You are on page 1of 50

ORC and Kalina Analysis and experience

Sabbatical December 2003 Lecture III Pll Valdimarsson professor of mechanical engineering

Energy and energy use


Energy is utilized in two forms, as heat and as work Work moves, but heat changes temperature (moves the molecules faster) These are two totally different products for a power station
2

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Convertability
Work can always be changed into heat (by friction since ste stone age) Conversion of heat into work is difficult and is limited by the laws of thermodynamics. A part of the heat used has always to be rejected to the surroundings
3

Heat and work again


Work is the high quality, high priced product Heat is second class quality, a low priced byproduct

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

A power plant
Electricity Source Heat Fuel Sellable heat Power plant

Rejected heat Losses


5

Single flash - condensing


Turbine Cooling tower Separator Condenser

Pump Pump

Production well

Injection well

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

T-s diagram

ORC with regenerator


Production well Turbine Boiler Regenerator Injection well Pump Condenser
8

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

T-s diagram
0, 0,0026 0 ,1 63 0, 5 0, 37 89 m 3/ kg

250

Isopentane
0, 00
2300 kPa 1000 kPa 350 kPa 0,2 90 kPa 0,4 0,6 0,8

200

150

T [C]

100

50

-50 -2,0

-1,5

-1,0

-0,5

45

0,0

0,5

1,0
9

s [kJ/kg-K]

ORC with paralell single flash


Turbine Cooling tower

Condenser Separator Pump

Turbine

Cooling tower

Boiler

Condenser Production well Injection well 10

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

ORC with serial single flash


Separator Throttling valve Turbine

Turbine

Cooling tower

Boiler

Condenser

Production well

Injection well

11

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Rogner, Bad Blumau


The 250 kW air-cooled geothermal CHP plant generates electrical power as well as district heating using a low temperature geothermal resource. One standard containerized ORMAT CHP module, generating 250 kW electricity and 2,500 kW heat. The power plant is in commercial operation since July 2001.
15

Mokai, New Zealand


The 60 MW Geothermal Power Plant is comprised of:
one 50 MW module operating on geothermal steam two 5 MW units operating on geothermal brine

The power plant uses air-cooled condensers and achieves 100% geothermal fluid reinjection to produce electrical power with virtually no environmental impact.

16

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Kalina
Separator Production well Turbine

Throttling valve Boiler Brine hx Regenerator

Injection well

Cooling tower Condenser Pump 18

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Geothermal experience
Rough surroundings Aggressive chemistry Simple and reliable solutions Geothermal energy - a mayor economic factor

19

20

10

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Conversion of heat to electricity


The Carnot efficiency applies for infinite heat sources The maximum efficiency is lower than the Carnot efficiency for a source stream with finite heat capacity Kalina reduces entropy generation in the heat exchange process
21

Carnot efficiency

Hot reservoir Heat in

Carnot = 1
Work output Heat out Cold reservoir

T0 T1

22

11

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Maximum efficiency for a liquid source


T1
(h) Ex

T ln 1 T 2 = H * 1 T0 T1 T2

T2

T0

T0
23

What is a Kalina process?


A modified Rankine cycle, or rather: a reversed absorption cycle Ammonia - water working fluid Patented by Exergy Inc and A. Kalina

24

12

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

The characteristics
Heat is added in a combined boiling and separation process
at a variable temperature

Heat is rejected in a combined condensation and absorption process


as well at a variable temperature

25

Mixture boiling at 30 bar


240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60

Temperature [C]

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Ammonia mass fraction [-]

0.8

0.9

26

13

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Heat addition - boiler


Source Kalina

ORC

27

The working fluid


Ammonia has a molar mass of 17, so steam turbines can be used The mixture properties are more complex, usually three independent properties are needed for the calculation of the fourth Therefore the cycle is more flexible, and can be closely optimized to the source
28

14

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

The benefit
The working fluid is almost at the temperature of the source fluid when leaving the boiler The variable heat rejection temperature makes regeneration possible

