INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESEARCH

Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512

Published online 12 December 2008 in Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/er.1495

Energy, exergy and exergoeconomic analysis of a steam power plant:

A case study

Mohammad Ameri,y, Pouria Ahmadi and Armita Hamidi

Combined Heat and Power Specialized Unit (CHP), Energy Engineering Department, Power and Water University of Technology,
P.O. Box 16765-1719, Tehran, Iran

SUMMARY

The objective of this paper is to perform the energy, exergy and exergoeconomic analysis for the Hamedan steam power
plant. In the first part of the paper, the exergy destruction and exergy loss of each component of this power plant is
estimated. Moreover, the effects of the load variations and ambient temperature are calculated in order to obtain a
good insight into this analysis. The exergy efficiencies of the boiler, turbine, pump, heaters and the condenser are
estimated at different ambient temperatures. The results show that energy losses have mainly occurred in the condenser
where 306.9 MW is lost to the environment while only 67.63 MW has been lost from the boiler. Nevertheless, the
irreversibility rate of the boiler is higher than the irreversibility rates of the other components. It is due to the fact that
the combustion reaction and its high temperature are the most significant sources of exergy destruction in the boiler
system, which can be reduced by preheating the combustion air and reducing the air–fuel ratio. When the ambient
temperature is increased from 5 to 241C, the irreversibility rate of the boiler, turbine, feed water heaters, pumps and the
total irreversibility rate of the plant are increased. In addition, as the load varies from 125 to 250 MW (i.e. full load) the
exergy efficiency of the boiler and turbine, condenser and heaters are increased due to the fact that the power plant is
designed for the full load. In the second part of the paper, the exergoeconomic analysis is done for each component of
the power plant in order to calculate the cost of exergy destruction. The results show that the boiler has the highest cost
of exergy destruction. In addition, an optimization procedure is developed for that power plant. The results show that
by considering the decision variables, the cost of exergy destruction and purchase can be decreased by almost 17.11%.
Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

KEY WORDS: energy; exergy; exergoeconomic; steam power plant; Hamedan

1. INTRODUCTION optimum application of energy and the energy

The optimization of power generation systems is
one of the most important subjects in the energy
engineering field. Owing to the high prices of
energy and the decreasing fossil fuel recourses, the
consumption management methods are very
important.
Exergy analysis based on the first and second
thermodynamic laws is a significant tool to analyze
the energy systems. It also reveals the inefficient

*Correspondence to: Mohammad Ameri, Combined Heat and Power Specialized Unit (CHP), Energy Engineering Department, Power
and Water University of Technology, P.O. Box 16765-1719, Tehran, Iran.
y
E-mail: ameri_m@yahoo.com

Received 5 June 2008

Revised 22 October 2008
Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Accepted 28 October 2008
500 M. AMERI, P. AHMADI AND A. HAMIDI
thermodynamic processes. Recently, exergy analy-
sis has become a key issue in providing a better
understanding of the processes, to quantify
sources of inefficiency and to distinguish quality
of energy consumption [1–3].
It is well known that the exergy can be used to
determine the location, type and true magnitude of
exergy loss (or destruction). Thus, it can play an
important role in developing strategies and in
providing guidelines for more effective use of
energy in the existing power plants [2]. Moreover,
another important issue for improving the existing
system is the origin of the exergy loss. Hence, a
clear picture, instead of only the magnitude of
exergy loss in each section, is required.
The exergy analysis has been widely used for the
evaluation of the thermal power plants. Sciubba
and Su [4] had done a second law analysis of the
steam turbine power cycle to study the effect of
reheat temperature and pressure on regenerative
cycle performance. Sahin and Ali [5] carried out an
optimal performance analysis of a combined
Carnot cycle (two single Carnot cycles in
cascade), including internal irreversibilities for
steady-state operation. They obtained the maxi-
mum power and efficiency analytically and
demonstrated the effects of irreversibility para-
meters on maximum power output.
Dincer [1] analyzed a Rankine cycle reheat
steam power plant to study the energy and exergy
efficiencies at different operating conditions with
varying boiler temperature, boiler pressure, mass
fraction ratio and work output from the cycle. The
analysis tool was applicable to identify the process
inefficiencies so that plant efficiency can be further
improved.
Rosen and Dincer [6] performed a thermo-
economic analysis of power plants and applied it
to a coal fired electricity generating station. They
found that the ratio of thermodynamic loss rate to
the capital cost is a significant parameter in
evaluation of the power plant performance,
which may lead to a successful trade-off in the
design of the plant.
Kotas [3], Fischer [7], Ameri [8–10], Cihan [11],
Habib [12] and Szargut [13] have carried out the
exergy analysis for the power plants. They have
shown that in addition to the energy analysis, a
Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
full-exergy analysis helps to identify components
in which high inefficiencies occur. Improvements
should be done for these components to increase
the efficiency of the power plant.
An exergy analysis was carried out by Habib
et al. [14] for the Ghazlan power plant to specify
the irreversibility in the system. Rosen [15]
performed the energy and exergy for the
combustion airflow in a steam power plant. He
concluded that the steam generator (and its
combustion and heat-transfer processes) was the
most inefficient plant device and that significant
increases in overall plant efficiency were possible
by reducing steam-generator irreversibilities.
Kopack [16] performed the energy and exergy
balance for one of the thermal power plants in
Turkey. It was found that the efficiency defect of
boiler had strong effects on the total efficiency defect
and the rational efficiency of the plant. In that study
the effect of ambient temperature was discussed.
Ameri et al. [9] performed the exergy analysis of
the supplementary firing in heat recovery steam
generator (HRSG) in a combined cycle power
plant (CCPP). Their results showed that if a duct
burner is added to an HRSG, the first and second
law efficiencies are reduced. Nevertheless, the
results show that the CCPP output power
increases when the duct burner is used.
Energy and exergy analysis were performed for
one of the steam power plants in Jordan [17]. He
concluded that the boiler is the major source of
irreversibilities in the power plant. He concluded
that the chemical reaction was the most significant
source of exergy destruction in a boiler system and
it could be reduced by preheating the combustion
air and reducing the air–fuel ratio.
The objective of this study is to calculate the
exergy, energy and exergoeconomic analysis of one
of the large thermal power plants in Iran.
Hamedan steam power plant that produces
1000 MW output power has been studied. It is
located in the western part of Iran close to the
ancient city of Hamedan. Each power plant unit
that generates 250 MW is composed of four low-
pressure heaters, one deaerator and three high-
pressure heaters for increasing the efficiency of this
cycle (Figure 1). Although, there are some papers
regarding this subject in the literature, however,
Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
 ENERGY, EXERGY AND EXERGOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF A STEAM POWER PLANT 501

