
Acknowledgment
The authors acknowledge the support of King Fahd University of
Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, and the
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
(NSERC).
List of Symbols
a Extent of steam reforming reaction for methane, mole/s
A Active surface area, cm
2
A
ap
Aperture area, m
2
A
c
Area of the receiver cover, m
2
A
r
Area of the receiver, m
2
b Extent of water gas shift reaction, mole/s
c Extent of electrochemical reaction, mole/s, cell, or cost
per unit of exergy, $/GJ
C Constant or heat capacity, kW/K
C
p
Specic heat, kJ/kg-K
Col
n
Total number of collectors per single row
Col
r
Total number of solar collectors rows
D Diameter, m
COP Coefcient of performance
D
aeff
Effective gaseous diffusivity through the anode, cm
2
/s
D
ceff
Effective gaseous diffusivity through the cathode, cm
2
/s
Emi Emission
_
E Energy rate, kW
F Faraday constant, C
F
R
Heat removal factor
F
1
Collector efciency factor
G Change in specic molar Gibbs free energy, J/mole
G
b
Solar radiation, W/m
2
h
c
Convection heat coefcient, kW/m
2
-K
h
r
Radiation heat coefcient, kW/m
2
-K
I Current, A
j Current density, A/cm
2
j
as
Anode-limiting current density, A/cm
2
j
cs
Cathode-limiting current density, A/cm
2
j
oa
Exchange current density of anode, A/cm
2
j
oc
Exchange current density of cathode, A/cm
2
k Thermal conductivity, W/m
K Equilibrium constant
L Thickness of an SOFC layer, cm
HHV Higher heating value, kJ/kg
LHV Lower heating value, kJ/kg
m Mass, kg
M
w
Moisture content in the biomass fuel, % wt, dry basis
_ n Molar ow rate
N
FC
Total number of fuel cells
Nus Nusselt number
P Pressure, kPa
Q Heat, kJ
_
Q Heat rate, kW
R Universal gas constant, J/mol-K, or resistivity contact
r
el,h
Electrical to heating energy ratio
r
el,c
Electrical to cooling energy ratio
S Absorbed radiation by the receiver, W/m
2
T Temperature, C
o
or K
U
f
Fuel utilization ratio
U
O2
Air (oxidant) utilization ratio
UA Overall heat coefcient and area, kW/K
UL Overall heat loss coefcient of the solar collector,
kW/m
2
-K
U
o
Heat loss coefcient between the ambient and receiver of
the solar collector, kW/m
2
-K
V Voltage, V
w Collector width, m
_
W Power, kW
_
W
FC
Power of the fuel cell (W)
x Molar concentration
Greek letters
3
cv
Emittance of the receiver cover
h Energy efciency
u Moisture content factor
s StefaneBoltzmann constant, kW/m
2
-K
4
r Density, kg/m
3
or electrical resistivity of fuel cell
components, ohm-cm
Subscripts
0 Atmospheric conditions
a Anode, absorber, or ambient
ac AC current, actual
act Activation
aam Above ambient
BM Biomass-trigeneration system
b1 Blower 1
b2 Blower 2
c Cathode or receiver cover
conc Concentration
cog, c Cooling cogeneration
cog, h Heating cogeneration
e Electrolyte, exit
eq Equilibrium
ev Evaporator
f Fuel
FC Fuel cell
g Generator
h Heating
HEx Heat exchanger
hp Heating process
i Inlet
int Interconnect
inverter DC to AC inverter
m Motor
oe Organic cycle evaporator
ohm Ohmic
op Organic cycle pump
ot Organic cycle turbine
N Nernst
p Product
r Reactant or receiver
So Solar-trigeneration system
so Solar mode of the solar-trigeneration system
SOFC SOFC-trigeneration system
sol, p Pump of the solar system
soest Solar and storage mode of the solar-trigeneration system
sp Solution pump
st Storage mode of the solar-trigeneration system
st1, p First pump in the thermal storage system
st2, p Second pump in the thermal storage system
wgs Water gas shift reaction
tri Trigeneration
u Useful
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5753
Superscripts
e
Molar base
.
Rate of a component
0 At standard pressure
CH Chemical exergy
PH Physical exergy
Acronyms
GHG Greenhouse gas
LieB Lithium-bromide
ORC Organic Rankine cycle
SEAC Singe-effect absorption chiller
SOFC Solid oxide fuel cell
References
[1] Al-Sulaiman FA, Hamdullahpur F, Dincer I. Trigeneration: a comprehensive
review based on prime movers. International Journal of Energy Research
2011;35(3):233e58.
