Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

A comprehensive review on the exergy analysis of combined cycle power T

plants
⁎
Thamir K. Ibrahima, , Mohammed Kamil Mohammedb, Omar I. Awadc, Ahmed N. Abdallad,
Firdaus Basrawic, Marwah N. Mohammede, G. Najafif, Rizalman Mamatc
a
College of Applied Engineering, Tikrit University, Iraq
b
Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
c
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Pekan, Pahang 26600, Malaysia
d
Huaiyin Institute of Technology, Jiangsu, P. R. China
e
Faculty of Chemical Engineering and Natural Resources Engineering Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Lebuhraya Tun Razak, 23600 Kuantan Pahang, Malaysia
f
Faculty of Elect. Infor. Eng, Tarbiat Modares University, P.O.Box: 14115 111, Tehran, Iran

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The arriving optimum improvement of a thermodynamic system of energy conversion such as a combined cycle
Combined cycle power plant power plant (CCPP) is complicated due to the existence of different factors. Energy and exergy analysis is utilized
Energy as effective methods to determine both the quantity and quality of the energy sources. This paper reviews the
Exergy latest thermodynamics analysis on each system components of a CCPP independently and determine the exergy
Exergy destruction
destruction of the plant. A few layouts of the CCPP plant from different locations considered as case studies. In
fact, the most energy losses occurred in the condenser compared with the plant components. It found that in the
combustion chamber (CC) the highest exergy destruction occurred. The ambient temperature causes an evident
decrement in the power production by the gas turbine (GT). The result has proved that besides energy, exergy
analysis is an efficient way to the assessment of the performance of the CCPP by recommending a more ad-
vantageous configuration of the CCPP plant, which would lead to reductions in fuel required and emissions of air
pollutants.

1. Introduction greatly sustained by the combustion of fossil fuel [2]. According to

World’s population growth and substantial global economic devel-
opment are causing the increase in demand for energy dramatically.
The energy supply has undergone a shock due to the economic crisis
that has inflicted the global market. The gap between energy supply
and demand has risen continuously. Studies have determined that there
was an approximate 6% average annual growth in the electricity de-
mand for the world [1]. Further, increase in demand for the energy
expected for the next few years.
In general, there are many resources from which energy can be
generated, including the conventional resources of fossil fuels, nuclear
and renewable energy resources. The most common fuels used to gen-
erate energy are natural gas, coal and petroleum. Among the fossil
fuels, coal has been one of the most abundant resources used for gen-
erating the electricity worldwide. In fact, the world energy demand
International Energy Agency (2010), by the year 2030 the coal con-
sumption rate will be more than 6000 million tonnes of carbon
equivalents, and across the globe, 42% of electricity supply mainly
comes from the coal power plants.
Technically, the operation of a thermal plant that generates elec-
tricity using combustion of fossil fuel is much more complicated as
compared to a hydroelectric plant. It required flowing fluids to work
under extremely high temperature and pressure [3]. Moreover, con-
tinuous supervision and maintenance on the complex automatic control
units and operating conditions of the thermal power plants are neces-
sary to ensure the power plant operating efficiently and produce max-
imum power [3–5].
To protection the mother nature and reduce the energy wasted,
growing awareness was focused recently to the on more-efficient power
generation system and generates power depend on the renewable

Abbreviations: BFW, Boiler feed water; CC, Combustion chamber; GT, Gas turbine; LHV, Low heating value; HHV, High heating value; HP, High pressure; LP, Low pressure; IP,
Intermediate pressure; HRSG, Heat recovery steam generator; ST, Steam turbine; CCPP, Combined cycle power plant; BFP, Boiler feed water pump; SH, Superheater; RH, Reheater; DeSH,
Desuperheater; Eco, Economizer; Eva, Evaporator; CEP, Condensate Extraction Pump; N2, Nitrogen; O2, Oxygen; CO2, Carbon dioxide; H2O, Water
⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: thamirmathcad@tu.edu.iq (T.K. Ibrahim).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.072
Received 25 July 2016; Received in revised form 22 March 2018; Accepted 22 March 2018
1364-0321/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
T.K. Ibrahim et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850

List of symbols i Initial

T Turbine
e Specific exergy [kJ/kg] in Inlet
Ex Exergy [kJ] out Outlet
Eẋ Exergy flow rate [kW] P Pump
h Specific enthalpy [kJ/kg] a Air
ṁ Mass flow rate [kg/s] c Compressor
P Pressure [kPa] g Combustion gas
Q̇ Heat rate [kW] x Exergy
R Gas constant [kJ/kmol K] w Work
s Specific entropy [kJ/kg K] 0 Ambient condition
T Temperature [°C] AC Air compressor
y Molar fraction Cond Condenser
Ẇ Work [kW]
Ė Energy [kW] List of superscripts & greek letter
İ Exergy Destruction Rate [kW]
c Specific heat capacity [kJ/kg K] T Temperature
r Pressure ratio P Pressure
k Heat ratio ch Chemical exergy
ph Physical exergy
List of subscripts η Efficiency
λ Air-fuel ratio
f Fuel ξ Ratio of chemical exergy to LHV of fuel
Dest Destruction