Figure 1. Schematic of the Hamedan steam power plant.

those papers have not analyzed the effect of load In order to do the exergy analysis, mass and
and ambient temperature. In this paper, the energy balances on the system are required to
variation of ambient and load variation have determine the flow rates and energy transfer rates
been discussed and the exergoeconomic analysis at the control surface. If one applies the first and
has been performed. Moreover, an optimization second laws of thermodynamics, one can find the
procedure has been performed by introducing an formula for exergy balance as the following [3]:
objective function, which is defined as a Continuity equation
summation of exergy destruction and purchase X X
m_ i ¼ m_ e ð1Þ
cost of each component.
Energy equation:
X X
Q_  W_ ¼ m_ e he  m_ i hi ð2Þ
2. EXERGY ANALYSIS
Exergy can be divided into four distinct compo- Exergy balance equation
X X
nents. The two important ones are the physical E_ Q þ m_ i ei ¼ m_ e ee þ E_ W þ E_ D þ E_ L ð3Þ
exergy and chemical exergy. In this study, the two i e
other components that are kinetic exergy and where subscripts i and e refer to streams entering
potential exergy are assumed to be negligible as the and leaving the control volume, respectively. The
elevation and speed have negligible changes exergy rate of a stream of substance (neglecting the
[8,9,11,16]. The physical exergy is defined as the potential and kinetic components) can be written
maximum theoretical useful work obtained as a in the form:
system interacted with an equilibrium state. The In this equation, (e) is the total specific exergy
chemical exergy is associated with the departure of and E_ D is the exergy destruction.
the chemical composition of a system from its  
chemical equilibrium. The chemical exergy is an _ T0 _
EQ ¼ 1  Qi ð4Þ
important part of exergy in combustion process. Ti

Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
502 M. AMERI, P. AHMADI AND A. HAMIDI

E_ W ¼ W_ ð5Þ heating value is usually close to 1, one may

write [8]:
eph ¼ ðh  h0 Þ  T0 ðS  S0 Þ ð6Þ
xCH4 ¼ 1:06
where T is the absolute temperature (K) and
subscripts (i) and (0) refer to inlet and ambient xH2 ¼ 0:985 ð12Þ
conditions, respectively. For gaseous fuel with CxHy, the following
E_ ¼ E_ ph þ E_ ch ð7Þ experimental equation is used to calculate x [3]:
where E_ ¼ me.
_ y 0:0698
x ¼ 1:033 þ 0:0169  ð13Þ
The mixture chemical exergy is defined as x x
follows [3]: In the exergy analysis of power plants, the exergy
" #
Xn X
n of steam is calculated at all states and the changes
exch
mix ¼ Xi exchi þ RT0 Xi LnXi þ GE ð8Þ in the exergy are determined for each major
i¼1 i¼1
component. The source of exergy destruction (or
E
The last term, G , which is the excess free Gibbs irreversibility) in boiler and steam turbine is
energy is negligible at low pressure at a gas mainly combustion (chemical reaction) and
mixture. One can generalize the chemical exergy thermal losses in the flow path, respectively [11].
concept of fuel to every Ca Hb Ng Od component However, the exergy destruction in the heat
[18]. The molar chemical exergy exchc of such a exchangers of the system, i.e. condenser, feed
component will be: water heater, is due to the large temperature
exch e difference between the hot and cold fluid.
c ¼ ðmc;0  mc Þ ð9Þ
The exergy destruction rate and the exergy
where mec refers to the chemical potential of the efficiency for each component and for the whole
component at the restricted dead state [3]. system in the power plant (Figure 1) are shown in
mec ¼ am eCO2 þ ðb=2Þm eH2 O þ ðg=2Þm eN2 Table I. The operation conditions of the steam
þ ða  b=4 þ d=2Þm eO2 ð10Þ power plant such as fuel mass flow rate and
calorific value, stack flue gas temperature, output
mc;0 represents the chemical potential of the electrical power and efficiencies of electrical
components at their thermo-mechanical equili- motors and pumps are listed in Table II.
brium state with the standard ambient.
For the evaluation of the fuel exergy, the above
equation cannot be used. Thus, the corresponding 3. EXERGOECONOMIC ANALYSIS
ratio of simplified exergy is defined as the
following: Developing techniques for designing efficient and
cost-effective energy systems is one of the foremost
x ¼ exf =LHVf ð11Þ challenges energy engineers face. In a world with
Due to the fact that for the most of usual gaseous finite natural resources and increasing energy
fuels, the ratio of chemical exergy to the lower demand by developing countries, it becomes

