CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
To improve the economy of country energy is the basic need. India ranks worlds fifth
largest energy consumer accounting for about 3.5% of worlds total energy consumption,
but per capita energy consumption of energy is very low at 631kWh as compared to
world consumption of 2873kWh. Conventional sources such as thermal, hydro and
nuclear are major sources of generation of electricity in India. Over the years (since
1950) the installed capacity of all India power generation has increased to 1,51,434.54
MW. The breakup of the installed capacity is given as under in Table 1.1 and Table 1.2;
Table 1.1 Total installed capacity*

Table 2.2 Fuel based installed capacity*

*Source www.powermin.nic.in
The thermal and hydro power plants contribute the 64.6 and 24.7% respectively. The
thermal power stations in the country are mostly based on the following technologies:
a) Steam power plants
1

b) Gas turbine power plants

1.1.1 STEAM POWER PLANTS
The steam power plants are mostly coal- based. The size of generating units that has
progressively increased from about 15MW to 500MW at present. All steam power plants
are conventional drum type and majority of them are two pass design. Steam power
plants can be either non-condensing or condensing. In the condensing steam power
plants, steam is discharged into the condenser. The pressure in the condenser is less than
the atmospheric. The overall efficiency of condensing and non-condensing power plants
ranges 7 to 36% and 3 to 10% respectively. Power plants in the country are having subcritical steam parameters. Increase in steam parameters, i.e. temperature and pressure, is
one of the most effective measures to increase the efficiency and economy as well. This
method typically in the form of supercritical operation has been followed since the
decades in many countries; particularly in United States, Europe and Japan. Supercritical
cycle units offer a number of advantages. The most obvious advantage is higher
efficiency, and therefore, saving of fuel resources. The improvement in efficiency varies
from 1.3% to 3.6% depending upon steam parameters. The available material sets the
limit for feasible steam parameters. Government has launched supercritical power
programme on the lines of US, Japan and other European countries. Studies are being
conducted for super critical vs. sub critical boilers for the introduction of super-critical
technologies.
1.1.2

GAS TURBINE POWER PLANTS

The present installed capacities of Gas turbine power plants are 16,385.61MW which is
10.5% of total thermal power plant capacity. The gas turbine plants are the combined
cycle plants and few are based on open cycle mode. The combined-cycle unit combines
the Rankine (steam turbine) and Brayton (gas turbine) thermodynamic cycle. It uses heat
recovery boilers to capture the energy from gas turbine exhaust gases for steam
production and steam is supplied to the steam turbine. Process steam can be also provided
for industrial purposes.
The modern power gas turbine is a high-technology package that is comprised of a
compressor, combustor, power turbine, and generator, as shown in the Figure 1.1 "Open
3

Cycle Gas Turbine Plant". In a gas turbine, large volumes of air are compressed to high
pressure in a multistage compressor for distribution to one or more combustion gases
from the combustion chambers power an axial turbine that drives the compressor and the
generator before exhausting to atmosphere. In this way, combustion gases in a gas turbine
powered the turbine directly, rather than requiring heat transfer to a water or steam cycle
to power a steam turbine, as in the steam plant. The latest gas turbine designs use turbine
inlet temperatures of 1,500oC (2,730oF) and compression ratios as high as 30:1 (for
aeroderivatives) giving thermal efficiencies of 35 percent or more for a simple cycle gas
turbine.

Figure 1.1 Open cycle gas turbine power plant.

Most of the open cycle gas turbine power plants in the country use the natural gas as fuel.
Out of the total production of natural gas, 41% is used by gas power plants. The natural
gas is mostly preferred because it is environmental friendly, has high efficiency and cost
is also charming. Most of the production of gas comes from western offshore area of
country. The gas brought to Hazira is sour gas which is properly make sweet by
eliminating slupher. After sweetening the gas some part of gas is utilized in Hazira and
the remaining gas is send to Hazira-Bijaipur-Jagdishpur (HBJ) pipeline. In northern part
of country, the gas is supplied through Hazira-Bijaipur-Jagdishpur pipeline.

Generating the mechanical power without loss and polluting the environment is a major
aim of thermal power plants. In view of shortage of energy production and rapid increase
in demand, there is need to conserve it in all possible ways. Recovering the energy from
waste and utilizing the waste heat are becoming the common solution for improving the
system efficiencies. The present energy crisis has forced the scientist and engineers to
explore the possibilities to conserve the energy and also to design the thermal systems
that are not only economically perfect but also thermodynamically and environmentally
feasible. Thermal power plants are the vital component for growth of country. Therefore
it is desirable rather necessity to provide a base for reducing the energy loss and design of
thermal power plants from the thermodynamics, economical and environmental point of
view because improving a system thermodynamically without considering the economics
is misleading. The energy conservation in thermal power plants has vast potential and
therefore, present thesis aimed to explore the various irreversibilities in the plant in every
aspect i.e. thermal as well as economic point of view.
The investigations taken in this thesis are of existing plants and can create a base for
further R & D activities in the direction of energy conservation and also heat recovery
options whether the saving is economical or not. The present thesis is an attempt to
explain the irreversibilities from the exergy economic or thermoeconomics point of view
of designed and under the different operating conditions.

1.2 CONCEPT AND APPLICATION OF EXERGY, EXERGETIC

COST & EXERGY ECONOMIC OR THERMOECONOMICS
ANALYSIS
To know what amount of energy exactly we are using to produce goods force engineers to
analyze and estimate the system by using some concept for decision-making. The origins
of energy analysis are very diverse. For the last three decades, we have been hearing
about energy crisis which in turn forced us to think about its conservations. So demand of
saving energy move us forward to find new analysis techniques concerned with concept
of exergy.

To avoid confusion with familiar energy-based methods for analysis and design of
thermal systems, a careful distinction must be drawn between energy and exergy. Energy
conservation law is applicable everywhere. Energy entering with fuel, electricity, flowing
stream of matter and so on can be accounted for in the products and byproducts. Energy
can not be destroyed. The idea that something can be destroyed is useful. It can not be
applied to energy, however, but to another variable: exergy. Moreover, it is exergy and not
energy that properly gauges the quality (utility) of, say, one kJ of electricity generated by
a power plant versus one kJ in the plant cooling water stream. Electricity clearly has the
greater quality and not incidentally, the greater economic value. The simplified electrical
generating power cycle shown schematically in Figure 1.2 highlights the distinction
between energy and exergy. Figure 1.2 (a) is on an energy basis, and indicates that out of
100 energy units entering with the fuel, 30 energy units are obtained as the electricity and
the balance 70 units are discharged to the surroundings, say to cooling water. Invoking an
oft-used approximation we may consider that 100 units of exergy also enter with the fuel
as shown in Figure 1.2 (b) since the generated electricity is exergy in transit, 30 units of
exergy exit by this means. So there is a balance of 70 units to be accounted for; but when
these 70 exergy units are considered, we find that 67 to 68 units of this exergy are
destroyed within the plant by various irreversibilities and just 2 to 3 units are discharged
to the surroundings. Although considerable energy is discharged to the cooling water, its
quality (utility) is low because the water used for cooling typically comes out the plant at
a temperature slightly higher than that of the surroundings. Accordingly, to improve the
performance, the energy analysis is misleading. The exergy analysis on the other hand not
only shows that the discharge is a relatively minor area of concern but also that
significant performance

improvement can come only by identifying and remedying

sources of inefficiency within the system.

Figure 1.2 Power cycle

Moreover it is the exergy that has economic value in the market place and serious
misestimations can result when cost analysis of the systems are carried out on energy
basis [Kenney (1984)].
First law of thermodynamics is the base of analysis. There can never be an energy loss,
but energy transfer to the environment in that case it is useless. For pinpointing and
quantifying the irreversibilities, an exergy analysis is being performed over the years.
Two basic concepts, exergy and irreversibility, gave rise to a variety of derived concepts,
techniques and criteria performance. Although the exergy method is usually regarded as
new technique. We can say exergy analysis is same as useful energy.

11

In the absence of nuclear, magnetic, electrical and surface tension effects the total exergy
of a system is
E E PH E KN E PT E CH

(1.1)

The sum of last three terms on Right hand side is referred as thermomechanical exergy
[Bejan et al. (1996), Moran (1989, 1995)]. The superscripts PH, KN, PT and CH
represent the physical, kinetic, potential and chemical exergy respectively in Equation
1.1. The total specific exergy on a mass basis i.e. unit mass basis is given by

e e PH e KN e PT e CH

(1.2)

where, e denotes the specific exergy. If we assume that system is on rest then
(e

KN

e PT 0 ), the total specific exergy of system is sum of physical and chemical

exergy. The total physical exergy of a closed system at a specified state is given by

E PH (U U 0 ) p0 (V V0 ) T0 (S S 0 )

(1.3)

where, U, p, V, T, and S denotes the internal energy, pressure, volume and entropy
respectively at a specified state. The subscript 0 represents atmospheric condition.
For closed system chemical exergy is given by

E CH N R ( R 0 R0 )

(1.4)

where N is the number of moles of species

potential.

R in

mixture and denotes chemical

E E tot (U U 0 ) p 0 (V V0 ) T0 ( S S 0 ) N R ( R 0 R0 )
R

For closed system total specific exergy is given by

13

(1.5)

e e tot (h h0 ) T0 ( s s0 ) N R ( R 0 R0 )

(1.6)

In exergy analysis our aim is to find the performance of every component by getting
exact value of generated entropy by each component. Let us consider P as the product
and F as the fuel, for a process, both are evaluated in the terms of their individual
exergy.

So

according

F P I 0, where I T0 S g

destruction.

The

exergetic P / F 1
product; viz.

to

this

given

equation

should

be

satisfied:

(Gouy-Stodola theorem) is the irreversibility i.e. exergy

thermodynamic

efficiency

of

process

will

be

given

by

. The inverse of this efficiency represents the unit exergetic cost of

k P F / P 1 / exergetic 1

.Economic estimation should also be done

considering internal flows and products. There are two environment for thermal systems :
(i) the physical (raw material) and (ii) the economic environment (market prices) .
Physical environment is considered to estimate products of a system, and in this refrence
exergetic cost is the main variable, which informs us of the actual amount of exergy that
is needed to produce them [Lozano et. al (1993)].
In case of economic environment, there are two extra factors: market prices ( c F ) and
cost of depreciation needed for productive process ( Z ).For optimization purpose, the
main aim is the unit cost of the product, viz. c P c F F Z / P c F k P Z / P .
By combining the concepts exergy with economic analysis new method of analysis and
research was developed, called as exergoeconomics. Exergoeconomic investigation
calculate the unit cost of products. A complete exergoeconomic analysis consists of (a)
energy and exergy analysis, (b) economic analysis, (c) exergy costing, and (d) an
exergoeconomic estimation of each plant component.

1.3 OBJECTIVE OF THE THESIS

15

Thermal system design and analysis involves principles from many fields of Thermal
Engineering. In this thesis, thermodynamics aspect of design is handled.
Among the thermal systems, coal based power plant and open cycle gas turbine are
analyzed by advanced thermodynamic topics. These topics include the exergy analysis,
exergetic cost based and exergy economic or thermoeconomic analysis. The exergy
economic analysis is cited by many researchers to be a strong tool for assessing the plant
performance from thermodynamic and economic point of view. Therefore this technique
has been used in many industries like electrical generation companies in Europe but it is
not surprisingly used by all industries.
This work would deal with the following:
1. To perform the detailed second law based exergy analysis of cycles to gets proper
insight from thermodynamic point of view and to point out expected energy
saving.
2. To perform the exergetic cost based analysis.
3. To perform the exergy economic or thermoeconomic analysis of power plant
cycles in order to:
a) To find individually the costs of each product in cycle for different
components.
b) To know the cost configuration process for whole plant and plant components.
c) Study of thermoeconomic variables and performance estimation of existing
system.
4. To study the effects of conclusion variables on exergy, exergetic cost and
thermoeconomic variables.