[2] Lai SM, Hui CW. Feasibility and exibility for a trigeneration system. Energy
2009;34(10):1693e704.
[3] Schicktanz MD, Wapler J, Henning HM. Primary energy and economic analysis
of combined heating, cooling and power systems. Energy 2011;36(1):575e85.
[4] Al-Sulaiman FA, Dincer I, Hamdullahpur F. Energy analysis of a trigeneration
plant based on solid oxide fuel cell and organic rankine cycle. International
Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2010;35(10):5104e13.
[5] Rentizelas A, Karellas S, Kakaras E, Tatsiopoulos I. Comparative techno-
economic analysis of orc and gasication for bioenergy applications. Energy
Conversion and Management 2009;50(3):674e81.
[6] Al-Sulaiman FA, Hamdullahpur F, Dincer I. Energy and exergy assessments of
a new trigeneration system based on organic rankine cycle and biomass
combustor. In: Proceedings of ASME 2010 4th International Conference on
energy Sustainability; 2010, ES2010e90258.
[7] Kalogirou S. Solar energy engineering: processes and systems. Elsevier; 2009.
[8] Bruno JC, Lopez-Villada J, Letelier D, Romera S, Coronas A. Modelling and
optimisation of solar organic rankine cycle engines for reverse osmosis
desalination. Applied Thermal Engineering 2008;28(17e18):2212e26.
[9] Vijayaraghavan S, Goswami DY. Organic working uids for a combined power
and cooling cycle. Journal of Energy Resources Technology, Transactions of the
ASME 2005;127(2):125e30.
[10] Herold KE, Radermacher R, Klein SA. Absorption chillers and heat pumps. CRC
press; 1996.
[11] Colpan CO, Dincer I, Hamdullahpur F. Thermodynamic modeling of direct
internal reforming solid oxide fuel cells operating with syngas. International
Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2007;32(7):787e95.
[12] Bossel UG. Final report on SOFC data facts and gures. Swiss Federal Ofce of
Energy; 1992.
[13] Kim J-W, Virkar AV, Fun K-Z, Mehta K, Singhal SC. Polarization effects in
intermediate temperature, anode-supported solid oxide fuel cells. Journal of
the Electrochemical Society 1999;146(1):69e78.
[14] Chan SH, Low CF, Ding OL. Energy and exergy analysis of simple solid-
oxide fuel-cell power systems. Journal of Power Sources 2002;103(2):
188e200.
[15] Tao G, Armstrong T, Virkar A. Intermediate temperature solid oxide fuel cell
(it-sofc) research and development activities at msri. In: Nineteenth annual
ACERC and ICES conference, Utah, USA; 2005.
[16] Ganapathy V. Steam plant calculations manual. Marcel Dekker; 1994.
[17] Prabir B. Combustion and gasication in uidized beds. CRC Press; 2006.
[18] Dufe J, Beckman W. Solar engineering of thermal processes. John Wiley &
Sons, Inc; 2006.
[19] Dudley V, Kolb G, Sloan M, Kearney D. Segs ls-2 solar collector test results.
Report of Sandia National Laboratories, SANDIA94e1884; 1994.
[20] Hung TC. Waste heat recovery of organic rankine cycle using dry uids.
Energy Conversion and Management 2001;42(5):539e53.
[21] Tchanche BF, Papadakis G, Lambrinos G, Frangoudakis A. Fluid selection for
a low-temperature solar organic rankine cycle. Applied Thermal Engineering
2009;29(11e12):2468e76.
[22] Drescher U, Brggemann D. Fluid selection for the organic rankine cycle (orc) in
biomass power and heat plants. Applied Thermal Engineering 2007;27(1):
223e8.
[23] Yaws CL. Chemical properties handbook. McGraw-Hill; 1999.
[24] Lv PM, Xiong ZH, Chang J, Wu CZ, Chen Y, Zhu JX. An experimental study on
biomass air-steam gasication in a uidized bed. Bioresource Technology
2004;95(1):95e101.
[25] Zarza E, Rojas ME, Gonzalez L, Caballero JM, Rueda F. Inditep: the rst pre-
commercial dsg solar power plant. Solar Energy 2006;80(10):1270e6.
[26] Montes MJ, Abanades A, Martinez-Val JM, Valdes M. Solar multiple optimi-
zation for a solar-only thermal power plant, using oil as heat transfer uid in
the parabolic trough collectors. Solar Energy 2009;83(12):2165e76.
F.A. Al-Sulaiman et al. / Energy 36 (2011) 5741e5754 5754