resources energy [6,7]. Many latest policies of the energy encourage plant. A summary of the most important findings of the works related to
researchers to boost the dependent on the sources of the renewable the present study given. These include comparison of an ideal and ac-
energy, to help in reducing environmental issues and enhance the en- tual cycle, energy and exergy analysis of the advanced combined cycle
ergy security of the regions which depend on the use the fossil fuel systems. The third part discusses three case studies and shows how they
[8–10]. performed the exergy analysis. The last part states the conclusions of
. Numerous thermodynamic power cycles have been established and the literature work and provides recommendations for future work.
studied for the past few years [11,12]. Some of these new cycles are
found to handle the system that utilizes the heat sources with low or
medium temperatures, as well as, the theoretical and experiments in- 2. Thermodynamics analysis of the combined cycle power plant: a
vestigations have confirmed their capabilities [13–15]. The combined review
cycle consist from the Brayton and Rankine thermodynamic cycle as
shown in Fig. 1 [16]. The increase in the CCPP efficiency required to The CCPP plant introduced with the cogeneration technology that
implement the suitable working fluid such as binary mixture [17,18]. utilizes both power and heat from one single primary fuel or energy
The increase of the boiling temperature in the Heat recovery steam source simultaneously, able to provide a more efficient power genera-
generator (HRSG), gives the ability to produce a high thermal exchange tion system [23,24]. Heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) detain the
between the working fluid and the sources of the heat under variable heat rejected from GT and make use of it to increase the temperature of
temperature [19,20]. Therefore, the more heat exchange will decrease the steam (working fluid) in Rankine cycle (steam cycle) [25,26].
the losses of irreversibility in the process of heat addition [21,22]. The improvement the exploitation of the energy resources required
Fig. 2 shows studies that have been conducted on energy and exergy efficient methods to the analysis of the performance of power genera-
of the CCPP most of them during the last forty years. At the same time, tion cycles. Commonly, to analysis, the process of energy conversion,
by the use of power output of the plant, researchers can improve the first law of thermodynamics is applied in the methodology for
thermodynamics performance. Thus, CCPP performance can be main-
tained to operate at an optimum level. For this reason, this paper takes
a review of the energy and exergy analysis of CCPP. Fig. 2 included the
published articles from the year 1976 to the year 2017, it is clear to
note that, the number of the published article was increased to arrive
the maximum number in 2017. These increases show the interested of
the researcher to use the exergy analysis of the CCPP.
This paper reviews the combination of an available literature in the
area of the combined cycle power plant. The general aspects of the
different configuration of the combined cycle power plant, its im-
provement, modelling, and simulation are discussed. Additionally, the
analysis of the each component is carried out based on the energy,
exergy and exergy destruction and made suggestions improvement.
Finally, one can make a decision to use current combined cycle power
plant to produce innovative more effective outputs. This study divided
into four main parts including the introduction. Thermodynamics
analysis of the combined cycle power plant deals with a literature re-
view of the thermodynamics analysis of the combined cycle power
Fig. 1. Entropy-temperature of the CCPP cycle [16].

836
T.K. Ibrahim et al.
70
60
50
Number of Articles
40
30
20
10
0
Years
Fig. 2. Number of published research on energy and exergy analysis with
search subjects CCPP.
system energy analysis [27]. It considered as the most economical and
useful analysis for the performance of power system. However, there is
increasing interest in the advanced thermodynamics topic which com-
bined the first and second laws of thermodynamics to carry out the
cycle analysis by energy and exergy [28]. Exergy analysis (destruction
and efficiency) introduced to evaluate the thermal efficiency of the
cycle based on energy consumption. The analysis by using exergy
method, act as a tool for a clear variation between losses of energy to
the surrounding and irreversibilities in the internal process [29,30].
Analysis of the power plant is a broad concept involving the profi-
cient use of energy resources. In earlier days, the energy efficiency of
the plant was measured up to the first law of thermodynamics [31,32].
In fact, the design and analysis of most of the thermal system based on
the first law of thermodynamics are not sufficient [33,34]. The typical
approaches by the industry for the power plant efficiency analysis de-
pend on the principle of conservation of energy as stated in the first law
of thermodynamics [35,36]. However, this methodology is defective
basically as a result of the fuel and heat input regarding energy cannot
be added to power output and irreversibilities disregarded. In latest,
Taillon et al. [37], have discussed that exergy investigation given the
first and second law of thermodynamics must be involved to get the
correct approach for performance analysis of power plant.
Frankly, the second law of thermodynamics has been extensively
used to determine exergy losses because it is related directly to the
quality of energy produced within the system [38,39]. Through exergy
analysis on the whole plant, irreversible loss distribution of each
component can obtain. Thus, the vulnerable spot in power generation
system can be determined and solved to gain better performance. En-
ergy equilibrium method has stranded in most of the energy en-
gineering industry due to an inherent flaw which only energy con-
servation principle involved qualitatively [40]. Daud et al. [41],
conducted an analysis of the performance of coal-fired thermal power
plants in Turkey based on a comparison between energetic and ex-
ergetic. Unusual exergy parameter of the corresponding components
can determine in actual thermal power plant operation. Therefore, it is
undeniable that loss and exergy efficiency analysis of power plant
contribution a lot in gaining information about the malfunction re-
cognition and detection of power plant [42].
Exergy analysis is a strategy for the review of the mechanical de-
vices performance and thermal system processes. It includes more va-
luable data than energy analysis in determination of exergy at parti-
cular focuses in a progression of conversion energy steps. The steps that
contribute the greater thermodynamic losses (i.e., the greatest edge for
enhancement) can be identified by evaluating their efficiencies [43,44].
Exergy investigation of every component gives better comprehension of
losses at different conditions of the framework [45,46]. Exergy
837
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850
compared with energy can likewise identify preferable in the energy
technologies from the side of the economics and environmental benefits
view [47–49]. Exergy is hypothetically not rationed as energy, yet
destructed in the thermal system. The assessment of irreversibility that
is the losses source of the performance is known as the exergy de-
struction. As a matter of fact, the analysis of an exergy assessing the
quantity of exergy destruction identifies the location, the magnitude
and the inefficiencies thermodynamic component in a thermal energy
system [50,51].
The identification of the thermal system component where exergy
destruction happens can demonstrate the road towards potential en-
hancement [52]. Hence an exergy investigation may serve as a valuable
apparatus regarding enhancing the energy efficiency of vast scale of the
thermal energy system. According to [53], Exergy Analysis is a method
that permits to identify and quantify inefficient component in a system
involving heat and power, not just as far as heat loads (quantity of
energy), yet as far as pressure and temperature gradients (energy
quality) respect to the ambient conditions. Nevertheless, the analysis
using the exergy method does not set up clear functional guidelines to
optimum energy use. Yong and Lei [54], state that exergy denotes the
maximum valuable work a system can attain within ambient conditions
(25 °C, 1 atm).
Sengupta et al. [55] study the performance of thermal power plant
working on the coal based on exergy analysis, then they presented the
entire plant by three splitting zones for the analysis. Wang et al. [56]
implemented the exergy analysis of various cogeneration system in
cement industry, accomplishing an optimum parameter enhancement
for every cogeneration system. Saidi et al. [57] perform optimization
study using the second law of thermodynamics for the polymer elec-
trolyte fuel cell with cogeneration to get the optimum power generation
based on exergy analysis. Kamate and Gangavati, [58] they study the
performance of the cogeneration plant of a typical sugar factory based
on an exergy analysis of a heat matched bagasse-based cogeneration
plant.
In the modern power industry, engineer approach to utilizing the
process through the exergy analysis, which gives a more practical view
of the procedure and a helpful device for designing assessment [59–61].
In fact, the thermodynamics analysis based on exergy has become a
crucial feature in determining sources of inefficiency, providing a better
understanding of the process, and to measure the quality of energy used
[62,63]. There are some investigators even devoted their studies to
exergy analysis and efficiency improvement for the system component
[64,65]; while others concentrated on design and analysis of the sys-
tems [66–70].
The CCPP cycle has greater overall thermal efficiency due to the
smaller exergy losses of the combustion process in the power generation
system [71,72]. A rise in pressure ratio of the GT cycle will results of
exergy destruction in a lower rate of the power plant. Meanwhile, rate
of exergy destruction increase with an increase both ambient tem-
perature and turbine inlet temperature [73]. It has been found that
higher thermal efficiencies based on energy and exergy analysis can
achieve by using the methane as an energy source when to compare
with the coal and natural gas [45,74].
2.1. Energy analysis
An energy diagnosis is one of the methodologies to improve the
efficiency of the power system and to reduce the cost of fuel consumed,
cooling water of cooling system and emissions from the combustion of
fuel into the atmosphere [75–77]. First law of thermodynamics deals
with the amount of energy with the various form being transferred
within the system and its surrounding, causing changes in energy stored
in the system. Based on the first law of thermodynamics, power output
and thermal efficiency are commonly the main performance criteria
[41,78]. Work and heat interaction is treated as equivalent forms of
energy in transit and offers no indication about the possibility of a
T.K. Ibrahim et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850