Table I. The exergy destruction rate and exergy efficiency equations for plant components.
Components Exergy destruction Exergy efficiency
P P
Boiler E D;B ¼ E_ f þ i;B E_  e;B E_
_ Ze;B ¼ ðE_e;B  E_i;B Þ=E_f
P P
Steam turbine E_ D;T ¼ i;T E_  e;T E_  W_ Ze;t ¼ W_ t =ðE_ i;T  E_ e;T Þ
Pump _ _ _ _
E D;P ¼ E i;P  E E;P þ W P Ze;p ¼ ðE_ i;p E_ o;p Þ=W_ p
P P P P
Heater E_ D;H ¼ i;H E_  e;H E_ Ze;H ¼ eE_ i E_
P P
Condenser E_ D;C ¼ i;CE_  E_
e;C Ze;C ¼ E_e;c =E_i;c

Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
 ENERGY, EXERGY AND EXERGOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF A STEAM POWER PLANT
Table II. Operating conditions of the power plant.
Name Value
Mass flow rate of natural gas 18.41 kg s1
Lower heating value of natural gas 49 433.96 kJ kg1
Stack flue gas temperature 1201C
Electrical power 250 MW
Mechanical efficiency of pump 0.98
Efficiency of electrical motor 0.96
increasingly important to recognize the mechanisms
that degrade energy and resources and to develop
systematic approaches for improving the design of
energy systems and reducing the impact on the
environment. The second law of thermodynamics
combined with economics represents a very power-
ful tool for the systematic study and optimization
of energy systems. This combination forms the
basis of the relatively new field of thermoeco-
nomics (exergoeconomics).
In addition, many of researchers have
developed good methods for performing
economic analysis based on the exergy concepts,
which are referred to by a variety of names (e.g.
thermoeconomics, second law costing, cost
accounting and exergoeconomics). All of these
analysis techniques have the following common
characteristics:
 They combine exergy and economic disciplines
to achieve the objectives listed above.
 They recognize that exergy (not the energy) is
the commodity that has value in a system, and
they consequently assign costs and/or prices to
exergy related variables.
The application field is the evaluation of utility
cost as products or supplies of production plants,
the energy cost between process and operations of
an energy converter. These costs are applicable in
feasibility studies, investment decisions, comparing
alternative techniques and operating conditions, a
cost-effective section of equipment during an
installation and an exchange or expansion of an
energy system [19].
Exergy costing involves cost balance usually
formulated for each component separately. A cost
balance applied to the kth system components
Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
503
shows that the sum of cost rates associated with all
existing exergy stream equals the sum of cost rates
of all entering exergy streams plus the appropriate
charges due to capital investment and operating
and maintenance expenses. The sum of the last two
terms is denoted by Z_ k . Accordingly, for a
component that receives heat transfer and
generates power, one can write [19]:
X X
C_ e;k þ C_ w;k ¼ C_ q;k þ C_ i;k þ Z_ k ð14Þ
e i
The cost balances are generally written so that all
terms are positive.
Using Equation (14), one can write [19]:
X X
ðce E_ e Þk þ cw;k W_ k ¼ cq;k E_ q;k þ ðci E_ i Þk þ Z_ k
ð15Þ
C_ j ¼ cj Ej ð16Þ
As part of exergetic efficiency discussion, let us
introduce the concept of product and fuel. The
exergy product is defined according to the
components under consideration. The fuel
represents the source that is consumed in
generating the product. Both the product and
fuel are expressed in terms of exergy. The cost
rates associated with the fuel ðC_ F Þ and product
ðC_ P Þ of a components are obtained by replacing
the exergy rates ðEÞ. _
In the cost balance formulation (Equation 14),
there is no cost term directly associated with
exergy destruction of each component.
Accordingly, the cost associated with the exergy
destruction in a component or process is a hidden
cost. Thus, if one combines the exergy balance and
exergoeconomics balance together, one can obtain
the following equations:
E_ F;K ¼ E_ P;K þ E_ L;K þ E_ D;K ð17Þ
where E_ F;K represents the fuel exergy rate for kth
component, and E_ P;K stands for the product
exergy rate of kth component, E_ L;K and E_ D;K are
the exergy loss and exergy destruction rate of that
component, respectively. For example, E_ L;K is the
useful energy (exergy) that is wasted to the
environment without converting to the useful
form of energy and E_ D;K is the exergy
destruction due to the irreversibilities. For the
Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
504 M. AMERI, P. AHMADI AND A. HAMIDI