17

The general methodology adopted in this thesis lies with the approach proposed by
[Ahern J E (1980), Bejan A (1988), Bejan et al. (1996), Dentice M et al. (1998), Kelly S
et al. (2009), Kaushik S C et al. (2005), Kotas T J (1985), Lozano M A (1993) and
Moran M J (1989)].

1.3 CHAPTERWISE SUMMARY OF THE THESIS

A chapter wise summary of thesis is as follows:

Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter presents an overview of current status of energy generation in country and
basic concepts of power plants, exergy, exergetic costs and exergy economic estimation
of power plants. The chapter discusses the objective of proposed study. At the end of
chapter organization of thesis has been provided.
Chapter II: Literature Review
A detailed relevant literature survey for exergy, exergetic cost and exergy economic or
thermoeconomics analysis for thermal systems has been included. The various methods
of thermoeconomic techniques developed and the effort made by researchers in the past
for the development of field has been discussed. The various thermal systems analyzed in
researchers are included.
Chapter III: Energy and Exergy Analysis of Coal Fired Thermal Power Plant
In this chapter exergy and energy analysis has been carried out for the coal based non
reheat thermal power plant. The expressions for thermal efficiency based on the
thermodynamics first law and , exergy destruction and exergetic efficiency in components
has been used. Second law efficiency at part load condition for the components and
whole plant has also been investigated.
Chapter IV: Exergy economic analysis of Coal fired thermal power plant
19

In this chapter the exergy principles are combined with economic principles. The cost of
various components of the plant has been considered for exergy economic estimation. By
exergy economic methodology, each product cost in the plant and flow rate cost with all
streams has been calculated. The thermoeconomic variable for the designed and at part
load condition has been investigated.

21

CHAPTER-2

LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The word Energy is derived from the Greek: en and ergon (i.e. internal force or work).
The concept was first formulated in the middle of the 19 th century by Kelvin and Joules.
The word exergy is derived from the Greek ex and ergon (i.e. outer force or work) and
the concept was first noticed in 1824 by Carnot in the relation of heat and work. A further
rigorous literature review on exergy and exergy economic analysis for the past period has
been performed to get more insight in this research field. The book Thermal Design &
Optimization by Bejan et. al. (1996) provides a comprehensive and rigorous introduction
to thermal system design and optimization from a contemporary perspective. A detailed
description of exergy analysis, exergy economics has been presented with case study for
design of gas turbine cogeneration system in literature surveyed.

2.2 DEVELOPMENTS IN EXERGY AND ITS BENEFITS

The number of publications dealing with second law of thermodynamics and/or exergy or
available energy has been published during past. All these researches and developments
aim at

for higher thermal efficiency for thermal systems. This has moved

ahead

development of various analysis technique based on thermodynamic laws. Exergy

analysis is based on second law of thermodynamics. The use of available energy (and/or
exergy) in the analysis of power plants and refrigeration systems has been well
established. In the literature, exergy analysis/ second law analysis for Rankine, Brayton,
combined & cogeneration and gas turbine power plants have been performed by Kaushik
S C and Tyagi S K (1999.
Khaliq A and Kaushik S C, (2004) examined from the Second law point of view the
Brayton/ Rankined combined power cycle with reheat. They investigated the effect of ,
cycle temperature ratio , pressure ratio, pressure drop and cycle number of reheats. Their
investigations have revealed that over 50% exergy devastation occurs in combustion

23

chamber. In other studies, the effect of pinch point on first and second law efficiency has
been studied.
Besides above mentioned work, Habib, M. et al. (1992), also have examined performance
of regenerativereheat power plants. The second law (exergy) analysis has been
identified an efficient tool for identifying and quantifying both the consumption of useful
energy (exergy) used to derive a process as well as the irreversibilities and losses of
exergy.
Survey reveals the use of exergy principles that enhances the understanding of
thermal/chemical processes and allows the sources of incompetence to be quantified.
Such essential thermodynamic considerations can be integrated with principles of
engineering economics to determine the potential for cost effective improvement of
existing systems. [Ayres et al. (1998), Bejan et al. (1996), Bilgen E (2004), Connelly L
(2001), Cornelisen R L (1997), Dentice M(1998), Ebadi M.J. (2005), Granovskii M et al
(2008), Hermann W (2006), Horlock J H (2000) etc.] A new sustainability index has been
developed as a measure of how exergy efficiency affects sustainable development.
Exergy has

better identified environmental benefits and economics of energy

technologies than energy [Rosen M et al. (2008)]. The exergy analysis is also using in
designing [Y M EI-Sayed (2002)] to get minimum costs and maximum efficiencies.

2.3 APPLICATIONS OF EXERGY

The exergy and exergy costing principles has been used at initial design state to develop
the systems that are optimized in annualized cost. Indeed, the primary field of application
of exergy analysis nowadays is in the thermal/chemical systems design and optimization.
The exergy analysis has also been used to assess the real effect of off-design conditions
on individual components or overall plant [Kim S et al. (1998), Tsatsaronis et. al. (1994),
Kwak et al. (2003) and Erlach et al. (1999)].
Second law based exergy analysis has not only been applied to thermal power plants but
also

to

diesel

engine

power

generation,

25

refrigeration

cycles,

and

process

industries[Abusoglu A et al. (2008), Kamte S et al. (2009), Koroneos C et al. (2003),

Modesto M et al. (2006), Morosuk T et al. (2009), Talens I et al. (2007), Wall G (1998)].
In literature, exergy is one of the best tool by which we can utilize the resources as much
as possible. Energy belongs to quantity while exergy can be used as a scale for quantity
as well as quality of the energy sources . Number of publications dealing with exergy
analysis has been increasing continuously in the past years. Yantovski E (2000)
recommended the exergy in education. The publications and textbooks covers large
spectrum of symbols. Therefore for the further and fast development of field, a consensus
on the use of standard symbols has been felt Tsatsaronis G (2007).

2.4 EXERGY ECONOMICS

The addition of economic and exergetic analysis called exergy economic analysis has
become a great tool for evaluating the performance of energy conversion systems. In this
series many researchers have taken a keen interest to prove the importance of this
technique [Abusoglu et al. (2009), Alvarado S et al. (1994), Boregert J A et al. (20040Can
A et al. (2002), Hub B et al. (1997), Kim S et al. (1998), Kwon Y et al. (2001), Ozgener
et al. (2007), Rosen M et al. (2003), Sahoo P K (2008). Tsatsaronis et al. (1985)]
presented this technique for analyzing the energy conversion process. The economic
estimation of costs caused by irreversibilities, as well as comparison between the costs
and investments and operating costs for each component of a plant has been performed.
The tool permits the identification of inefficiencies and monetary losses [Abusoglu et al.
(2009), Ahern (1980), Alvarado, et al. (1994)].

2.5 BROAD APPLICATIONS OF EXERGY ECONOMICS

In the past, advanced power plants and energy intensive chemical processes have been
analyzed and optimized by Professor Tsatsaronis and many more others using the exergy
economic method. Energy conversion systems that were analyzed and improved in the
past are:

Conventional steam power plants.

27

Incorporated gasification combined-cycle power plants.

Coal fired concepts.

Advanced gas turbine systems.

Crude oil distillation systems.

Refrigeration systems.

In the same direction, some of fresh applications are highlighted here. Bhargava et. al.
(2002) analyzed an intercooler reheat gas turbine, with and without recovery, for
cogeneration applications using the exergy economic principles. Their study provides the
useful results for selection of gas turbine cycle for cogeneration appliance. Attala et al.
(2001) have used exergy economics as a design tool for the realization of a gas-steam
combined power plant principle whereas Mishra et al. (2003, 2005) have optimized a
single and double effect vapour absorption refrigeration systems. Sahoo (2008)
performed exergy economic analysis of a cogeneration system and optimized the cycle.
Many other researchers who contributed their efforts are Abusoglu et al. (2009), Accadia
et al. (2004), Aguilar et al. (2007), Alvarado et al. (1994), Arena A et al. (1999), Boregert
et al. (2004), Can A et al. (2004), Caranosa et al. (2004), Corti et al. (1999), Dentice et al.
(1998), Frangopoulos et al. (1987, 1994, Hamed et al. (2006), Hebecker et al. (2005),
Hua et al. (1997), kim et al. (1998), Kwak et al. (2003), Kwon et al. (2001), Lior et al.
(1997), Mishra et al. (2005), Piacentino et al. (2007), Rosen et al. (2003), Sahoo et al.
(2008), Sala et al. (2006), Sciubba et al. (2001), Temir et al. (2004), Traverso et al.
(2002), et.

2.6 METHODS OF EXERGY ECONOMICS

Many methods for performing the exergy economic analysis have been developed and
applied with varying degrees of success [Lozano et. al. (1993), Bejan et. al. (1996), and
Erlach et. al. (1999)]. These methods are named as

29

Thermo economics

Second law costing

Exergy costing

Exergy economics.

Long time exergy-economic researcher Tsatsaronis (1997) identifies the four types of
exergy economic methodologies, depending upon any of the following of the technique:
(a) Exergy-economic cost accounting,
(b) Exergy-economic calculus analysis,
(c) Exergy-economic similarity numbers,
(d) Product/cost efficiency diagrams,
Several details of all these technique has been discussed [Tsatsaronis (1997), Sayed et.
al. (1989)].

2.7 DEVELOPMENTS IN EXERGY ECONOMICS AND THEIR

APPLICATIONS
Lozano and Valero (1993) make formulas to find the cost and efficiency of system.
Energy concept, fuel product concept and mathematical formulation are the pillars of
analysis theory. Applications are: (i) assessment of alternatives for energy savings, (ii)
cost allocation, (iii) operation optimization, (iv) local optimization of subsystems, (v)
energy audits and assessment on fuel impact of malfunctions. It is found that exergy
concept is very powerful tool to identify, assign, measure and attribute a cause to the
inefficiencies of the real plant.
Exergetic cost concept developed by Lozano and Valero (1993) has been applied to
thermal systems. Valero et al. (1994) explained the strategy for optimizing the thermal
31

system using the Exergetic Cost Theory (ECT) and symbolic exergoeconomics. ECT
permits the allocation of costs to each of the flows of installation. The symbolic
exergoeconomics permits to relate the efficiency and cost of its flows and products to
efficiencies of components. The ECT help to enhance physical model of plant and not
thermal model but this information can be used to improve local optimization. Dentice et
al. (1998) has applied this technique for the estimation of refrigeration and heat pumps.
Mishra et al. (2002) used this theory for the estimation of LiBr/H 2O vapour absorption
system. Modesto et al. (2006) applied the theory for a power plant for steel mill. The
system has been assessed by two theories, theory of Thermoeconomic Functional
Analysis and exergetic cost developed by Frangopoulos (1987).
Earlier work by Tribus, Evans and EI-Sayed on thermoeconomics led to the development
of thermoeconomic isolation (TI) Any thermal system component may be regarded as
thermo economically isolated from other system components when its economic
interactions are completely described by a set of single numerical values of stable
Lagrange multipliers for each interaction. Examples of useful energy analysis are
mentioned for feed-water heaters, condensers, evaporators and condensers in
refrigeration systems Evans (1980). In order, to approach the thermoeconomic isolation,
Evans (1980) made use of the functions or the purposes of thermal systems components
to obtain the TI under some conditions. The attempt to derive the complete set of
conditions for TI led to the development of a new method for optimal design or
improvement of

complex thermal system, which is named as thermoeconomic

functional analysis (TFA)[ Frangopoulos (1987, 1994)].