spontaneous process proceeding in a certain direction [79]. The heat loss factor is denoted by h1f commonly lying in the range
Basic thermodynamics is applied to power system to find mass flow 0.98–0.99 [98].
rate of steam generated at drums, thermodynamics properties of each The approach points (Tap ) and the designed pinch point (Tpp ) are the
equipment and state, the electrical output of the system and thermal basis for the thermal analysis of the HRSG. Eq. (2) expresses the tem-
energy of process [53,80]. Effect of different parameters involved has perature of the gas being emitted from the evaporator:
been discussed in articles and journals including steam properties, the
Tg3 = Ts + Tpp (2)
pressure of high-pressure drum, pinch point, etc. Commonly, processes
are considered to be steady state steady flow. Moreover, kinetic and At superheated pressure, the saturation steam temperature is de-
potential energy effects are ignored. The input and output values of noted by Ts. Moreover, Eq. (3) defines the temperature of the water
every plant components can define as the measure of thermodynamic entering the evaporator.
variables such as enthalpy, pressure, temperature, entropy, mass flow
Tw2 = Ts − Tap (3)
rate, etc. [41,81].
Pinch Technology has developed as a tool for energy engineering Eq. (4) is used for calculating the mass flow rate of the generation
industries to carry out thermodynamic analysis that mainly uses for steam [81].
energy optimization [82–84]. Its application has allowed the im-
mg. (Cpg1 Tg1 − Cpg3 Tg3) × h1f
provement of the energetic efficiency in chemical plant and refineries, ms. =
by implementing an optimum use of heat loads of the process streams (hss − h w2) (4)
and thermal gradients between Pinch Analysis and Process Integration As defined in Eq. (5), the energy balance is used for calculating the
[53,85]. temperature of the gases that leave the superheater:
Each component of the system in the models assumed as an in-
dividual control volume. Thus in orders to conduct the analysis, prin- Cpg1 Tg1 ms. (hss − hs )
Tg 2 = −
ciple of first and second laws of thermodynamics, and mass conserva- Cpg 2 mg. Cpg 2 × h1f (5)
tion are applied to the component with negligible kinetic and potential
The trial and error method on Eq. (5) is performed for calculating
energy changes [86–89]. Throughout the whole system process, the
the specific heat (Cpg2 ) and Tg2. As shown in Fig. 4, the energy balance
steady state assumed for the operations. The thermodynamic property
of the economizer could be considered for calculating the temperature
relations with corresponding equations are solved by the energy bal-
of the exhaust hot gases emitting the HRSG.
ance of the cycle performance according to [90–92].
Eq. (6) is another way of demonstrating the heat available from the
A schematic of the CCGT and bottoming cycle using a single-pres-
exhaust gases:
sure heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) without reheating is illu-
strated in Fig. 1. To enable burning of natural gas for expansion in the Qav = mg × Cpg × (Tg1 − Tg 4 ) × h1f (6)
GT, a combustor and a single stage axial flow compressor are included
in the GT (topping cycle). For combining with fuel in order to produce where the exhaust temperature of the HRSG is represented by Tg4 .
high temperature flue gas, the principle of GT states that the air is The energy balance between states 4 and 5 can be considered for
compressed by the air compressor before being transferred to the calculating the temperature of the hot gases leaving the HRSG. This is
combustion chamber (CC). Next, the GT which is linked to the gen- shown in Fig. 4.
erator’s shaft for producing electricity becomes the recipient of tem- Cpg3 Tg3 ms. (h w2 − h w1)
perature flue gas [82]. In flowing into the HRSG, a decrease becomes Tg 4 = −
Cpg 4 mg. Cpg 4 × h1f (7)
imminent in the effluent exhaust gas temperature.
The superheater, economizer and evaporator exist in the HRSG. The ST becomes the recipient of the high pressure and high tem-
Electricity is produced with the transmission of steam by the HRSG to perature steam obtained from the HRSG [86,99], Fig. 3 shows the en-
the ST. The effluent condensate flows from the ST into a condenser. ergy balance.
Over here, waste heat is transferred by the cooling water to the cooling
Wst = ms. (h6 − h7) (8)
tower [93]. In the last stage, the output from the condenser namely the
feed water is suctioned by the feed water pump before transference to Eq. (9) expresses the heat rejected from the condenser [100]:
the HRSG [94]. The assumption that ηst andηp represent steam turbine
Qcond = m w. (h7 − h8) (9)
and pump efficiencies respectively is taken here. The solid and dashed
lines represent the ideal and actual processes on the temperature en- The pump extracts the condensate from the condenser which is then
tropy diagram illustrated by Fig. 3 [84].
For the CCGT plant, a single pressure HRSG is classified as a
common type. The temperature profile for a single pressure HRSG case
containing a superheater, economizer and evaporator is shown in Fig. 4.
Feed water temperature and blow down are the terminologies used for
superheated steam temperature and pressure. Conditions of GT exhaust
like temperature exhaust gases, flow rate and compositions are known
as well. In the design mode, the aim is also to obtain the steam flow, gas
and steam temperature profile. For calculating the HRSG temperature
profile, the main parameters are pinch point (Tpp ) and approach points
(Tap ). Fig. 4 defines them which include steam flow fall, the complete
gas and steam temperature profiles [91]. The values for (Tg3) and (Tw2)
can be calculated while assumptions are made for the pinch and ap-
proach. Hence, as shown in Fig. 3, the gas and water properties can be
calculated by applying the energy balance for gas and water in every
part. The following equations have been solved for obtaining the result:
Eq. (1) expresses the superheater duty [95–97]:
Qsh = ms. (hsh − hs ) = mg × Cpg × (Tg1 − Tg 2) × h1f (1) Fig. 3. Temperature-entropy diagram for steam turbine plant.