29

Kalina vs. ORC


Kalina is better when the heat source stream has a finite heat capacity ORC and Kalina are similar when the source is condensing steam

30

15

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Boiling curves for Hsavk


120 110 100 90 Temperature [C] 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 0 200 400 600 Enthalpy [kJ/kg] 800 1000 1200 Water Kalina ORC

31

32

16

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

33

Kalina again
Separator Production well Turbine

Throttling valve Boiler Brine hx Regenerator

Injection well

Cooling tower Condenser Pump 34

17

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

35

36

18

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

37

T - h diagram
200
31

150

31

31

6.5

Temperature [C]

31
100
31 6 .5

1 3 6.5

6.5

31

31

6.5

6 .5

50
31

6.5
31 31

6.5

6 .5
6. 5

6.5

6.5

200

400

600 800 Enthalpy [kJ/kg]

1000

1200

1400

31

1600

38

19

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Comparison

Power [kW]

1. law

2. law

Max liquid eff. 0,56 0,45 0,45 0,20

Kalina ORC Flash cycle Themoelectricity

2000 1589 1589 720

0,13 0,10 0,10 0,05

0,45 0,36 0,36 0,16

Volume to turbine [m 3/s] 0,57 2,06 22,4 0

39

Comparison of Kalina and ORC


Heat (10MW) is available down to 80C Cooling water (120kg/s) is available at 20C Heat exchangers have a pinch of 3C Condensers have a pinch of 10C

40

20

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

0.25

Carnot Liquid Kalina ORC

0.2 Efficiency [-]

0.15

0.1

0.05

0 90

95

100

105

110 115 120 Temperature [C]

125

130

135

140

Hsavk geothermal power plant

42

21

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

General design parameters

43

Summary
Commissioned in the summer 2000 Running at ~1500 kW net 2000 - 2001 Running at ~1700 kW net since November 2001 Final acceptance certificate issued Total investment cost 3,7 MEUR
44

22

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Process diagram
0,81 NH 3 118 C 31 bara 90 kg/s 121 C 11,2 kg/s

G
5,5 bara

1950 kW

67 C 16,3 kg/s 80 C 24 C 130 kW 12 C 5 C 173 kg/s

45

The power plant

46

23

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Design
Standard industrial components Turbine-generator from KKK, Germany Electrical components CE marked Heat exchangers from USA Most of the tanks made in Iceland Installed by a local contractor
47

Equipment
Evaporator, shell and tube, 1600 m2 Separator Turbine Recuperators Condenser, plate, 2 x 750 m2 Hotwell Circulation pump
48

24

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Auxillary equipment
Ammonia storage tank Demineralized water tank Blow down tank

49

Thermal equilibrium
Power input Brine 15.700 kW

Power output

Electricity, net Cooling water

1.700 kW 14.000 kW

50

25

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Start-up problems
Separator Evaporator Axial sealing of the turbine, ammonia leakage Condensers Miscellaneous
Main pump Safety valves Magnetite
51

Separator
Difficult to measure the performance of the separator Mist eliminator module wrongly installed New separator installed November 2001

52

26

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Evaporator
Ammonia leaking into the hot water All tubes rolled again in November 2001, no leakages since

53

Axial sealing
One axial sealing on the low pressure side N2 used in the sealing The sealing has been replaced once Leakage caused by carry-over from separator

54

27

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Condensers
Plate heat exchangers Important to mix liquid and vapor Spraying nozzles modified Increase power output by improving performance of the condensers

55

Miscellaneous
Safety valves, leakage Circulation pump, seals and guides/bushings for shaft Improvment of spraying system in recuperator 2 Magnetite (Fe3O4)
56

28

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Turbine corrosion
Ferritic material in the turbine corrodes Austenitec material is unharmed Corrosion is from the turbine control valve until abt 1 metre after the turbine Influence of rotor magnetic field?
Elimination of ferritic material in the steam side of the turbine
57