Tsatsaronis et al. (1985) applied the thermoeconomic approach to energy conversion
plants. They verified that approach allows the monetary estimation of costs caused by the
irreversibilities losses, as well as the comparisons between these costs and investment
and operating costs for each component of plant. This information can be used for
improvement in plant. Tsatsaronis et al. (1994) have simply applied this theory to the
CGAM problem. In presented study, Tsatsaronis, Tawfik et al. (1994) applied the
technique to two KRW-Based IGCC power plants supported by Department of Energy,
USA. Several configurations of IGCC plant were developed. One of these configurations
33

has been analyzed from exergoeconomic (thermoeconomic) view point. Several

conclusions and recommendations were made for improving the performance of plant
and also considerable cost saving. By using the iterative exergy aided cost minimization
method, for optimal case, 45% overall exergetic efficiency has been reported.
In this literature recent rules of optimization for multiproduct systems are also added. The
rules contain the loss of unit cost due to irreversibilities in a subsystem. Comparison of
new and old rules for the case of a cogeneration.
Erlach et al. (1999) proposed the Structural theory of thermoeconomics. According to
Tsatsaronis, there are two main groups of thermoeconomics methods: (a) cost accounting
method, and (b) optimization methods. When comparing the different methodologies,
many nomenclatures, concepts and names are faced by readers. This was one of reason
impeding the faster development of thermoeconomics. To avoid the unnecessary
confusion, the need of common mathematical language was felt. This common
mathematical language is provided by the Structural theory of thermoeconomics.
Torres et al. (2002) introduced the method based on the structural theory and symbolic
thermoeconomics. It integrates the thermoeconomic methodologies developed until now,
such as fuel impact, technical exergy saving and also computes the additional fuel
consumption and malfunction costs of plant components.
The structural theory is able to predict exactly total additional fuel that the plant
consumed on malfunctioning the some plant component Zang et al (2006).
In the case of thermoeconomics, the effect of malfunction is quantified in terms
additional fuel consumed for same production, with respect to base case design condition.
The main methodologies has been discussed in Lozano et al. (1993), Valero et al. (1994),
Bejan et al. (1996), Valero et al. (2002) , Zang et al. (2006), Dentice et al. (1998),
Dentice et al. (1998), Mishra et al. (2002),
Kwak

et al. (2003) has analyzed a 500 MW combined cycle plant, the exergy and

exergetic cost balance for each component and for the whole system have been
considered carefully. The exergoeconomic model has been used to visualize the cost
35

formation process and productive interaction between the components. At the 100% load
condition measured and calculated exergetic efficiency are 57 and 54.8% respectively.
The unit cost of electricity is directly proportional to the unit cost of fuel.

2.8 CONCLUSIONS
Theory of exergetic cost have been applied to thermal power plants abroad and it is
obvious from previous researchers work that it is a powerful tool for assessing the
thermal systems. Not surprisingly, this technique has been used in the Europe to enhance
and maintain the plant performance. However, this technique is not widely used in India
where 71% of energy comes from thermal power plants. Therefore more work is needed.
Such developments will allow us to profit significantly, in economic terms and in many
other ways also.
Much has been done on exergy and exergoeconomics but more work is still needed.
Finally exergy analysis can be applied globally to the industrial sector, or an entire nation
to develop insights. Such insights can be used to guide measures for improving the
sectors overall conversion efficiency, reducing thereby resource waste.
.

37

CHAPTER-3

EXERGY AND ENERGY ANALYSIS OF COAL

FIRED NON-REHEAT THERMAL POWER PLANT
3.1 INTRODUCTION
In India annual demand for electricity has increased from 1714 MW in 1950 to
180323.41 MW (2014).The electricity generated from thermal power plants constitutes
64.6 % of total generation. From, the Fifth Five year plan onwards i.e. 1974-79, the
Government of India got itself involved in a big way in generation of power to
supplement the efforts at the state Government level and took upon itself the
responsibility of setting up the large power projects based upon the coal as well on other
resources like hydro, nuclear etc.. NTPC NHPC and NPC were set up for these purposes
in 1975.
The size of the generating unit that has been used in the country in coal based power
stations has progressively increased from about 15 MW to 500 MW but now-a-days 660
MW and 720 MW units are being installed. With the introduction of more and more
power plants, certain difficulties are arising in their efficient and smooth operation and
maintenance. The availability of coal in the country is such that the higher grades of coal,
which have higher calorific value, have been exhausted and progressively lower grades of
coal are being made available for generation of electricity in power plants. This had
resulted in poor thermal efficiencies of power plants. Shortage of power is being felt from
all corners of India and National Electricity Policy (NEP) stipulates the power for all by
2012. To fulfill the objective of NEP, a capacity addition of 78,700 MW has been
proposed for the 11th Plan. The share of thermal power plant would be 75.8% in this
capacity addition.
This growing demand of power all over the world has made the

power plants of

scientific interest and also for the efficient utilization of resources. This has led to
development of various analysis techniques for magnifying the output of power plants.

38

We use First Law of Thermodynamics for this.But as time passes both exergy and energy
both concepts are required in power plant to find efficiecny.
The exergy balance of system allows us to allocate and calculate irreversibilities in the
production process and to identify which units and what for reason they affect the overall
efficiency. An exergy assessment allows one to quantify the loss of efficiency in a process
due to loss of quality of the energy. This analysis can indicate where the process can be
improved and, therefore, what areas should receive more attention.
We are not able to find main thermodynamic flaw in different processes in thermal power
plants by using just an energy analysis. These effects of the aforesaid irreversible
phenomenon can be detected and evaluated by only exergy analysis. The exergy analysis
can therefore give the information about the possibilities of improving thermal processes,
but cannot state whether or not the possible improvement is practicable. Such a question
can be answered only by the economic analysis and has been discussed in Chapter IV.

3.2 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

The power plant consists of three units of 3 X 55 MW at full load. Figure 3.1 shows the
schematic diagram for 55 MW power plants for one unit. Boiler of considered unit is
designed for coal of calorific value of 23100 +- 840 KJ/kg with ash content of 22% and
volatile matter of 38%. However, the coal received is of 16765KJ/kg with ash content of
38% and 26% volatile matter Plant consists of HP and LP turbines without any reheating.
Steam after expanding in LP turbine is exhausted in condenser. The condensed steam
passes through the LP and HP regenerative feed water heaters. The hot water is then fed
to boiler drum through the two economizers. Cycle has been analyzed with following
assumption.
1)

Specific exergy of fuel has been calculated as in Bejan et al. (1996).

2)

Gross calorific value has been used in calculations.

39

3.3 ENERGY AND EXERGY ANALYSIS OF NON REHEAT COAL

BASED THERMAL POWER PLANT
In analysis conservation of mass and energy laws are used for individual as wells as total
system. Both exergy and energy analysis condition are applied on 55MW and at 40MW
to find process irreversibilities.
The major streams entering and leaving the components of the plant are shown in the
Figure 3.1.To identify the sources of the availability destruction, the entire plant has been
split into different control volumes, viz. Boiler with its inputs and outputs, generator

40

Hot Air Supply

48
47
Coal
_1

Boiler Unit
35 _

_2

_3

36

Exit SH

HP
4

34

LP Turbine
7

37

10

13

16

19

Platen
SH
33_

Condense
r

Cold Water in 49

38
Hot water out 50
LTSH

25

20

Deareator
32

39
18

Economizer 2

40

_47
AP 2

31_

_5

41

H
P
H
2

46
Economizer 1
30

42

AP 1

8
H
P
H
1

28

29

_26

_11

B FP

27

24

9a

L
P
H
3

14

23
12

LP
H
2

17

22

L
P
H
1

21

CEP

15

6
Make up-Water
51
ID Fan

41

Hot
Well

Air in 44

45
43 Flue gases to Stack

Figure 3.1 Schematic diagram of non-reheat thermal power plant

42

condenser and regenerative system and the entire cycle with boiler, turbine, generator,
condenser and regenerative system. By doing this we can also calculate the part of each
component irreversibility in gross irreversibility of the plant. A general energy and
exergy-balance equations, applicable to any component of a thermal system may be
formulated by using the first and second law of thermodynamics; the specific thermomechanical exergy (neglecting kinetic and potential energy) is evaluated from the
following equation:
e j (h j h0 ) T0 (s j s0 )

(3.1)

The total rate of exergy with any stream can be estimated as

E j m j e j

(3.2)

and total rate of energy with any stream can be estimated as

.

B j m j h j

(3.3)

where the m, j ,h, s and 0 denotes mass flow rate of stream, energy or exergy flow
streams entering or leaving the component at any point, specific enthalpy, specific
entropy and thermodynamic properties at ambient conditions respectively in above
Equations.
Chemical exergy (based on dry and ash free) estimation, required for the fuel only, has
been evaluated separately.

CH
e DAF
( HHV ) DAF T0 [ s DAF v O2 * s O2 v CO2 * s CO2 v H 2O * s H

2O

v SO2 * s SO2 v N 2 * s N 2 ]

CH
CH
[v CO2 * eCO
v H 2O * e HCH
v SO2 * e SO
v N 2 * e NCH
v O2 * eOCH
]
2
2O
2
2
2

DAF and HHV denote dry and ash free and higher heating value respectively.
43

(3.4)

Out of it the exergy flow rate leaving with flue gas is:
g
g g
E out m j e j

(3.5)

where, the summation applies over all the components of the flue gas and superscript g is
for flue gas.
A detailed exergy analysis includes calculating the exergy destruction and loss in each
component. The exergy balance equation for any component (without decomposing)
.

E e,k W k E q ,k E i ,k
e

(3.6)

The subscripts e, i, k and q denote exit, inlet, component and heat transfer respectively.
.

E and W denote the Exergy rate and work transfer rate in Equation 3.6.
The exergy destruction rate in a component is calculated from exergy balance
.

E D E i ,k E e,k
i

(3.7)

The exergy destruction ratio

y D ,k

k
represents the exergy destruction rate E D in the th

component with total exergy destruction rate in the system.

.

y D , k E D .k / E D , k

(3.8)

The general definition for exergetic efficiency for a thermal system is

Exergetic Efficiency 1

Exergy loss
All Input Exergies

44

(3.9)

Appendix 1 shows the equation used for calculating exergy destruction and exergy
efficiencies for plant subsystem.
Table 3.1 Pressure, temperature, mass flow rate, energy and exergy flow rate for the
streams of power plant at 55 MW (Base case design)
Stream
1
4
6
7
9a
10
12
13
15
16
18a
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
323
39
40
41
42
43
44
46
47
47
48
49
50
51

Pressure
(bar)
92.157
26.874
26.877
11.898
11.898
3.298
3.298
0.843
0.843
0.699
0.699
0.107
0.107
11.454
11.454
11.454
11.454
11.454
4.010
129.456
129.456
129.456
129.456
129.456
129.456
104.289
0.025
0.025
0.024
0.024
0.024
1.013
1.058
1.058
1.058
1.013
1.013
1.013
1.013

Temperature
(K)
811.823
599.612
500.284
601.522
460.123
461.000
402.559
420.113
389.241
390.553
360.991
299.359
326.881
311.663
349.226
379.114
389.449
389.447
419.559
433.884
439.551
459.118
459.117
519.777
539.448
579.423
829.473
664.123
635.000
500.000
416.150
298.000
481.000
613.000
613.000
298.150
306.000
315.000
298.000

Flow
(kg/s)
71.119
4.569
4.123
4.108
4.289
2.543
2.543
3.108
5.119
8.989
12.984
50.789
52.107
64.873
64.873
64.873
64.873
64.873
73.445
73.445
73.445
73.445
73.445
73.445
73.445
73.445
387.440
378.446
387.440
387.440
387.440
377.700
377.700
377.700
377.700
9.740
2960.000
2960.000
0.692