838
T.K. Ibrahim et al.
Fig. 4. A typical temperature heat transfer diagram for single-pressure HRSG
combined cycle.
elevated to the economizer pressure. Eq. (10) presents the corre-
sponding work:
Wp = m w. × vf 9 (psh − pc ) (10)
Hence, the ST power plant’s net work is :
Wsnet = Wst − Wp (11)
The ST power plant’s efficiency is [95]:
Wsnet
ηstc =
Qav (12)
Eq. (13) represents the overall thermal efficiency of the CCGT power
plant [101,102]:
WGnet + Wsnet
ηall =
Qadd (13)
2.2. Exergy analysis
Exergy is defined as the maximum amount of work that can be
obtained from any disequilibrium or gradient between a physical
system and surrounding environment. In simpler words, it determines
the availability of a system to produce work. Utilization of exergy has
spread to various fields of physics and engineering as a useful decision-
making tool in recent decades. Despite the name of terms, exergy is
directly related to energy. However, unlike energy, exergy is not con-
served and destroyed by irreversibilities within a system, internally and
externally [103]. The identification of parts of a system where the de-
struction of exergy takes place can provide guidance towards potential
improvements [52,104].
As a combination property of a system and its environment, exergy
depended on both the state of the system and surrounding. The ration of
energy to exergy in a system can be considered as a measure of energy
quality that indicates the improvement of energy efficiency. According
to Arriola et al. [53], exergy analysis is a tool that allows us to identify
and quantify inefficient of equipment in a system that involving heat
and power. This analysis is conducted not only regarding heat loads or
the measure of the quantity of energy but also regarding temperature
and pressure gradient (energy quality) concerning the ambient condi-
tions [53]. However, exergy analysis does not establish clear, practical
design guidelines to optimize the use of energy [105,106].
Saidi et al. [57], optimized the power output of a polymer electro-
lyte fuel cell with cogeneration using the second law of thermo-
dynamics, based on an exergy analysis. Sengupta et al. [55], presented
839
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850
exergy analysis of a coal based thermal power plant by splitting up the
entire plant cycle into three zones for the analysis. Wang et al. [56],
performed exergy analysis of different cogeneration system in cement
industry, achieving a parameter optimization for each cogeneration
system. Kamate et al. [58], conducted an exergy analysis of a heat
matched bagasse-based cogeneration plant of a typical sugar factory.
Exergetic analysis acts as a tool for a clear variation between energy
losses to the environment and internal irreversibilities in the process
[107–109]. The steps that contribute the greater thermodynamic losses
(i.e., the greatest margin for improvement) can be identified by eval-
uating their efficiencies [43,110]. Exergy analysis of each component
provides a better understanding of losses at various states of the system
[45,111]. Exergy can also identify better than the energy the environ-
mental benefits and economics of energy technologies [47,112].
Exergy is theoretically not conserved as energy, yet destructed in
the system. The evaluation of irreversibility that is the source of per-
formance loss is known as the exergy destruction [113,114]. As a
matter of fact, an exergy analysis assessing the quantity of exergy de-
struction identifies the location, the magnitude and the source of
thermodynamic inefficiencies in a thermal system [50]. In the modern
power industry, engineer approach to process analysis utilizes the ex-
ergy, which provides a more practical view of the process and a handy
tool for engineering evaluation [59]. In fact, exergy analysis has be-
come a crucial aspect in determining sources of inefficiency, providing
a better understanding of the process, and to measure the quality of
energy used [62]. There are some researchers even devoted their stu-
dies to component exergy analysis and efficiency improvement [64,65];
while others focused on systems design and analysis [66–70].
In thermodynamics, energy transfer and conversion processes of a
thermal system or equipment are the main consideration to determine
the efficiency of the system. The ratio between exergy used or gained
and consumptive exergy is defined d as the exergy efficiency of the
system or equipment [115]. The exergetic efficiency of the thermal
equipment is defined by the ratio of exergy to heat absorbed [116,117].
For a thermodynamic system that interacts with a reference ambient
giving or absorbing energy in the form of heat, energy can be expressed
in the form of exergy defined by:
T0
Exergy = Q (1− )
T (14)
Exergy analysis of power plant is mostly involved with enthalpy
exergy whose exergy calculation formula:
e = (h − h 0) − T0 (s − s0) (15)
Where h, s and T represent enthalpy, the entropy of working system
under environment condition and thermodynamics temperature of en-
vironment respectively. Exergy efficiency is the exergy utilization ratio;
however, it cannot reflect the situation of exergy loss distribution. To
achieve that, exergy loss rate, d and exergy loss coefficient is calculated
as indicators that can find the inefficient part of the power system.
Unlike exergy loss rate, exergy loss coefficient, εi is the ratio of local
exergy loss rate to total fuel entered into the thermal system.
The balance of the exergy rate can be expressed for every compo-
nent of the thermal system as shown in Eq. (16) [118,119]:
∑ Eẋ i + Eẋ heat = ∑ Eẋ e + Ẇ +I (16)
Subscripts of i and e in Eqs. (1)–(16) indicate inlet and exit states of
the stream flow. Meanwhile ṁ and h donate the mass flow rate and
enthalpy respectively. Furthermore, exergy rate and exergy destruction
is represented by Eẋ and I . Net exergy transfer rate by heat at tempe-
rate T is given by [120–122]:
T
Eẋ heat = ∑ ⎛1− T0 ⎞ Q̇ (17)
⎝ ⎠
In Eq. (17), subscript 0 refers to the ambient environmental con-
ditions and T0 is referred to the ambient temperature. Exergy rate of the
 T.K. Ibrahim et al.