Operating experience
Maximizing the output by optimizing the strength of the NH3 H2O solution Prevent air entering the system Improvement of flushing and filters The system is stable in operation

58

29

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Lessons learned
The technology is proven Standard equipment has been adjusted The plant is running according to specs Individual equipment still may be improved to increase output Engineering details will improve future plants
59

What do we have?
New thermodynamic cycle with better efficiency in particular when the heat source cooled down while heat is extracted Theoretical and technical descriptions of the processes involved. Mathematical models that have been tested up against Husavik Plant Known media and known machinery
60

30

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

The knowledge
Real experience and know how from the Husavik plant Mathematical models and ,,steam tables, worked out in cooperation with University of Iceland. Over 30 years of experience in electrical generation from low and mid heat sources (Geothermal)
61

Kalina references
Canoga Park, USA, demonstration plant 3 6 MW, 1991-1997 Fukuoka, Japan, incineration plant, 4,5 MW, 1999 Sumitomo, Japan, waste heat recovery from a steel plant, 3,1 MW Husavik, Iceland, geothermal plant, 2,0 MW, 2000
62

31

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Svartsengi 1980, 37 MWel, 60 MWdh

Krafla 1970, 60 MWel

Nesjavellir 1990, 90 MWel, 250 MWdh

Were does it fit?


Temperature above 150C and good size stands on its own. Cogeneration of electricity and water for district heating. Good cold end helps Environmental issues and subsidizing changes these values
64

32

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Budgetary unit price


Budgetary price for 500 kW unit 720.000 USD Equals 1440 USD/kW Turbine/generator most costly unit (3035%) Presuming cooling water available

65

Opportunities
Where there may be hot water or other fluid/gas available at temperatures between 120 and 300C Geothermal Waste heat
Industrial processes Gas and diesel engine exhaust
66

33

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Kalina plant benefits


Energy cost efficient Environmental issues Green energy Reduced emissions Standard off the shelf equipment

67

General market conditions


General market price 4 eurocents/kWh General pay-back time 4 years required General investment 1000 USD/kW So how can 1440 USD/kW be competitive?
68

34

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

German law
Green electrical power generation bonus
2002-2004 2005-2006 2007-2008 2009-2010 1,74 eurocents/kWh 1,69 eurocents/kWh 1,64 eurocents/kWh 1,59 eurocents/kWh

Provided plant in operation before end of 2005

69

Competitive investment ?
Given 1,65 eurocents/kWh bonus 4 year pay-back period Additional investment acceptable for green energy USD 528.000/MW Total acceptable investment cost thus USD 1.528.000/MW or 764.000 USD for our 500 kW unit.
70

35

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Green energy?
Is waste heat recovery=green energy? Waste heat recovery reduces emissions CO2 quotas pricing as high as 20-25 USD/tonCO2 Average emission 800 gCO2/kWh in fossil fuel plants Equals values of 1,8-2,2 eurocents/kWh
71

Summary
Given green energy bonuses or CO2 evaluation the investment in a Kalina waste heat recovery electrical generating plant is feasible The investment is competitive to other investments for industrial improvements Pay-back time of 4 years in a green energy technology is short
72

36

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Introduction
Finite source heat capacity lowers this upper bound due to the reduction of the source temperature as heat is removed from the source This results in high cost for such low temperature power plants, as they have to handle large heat flows The Kalina cycle is a novel approach to increase this efficiency
73

The Models
It is assumed that a fluid is available at temperatures ranging from 100 to 150C A heat customer is assumed for the primary outlet water at the temperature of 80C Primary flow of 50 kg/s is assumed Cooling water source is assumed at 15C, and cooling water outlet is fixed at 30C It is assumed that a cooling water pump has to overcome a pressure loss of 1 bar on the cooling water side in the condenser
74

37

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Solution
The software Engineering Equation Solver (EES) is used to run the models The cost model keeps the logarithmic mean temperature difference for each heat exchanger at the same value as found in the cycle data for the tenders for the Husavik power plant Estimated cost figures for individual components were then added together in order to obtain the final cost value