45

Energy
(KW)
258619.111
10843.143
3499.669
10845.234
5576.998
4700.162
845.229
8000.112
1900.236
23999.488
5000.112
141211.558
9412.135
15000.336
20010.341
30000.112
31365.755
199998.653
198432.114
46892.813
49989.951
60000.342
60000.341
81234.456
84749.159
111112.543
1452333.369
1333511.243
1145800.000
914490.000
706840.000
112960.000
5323900.000
6768300.000
6768300.000
224800.000
407590.000
518910.000
434.300

Exergy
(KW)
114181.125
4275.147
739.249
3490.354
990.111
1146.241
95.234
1392.217
150.223
3918.236
319.123
8101.142
150.220
420.174
1189.336
2415.328
3511.858
3399.408
49112.009
7113.220
8999.222
12000.134
12000.139
20123.443
31998.637
29999.123
75998.692
56264.396
50139.000
32975.000
22050.000
0.000
15273.000
37900.000
37900.000
247660.000
2651.800
7179.500
0.000

3.4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Here both energy and exergy analysis

are done on 55MW Non-Reheat coal based

thermal power plant. Figure 3.1 and Table 3.1 shows related thermodynamic data. For
normal running of plant at 55MW, boiler generates the 71.119 kg/s of superheated steam
at 92.157 bars. The superheated steam produced in super heaters enters into the HP
turbine. After expansion in HP turbine, steam enters into LP turbine without any reheat.
Finally, the exhaust of LP turbine is condensed into the condenser and used for closed
cycle. For regenerative heating of condensate, steam extracted from various points as
shown in Figure 3.1.The relevant performance characteristic and boundary characteristic
are in the form of process flow and operating data is provided by plant operation
personnel of the power plant. These data includes the mass flow rate, temperature and
pressure of steam at 40 and 55MW. The reference state for water, air and fuel is 250C.
When analyzing a real thermal power plant it is really hard , complex and cumbersome to
find the real data related to parts of system on many variable operating conditions and
when the relations are not linear. To overcome all these complexity, we done our analysis
by doing programming in MATLAB. The program calculates total energy, total exergy at
different plant load conditions. Using these intensive and extensive properties, program
calculates subsystem effectiveness at rated load and part load conditions. Main
subsystems of thermal power plant are boiler, turbine, and condenser and feed water
heaters.
The relevant steam operating data for power plant at 40 and 55MW load were supplied as
an input and the values of enthalpy, exergy and effectiveness has been computed as an
output data. Table 3.1 shows the computed values of energy and exergy of various flows
in the plant.
Table 3.1 contain relevant thermodynamic data i.e., pressure, temperature, energy and
exergy for steam power plant at 55MW. Similar calculations were also performed for
40MW. Corresponding energetic and exergetic efficiencies of subsystems and of the
whole plant at 55MW is shown in Figure 3.2. From energetic point of view turbine is
maximum efficient component with an efficiency of 96.53%. The Feed water heaters,
46

Second Law efficiency

boiler and condenser are equally efficient components with the efficiencies of 84.82,
84.35 and 84.14% respectively. The energetic efficiency of plant was estimated as
24.52%.
First Law efficiency

From Second law point of view, the turbine remains as the maximum efficient

component with exergetic efficiency of 66.25% and boiler is the least efficient
component with exergetic efficiency of 37.67% whereas the exergetic efficiencies of
feed water heaters and condenser are 83.14% and 59.46% respectively and lies between
the exergetic efficiencies of turbine and boiler. The exergetic efficiency of the whole
plant has been estimated as 22.21%.

Efficiency (%)

Feed Water

Plant Heaters
Condenser
Turbine

120
100
80

Figure 3.3 shows the First law efficiency at full and part load condition of 40MW. From
60

energy or the first law standpoint view the overall plant efficiency varies 24.52 at 55MW
40

to 22.01% at 40MW. The component-wise variation in the First law efficiency is also
20

indicated in Figure 3.3. The efficiencies of boiler, turbine, condenser and feed water
0

Boiler

47

Figure 3.2 Efficiencies of plant and subsystems a

55 MW
40 MW

120
100
80 (%)
Efficiency
60
40
20
0

Boiler

Turbine

Condenser

Feed Water
Heaters

Plant

Figure 3.3 First law efficiency for subsystems and overall plant

55 MW
40 MW
100

80

Efficiency (%)
60

40

20

Boiler

Turbine

Condenser

Feed Water Heaters Plant

Figure 3.4 Exergetic efficiencies for subsystem and plant

48

heaters drop to 82.84, 92.88, 43.19 and 75.29% respectively. The condenser operates with
lowest efficiency at 40MW as indicated in Figure 3.3. Figure 3.4 shows second law or
exergetic efficiency of subsystems and overall plant at rated full load and part load
condition. The exergetic efficiency of plant at designed rated condition, which is 22.10%
drops to 19.94% at part load of 40MW, which is very low. This indicates that tremendous
opportunities are available for the improvement. However, part of this irreversibility
cannot be avoided due to physical, technological and economic constraints. The exergetic
efficiency for boiler varies from 37.67 to 36.50%, for turbine, the efficiency is improved
to 68.25% at 40MW, for the condenser, the second law efficiency varies from 59.46% at
full load to 15.05% at part load of 40MW and for, feed water heaters and the exergetic
efficiency varies from 83.12% at 55MW to 75.08% at 40MW.

100

80

Exergy destruction (%)

60

55 MW
40 MW

40

20

Boiler

Turbine

Condenser

Feed Water
Heaters

Figure 3.5 Exergy destruction (%) within subsystems

Figure 3.5 shows the exergy destruction in percentage (exergy destruction in a component
to the total exergy destruction in plant) in subsystems of plant at 55MW and 40MW. This
figure shows that maximum exergy destruction takes place in the boiler and least exergy
49

destruction takes place is feed water heaters at 55 and40MW. The exergy destruction in
the boiler increases from 78.83% to 80.20%. It is observed that maximum exergy
destruction of total exergy destruction occurs within the boiler and destruction rate
increases at part load conditions. There are many sources of irreversibility within the
boiler. The major sources of exergy destruction firstly, is chemical reaction in boiler
combustion chamber where chemical reaction is the most significant source of exergy
destruction causing the incomplete combustion in a combustion chamber which is the
irreversible combustion itself. Primary source of destruction is that high potential fuel is
consumed in the spontaneous combustion. The exergy destruction at part load increases
due to improper heating of inlet combustion air. Secondly, the exergy destruction in the
combustion chamber also significantly affected by excess air and inlet temperature of air.
The efficiencies of combustion can significantly increased by preheating the inlet
combustion air effectively and controlling the air-fuel ratio effectively. As discussed
earlier maximum exergy destruction occurs in the boiler due to incomplete combustion,
excess air, and poor performance of air pre-heaters and use of low grade fuel other than
designed fuel. The temperature of air supplied to the boiler at full load is 340 oC where as
at 40MW part loads this temperature is 303oC. Thirdly and lastly, the exergy destruction
also caused by the poor heat transfer from flue gas to steam which is the irreversible heat
transfer between the hot combustion products and the fluid in the boiler tubes. The coal
temperature at mill outlets should be in the range of 65-80 oC where as actual temperature
is in range of 84-89oC at the all mills. A steep fall in the condenser efficiency may be
seen at part load condition because of the actual high back pressure and high terminal
temperature difference against designed values. Lowering the condenser temperature,
consequently, lowers cycle average temperature. Essential effect is that, the exergy lost
through condenserambient heat transfer decreases. Quality and quantity of raw water
supplied to cooling tower is poor. Equivalent mineral acidity and KMNO 4 is very much
above design values. The performance of regenerative system is very poor particularly at
part loads. There are 2 HP heaters and 3LP heaters provided in the system. The main
approach is to maximize the cycle high temperature. Counter flow heat transfer between
the two streams raises temperature of feed water near to boiling point. The intended
outcome of feed heating is to avoid the degradation of heat transfer from bleeding steam
50

in the course of heating the feed water. Feed heating shown in Figure 1 derives its
irreversibility from two main sources, first, the mixing of sub cooled liquid with a
saturated mixture of higher temperature, and, in the case of the later feed heating stages
and second, the mixing of superheated steam with a saturated mixture of lower
temperature. The thermodynamic data provided for of regenerative system were
insufficient for calculation purpose. However based on some assumed data, calculation
for exergetic efficiency has been made. It is observed from the data that at part load, LP1
is not in the service as there is no temperature gain in the heater. In turbine exergy
destruction drops from 16.70 % to 14.54% indicating that turbine performance improves
at part load condition from second law point of view whereas in the condenser the exergy
destruction increases from 3.01% to 4.20%

and for the feed water heaters exergy

destruction increases from 1.45% to 2.50%.

According to First Law analysis turbine and feed water heaters are most efficient parts
whereas the boiler and condenser are equally efficient but comparatively not efficient as
turbine. On comparing the Figure 3.3 and Figure 3.4, it is observed that boiler
performance is not as good as from the exergetic efficiency point of view and same
conclusion may be drawn from other subsystems also. In this sense first law analysis is
misleading. Second Law Analysis serves to pinpoint the true power generation
inefficiencies occurring throughout the power plant.

3.5 CONCLUSIONS
In this work an energy and exergy analysis has been

performed on a 55MW actual

thermal power plant at 40MW and 55MW output to find the losses taking place in the
plant. Exergy and percent of destruction along with energetic and exergetic efficiencies
have been evaluated. In the considered power cycle, maximum energy loss was found in
the condenser. Feed water heaters and boiler were the next. In the terms of exergy
destruction, it was found that exergy destruction rate of boiler is dominating over all other
irreversibilities in the plant. Next to it was turbine where approximate 16% (at 55MW) of
the total exergy destruction in the plant was destroyed. The percentage exergy destruction

51

in the condenser and feed water heaters is very low. Calculated exergetic efficiency of
plant is 22.10% at 55MW which is very low as compared to modern power plants.
Finally exergy based analysis provides a measure of approach to ideality or deviation
from ideality.

52

CHAPTER-4

EXERGOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF COAL FIRED

NON-REHEAT THERMAL POWER PLANT
4.1 INTRODUCTION
In chapter III of this thesis, the energy and exergy analysis of coal fired non-reheat
thermal power plant has been performed. Exergy analysis usually predicts the
thermodynamic performance of an energy system [Lozano M A et al. (1993) and Szargut
J et al. (1988)]. Furthermore, exergoeconomic analysis combines the exergy analysis and
economic principles, estimates the unit cost of products and quantifies monetary losses
due to irreversibility [Bejan A et al. (1996) and Kotas T J (1985)]. At present, such
analysis is in great demand because proper estimation of production cost is essential for
companies. Exergoeconomics that integrates the exergy and economics includes the
determination of:

the appropriate allocation of economic resources

the economic feasibility and profitability of a system

All techniques have the following common characteristics:

they combine exergy and economic principles

they recognize that exergy, not the energy , is the commodity of the value
in a system, and they consequently assign the costs and /or prices to
exergy related variables

In present study, exergetic and thermoeconomic analysis has been performed for 55MW
non reheat thermal power plant. In this analysis, mass and energy conservation laws were
applied to each component. Quantitative balance of exergies and exergetic costs for each
component and for whole system was considered carefully. The exergy- balance and cost
balance equation mentioned in Bejan et al. (1996) has been used in these analyses.
53

Calculation result shows that unit cost of electricity increases with decrease in load. In
this work certain exergy-related variables also has been calculated to study the various
components of power plant.