Table 1
Energy and exergy analysis of the CCPP.
References Year Capacity (MW) Energy analysis Exergy analysis Remarks

[82] 2001 850 Yes This study focus on the developed simulation and optimization code to select optimum operation parameters.
[146] 2001 1100 Yes A thermodynamics optimization of large-scale coal-fired power plant was done.
[147] 2007 500 Yes Yes The results show the lower energy efficiency due to higher energy rejection and poor exergy efficiency is due to higher exergy destruction relative to net output at
part load operation.
[148] 2009 315 Yes Yes The condenser show maximum energy losses. In terms of exergy destruction, the major loss was found in the boiler and turbine.
[149] 2009 7.7 Yes Yes Energy and exergy analysis have been done and predicted that fluidized bed combustor has the largest exergy destruction
[150] 2010 32 Yes Yes The irreversibilities yield of the boiler and turbine represent the highest exergy losses in the power plant.
[151] 2010 348.5 Yes Yes Energy losses, mainly occur in the condenser while the exergy destruction of the boiler is higher than the other components of the power plant.
[152] 2011 300 Yes Yes Exergy loss mainly takes place in boiler and in condenser energy loss takes place at most
[153] 2011 435 Yes Yes Optimum design parameter was selected based on multi-objective optimization
[154] 2011 107 Yes The lower exergy efficiency of plant components was occurred in the combustion chamber.
[155] 2014 660 Yes Yes The results show that minimum energy losses maximum rate of exergy destruction were occurred in the boiler.
[156] 2014 300 Yes Yes The results produced from compared two power plant work at same capacity show that the most energy losses was occurred in the condenser and the boiler represent
the major exergy destruction between the power plant components.