turbines, if they are assumed to be adiabatic,
E_ L;K is equal to zero. In addition, if the pumps
are supposed to be adiabatic, EL is equal to
zero. Moreover, for the heaters if they are
supposed to operate adiabatically E_ L;K will be
equal to zero. For each flow line in the system, a
parameter that is called flow cost rate C_ ($/s) is
defined.
cP;K E_ P;K ¼ cF;K E_ F;K  C_ L;K þ Z_ K
If one eliminates E_ F;k from Equations (17)
and (18), one can obtain the following
relations:
cP;k E_ P;k ¼ cF;k E_ P;k þðcF;k E_ L;k  C_ L;k Þ
þ Z_ k þcF;k E_ D;k
If one eliminates E_ P;k , he can obtain:
cP;k E_ F;k ¼ cF;k E_ F;k þ ðcP;k E_ L;k  C_ L;k Þ
As discussed before, if one assumes that the
product E_ P;k is fixed and that the unit cost
of fuel cF;k of the kth component is independent
of the exergy destruction, one can define the
cost of exergy destruction by the last term of
Equation (21).
C_ D;k ¼ cF;k E_D;k ð21Þ
This equation is written when E_ P;k is fixed.
ð18Þ Several methods have been suggested for
expressing the purchase cost of equipment in terms
of design parameters in Equation (14) [19–21].
However, we have used the cost functions that are
suggested for [19]. Nevertheless, some modifications
have been made to tailor these results to the regional
ð19Þ conditions in Iran and taking into account the
inflation rate. For converting the capital investment
into cost per time unit, one may write:
Z_ k ¼ Zk  CRF  j=ðN  3600Þ ð22Þ

þ Z_ k þ cP;k E_ D;k ð20Þ where Zk is the purchase cost of kth component in

dollar (Table III). The capital recovery factor
The last term on the right side of each (CRF) depends on the interest rate as well as
equation involves the rate of exergy destruction. estimated equipment lifetime. CRF was determined

Table III. Cost functions in terms of thermodynamic parameters for the system components [12,17].

System component Capital or investment cost functions

a2
Boiler ZBoiler ¼ a1 ðm_ Boiler Þ Fp FT FZ FSH=RSH
     a
  Z1 4
Fp ¼ exp Pea3Pe ; FT ¼ 1 þ a5 exp Tea6Te ; FZ ¼ 1 þ 1
1Z 1

FSH=RSH ¼ 1 þ Te T
Te
iSH
þ mm__Boiler
RSH
 TeRSH TiRSH
TeRSH

Te ¼ 593 C; P e ¼ 28 bar; Z 1 ¼ 0:9; a1 ¼ 208 582 $ kg1 s1

a2 5 0.8, a3 5 150 bar, a4 5 7, a5 5 5, a6 5 10.421C
Dearator
ZDearator ¼ a1 ðm_ water Þa2
a1 ¼ 145 315 $ kW0:7 ; a2 ¼ 0:7
  3    
1
a 866 K
ST ZST ¼ a51 :P0:7
ST 1 þ 0:05
1Z  1 þ 5 exp T10:42 K1
;
ST

0:7
a51 ¼ 3880:5 $ kW

Q_ Cond
Cond ZCond ¼ a61 : k:DT in
þ a62 : m_ CW þ 70:5: Q_ Cond  ð0:6936: LnðTCW  Tb Þ þ 2:1898Þ
a61 ¼ 280:74 $ m2 ; a62 ¼ 746 $ kg1 s1 ; k ¼ 2 200 Wm2 K1
 
Pump ZPump ¼ a71 :P0:71
Pump 1 þ 0:2
1Z ; a71 ¼ 705:48 $ kg1 s1
Pump

Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
 ENERGY, EXERGY AND EXERGOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF A STEAM POWER PLANT 505