4.2 THE NON REHEAT THERMAL POWER PLANT

A schematic of a 55MW non reheat thermal power plant is shown in Figure 3.1 and
shows main work and exergy flows and state points which we accounted in these
analyses. The system consist of a boiler, low and high pressures steam turbines,
condenser and feed water heaters. The mass flow rate of steam to the turbine is 72.220
kgs-1 at 530oC and 93.17 bar when plant operates at 55MW. The temperature and pressure
of exhausted steam from LP turbine is 46 oC and 0.098 bars respectively. Water enters to
economizer at 194oC raising its temperature from 52oC through feed water heaters. The
incoming air to air pre-heater has a temperature of 25 oC and pressure 1.013 bars. The
temperature of incoming air increases to 340oC by air pre-heaters. Temperature of flue
gases leaving air pre-heaters is 150oC.Total cost of coal consumed by the plant is Rs
627.33 million in a year and 299 mega units of electricity have been generated. The unit
has been designed for a calorific value of 23100 KJ/kg with ash content of 22% and a
volatile matter of 38%. However during recent years the average calorific value of fuel of
about 19337 KJ/kg with ash content of 30.65% and volatile matter of 25.73% is being
supplied but in the calculation the value GCV of 23080 KJ/kg has been used.

4.3 FORMULATION
EQUATION

OF

EXERGO-ECONOMIC

BALANCE

A general exergy- balance equation, applicable to any component of a thermal system is

formulated in chapter 3.1 and is as follows:

E
e

.
e,k

W k E q ,k E i ,k

(4.1)

Assigning a unit exergy cost to every exergy stream, we can write the cost balance
equation corresponding to equation (4.1)

55

 (c

E e ) k c w , k W k c q , k E q , k (c i E i ) k Z k

(4.2)

where c denotes the unit exergy cost and term

associated with owning and operating the

k th

Zk

includes all financial charges

plant component. Equations (4.1) and

(4.2) are two main equations used in this analysis. This exergy costing is similar to that
suggested by Lozano and Valero (1993). The productive structure of the system can be
obtained by applying Equation (4.2) to each component.

The other exergoeconomic variables are relative cost difference

fk

factor

rk

and exergoeconomic

.The relative cost difference is as in Bejan et al. (1996).

.
CI
k

.
OM
k

1 k Z Z

.
k
c F , k E P ,k

c F ,k

where
.
OM
k

rk

(4.3)
.

CI
cost per unit fuel exergy, Z k : cost rate associated with capital investment,

: cost rate associated with operating and maintenance. This reveals the real cost

associated with k th component.

The exergoeconomic factor

f k is as in the Bejan et al. (1996).

Zk

f k
.

Z k c F , k ( E D , k E L ,k )
.

The

Zk

is total cost rate associated with

(4.4)

k th

component whereas E D and E L represents the

exergy destruction rate and exergy loss rate respectively. The exergoeconomic factor
57

expresses as a ratio the contribution of the non-exergy-related cost to total cost increase.
A low value of the exergoeconomic factor calculated for a major component suggest that
cost saving in the entire system might be achieved by improving the component
efficiency even if the capital investment for this component will increase.

4.4 ECONOMIC ANALYISIS

COMPONENTS

FOR

THE

POWER

PLANT

The aim of economic analysis in this thesis is to provide sufficient inputs to be used in the
exergoeconomic analysis. These inputs are initial investment or purchased equipment
cost, operation and maintenance cost and annualized cost for the plant components and
for whole plant.
Following steps has been applied in this kind of economic analysis:
I. Purchased equipment cost should be estimated and there are several ways to
obtain purchased equipment costs of equipments. Best source is venders
quotations. Other ways are cost estimates from past purchased orders, quotations
from experienced professional cost estimates. Cost databases maintained by
companies. In this thesis, purchased equipment cost has been obtained from the
stock register of cost database of power plants. All costs due to owning have been
taken from the stock register and were purchased during year 1976 as listed in
Table 4.2 in 2nd column.
II. Levelized costs should be calculated as the costs of components vary significantly
within the economic life of the plant. In general, carrying charges decreases while
fuel, raw material and O&M costs increase with increasing years of operation.
Therefore, levelized annual values for all cost components should be used to
simplify the exergoeconomic analysis.
III. Levelized annual costs for all components should be calculated. In this thesis, the
annualized (levelized) cost method of Moran (1989) has been used.
The amortization cost or present worth for a particular component may be written as
59

PW Ci S n PWF i, n

(4.5)

Ci, i.e. initial capital investments or purchased-equipment costs (PEC) (Rs.) for the
components and has been taken from stock register of the company.

Sn

and PWF denotes

the salvage value and present worth factor whereas i and n denotes interest rate and
component life in years.
The present worth of a component is converted to annualized cost by using the capital
recovery factor CRF (i, n), i.e.
.

C (Rs. / year) = PW * CRF (i, n)

(4.6)

Dividing levelized cost by 8760 annual operating hours, we obtain the following capital
cost for the
.

k th

component of the plant.

.

Z k k C k /(3600 * 8760 )

(4.7)

The maintenance cost can be taken into consideration through the factor

k 1.06 but in

the calculation this value has taken as unity for each plant component whose expected life
is assumed to be 25 years.

4.5 COST BALANCE EQUATIONS FOR NON REHEAT THERMAL

POWER PLANT
The cost balance equations for each component in the power plant, shown in Figure 3.1,
can be derived from the general cost-balance equation given in Equation (4.2). These cost
balance equation may be solved for the cost per exergy unit of exiting steam with the
need of auxiliary relations. As a rule, n-1 auxiliary relations are required for the
component with n exiting exergy streams [Lozano M.A et al (1993), Bejan A et al (1996)
and Kwak H et al. (2003)].

61

4.5.1

BOILER

The function of boiler is to raise the temperature and pressure of feed water. The cost
balance equation for boiler is
.

c 48 E CHE c w E baux. c 29 E 29 Z b c 1 E 1 c 43 E 43

(4.8)

c48, c43, cw and c1 are the cost per exergy unit associated with stream 48 , 43 ,auxiliary
.

E, E
exergy consumption to boiler and stream 1 respectively.

.
.
CHE

, E baux and Z b denote

exergy rate at various points, chemical exergy with fuel, the auxiliary exergy
consumption to boiler and sum of charges associated with boilers capital investment and
operating & maintenance costs respectively. The auxiliary relations for this equation are
[Bejan et al. (1996)]

c 43 c 48 and c 43 0

(4.9)

The cost of exergy of escaping streams to the environment is taken to be zero.

63

4.5.2

TURBINE

The plant unit consist of high and low pressure turbines. For the simplicity, both the
turbines have been considered in a single unit assuming that steam is expanding from
turbine inlet pressure to condenser back pressure. The cost balance equations for turbine
are as
.

c 1 E 1 c w E taux Z t c 4 E 4 c 7 E 7 c 10 E 10 c 13 E 13 c 16 E 16 c19 E 19 c w E turbine

(4.10)

and auxiliary relations are

c1 c 4 c 7 c 10 c 13 c16 c19

(4.11)

In above Equations c denote the unit exergy cost for various flows whereas
.

Z t , E taux and E turbine

denote the sum of charges associated with turbines capital

investment and operating & maintenance costs, auxiliary exergy to turbine and exergy at
turbine outlet respectively.
4.5.3

CONDENSER

c 19 E 19 c 49 E 49 c w E caux Z c c 50 E 50 c 20 E 20
.

The

(4.12)

E caux and Z c

denote auxiliary exergy to condenser and the sum of charges

associated with condensers capital investment and operating & maintenance respectively
and auxiliary relations are

c1 c 50 c 19 and c 49 0
4.5.4

(4.13)

FEED WATER HEATERS

Assuming the feed water heaters as single unit

65

c 4 E 4 c 7 E 7 c10 E 10 c 13 E 13 c 16 E 16 c 21 E 21 c w E htaux Z htrs c 29 E 29 c 18 E 18

.

E htaux and Z htrs

The

(4.14)

denote auxiliary exergy to feed water heaters and the sum of charges

associated with feed water heaters capital investment and operating & maintenance
respectively and auxiliary relations are

c 4 c 7 c 10 c 13 c 16 c 21 c 18 c 1
4.5.5

(4.15)

OVERALL POWER PLANT

c 48 E CHE Z OP c w E aux c w W t c 50 E 50 c 43 E 43
.

The

(4.16)

Z OP , E aux and W t

denote the sum of charges associated with overall plants capital

investment and operating & maintenance, auxiliary exergy to plant and net output from
turbine respectively. The system of linear equations (4.8)-(4.16) is solved for the
unknown values of cost per unit of exergy. Before solving these equations, the values of
.

term

Zk

for the

k th

component have been calculated with the aid equation (4.7). The

carrying charges (CC) and annual operating and maintenance cost (OMC) for the total is
taken into consideration through the factor

k 1.00 for each plant component whose

expected life is assumed to be 25 years.

4.6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The Table 4.1 shows the relevant thermodynamic data of power plant and calculated
values of exergy flow rates at various state points shown in Fig.3.1. These flow rates
were calculated based on the values of measured properties such as pressure, temperature,
and mass flow rate at various points. Table 4.2 shows the initial investment cost
.

annualized cost and monetary flow rates to each component. Monetary flow rate i.e. Z
67

for turbine unit is highest and lowest for feed water heaters. The Table 4.3 shows the
values of exergy, cost rates associated with flows and average unit costs of flows for base
case design at 55MW. These costs have been obtained by applying the cost equations
from (4.8) to (4.16). The average unit cost value of fuel (coal only), 0.095 Rs per MJ, has
been used in this calculation. In this analysis, the highest exergy unit cost with a value of
0.3969 Rs per Mega Joules is achieved at turbine-generator exit where all exergy is
available at exit in electrical power, which is the most expensive product in the system. It
is also noted that cost per exergy unit is considerably higher for stream 50 and stream 29.
The monetary losses associated with exergy loss of stream 43 and streams 50 are
7554.600 Rs per hr and 97182.00 Rs per hr respectively. The cost of final product is
depends on the cost of input fuel.
In Table 4.4, thermoeconomic variables are summarized. These variables include average
costs per unit of fuel exergy c F , product exergy c P , cost rate flow rate of various streams
.

C , investment and O&M cost rate Z , C D Z (Rs/hr), relative cost difference "r" and
.

exergoeconomic factor " f " , the boiler and turbine have the highest values of C D Z and
are, therefore most important components from the thermoeconomic viewpoint. The low
value of variable " f " for boiler suggest that cost associated with boiler is exclusively due
to exergy destruction and cost saving might be achieved by improving the component
efficiency. On the other hand, the value of "r" reveals the real cost source associated
with any component. The high value of "r" for the boiler suggests that while optimizing
the component, this value has to be minimized instead of minimizing the cost per exergy
unit of the products for the component. Therefore the 0.12% value of " f " for boiler
suggest to increase the exergetic efficiency, even if the capital investment increases and
165.57% value or "r" suggest that this value has to be reduced so that real cost
associated with boiler decreases. Turning next, relatively high value of " f " for the steam
turbine suggests that capital investment and O&M costs dominates but this value of " f "
suggest that by reducing the exergy destruction, the exergetic efficiency of turbine can be
69

improved further and cost saving in the system may be achieved by improving the
exergetic efficiency of component.