840
[157] 2014 500 Yes Yes Perform energy and exergy analysis was done to compare between coal-fired power plant and nuclear power plant at same capacity and condition.
[158] 2015 150 Yes Yes A less exergy loss takes place in the condenser while boiler has a major exergy loss in comparison to other components.
[159] 2015 110 Yes Yes The energy loss was insignificant in the condenser due to its low quality and that the greatest process irreversibility and possibility for efficiency improvement is
found in the boiler
[71] 2015 50 Yes Yes Among the system components in the combustion chamber most exergy destruction was occurred after applied the first and second law of thermodynamics analysis.
The energy and exergy efficiencies of the CCPP are found as 56% and 50.04% respectively.
[119] 2016 200 Yes Yes The main wasting exergy equipment was the boiler while the be most wasting energy equipment was the condenser.
[160] 2017 660 Yes Yes Development efficient methodology for Thermodynamic optimization of the power plant has been done using coupled artificial neural network (ANN) and genetic
algorithm (GA) and found the optimum parameters.
[67] 2017 232.6 Yes The reduce of the exergy destruction in the cycle can be achieve by reducing the temperature differences of the net heaters and increasing the amount of supplied
working fluid to the turbine.
[161] 2017 180 Yes Due to their high irreversibility the combustion chambers are the main sources of exergy destruction
[162] 2017 250 Yes Yes The results show that the energy efficiency was 32.4% while the exergy efficiency was 34.3% of the plant.
[163] 2017 430.54 Yes Yes The energy and exergy analysis are assessment of an integrated steam generation CCPP
[164] 2018 315 Yes The simulator model can predict the exergy destruction in the cycle with relative errors of less than 1.5% for different operating conditions.
[165] 2018 2.33 Yes Yes Energy and exergy assessments are proposed of the cogeneration system.
[166] 2018 0.033 Yes The combustion chamber had half of the total exergy destruction of the plants.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850
T.K. Ibrahim et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850

fluid flow is the summation of physical and chemical exergy rate, dis- coal-fired steam power plant. In 2011, Kaushik et al. [141] presented a
regarding the kinetic and potential exergies of the flow [123,124]. brief review of various studies and comparison between the energy and
exergy analyses of thermal power plants stimulated by coal and gas.
Eẋ = Eẋ ph + Eẋ ch (18)
Based on the exergy analysis presented in this study, main exergy loss in
The term of physical exergy is calculated as [125–127]: coal based power plants is in the boiler. While for gas fired combined
cycle thermal power plant, combustion chamber has the largest exergy
Eẋ ph = ṁ [(h − h 0 ) − T0 (s − s0 )] (19) loss distribution among the other parts of the systems [141].
To determine the chemical exergy of the blend, it is essential to Introducing exergoeconomic analysis, Ameri et al. [5] performed
know the molar structure, x of the gases of the combustion after com- the analysis together with energy and exergy for a steam power plant.
bustion process by the chemical balance equation [128,129]. Ghaebi et al. [142] conducted energy, exergy and thermo-economic
analysis on a combined cooling, heating and power system. Wei et al.
n n [143] presented an exergy analysis and an exergoeconomic evaluation
Eẋ ch = ṁ ⎡∑ x i Ex ich + RT0 ∑ x i ln(x i ) ⎤
⎢ i=1 i=1 ⎥ (20) to identify potential energy savings in distillation processes. Compar-
⎣ ⎦
ison between energy and exergy analysis has been made by Li et al.
Calculation of exergy destructions and exergy efficiency for each [144] using sub-critical, super-critical, ultra-supercritical steam condi-
component of the system are included in exergy analysis and also the tions of power systems. In 2014, Chen et al. carried out energy and
overall system. The formula of exergy efficiency is mathematically ex- exergy analysis of the combined cooling, heating and power system
pressed as below [125,130,131]: driven by gas turbine [145].
̇ , GT
Wnet Combined method of energy and exergy analysis is a useful tool for
ηex , GT = decision making because it allows optimizing the operation of the
Eẋ ch (21)
power plant, as well as recommending actions in rehabilitation and
̇ , ST
Wnet modernization programs [111]. Besides that, it also optimizes the use of
ηex , ST =
Eẋ ch (22) energy in a process of industrial power plant that guarantees the effi-
cient use of energy resources [53,106]. In this study, a number of re-
̇ ,
Wnet GT
̇ ,
+ Wnet ST search articles based on thermodynamic analysis in the CCPP have been
ηex , overall =
̇
Ex ch (23) reviewed. A lot of research articles, including energy and exergy ana-
lysis. Therefore more, these studies have been also taken into in-
Eq. (24) shows the calculation for the fuel specific exergy
vestigation. It is also noted that, most energy losses was occurred in the
[132,133]:
condenser but the major exergy destruction occurred in the combustion
ch chamber as shown in Table 1.
Eẋ fuel = ξ × LHVfuel (24)
where c = 1.06, is indicated as the factor of exergy based on the lower
3. Case studies of the energy and exergy analysis of the combined
heating value [134,135].
cycle
Exergy of an energy-conversion system can be quantified by speci-
fying both the system and its surroundings. It is concluded that any
In calculating the variation in a thermodynamic property analysis
process does not remarkably vary the concentrated thermodynamic
(first law of the thermodynamics), the reference ambient state is in-
properties of the ambient environment. The case, when considered the
significant. However, it is supposed that the dead state will influence
system, is at equilibrium with the surroundings called the dead state
the results of exergy analysis (second law of the thermodynamics)
[136,137]. There are no potential variances occur when a system is at
[167,168]. So as to determine the significant of the dead state towards
equivalent pressure, temperature, velocity, chemical composition, and
the exergy analysis, the case studied was analyzed using the corre-
elevation as its surroundings, that would extract the useful work of the
sponding equations; with the reference of the environment temperature
system [43,138].
varies from 283.15 to 318.15 K while keeping the pressure at 101.3 kPa
[50,169]. REFPROP 8 software was utilized to calculate the thermo-
2.3. Combined energy and exergy analysis dynamic properties of air and water at various nodes of case studied
[170,171]. In this part will discuss three previous case studies of the
The combination of both energy and exergy analysis in a single combined cycle based on the energy and exergy analysis.
methodology could provide a right solution for the analysis of heat and
power systems. The combined approach in analyzing the operation and
design of a typical combined cycle power plant not only quantifies total 3.1. Externally fired biomass CCPP
exergy loss for the equipment, but also the energy and exergy effi-
ciency, potentially improves the power systems towards efficient use of In the study of externally fired biomass CCPP as shown in Fig. 5, a
energy resources. thermodynamic mathematical model is developed for the gasification
Analysis of cross pinch heat transfer in a combined cycle power process assuming that the producer gas is in chemical equilibrium
system identifies additional losses of energy due to the inefficient de- [172]. Regarding the lower heating value of the biomass fuel, the
sign of the heat recovery steam generation system (HRSG). Arriola et al. overall energy efficiency can be expressed as:
[53], stated that elimination of cross pinch heat transfer in process ̇ , GT + Wnet
Wnet ̇ , ST
operating conditions would allow an increment of 0.81% on the cycle ηoverall =
ṁ biomass LHVbiomass (25)
efficiency and a reduction of 2.4% in the cooling water required. Plant
efficiency can be improved by implementing new or rehabilitated where Wneṫ , GT = WGT ̇ , ST = WST
̇ − Ẇ pump and Wnet ̇ − Wair
̇ − comp .
equipment. However, some energy losses could remain due to an in- In previous studies, a few researchers have conducted conventional
efficient thermal integration [53]. It has been found that higher energy exergy analysis towards externally fired biomass CCPP to define the
and exergy efficiencies can achieved when methane is used as an energy efficiency as “exergy of product/exergy of fuel” [125,134,174–179].
source when compared to natural gas and coal [45]. Esen et al. [139] Soltani, Yari et al. [173] has reported the explanation of product and
investigated energetic and exergetic efficiencies of a ground-coupled fuel exergy, as well as exergy destruction and exergy efficiency for the
heat pump system. case studied.
Rosen et al. [140], examined energy and exergy efficiencies in a Fig. 6 shows that the influence of pressure ratio and two gas turbine