using the relation, i ð1 þ iÞn =ðð1 þ iÞn  1Þ [19,22], in Table IV. Volume fraction of the natural gas
which i, is the interest rate and n is the total components.
operating period of the system in years. Component of natural gas Volume fraction (%)
N is the annual number of the operation hours
Methane (CH4) 98.57
of the unit, and j (1.06) is the maintenance factor. Ethane (C2H6) 0.63
Finally, in order to determine the cost of exergy Propane (C3H8 ) 0.1
destruction of each component, the value of Butane (C4 H10) 0.05
exergy destruction, ED,k, is computed using Pentane (C5H12) 0.04
exergy balance equation. Finally, the cost Nitrogen (N2) 0.6
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 0.01
balance equation is applied to each component:
X X
Z_ k þ C_ in;k ¼ C_ out;k ð23Þ
Table V. Reference ambient model of air [8].
in which C_ j and cj are the flow cost rate and the
unit cost of exergy for the jth flow line, Air components Molar fraction (%)
respectively. If the cost balance equations for all N2 75.67
components of the system are written, a set of O2 20.35
linear algebraic equations are formed and solved H2O 3.03
for C_ j and cj. CO2 0.0345
CO 0.0007
For each component of Hamedan power plant, SO2 0.0002
the term C_ D;k þ Z_ k is calculated in order to get a H2 0.00005
good insight into purchase cost and exergy Others 0.91455
destruction cost. The term Zk for each component
of this power plant is listed in Table III.
found that the irreversibility rates of the boiler are
higher than the irreversibility rates of the other
components (Figure 2). However, the exergy
4. EXERGY RESULTS
analysis has shown that only less than 5% of the
The main fuel for this power plant is natural gas. exergy has been lost in the condenser. The real loss
Therefore, the exergy analysis is performed for this is primarily occurs in the boiler where entropy is
type of fuel. The fuel composition is given in produced. Contrary to the first law analysis, this
Table IV. The reference ambient model [11] for air demonstrates that significant improvement
that is used in the current analysis is given in chances exist in the boiler system rather than in
Table V. The operation thermodynamic properties the condenser.
for the various power plant points are given in The reference environment state is irrelevant for
Table VI. The heat loss ratio of the steam power calculating a change in a thermodynamic property
plant components is presented in Table VII. It (first law analysis). However, it is expected that the
reveals that 70.5% of the total energy loss happens dead state will have some effects on the results of
in the condenser and carried out into the environ- exergy (second law) analysis. In fact, some
ment, while only 15.5% is lost in the boiler. researchers assumed that small and reasonable
Nevertheless, the efficiency based on the energy changes in dead-state properties have little effect
concept can be often misleading. In addition, on the performance of a given system [10,16]. To
losses of energy can be large quantity while its find out how significant this effect will be on the
value is thermodynamically insignificant due to its results, the dead-state temperature has been
low quality. However, the exergy-based efficiencies changed from 5 to 241C, while keeping the
and losses provide measure of approach to ideality pressure constant at 101.1 kPa. As the ambient
or deviation from ideality. The exergy-based temperature is increased from 5 to 241C
calculated results are given in Table VIII for the (Figures 3, 4), the irreversibility rates of the
ambient temperatures from 5 to 241C. It has been boiler and turbine are increased. However, as it

Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
506 M. AMERI, P. AHMADI AND A. HAMIDI

Table VI. The operation thermodynamic properties for the various power plant points.
Point P (MPa) T (1C) m (kg h1) h (kJ kg1) S (kJ kg1 K1)
1 14.3965 541 789 150 3432 6.517
2 13.6316 538 789 150 3431 6.537
3 3.81489 349.2 709 720 3097 6.627
4 3.66778 359 709 720 3118 6.643
5 3.66778 541 709 720 3541 6.639
6 3.37358 538 709 720 3537 7.283
7 0.71002 317.2 595 580 3093.87 7.352
8 0.006667 38.1 500 120 2377.23 7.671
9 0.006674 38.12 597 970 159.7 0.5474
10 1.96138 40.1 597 970 169.7 0.5592
11 1.96138 62.97 597 970 266 0.859
12 1.96138 82.2 597 970 351.2 1.11
13 1.96138 111.5 597 970 472.4 1.441
14 1.96138 134.3 597 970 570.5 1.688
15 1.96138 164.3 729 600 701 1.993
16 17.2602 167.3 729 600 715.5 2.01
17 17.2602 200.6 729 600 860.4 2.324
18 17.2602 243.3 729 600 1054 2.705
19 0.02589 66.92 24 530 2621 7.824
20 0.02589 45.43 97 850 191.175 0.6444
21 0.05992 81.3 19 600 2653 7.53
22 0.05992 67.9 73 320 286.908 0.932
23 0.164756 238.8 28 270 2949 7.752
24 0.164756 87.58 51 960 371.427 1.17
25 0.332454 238.8 23 690 2942 7.426
26 0.332454 137.1 23 690 658.458 1.908
27 0.688445 316.8 30 640 3094 7.365
28 1.51026 424.7 37 460 3306 7.346
29 1.51026 170.9 100 990 731.713 2.06
30 3.49126 349.2 63 530 3102 6.655
31 3.49126 206.1 63 530 880.613 2.385
32 3.102 24.5 28 500 102.8 0.3603
33 5.471 34.5 28 500 144.5 0.4983