Table 4.1 Pressure, temperature, mass flow rate and exergy flow rate at 55 MW
Point

1
4
6
7
9a
10
12
13
15
16
18a
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
323
39
40
41
42
43
44
46
47
47
48
49
50
51

Pr.(Bar)

93.166
25.988
25.988
10.787
10.787
2.187
2.187
0.932
0.932
0.588
0.588
0.098
0.098
10.788
10.788
10.788
10.788
10.788
3.923
132.394
132.394
132.394
132.394
132.394
132.394
105.910
0.024
0.024
0.024
0.024
0.024
1.013
1.058
1.058
1.058
1.013
1.013
1.013
1.013

Temp (K)

Flow(kg/s)

803.000
663.000
496.050
590.000
456.200
460.000
397.250
413.000
370.750
384.520
358.650
319.000
316.760
325.000
352.000
377.000
391.200
391.200
421.000
421.000
443.000
467.000
467.000
526.000
542.000
588.000
832.000
673.000
635.000
500.000
416.150
298.000
481.000
613.000
613.000
298.150
306.000
315.000
298.000

72.220
3.658
3.710
3.910
3.910
1.654
1.654
2.960
4.613
9.070
13.683
51.200
51.200
65.575
65.575
65.575
65.575
65.575
72.894
72.894
72.894
72.894
72.894
72.894
72.894
72.894
387.440
387.440
387.440
387.440
387.440
377.700
377.700
377.700
377.700
9.740
2960.000
2960.000
0.692

71

Exergy(KW)

105090.000
4186.900
744.850
3521.300
989.000
1057.000
94.185
1463.200
149.380
3809.400
326.000
8015.000
148.020
416.010
1293.500
2536.500
3408.700
3408.700
48928.000
7054.400
9167.100
11797.000
11797.000
19730.000
32009.000
30761.000
76667.000
55175.000
50139.000
32975.000
22050.000
0.000
15273.000
37900.000
37900.000
247660.000
2651.800
7179.500
0.000

Table 4.2
Initial

investment costs, annualized costs and corresponding monetary flow rates of each
component in power plant
Component

Initial
Investment
cost (Rs 106)

Boiler
Turbine
Condenser
Feed water
heaters
Other
equipments
Plant

Annualized
cost
(Rs106/year)

Monetary
flow rates
(Rs/hr)

21.931
76.481
4.048
0.485

2.416
8.425
0.446
0.053

292.36
1019.56
53.96
6.47

128.102

14.114

1708.15

231.047

25.454

3080.05

Table 4.3 Exergy, cost rates associated with flows and unit costs of flows at 55 MW
Stream
No.
1
4
7
10
13
16
18
19
20
21
29
Cw
43
48
49
50
51

Component

Unit Cost of
Fuel Exergy
cF
(Rs/MJ)

Unit Cost of
Product
Exergy c P
(Rs/MJ)

(MW)
105.900
4.187
3.521
1.056
1.463
3.809
0.216
8.015
0.148
0.412
11.797
55.000
22.050
247.660
0.000
7.180
0.000

Cost flow
Rate of
.

Stream C
(Rs/hr.)

Boiler
Turbine
Condenser

0.1061
0.2543
0.2543

0.2543
0.3969
0.3760

99135.72
96292.8
7344.36

Feed Water

0.2545

0.3362

0.095

0.3969

Heaters
Plant

(Rs/MJ)

C (Rs/hr)

0.2543
0.2543
0.2543
0.2543
0.2543
0.2543
0.2543
0.2543
0.2543
0.2543
0.3362
0.3969
0.0950
0.0950
0.0000
0.3760
0.0000

96292.800
3836.520
3226.610
968.000
1340.520
3490.668
198.010
7344.360
135.630
377.172
14280.120
78586.200
7554.600
84855.600
0.000
97182.000
0.000

Cost of
exergy
destruction(
Rs/hr)

(Rs/hr)

CDZ
(Rs/hr)

r (%)

f (%)

CD

505409.4
25664.8
4629.95

292.36
1019.56
53.96

505701.76
26684.36
4683.91

165.57
52.99
108.8

0.12
2.17
0.75

13239.47

2231.68

6.47

2238.15

20.29

0.05

84855.60

537935.8

3080.05

541015.85

366.64

4.46

73

Table 4.4 Values of PEC and thermoeconomic variables at 55 MW

75

Further, the condenser and feed water heaters are next components having the low value
.

of C D Z . For condenser and feed water heaters these values are 4683.91 and 2238.15 Rs
per hr respectively, whereas the values of " f " are 0.75 and 0.05% respectively. This
suggest that by improving the performance, cost saving might be achieved by improving
the exergetic efficiency of these components even if the cost of capital investment
increases. The value of "r" for the condenser which is 108.8%, is considerably on higher
side, therefore condenser can be optimized by reducing this value. For the overall plant
the value of exergoeconomic factor " f " is 4.46%, which is low and suggest that in
overall plant exergy destruction dominates and therefore cost of exergy destruction and
therefore cost saving can be reduced by improving the exergetic efficiency of the plant,
even if the capital investment increases. While optimizing power plant, the relative cost
difference "r" , which is 366.64%, has to be reduced instead of minimizing the cost per
exergy unit of the final product. The columns 3rd and 4th of Table 4.4 show the cost per
unit exergy for fuel and products respectively for the various components. The average
unit cost of fuel exergy for the feed water heaters is slightly higher with a value of 0.2545
Rs. per MJ than the turbine and condenser whose value is 0.2543 Rs per MJ for both
components. The average unit cost of fuel exergy for the boiler is lowest with a value of
0.1061 Rs per MJ.
Table 4.5 Calculated production rates of electricity, exergetic efficiency at various load
conditions
Load
Condition
(%)

100
70

Mass flow rate (kg/s)

Fuel
9.740
7.890

Steam
72.202
57.220

Chemical
Exergy
(MW)

Exergetic
Efficiency
(%)

Unit Cost of
Product ,
cW
(Rs/MJ)

247.660
200.620

22.208
19.938

0.3969
0.4763

Estimated amounts of products and corresponding unit cost electricity in terms of exergy
produced from steam power plant at both the load conditions are shown in Table 4.5. The
exergetic efficiency of the plant for given fuel exergy for full and part load condition has
76

been listed in this table. Generally, unit cost of electricity produced by coal based non
reheat power plant increases at part load conditions because full capital expenditures are
utilized at part load conditions. At the full load condition i.e. at 55MW the unit cost of
product at turbine generator exit is Rs 0.3969 per MJ and at 40MW part load the unit cost
of product is Rs 0.4763 per MJ. The average unit cost of product exergy for the boiler,
turbine, condenser and feed water heaters are 0.2543, 0.3969 0.3760 and 0.3362 Rs per
MJ respectively at 55MW. This cost is minimum for the boiler and maximum for turbine
generator. The Figure 4.1 compares the average unit cost of fuel exergy in Rs per MJ for
the subsystems and overall plant at 55 and 40MW. Unit cost of fuel exergy for the feed

0.35
0.3

Boiler

Unit cost 0.25

of fuel exergy
(Rs. per MJ)

Turbine

0.2

Condenser
0.15

Feed water heaters

0.1

Plant

0.05
0

55 MW

40 MW

Figure 4.1 Average unit cost of fuel exergy (Rs. per MJ) for subsystems and plant

water heaters remains slightly high at 55 and 40MW having the values of 0.2545 and
0.3144 Rs per MJ respectively while unit cost of fuel exergy for the turbines and
condensers are same at both the loads with the values of 0.2543 and 0.3142 Rs per MJ
respectively. Unit cost of fuel exergy for boiler is 0.1061 and 0.1282 Rs per MJ at 55MW
and 40MW respectively and is the lowest among all components.

77

Figure 4.2 compares the average unit cost of product exergy for subsystems and overall
plant at 55MW and 40MW. It has been observed that unit cost of product exergy for the
boiler has increased to 0.3142 Rs per MJ from 0.2543 Rs per MJ when plant operates at
part load of 40MW. Thus unit cost of product exergy is higher at part load because exergy
destruction at part loads increases and more than that because at part load product cost
has to bear the full capital expenditure for its process. Unit cost of product exergy for
turbine, condenser, and feed water is 0.4763, 0.3969 and 0.8368 Rs per MJ respectively
at part load of 40MW. The cost of product exergy for all subsystems increases at part load
as discussed earlier. It is also observed that real cost associated for the product i.e.
Boiler
difference of unit cost of product exergy and unit cost of fuel exergy increases at
part
Turbine
Condenser
Feed water heaters
Plant
1

Unit cost0.8
of product exergy
(Rs per MJ)
0.6

0.4

0.2

55MW

40 MW

Figure 4.2 Average unit cost of product exergy (Rs/ MJ) for subsystems and plant

load as shown in Figure 4.3. At 55MW this value is highest for boiler and minimum for
the condenser with values of 0.1482 and 0.0797 Rs per MJ respectively. For the turbine
and condenser real cost for the products exergy is 0.1426 and 0.1217 Rs per MJ. From
this analysis boiler and turbine are most critical component and requires the more
attention. At 40MW real cost associated with the product exergy is highest for the feed
78

water heaters with a value of 0.5224 Rs per MJ and requires the more attention, whereas
Turbine

Boiler
for the condenser, this value is again lowest with a value of 0.0827 Rs per
MJ. For the
Condenser

other components boiler and turbine at 40MW, real cost is on higher side with the value
Feed water heaters

of 0.1860 and 0.1621 Rs per MJ respectively.

Plant

0.6
0.5
Rs per0.4
MJ
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

55MW

40 MW

Figure 4.3 Real cost associated for products for subsystems and plants

Figure 4.4 and Figure 4.5 shows the thermoeconomic variables which are relative cost
difference "r" and exergoeconomic factor " f " respectively. Higher the value of "r" in a
component, more attention is required for the component. At the full load as well as at
part load conditions boiler and condenser is most critical component. At part load of
40MW the value of "r" for boiler increased to 174.03% from 165.57% at 55MW and for
condenser this increases to111.12% at 40MW from 108.8% at 55MW. For the turbine this
value drops to 48% when plant operates at 40MW and for the feed water heaters the vale
of "r" becomes almost double when operates at 40MW. For the overall plant the value of
"r" increased by 16% when plant operates at 40MW.

79

Boiler
Turbine
Condenser
Feed water heaters

The low value of " f " less then 1 % for all components except for the turbine, as pointed
Plant

out earlier, suggests that cost associated with these components is exclusively due to
exergy destruction and cost saving might be achieved by improving the component
efficiency. Next, relatively high value of " f " for the components suggests that capital
600

investment and O&M costs dominate.

400

r (%)

200

55 MW

40 MW

Figure 4.4 Relative cost difference r (%) for subsystems and plant

6
5
Boiler
4

f (%)

Turbine

Condenser
Feed water heaters

Plant
1

80

0
55MW

40MW

Figure 4.5 Exergoeconomic factor f (%) for subsystems and plant

4.7 CONCLUSIONS
The exergoeconomic techniques presented here seems to be powerful and systematic tool
for identifying all cost sources in any thermal system. An exergoeconomic balance
applied to a process or whole plant assesses the cost flow rates to the various flows in the
system. This technique also assesses the cost of consumed resources, money and system
irreversibilities in the terms of the overall production processes. Assessing the cost of the
flow streams and processes in a complex system helps to understand the process of cost
formation from input resources to the final products. By using the exergoeconomic
analysis in this thesis many conclusions can be made. The unit cost of exergy product
increases from full load condition to part load condition and unit cost of product exergy is
highest for feed water heaters at 40MW whereas the turbine unit cost of exergy is highest
at 55MW. Boiler is the main source of exergy destruction and therefore maximum cost of
exergy destruction goes to boiler, however the average unit cost of fuel exergy is lowest
for the boiler. The maximum real cost associated for product goes to boiler. The Rs
0.3969 per MJ unit cost of the product exergy at turbine generator has been obtained at
55MW. These results are very close to cost of electricity estimated by company which is
0.2333 Rs per MJ to 0.3889 Rs per MJ. These costs are based on fixed cost of the plant
only and O&M cost has not been considered. Further the relative cost difference and
exergoeconomic factor for the subsystems and for the whole plant has been obtained at
55MW & 40MW and it was observed that performance of the subsystems can be
improved by improving the exergetic efficiencies even if the capital investment increases.
The analysis shows that exergy and the exergoeconomic analysis presented here can be
applied to any energy system systematically. If the correct information of initial
investment, salvage values and maintenance costs for each component can be supplied,
the unit cost of production can be estimated.

81

Additional
irreversibility
Additional
irreversibility(MW)
(MW)

REFERENCES
1.

Abusoglu A. and Kanoglu M., First and second law analysis of diesel engine
powered cogeneration systems, Energy Conversion and Management, 2008, 49,
2026-2031.

2.