841
T.K. Ibrahim et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850

= 50,145 kJ/kg) of fuel is utilized to determine the energy efficiency of

combustion chamber are consider in this study. Meanwhile, its exergy
efficiency is calculated from the net work output of chemical exergy of
fuel at it is standard value (52,275 kJ/kg). Chemical equation of the
combustion process occurs in combustion chamber (CC) of the GT is:
CH4 + x (O2+3.76N2) → CO2+2H2 O + (x −2) O2+3.76xN2 (26)

where x represent the amount of air required to complete the com-

bustion process.
Table 2 was developed to summarize the exergetic losses calculation
based on determine the exergetic losses for each components of the
CCPP for the study [180].
Entropy change for air in isentropic compression and expansion
process is zero, Δs = 0 [180].
∆s = 0 = s32 − s 33′ (27)

P32
s32 = [sCO2+2s H2 O + (x −2) sO2+3.76xs N2]32 / − R [log
mpcc
2P32 3.76xP32 (x −2) P32
+2log +3.76x log + (x −2)log ]
mpcc mpcc mpcc (28)

s 33′ = [sCO2+2s H2 O + (x −2) sO2+3.76xs N2]33′

Fig. 5. Schematic diagram of case study (externally fired biomass CCPP) [173].
P 33′ 2P ′ 3.76xP 33′ (x −2) P33′
− R [log +2log 33 +3.76x log + (x −2)log ]
mpcc mpcc mpcc mpcc
(29)
where mpcc indicate the total mass of chemical contains in combustion
product. Heat balanced equation is used to determine the steam flow
rates and local outlet temperature in heating devices at low, medium
and high pressure. Eqs. (30 and 31) are expressed to calculate satura-
tion temperature of LP and IP evaporator.
TIP sat = TIP ex − TTDIP − DSHIP (30)

TLP sat = TLP ex − TTDLP − DSHLP (31)

TTD is defined as the terminal temperature difference between flue

gas and reheated/superheated steam; DSH is the degree of superheat in
superheater. Exhaust gas temperature is determined from:
THP ex = THP sat + PPHP (32)

TIP ex = TIP sat + PPIP (33)

Fig. 6. Effect of the pressure ratio and the turbine inlet temperature on the
energy and exergy efficiency of the CCPP [173]. TLP ex = TLP sat + PPLP (34)

In exergy analysis, chemical exergy and physical exergy associated

inlet temperatures values on the energy and exergy efficiencies varia-
tions. For a constant turbine inlet temperature of the GT cycle, it is
obvious that there is no significant on the both the efficiencies varia-
tion. However, at the specific value of the pressure ratio, the energy and
exergy efficiencies are boosted in their values. Thus we can conclude
that the rise of the turbine inlet temperature of GT will leads to greater
thermal efficiencies at all pressure ratios [173].
3.2. Combined cycle with pressure level of HRSG
Srinivas et al. [180] optimized different types of the HRSG such as:
single pressure (SP), dual pressure (DP) and triple pressure (TP) on the
performa.nce off the combined cycle power plant (CCPP) as shown in
Fig. 7. The exergy efficiency variations in the CCPP are plotted with the
pressure ratio of the, compressor; inlet temperature of the gas turbine,
HRSG superheated pressure (HP), the pressure of reheated steam, pinch
point (PP) and deaerator pressure. The optimized of the HRSG config-
uration led to improve the generation of the steam and therefore, the
output of the steam turbine.
Assumptions for analysis of the CCPP are tabulated . Energy effi-
ciency of the CCPP is determined based on the law heating value (LHV
in each component is estimated by:
e ch = ∑k nk εk0 + RT0 ∑ nk ln(Pxk )
k (35)
e ph = h − ∑k T0 sk (36)
th
where xk donate to mole fraction of k components.
In all HRSG configurations, the deaerator is located to help the
CCPP to remove dissolved gases in feed water as well as gain higher
efficiency. As last heat transfers surface the condensate preheater (CPH)
is placed in HRSG to enhance the heat recovery from the hot gases. The
pressure and temperature of the steam in each pressure level are de-
termined based on the local flue gas temperature in the HRSG. The
minimum temperature difference between saturation steam tempera-
tures in the evaporators and the exhaust gases leaving the evaporator
from the gas turbine called as pinch point (PP). On the other hand the
temperature difference between steam in the super heaters and the
exhaust entry are called terminal temperature difference (TTD) and it
Thus, the total exergetic losses of the CCPP cycle is
itot = iC + iCC + iGT + iHRSG + iex + iST + iCO + iw + iDE (37)
Exergy efficiency of the CCPP cycle can determine from