Table VII. Heat loss ratio of the steam power plant dead-state temperature increases. This will
components. decrease the exergy destruction and hence will
Heat loss Heat loss increase the exergy efficiency.
Components (MW) percentage (%) The changes of the irreversibility rates of the
power plant components versus the load variation
Condenser 306.9 70.55
Boiler 67.62 15.54 are presented in Figure 2 [23]. In addition,
Heaters 39.308 9.036 Figures 3–5, show the variation of the exergy
Turbine 17.05 3.91 efficiency or irreversibility of the boiler, condenser
Piping 4.123 0.94 and turbine versus the load variation. It is clear
Total 435.001 100 that if the load increases to the full load, the exergy
efficiency of those components will increase.
is shown in Figure 5, the irreversibility rate of Therefore, it is logical that a power plant has the
condenser is decreased when the ambient maximum exergy efficiency at the full load.
temperature increases. This can be explained by In Figure 6, the power plant exergy efficiency
noting the decrease in temperature difference versus the load and ambient temperature
between the steam and the cooling air as the is presented. The results show that when the

Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
 ENERGY, EXERGY AND EXERGOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF A STEAM POWER PLANT 507

Table VIII. The total exergy rate (kW) for each point of ambient temperature increases, the total exergy
the steam power plant at different ambient temperature efficiency of the power plant cycle decreases by
[23]. almost 1%. In addition, when the load increases
Point 278.15 1K 284.15 1K 290.15 1K 297.15 1K to the full load the total power plant exergy
1 355 004 346 588.1 338 289.9 328 756.1
efficiency increases by almost 5%. Therefore, it
2 353 565.6 345 123.1 336 798.6 327 234.1 demonstrates that the effect of load variation is
3 250 459.5 242 741.4 23 5129 226 381.3 more important than the ambient temperature. In
4 247 196.8 239 497.6 231 904.6 223 178.6 fact, when the power plant works at partial load,
5 334 070.9 326 357.5 318 750.3 310 007.7 the entire components of power plant do not work
6 272 496.5 264 745.8 257 092.3 248 284.3
7 173 561.6 166 381 159 289.4 151 127.2
well and the cycle losses are very high. For the
8 33 859.3 27 563 21 342.8 14 178.6 evaluation of performance of a power plant,
9 1267 839 500.7 217.5 exergy analysis has shown a better insight into
10 2382 1943 1593 1296.1 the losses in electric power generation. The overall
11 4527 3788.9 3139.9 2494.4 performance should be based on the second-law
12 7082 6094.1 5195 4257.6
13 11 921 10 603.2 9374.2 8052
efficiency (exergy efficiency) rather than the first
14 16 804 15 239.9 13 764.8 12 155.4 law (thermal efficiency). Energy analysis misleads
15 29 758 27 478.4 25 307.7 22 911.3 the determination of the inefficiencies in the
16 31 738 29 438.1 27 246.7 24 826.2 system.
17 43 404 40 722 38 148.7 34 877 As it has been shown, the boiler is the
18 61 163 58 017 54 980.8 51 574.3
19 3031 2716.7 2405.36 2046.6
major exergy destructor regarding the breakdown
20 329 243.6 172.45 107.6 of the power plant exergy. Thus, it has the largest
21 3041 2799.7 2560.5 2285.1 improvement potential. The chemical reaction
22 598 467.9 379.4 289.8 between air and fuel in the combustion process
23 6238 5867.3 5511.8 5102.4 is the main source of exergy destruction
24 666 575.4 492 404.5
25 5768.8 5480.2 5195.2 4867.1
(irreversibility) in the boiler. The second
26 841.8 771.2 704 630.1 largest consumer of exergy is the overall turbine
27 8899.3 8529.2 8163.7 7743 unit.
28 13 141.1 12 689.8 12 244.2 11 731.2 Although, the ambient temperature has some
29 4457.9 4131 3819.2 3474.4 effects on the changes of the irreversibility rate and
30 22 078.4 21 386.2 20 703.6 19 919
31 3836.7 3596.6 3366.1 3109
exergy efficiency of the boiler, however, it has the
32 21.9 10.4 3.1 0.0499 least effect on the other components of the power
33 48.1 30.1 16.3 5.53 plant except condenser. Based on the exergy

400
Irreversibility rate( MW)

350
300
250 250MW
200 200MW
150 125MW
100
50
0
r

ps
s
ne

er
ile

er
ns

m
i
bo

rb

at

pu
e

he
tu

nd
co

Figure 2. Irreversibility rates of components of power plant versus load variations.

Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
508 M. AMERI, P. AHMADI AND A. HAMIDI

Boiler Exergy efficiency%

60

55
250MW
50 200MW
125MW
45

40
5 11 17 24
Temperature(°C)

Figure 3. Exergy efficiency of boiler versus temperature at various loads.

100
98
96
Exergy efficiency%

94
92 250MW
90 200MW
88 125MW
86
84
82
80
5 11 17 24
Temperature(°C)

Figure 4. Exergy efficiency of turbine versus temperature at various loads.

35

30
Irreversibility rate(MW)

25

20 250MW
200MW
15
125MW
10

0
5 11 17 24
Temperature(°C)

Figure 5. Irreversibility rate of condenser versus temperature at various loads.

analysis for this ambient temperature range, the boiler system can be reduced by preheating the
power plant components that should be combustion air and reducing the air–fuel ratio [17].
considered for improvement are the boiler and However, this subject can be studied in another
the turbine unit. The exergy destruction in the research.

Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
 ENERGY, EXERGY AND EXERGOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF A STEAM POWER PLANT 509

38
37

Exergy Efficiency (%)

36
35
250 MW
34
200 MW
33
125 MW
32
31
30
29
5 11 17 24

Temperature(C)

Figure 6. Total power plant exergy efficiency for various loads and ambient temperatures.

Table IX. Cost of exergy destruction for each performance. In addition, the turbine has the
component of the steam power plant. second largest C_ D;k þ Z_ k among the other compo-
Operation Optimization nents similar to exergy analysis study. Therefore,
Components Z_ þ C_ D ð$ h1 Þ Z_ þ C_ D ð$ h1 Þ one can enhance the steam power plant perfor-
mance by designing boiler and turbine with less
Boiler 809.3 731.82
Condenser 16.85 10.07 exergy destruction costs. The exergy destruction
LP Heater 1 0.7 0.6 cost of the heaters and pumps are lower than other
LP Heater 2 0.5 0.8 power plant components.
LP Heater 3 0.44 0.4 Finally, a short optimization has been done in
LP Heater 4 0.4 0.38
order to have good insight into this study. For this
IP Heater 0.42 1.04
HP Heater 0.69 0.59 reason, an objective function is introduced and
Deaerator 102.54 100.51 summation of purchase cost of each component
HP Turbine 238.8 151.4 and cost of exergy destruction has been considered
IP Turbine 190.8 112.23 (i.e. C_ D;k þ Z_ k ). The decision variables are selected
LP Turbine 230.88 176.21
as extraction pressure and extraction mass flow rate
CEP 2.54 20.76
BFP 6 19.82 for each feedwater heater. By considering a set of
Total 1600.56 1326.63 constraints, an objective function has been optimized
using genetic algorithm. The convergence of
objective function is shown in Figure 7. The
5. EXERGOECONOMIC RESULTS amount of each decision variable in two cases is
In this study after performing the exergy analysis presented in Figures 8, 9. The sum of the purchase
and the study of load and ambient temperature cost and cost of exergy destruction for operation as
variation, we want to calculate the cost of exergy well as optimization is shown in Table IX. It is clear
destruction for each component of this power that by optimization, the amount of C_ D;k þ Z_ k
plant. Thus, first the exergoeconomic balance decreases almost to 273.93 ($/s) or 17.11%. The
(Equation 18) should be written. The sum of optimization code is developed in Matlab software
C_ D;k þZ_ k , as the important parameter in economic program, which is a suitable method for this case.
analysis, should be calculated for each component
of this power plant. The result of this analysis is
shown in Table IX. The results show that, like the
6. CONCLUSION
exergy analysis, boiler has the high exergy
destruction cost. Therefore, it is a very important The maximum energy loss has been found to occur
component for improving the power plant in the condenser where around 70.5% of the total

Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
510 M. AMERI, P. AHMADI AND A. HAMIDI

1360

1355

1350

1345

Z+CD
1340

1335

1330

1325
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Generation

Figure 7. Convergence of the objective function versus generation.

Operation Optimization

6000

5000
Pressure ( bar)

4000

3000

2000

1000

0
2

1
r4

r3

r2
or
er

er

er
t

te

te

te
ra
at

at

at
a

a
e
He

He

e
He

He

He
ea

Ha
D
P

LP

LP

LP

LP
H

Figure 8. The optimized and operation extraction pressures for different heaters.

Operation Optimization

25
Mass Flow Rate (kg/s)

20

15

10

0
1
r2

r1

or

r4

r3

r2

er
at

te

te

te
te

te

at
er

ea

ea

ea
ea

ea

ae
ea
H

H
D
P

LP

LP

LP

LP
H

Figure 9. The optimized and operation extraction mass flow rate for different heaters.

Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
 ENERGY, EXERGY AND EXERGOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF A STEAM POWER PLANT 511

power plant energy losses happen. The second Greek symbols

large energy loss occurs in the boiler system, which
d 5 efficiency defect
is about 15.5%.
x 5 specific exergy loss
On the other hand, the major exergy
Ze 5 exergy efficiency
destruction has been found in the boiler where
81% of the total exergy destruction of the power Subscripts and superscripts
plant cycle is destroyed. However, only 5%
B 5 boiler
of total exergy loss is due to the condenser.
Ch 5 chemical
Contrary to the first law analysis, this demon-
Cond 5 condenser
strates that significant improvement chances
CRF 5 capital recovery factor
exist in the boiler system rather than in the
D 5 destruction
condenser.
e 5 exit condition
In addition, the effects of load and ambient
f 5 fuel
temperature on the exergy efficiency of the cycle
go 5 gas outlet
and irreversibility rates have been studied.
gi 5 gas inlet
The exergoeconomic analysis has shown that
H 5 heater
the cost of exergy destruction in boiler and turbine
i 5 inlet condition
is higher than the other components cost.
k 5 component
The optimization studies have shown that one
L 5 loss
can decrease the cost of exergy destruction and
p 5 pump
purchase cost considerably by adjusting the
ph 5 physical
extraction mass flow rate and pressure of the
T 5 turbine
feed water heaters.
tot 5 total
0 5 reference ambient condition
_ 5 rate
NOMENCLATURE