Abusoglu A. and Kanoglu M., Exergetic and thermoeconomic analysis of diesel

engine powered cogeneration: Part 2- Application, Applied Thermal Engineering,
2009, 29, 234-241.

3.

Abusoglu A. and Kanoglu M., Exergy economic analysis and optimization of

combined heat power and production: A review, Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 2009.

4.

Abusoglu A. and Kanoglu M., Exergetic and thermoeconomic analysis of diesel

engine powered cogeneration: Part 2- Application, Applied Thermal Engineering,
2009, 29, 242-249.

5.

Accadia M. and Rossi F., Thermoeconomic optimization of a refrigeration plant,

International Journal of Refrigeration, 1998, 21, 42-54.

6.

Accadia M. and Vanoli L., Thermoeconomic optimization of the condenser in a

vapour compression heat pump, International Journal of Refrigeration, 2004, 27,
433-441.

7.

Aguilar A., Uson L., Szyszka J. and Espinosa F., Concept of thermoeconomic
estimation of steam turbines, Applied Thermal Engineering, 2007, 27, 457-466.

8.

Ahern J. E., The exergy Method of Energy Systems Analysis, Wiley Publications,
New York, 1980.

9.

Aljundi I.H., Energy and exergy analysis of steam power plant in Jordan, Applied
Thermal Engineering, 2009, 29, 324-328.

10.

Alvarado S. and Gherardelli C., Exergy economic optimization of a cogeneration

plant, Energy, 1994, 19, 1225-1233.

11.

Aljundi I., Energy and exergy analysis of a steam power plant in Jourdan, Applied
Thermal Engineering, 2009, 29, 324-328.

83

12.

Ayres R., Ayres L. and Martinas, K., Exergy, waste accounting, and life cycle
analysis, Energy, 1998, 23, 355-363.

13.

Arena A. and Borchiellini R, Application of different productive structures for a

thermoeconomic diagnosis of combined cycle power plant, International Journal
of Thermal Science, 1999, 38, 601-612.

14.

Baines P. and Carrington C., Second law measures of efficiency, Energy Research,
1986, 10, 189-191.

15.

Bejan A., Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics, New York: Wiley, 1988.

16.

Bejan A., Tsatsaronis G. and Moran M., Thermal Design and Optimization, New
York: Wiley, 1996.

17.

Bhargava M., Bianchi M., Montenegro A. and Peretto, A., Thermoeconomic

analysis of an intercooled, reheat and recuperated gas turbine for cogeneration
application. Part 1: Base load operation, ASME Journal of Engineering for Gas
Turbine Power, 2002, 124, 147-154.

18.

Bilgen E., Exergetic and engineering analyses of gas turbine based cogeneration
systems, Energy, 2000, 25, 1215-1229.

19.

Boregert J.A., and Velasquez J.A., Exergy economic optimization of a Kalina

cycle for power generation, International Journal of Exergy, 2004, 1, 18-28.

20.

Callaghan P. and Probert S., Exergy and Economics, Applied Energy, 1981, 8,
227-243.

21.

Can A., Buyruk E. and Eryener D., Exergy economic analysis of condenser type
heat exchangers, Exergy, An International Journal, 2002, 2, 113-118.

22.

Casarosa C., Donatini F. and Franco A., Thermoeconomic optimization of heat

recovery steam generators operating parameters for combined plants, Energy,
2004, 29, 389-414.

23.

Chejne F. and Restrepo J. A., New rules for exergo-economic optimization

methodology, Energy, 2003, 28, 993-1003

24.

Chen L., Li Y., Sun F. and Wu C., Power optimization of open cycle regenerator
gas turbine power plants, Applied Energy, 2004, 78, 199-218.

85

25.

Connelly L., Exergy and Industrial ecology-Part 1: An exergy based definition of

consumption and thermodynamic interpretation of ecosystem evolution, Exergy
International Journal, 2001, 3, 146-165.

26.

Corneliesen R.L., Thermodynamics and sustainable development, Ph. D. thesis,

Twente University, The Netherlands, 1997.

27.

Corti A., Fiashi D. and Manfrida G., Thermoeconomic estimation of the SCGT
cycle, Energy Conversion and Management, 1999, 40, 1917-1929.

28.

Dincer I., Role of exergy in energy policy making, Energy Policy, 2002, 30, 137149.

29.

Dentice M., Accadia D. and De Rossi F., Thermoeconomic analysis and diagnosis
of a refrigeration plant, Energy Conversion and Management, 39, 1998, 12231232.

30.

Dentice M., Accadia D. and Sasso M., Exergetic and exergy economic estimation
of vapour compression heat pump, Energy, 1998, 23, 937-942.

31.

Ebadi M.J. and Bandpy M.G., Exergetic analysis of gas turbine plants,
International Journal of Exergy, 2005, 2, 31-39.

32.

Erlach B., Serra L. and Valero A., Structural theory as standard for
thermoeconomics, Energy Conversion and Management, 1999, 40, 1627-1649.

33.

Evans R.B., Thermoeconomic isolation and essergy analysis, Energy, 1980, 5,

804-821.

34.

Fartaj A., Ting D. and Yang W., Second law analysis of the transcritical CO2
refrigeration cycle, Energy Conversion and Management, 2004, 45, 2269-2281.

35.

Fiorini P. and Sciubba E., Thermoeconomic analysis of MSF desalination plant,

Desalination, 2005, 182, 39-51.

36.

Frangopoulos C. A., Thermoeconomic functional analysis and optimization,

Energy, 1987, 12, 563-571.

37.

Frangopoulos C. A., Application of thermoeconomic functional approach to the

CGAM problem, Energy, 1994, 19, 323-342.

38.

Gaggioli R.A., and Wepfer W. J., Exergy Economics, Energy, 1980, 5, 823-38.

39.

Gong M. and Wall G., On exergy and sustainable development-Part 2: Indicators

and methods, Exergy International Journal, 2001, 4, 217-233.
87

40.

Granovskii M., Dincer I. and Rosen M., Exergy and industrial ecology: An
application to integrated energy system, International Journal of Exergy, 2008, 5,
52-63.

41.

Habib M. and Zubair S., Second law based thermodynamics analysis of

regenerative-reheat Rankine cycle power plants, Energy, 1992, 17, 295-301.

42.

Hamed O., Washmi H. and Otaibi H., Thermoeconomic analysis of a power/

water cogeneration plant, Energy, 2006, 31, 2699-2709.

43.

Hebecker D., Bittrich P. and Reidl K., Hierarchically structured exergetic and
exergy economic analysis and estimation of energy conversion processes, Energy
Conversion and Management, 2005, 46, 1247-1266.

44.

Hermann W., Quantifying global exergy resources, Energy, 2006, 31, 1685-1702.

45.

Horlock J.H., Young J.B., and Manfrida G., Exergy analysis of modern fossil-fuel
power plants, Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbine and Power, 2000, 122, 1-7.

46.

Hua B, Chen Q., and Wang P., A new exergy economic approach for analysis and
optimization of energy systems, Energy, 1997, 22, 1071-1078.

47.

International Federation of Institute for Advanced Study, Energy Analysis

Workshop on Methodology and Contentions, Stockholm, Sweden, 1974.

48.

Ishida M. and Chuang C., New approaches to thermodynamics, Energy

Conversion and Management, 1997, 38, 1543-1555.

49.

Kamate S. and Gangavati P., Exergy analysis of cogeneration power plants in

sugar industries, Applied Thermal Engineering, 2009, 29, 1187-1194.

50.

Kaushik, S.C., Singh N. and Tyagi S.K., Thermodynamic estimation of modified

steam regenerative Brayton heat engine for solar thermal power generation,
Journal of Solar Energy Soc. India, 1999, 63-75.

51.

Kaushik S. C., Tyagi S. K. and Singhal M.K., Parametric Study of an irreversible

regenerative Brayton heat engine with isothermal heat addition, Energy
Conversion and Management, 2003, 44, 2013-2025.

52.

Kaushik S.C., Chandra A. and Chandra H.S., First and Second law analysis of an
intercooled reheat-regenerative gas turbine thermal power plant, Exergy, An
International Journal, 2005, 3, 260-273.

89

53.

Kenney W. F., Energy Conservation in the Process Industries,

Academic

Press, Orland, FL, 1984.

54.

Kelly S., Tsatsaronis G. and Morosuk T., Advanced exergetic analysis:

Approaches for splitting the exergy destruction into endogenous and exogenous
parts. Energy, 34, 2009, 384-391.

55.

Khaliq A. and Kaushik S.C., Second law based thermodynamic analysis of

Brayton/ Rankine combined power cycle with reheat, Applied Energy, 2004, 78,
179-197.

56.

Khaliq A. and Kaushik S.C., Thermodynamic performance estimation of

combustion gas turbine cogeneration system with reheat, Applied Thermal
Engineering, 2004, 24, 1785-1795.

57.

Koroneos C., Roumbas G. and Moussiopoulos N., Exergy analysis of cement

production, International Journal of Exergy, 2005, 2, 55-69.

58.

Kotas T. J., The Exergy Method of Thermal Plant Analysis, Butterworths,

London, 1985.

59.

Kim S., Oh S., Kwon Y. and Kwak H., Exergy economic analysis of thermal
systems, Energy ,1998, 23, 393-406.

60.

Koroneos C., Spachos T. and Moussioulos N., Exergy analysis of renewable

energy sources, Energy, 2003, 28 295-310.

61.

Kwak H., Kim D., and Jeon J., Exergetic and thermoeconomic analyses of power
plants, Energy, 2003, 28, 343-360.

62.

Kwon Y., Kwak H. and Oh S., Exergy economic analysis of gas turbine
cogeneration system, Exergy International Journal, 2001, 1, 31-40.

63.

Lazzaretto A., A critical comparison between the thermoeconomic and emergy

analysis algebra, Energy, 2009, 1-10.

64.

Lior N., Energy, exergy and thermoeconomic analysis of effects of fossil fuel
superheating in nuclear power plants, Energy conversion and Management, 1997,
38, 1585-1593.

65.

Lozano M.A. and Valero A., Theory of Exergetic cost, Energy, 1993, 18, 939-60.

66.

Mishra R.D., Sahoo P.K. and Gupta A., Application of exergetic cost theory to
LiBr/H2O vapour absorption system, Energy, 2002, 1009-1025.
91

67.

Mishra R.D., Sahoo P.K. and Gupta A., Thermoeconomic optimization of single
effect water/ LiBr vapour absorption refrigeration system, International Journal of
Refrigeration, 2003, 26, 158-169.

68.

Mishra R.D., Sahoo P.K. and Gupta A., Thermoeconomic optimization of double
effect water/ LiBr vapour absorption refrigeration system, International Journal of
Refrigeration, 2005, 28, 331-343.

69.

Modesto M. and Nebra S.A., Analysis of repowering proposal to power

generation system of a steel mill plant through exergetic cost method, Energy,
31,2006, 3261-3277.

70.

Moran M.J., Availability analysis: A guide to efficient energy use, revised ed.,
New York, ASME, 1989.

71.

Moran M.J. and Shapiro, Fundamental of Engineering Thermodynamics, Wiley,

New York, 1995.

72.

Moran M.J. and Sciubba E., Exergy analysis: Principles and practice, Journal of
Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 1994,116, 285-290.

73.

Morosuk T. and Tsatsaronis G., Advanced exergetic estimation of refrigeration

machines using different working fluids, Energy, 2009, 1-11.

74.

Moran M.J. and E. Sciubba (Eds.), Second law analysis of thermal systems,
ASME, New York, 1997.

75.

Nag P.K. and Gupta A.V.S.S.K.S., Exergy analysis of Kalina cycle, Applied
Thermal Engineering, 1998, 18, 427-439.

76.

Nikulshin V., Wu C. and Nikulshina V., Exergy efficiency calculation of energy

intensive systems, Exergy, An International journal, 2002, 2, 78-86.