75

Process assumptions
The OCR model is based on a system without regeneration Isopenthane is assumed as a working fluid A Kalina cycle for generation of saturated vapour for the turbine is used

76

38

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

ORC flow sheet


Production well Turbine Boiler

Injection well Pump Condenser


77

Kalina flow sheet


Separator Production well Turbine

Throttling valve Boiler Brine hx Regenerator

Injection well

Cooling tower Condenser Pump 78

39

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Kalina assumptions
This cycle will be limited by the dew point of the mixture, that is when the boiling of the mixture is complete, and no liquid remains at the boiler outlet The bubble temperature of the mixture has to be lower or equal to the primary fluid outlet temperature to ensure safe operation The feasible region will be in the area between the 70 and 80C bubble contours The feasible area regarding the dew temperature is limited to a value some 2-4C lower than the maximum temperature of the primary fluid

79

Bubble temperature

Bubble temperature [C]

100 80 60 40 20 1

Bubble temperature

40 0.8 20 Ammonia ratio [-] 0.6 10 Pressure [bar] 30

40

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Dew temperature

200 Dew temperature [C]

Dew temperature

150

100

50 1 40 0.8 20 30 0.6 10 Pressure [bar]

Ammonia ratio [-]

Bubble temperature contours 1 0.95 Bubble contours

70

0.9
30

Ammonia ratio [-]

60

70

0.85

40

50

0.8

40

50

60

70

0.7

0.65 10 15 20 25 Pressure [bar] 30 35 40

80

90

0.75

80

80

41

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Dew temperature contours 1

Ammonia ratio [-]

Dew10 contours 0.95 0 120 0 11 0.9 130


0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 10
12 0
13 0

80

90

10 0 110

110 12 0 130 14 0

120 130 14 0 15 0

0 14
0 15

150
0 16
0 17

160

17 0

14 0

180
0 19

0 16

15

20

25 30 Pressure [bar]

35

40

More Kalina
Both high pressure level and ammonia content are design variables in the Kalina cycle This gives flexibility in the design of the cycle, and requires as well a certain design strategy The plant can be designed for maximum power or with strong demands on the investment cost The cost is 100 for the lowest cost, and the power 100 for the highest power An x denotes an infeasible solution, the cycle will not be able to run at these ammonia content pressure combinations
84

42

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Cost contours, 100C source 1


10810 9 10 7 10 5 10 4

Cost 0.95
Ammonia ratio [-] 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 15

11 0 contours

70 50 4 0 0 1 1 16 1 10 0 2101 13
1 10
10 1

10 3

102

3 10

102

10 3
106 78 10 10 10 9110

10 4 10 5

2 10 3 10 6 04 10 15 8 10 107 10 0 91 10 1

110
10 6 10 7 108 109

110

20

25 30 Pressure [bar]

35

40

Power contours, 100C source 1

Power contours 0.95


Ammonia ratio [-] 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75
90
91 90 92 94

90 91 92 93 95 96

90 91 92 93 95 94 96 97 99 98

90 91 92 93 2 4 0 9 95 9 4 1 3 99 97 96 4 6 7 3 1 2 0 5 99 98 9 9 4 6 1 0 7 8 9 2 5 3 9 9 9

0.7 0.65 20

91 90

995 6 7 4 3 1 0 2 8 9 9 99 98 1 6 0 3 5 7 4 2 9 9 9 7 99 49 5 0 1 3 2 9 9 9 96 0 2 1 3 9 4 9 95 9 9 94 0 21 9 99

25

97

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

95 93

30 Pressure [bar]

35

40

43

Cost function

600

Cost surface

400 Cost 200 0 1 40 0.8 20 Ammonia ratio [-] 0.6 10 Pressure [bar] 30

Power function

100

Power surface

Power

50

0 1 40 0.8 20 Ammonia ratio [-] 0.6 10 Pressure [bar] 30

44

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Discussion
The best power and best cost points are different The lowest cost is at 32 bar, 92% ammonia, but highest power is at 34 bar and 88% ammonia This leads to the definition of two different Kalina cycles, the best power and the best cost cycles, with different pressure and ammonia content