amb 5 ambient
BFP 5 boiler feed pump
Cond 5 condenser
REFERENCES
e 5 specific exergy (kJ kg-1)
E 5 exergy (kJ) 1. Dincer I, Al-Muslim H. Thermodynamic analysis of reheats
E_ D 5 exergy destruction (kJ) cycle steam power plants. International Journal of Energy
G 5 generator Research 2001; 25:727–739.
2. Jin H, Ishida M, Kobayashi M, Nunokawa M. Exergy
GE 5 excess free Gibbs energy (kJ) evaluation of two current advanced power plants: super-
h 5 specific enthalpy (kJ kg-1) critical steam turbine and combined cycle. Journal of
HT 5 high temperature Energy Resources Technology 1997; 119:250–256.
3. Kotas Tj. The Exergy Method of Thermal Plant Analysis.
LHV 5 lower heating value (kJ kg-1) Butterworths: London, 1985.
LP 5 low pressure 4. Sciubba E, Su TM. Second-law analysis of the steam
m 5 mass flow rate (kg h-1) turbine power cycle: a parametric study. ASME Winter
Annual Meeting, Computer-Aided Engineering of Exergy
P 5 pressure (bar) Systems, the Advanced Exergy System Division, Anaheim,
Q 5 heat transfer (kJ) CA, vol. AES 23, 1980; 151.
R 5 gas constant (kJ kg-1 K-1) 5. Sahin B, Ali K. Steady-state thermo-dynamic analysis of a
combined Carnot cycle with internal irreversibility. Energy
S 5 specific entropy (kJ kg-1 K-1) 1995; 20(12):1285–1289.
T 5 temperature (1C) 6. Rosen MA, Dincer I. Exergoeconomic analysis of
W 5 work (kJ) power plants operating on various fuels. Applied Thermal
Engineering 2003; 23:643–658.
x 5 molar fraction 7. Fischer DW. Searching for steam system efficiency. Plant
Zk 5 purchase cost of the component ($) Engineering 1996; 50:64–68.

Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er
512 M. AMERI, P. AHMADI AND A. HAMIDI
8. Ameri M, Ahmadi P, Khanmohammadi S. Exergy analysis
of a 420 MW combined cycle power plant. International
Journal of Energy Research 2008; 32:175–183.
9. Ameri M, Ahmadi P, Khanmohamadi S. Exergy analysis of
supplementary firing effects on the heat recovery steam
generator. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on
Mechanical Engineering, Paper No. 2053, Tehran, Iran,
2007.
10. Ameri M, Ahmadi P. The study of ambient temperature
effects on exergy losses of a heat recovery steam generator.
Proceedings of the International Conference on Power
Engineering, Hang Zhou, China, 2007; 55–61.
11. Cihan A, Hachafzoglu O, Kahveci K. Energy–exergy
analysis and modernization suggestions for a combined-
cycle power plant. International Journal of Energy Research
2006; 30:115–126.
12. Habib MA, Zubair SM. Second-law-based thermodynamic
analysis of regenerative-reheat Rankine cycle power plants.
Energy 1992; 17(3):295–301.
13. Szargut J, Morris DR, Steward FR. Exergy Analysis
of Thermal, Chemical, and Metallurgical Processes.
Hemisphere: New York, 1988.
14. Habib MA, AL-Bagawi S. Thermodynamic performance
analysis of the Ghazlan power plant. Energy 1995;
20(11):1121–1130.
15. Rosen M, Tang R. Effect of altering combustion air flow
on a steam power plant: energy and exergy analysis.
International Journal of Energy Research 2006; 31:219–231.
Copyright r 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
16. Kopac M, Hilalci A. Effect of ambient temperature on the
efficiency of the regenerative and reheat Catalagz power
plant in Turkey. Applied Thermal Engineering 2007;
27:1377–1385.
17. Aljundi I. Energy and exergy analysis of a steam power
plant in Jordan. Applied Thermal Engineering 2008. DOI:
10.1016.
18. Moran M. Availability Analysis. Guide to Efficient Energy
Use. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ,1989.
19. Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G, Moran M. Thermal Design and
Optimization. Wiley: New York, 1996.
20. Tsatsaronis G, Pisa J. Exergoeconomics evaluation and
optimization of energy systems application to the CGAM
problem. Energy—The International Journal 1994; 19:
287–296.
21. Roosen P, Uhlenbruck S, Lucas K. Pareto optimization of
a combined cycle power system as a decision support tool
for trading off investment vs. operating costs. International
Journal of Thermal Sciences 2003; 42:553–560.
22. Silvera JL, Tuna CE. Thermo economic analysis method
for optimization of combined heat and power systems.
Part 1. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 2003;
29:479–485.
23. Hamidi A. Exergy and exergoeconomic analysis of a
steam power plant. B.Sc. Thesis, Energy Engineering
Department, Power and Water University of Technology,
Tehran, Iran, 2008.
Int. J. Energy Res. 2009; 33:499–512
DOI: 10.1002/er