77.

Ozgener O., Hepbasali A. and Ozgener L., A parametric study on exergy

economic assessment of a vertical

ground coupled (geothermal) heat pump

system, Building and Environment, 2007, 42, 1503-1509.

78.

Piacentino A. and Cardona F., On thermoeconomics of energy systems at variable

load conditions: Integrated optimization of plant design and operation, Energy
Conversion and Management, 2007, 48, 2341-2355.

79.

Poredos A. and Kitanovski A. Exergy loss as a basis for the price of thermal
energy, Energy Conversion and Management, 2002, 43, 2163-2173.
93

80.

Richard A., Gaggioli W. and Wepfer J., Exergy Economics: I. Cost accounting
applications, Energy, 1980, 5, 823-837.

81.

Rosen M., Clarifying thermodynamic efficiencies and losses via exergy, Exergy
International Journal, 2002, 2, 3-5.

82.

Rosen M., Editorial-Exergy in industry: Accepted or not? Exergy, An

International Journal. 2001, 2, 67.

83.

Rosen M., Energy and Exergy based comparison of coal fired and nuclear steam
power plants, Exergy International Journal, 2001, 3, 180-192.

84.

Rosen M., Energy crisis or exergy crisis? Exergy, An International Journal, 2002,
2, 125-127.

85.

Rosen M., Exergy conservation: An alternative to conserving the already

conserved quantity energy, Exergy, An International Journal, 2002, 2, 59-61.

86.

Rosen M. and Dincer I., Exergy economic analysis of power plants operating on
various fuels, Applied Thermal Engineering, 2003, 23, 643-658.

87.

Rosen M. and Dincer I., Exergy-cost-energy-mass analysis of thermal systems

and processes, Energy Conversion and Management, 2003, 44, 1633-1651.

88.

Rosen M. and Dincer I., Thermoeconomic, Analysis of power plants: an

application to a coal fired electrical generating station, Energy Conversion and
Management, 2003, 44, 2743-2761.

89.

Rosen M.A., Dincer I. and Kanoglu M., Role of exergy in increasing efficiency
and sustainable and reducing environmental impact, Energy Policy, 2008, 36,
128-137.

90.

Rosen M., Exergy and economics: Is Exergy profitable? Exergy, An International

Journal. 2002; 2, 218-220.

91.

Rosen M., Should we educate the public about exergy? Exergy, An International
Journal, 2002, 2, 211-213.

92.

Sahoo P.K., Exergy economic analysis and optimization of a cogeneration system

using evolutionary programming, Applied Thermal Engineering, 2008, 28, 15801588.

95

93.

Sala J., Gonzalez L., Adana M., Miguez J., Eguia J. and Flores I., Exergetic and
thermoeconomic study for a container-housed engine, Applied Thermal
Engineering, 2006, 26, 1840-1860.

94.

Sciubba E., Beyond thermoeconomics? The concept of extended exergy

accounting and its application to the analysis and design of thermal systems,
Exergy, An International Journal, 2001, 2, 68-84.

95.

Song T., Sohn J., Kim J., Kim T. and Ro S., Exergy based performance analysis
of heavy duty gas turbine in part load operating conditions, Exergy, An
International Journal, 2002, 2, 105-112.

96.

Sue D. and Chuang C., Engineering design and exergy analyses for combustion
gas turbine based power generation system, Energy, 2004, 29, 1183-1205.

97.

Szargut J. and Morris D., Cumulative exergy consumption. Energy Research

1987; 11, 245-61.

98.

Szargut J., Morris D.R. and Steward F.R., Exergy analysis of thermal, chemical
and metallurgical processes, Hemisphere, New York, 1988.

99.

Talens L., Villalba G. and Gabarrell X., Exergy analysis applied to biodiesel
production, Resources Conversion and Recycling, 2007, 51, 397-407.

100.

Tanniguchi H., Mouri K., Nakahara T. and Arai N., Exergy analysis on
combustion and energy conversion processes, Energy, 2005, 111-117.

101.

Temir G. and Bilge D., Thermoeconomic analysis of a trigeneration system,

Applied Thermal Engineering, 2004, 24, 2689-2699.

102.

Torres C., Valero A., Serra L. and Royo J. Structural theory and thermoeconomic
diagnosis: Part I, On malfunction and dysfunction analysis, Energy Conversion
and Management, 2002, 43,1503-1518

103.

Traverso A., and Massardo A., Thermoeconomic analysis of mixed gas-steam

cycles, 2002, 22, 1-21.

104.

Tsatsaronis G., A review of exergy economic methodologies, In second law

analysis of thermal systems, ed. M. J. Moran and E. Sciubba, pp , 81-87. ASME,
New York, 1987

105.

Tsatsaronis G., Definitions and nomenclature in exergy analysis and exergy

economics, Energy, 2007, 32, 249-253.
97

106.

Tsatsaronis G., Invited papers on exergy economics, Energy Int J., 1994, 19, 279381.

107.

Tsatsaronis G., Thermoeconomic analysis and optimization of energy systems,

Progressive Energy Comb., 1993, 19, 227-257.

108.

Tsatsaronis G., Lin L. and Pisa J., Exergy costing in exergy economics, Journal of
Energy Resources Technology, 1993, 115, 9-16.

109.

Tsatsaronis G. and Moran M.J., Exergy aided cost minimization, Energy

Conversion and Management, 1997, 38, 1535-1542.

110.

Tsatsaronis G. and Park M.H., On avoidable and unavoidable exergy destructions

and investment costs in thermal systems, Energy Conversion and Management,
2002, 43, 1259-1270.

111.

Tsatsaronis G. and Pisa J., Exergy economic estimation and optimization of

energy systems; application to CGAM problem, Energy, 1994, 19, 287-321.

112.

Tsatsaronis G., Tawfik T., Lin L. and Gallaspy D.T., Exergetic comparison of two
KRW based IGCC power plants, Journal of Engineering for Gas turbine and
Power, 1994, 116, 291-299.

113.

Tsatsaronis G., Tawfik T., Lin L. and Gallaspy D.T., Exergetic comparison of two
KRW based IGCC power plants, Journal of Engineering for Gas turbine and
Power, 1994, 116, 300-306.

114.

Tsatsaronis G., Recent developments in exergy analysis and exergy economics.

International Journal of Exergy, 2008, 5, 5-6.

115.

Tsatsaronis G. and Winhold M., Exergy economic analysis and estimation energyconversion plants-1. A new general methodology, Energy, 1985, 10, 69-80.

116.

Valero A. and Torres C., On causality in organized energy systems: II. Symbolic
exergy economics, University of Zaragoza, Spain.

117.

Valero A., Lerch F., Serra L. and Royo J., Structural theory and thermoeconomic
diagnosis: Part II, Application to actual power plant, Energy Conversion and
Management, 2002, 43, 1519-1535.

118.

Valero A. Lozano M.A. and Serra L., CGAM problem: Definition and
conventional solution, Energy, 19, 1994, 279-286.

99

119.

Valero A. Lozano M.A., Serra L. and Torres C., Application of the exergetic cost
theory to the CGAM problem, Energy, 1994, 19, 939-960.

120.

Verda V., Serra L. and Valero A., The effects of control system on
thermoeconomic diagnosis of power plants, 2004, 29, 331-359.

121.

Wall G., Exergy flows in industrial processes, Energy, 1988, 13, 197-208.

122.

Wall G. and Gong M., On exergy and sustainable development-Part1: Conditions

and concepts, Exergy International Journal, 2001, 3, 128-145.

123.

Vries B. and Nieuwlaar E., A dynamic cost- exergy estimation of steam and power
generation, Resources and Energy, 1981, 3, 359-388.

124.

Y.M. El Sayed, Application of exergy to design, Energy Conversion and

Management, 2002, 43, 1165-1185.

125.

Y.M. El Sayed and R.A. Gaggioli, A critical review of second law costing
methods: Part I and II, ASME Journal Energy Res., Technology, 1989; 111, 1-15.

126.

Yantovski E., Exergy economics in education, Energy, 25, 2000, 1021-1031.

127.

Verkhivker G.P. and Kosoy B., On the exergy analysis of power plants, Energy
Conversion and Management, 2001, 42, 2053-2059.

128.

Zang C., Wang Y., Zheng C. and Lou X., Exergy analysis of a coal fired power
plant based on structural theory of thermoeconomics, Energy Conversion and
Management, 2006, 47, 817-843.

129.

Zhai H., Dai Y. and Wang R., Energy and exergy analysis on a novel hybrid solar
heating, cooling and power generation systems for remote areas, Applied Energy,
2009, 1395-1404.

101

APPENDIX I
Exergy destruction rate and exergetic efficiency equations for plant subsystem and
overall plant (Coal based non reheat thermal power plant ).

Subsystem
Boiler

Exergy destruction rate

.

E D , Boiler E Chemical exergy of

Exergy efficiency
fuel

E in E out

E in E in

II ,boiler

E Chemical exergy of

Turbine

E D ,Turbine E in E out W Turbine

fuel

E D,Turbine

II ,Turbine 1

E in E out

Condenser

E D,Condenser E in E out

II ,Condenser

E in
.

E out

Feed water

E D, Feed

water heaters

E in E out

II , Feed

heaters

water heaters

E D , Feed water heaters

.

E in

Plant

E D , Plant

II , Plant

D , All components

W Net ,out
.

E Chemical exergy of

103

fuel

APPENDIX-II
Exergetic Efficiency, Exergy Destructio n Rate and Exergy Destructio n Ratio for plant
components and Plant for Open Cycle Gas Turbine Plant

COMPRESSOR
Exergetic Efficiency
.
.

comp

E P ,comp
.

E comp,out E comp,in

E comp,sup p

Wcomp

Exergy Destructio n
.
.

E D ,comp E comp,out E comp.in

Exergy Destructio n Ratio
.
.

y D ,comp

E comp.out E comp,in
.
.

E fuel, plant
COMBUSTOR
Exergetic Efficiency
.

comb

E P ,comb
.

E comb,out

E comb,sup p E comb,in E fuel ,in

Exergy Destructio n
.

E D ,comb E comb,in E fuel,in E comb,out

Exergy Destructio n Ratio
y D ,comb

E comb,in E fuel,in E comb,out

.

E fuel, plant

62

TURBINE
Exergetic Efficiency
.

turb

E P ,turb
.

W net

E turb,sup p E turb,in E turb,out

Exergy Destructio n
.

E D ,turb E turb,in E turb,out W net

Exergy Destructio n Ratio
.

E turb,in E turb,out W net

y D ,turb

E fuel , plant

PLANT
Exergetic Efficiency
.

plant

W net
.

E fuel, plant
Exergy Destructio n
.

E D , plant E D ,comp E D ,comb E D ,turb

62

APPENDIX-III
Equations used for calculatin g the exergetic cos ts for open cycle gas turbine
power plant
E1* E 2* E12* 0
E 2* E10* E 4* 0
E 4* E5* E12* E13* 0
E1* E1 0
E10* E10
E13*
E
13
*
E12 E12

64

APPENDIX-IV
Equations for calculatin g the purchased equipment cos ts ( PEC ) for open
cycle gas turbine power plant
_______________________________________________________________________
.

C11 m1 p 2 p 2
PEC
ln
C12 SC p1 p1

Compressor

C11 71.10$/(kg/s), C12 0.9

C 21 m1
1 exp( C 23T4 C 24 )

p4
C 22

p3

C 21 46.08 $/(kg/s), C 22 0.995, C 23 0.018 ( K 1 ), C 24 26.4

.

PEC

Combustor

C31 m4 p 4
1 exp( C 33T4 C 34 )
PEC
ln
C 32 ST p5

C 31 479.34 $/(kg/s), C 32 0.92, C 33 0.036 ( K 1 ), C 34 54.4

Gas turbine
_____________________________________________________________________

65