89

Cost contours, 120C source 1


0 11 89 00 11
10 5 10 4 10 3
0 1 7 08 1 10 45 10 10 3
10 6

0.95

02

10 1

10 2

10 5 10 4 10 3

10 2
10 1

106 107

0.9 Ammonia ratio [-]

110

10

108 109

0.85

10 1

10

10 2 0 1 3

0.8

10

3
10 5 10 6 10 7

10

10 5 10 6 10 7

4 10

0.75
10 9 110

0.7

10

8 101 0 9

0.65 15

20

25 30 Pressure [bar]

35

40

45

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details www.fineprint.com at

Power contours, 120C source 1


7 6 78 80 84 82 86 90

76 78

0.95
70

88 90

82 84

94

88 91 92 93

84 90

86 94 96

88 91 92 93

95
97

98
99

72
74

80

96

0.9 Ammonia ratio [-]

95

93 92 91

0.85

70

0.8

78 76
72

86 84

82

80

0.75
74

0.7

0.65 22

24

26

28

30 32 Pressure [bar]

34

36

38

40

Cost contours, 150C source 1


10 87 10 1 0 610 5 0 4 1 03 1
10 1 30 4 10 1

0.95
10 8 10 7

102
10 1

0.9 Ammonia ratio [-]


11 0 10 9

10 2

10 1
10 2 3 10

10 5

0.85

10 6

10 4

10

0.8
10 5

10 4

10 8

0.75
11 0
10 9

10 6
10 8

7 10

0.7

10 9

0.65 18

20

22

24

26 28 Pressure [bar]

30

32

34

36

46

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details www.fineprint.com at

Power contours, 150C source 1

76

94

0.95
74 72 70

84 82 80

96

90

93

78

97 95

0.9 Ammonia ratio [-]

9291

88 86

0.85
76
84 82

80

0.8
70 72

74

78

0.75

0.7

0.65 22

24

26

28

30 32 Pressure [bar]

34

36

38

40

Comparison
Two ORC companies made a tender in the Husavik bid Manufacturer A offered a high power, high cost power plant, where manufacturer B took a more conservative approach Following is a comparison with both the low cost and high power Kalina power plants
94

47

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Kalina vs ORC cost comparison 2400

2200

Cost comparison

2000

Net cost [$/kW]

1800 Kalina LC 1600

ORC B ORC A

1400

Kalina HP

1200

1000 100

110

120 130 Source inlet temperature [C]

140

150

Kalina vs ORC power comparison 2000

Power comparison
1500 ORC B

Net power [kW]

Kalina LC 1000 Kalina HP ORC A

500

0 100

110

120 130 Source inlet temperature [C]

140

150

48

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

Results
The maximum power generated for a given source is greater for the Kalina cycle Kalina cycle is well positioned against an ORC cycle for applications with high utilization time, a base load application

97

Results II
A heat consumer is beneficial for the ORC cycle as it results in less temperature change of the primary fluid during the boiling process The Kalina cycle has the boiling or vaporization of the fluid happening over a temperature range up to 100C, which is beneficial when the primary fluid return temperature has to be minimized
98

49

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com

The debate
The theoretical efficiency and cost/production ratio are better for Kalina as shown above Other arguments like difficulties with machinery and lesser operational security or uptime are only temporary discussion items, as always for a new technology These arguments were exactly the same between conventional flash cycle and ORC when the latter popped up 30 years ago with better efficiency but little track record
99

Conclusion
The Kalina cycle is thermodynamically superior or equal to the ORC cycle There is no black magic behind the Kalina cycle The startup problems that have either been solved, or are solvable

100

50

Created with FinePrint pdfFactory (beta version) -- details at www.fineprint.com