842
T.K. Ibrahim et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850

Fig. 7. Schematic diagram of CCPP cycle with HRSG: a) single pressure ;b) dual pressure; and c) triple pressure [180].

843
T.K. Ibrahim et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850

Table 2
Components exergetic losses.
Components Exergetic loss (Irreversibility)

Compressor iC = e30 + wC − e31

CC iCC = eCH4 + e31 − e32
GT iGT = e32 + e33 − wGT
HRSG iHRSG = (eHRSG in − eHRSG out ) + ∑ (ewater in − estream out )
HRSG (Exhaust) i ex = eex
ST iST = T0 ∑ m (sout − sin)
Cond. Tw, out
iCO = T0 ⎛mCO ST (sout − sin)+mw ×4.18×log ⎞
⎝ Tw, in ⎠
Cond. (Hot water) iw = mw ×4.18×(Tw, out − Tw, in) − T0 mw ×4.18×log
Tw, out
Tw, in
Deaerator iDE = T0 [mDE steam (safter mix − sbefore mix ) + mfeedwater (safter mix − sbefore mix )

wnet physical and thermal design, based on used the Matlab software pro-
ηex = × 100
ε 0CH4 (38) gram for optimization is developed. To study the optimization of the
CCPP, the temperature profile of the gases and steam in the CCPP, es-
Clearly, exergy efficiency is not in view of the particular heat input
timated the enthalpy and exergy of each line in plant. The energy
to the steam; rather, the LHV of the fuel is used to include the losses
balance equations for various parts of the CCPP (Fig. 9) are as follows
from the furnace of the boiler system which mainly due to energy lost
[153]:
with incomplete combustion, hot gases, and etc.

• Air compressor:
Fig. 8(a) clearly shows that optimum pressure ratio increase from
single pressure to triple pressure in HRSG. According to the isentropic
expansion equation, the increase of pressure ratio will reduce the ex- ⎧ 1 ⎡ aγa
γ −1
⎤⎫
haust temperature of the GT cycle, thus the total cycle efficiency was TB = TA 1+ rc −1⎥
⎨ ηAC ⎢ ⎬
decreases. The HRSG is better in triple pressure configuration. At tur- ⎩ ⎣ ⎦⎭ (39)
bine inlet temperature 1200 °C value of the GT cycle, the optimum
pressure ratio is observed as 8, 10 and 12 for SP, DP and TP HRSG
respectively. The Exergy efficiency of the CCPP cycle was raised with Ẇ AC = ma cp, a (TB − TA) (40)
the increased of the turbine inlet temperature of the GT, at a constant where cp, a is assumed as a temperature variable function:
pressure ratio of 12 (Fig. 8b).
By increasing the inlet pressure of the steam turbine, the overall 3.8371T 9.4537T 2 ⎞ ⎛ 5.49031T 3 ⎞ ⎛ 7.9298T 4 ⎞
c p, a = 1.0481−⎛ ⎞+⎛ ⎜ − ⎟ + ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

efficiency of cycle will increase as well (Fig. 8c). A remarkable rise in ⎝ 10 4 ⎠ ⎝ 107 ⎠ ⎝ 1010 ⎠ ⎝ 1014 ⎠
efficiency is observed from DP to TP with the present of high pressure. (41)
In Fig. 8(d), at 200 bar of inlet pressure of the steam turbine, exergy
efficiency of CC increase gradually with steam reheat pressure for single
pressure configuration HRSG. However, dual and triple pressure HRSG • Combustion chamber:
shows a different graph due to the existence of reheater in the config- ṁ a hB + ṁ f LHV = ṁ g hc +(1−ηcc ) ṁ f LHV (42)
urations. Reheater is implemented to reduce the moisture contain in the
steam in order to prevent the erosion of turbine blades during expan-
sion process. Exergy efficiency is optimum at 100 bar steam reheat PC
= (1 − ΔPCC )
pressure with HP pressure at 200 bar. PB (43)
By maintaining HP pressure and steam reheat pressure at 200 bar
and 100 bar respectively, we observed from Fig. 8(e) that peak
deaerator pressure is approximately 1, 3 and 5 bar for distinct level of
• Gas turbine:
1 − γg
HRSG. Greater temperature difference between exhaust and steam (PP) ⎧ ⎡ γg ⎤ ⎫
⎪ P ⎪
will cause increase of irreversibility losses in heat transfer. Conse- TD = TC 1+ηGT ⎢1−⎛ C ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎥
⎨ ⎢ ⎝ PD ⎠ ⎥⎬
quently, combined cycle achieve higher exergy efficiency at low tem- ⎪ ⎪
⎩ ⎣ ⎦⎭ (44)
perature different (Fig. 8f).
Practically, the CCPP cycle has a constant pressure ratio of the
compressor and turbine inlet temperature of the GT designed by the ̇ = m g c p,
WGT − TD )
g (TC (45)
manufacturer. Thus, it is not ideal to reduce the exergetic losses in the
gas cycle components such as compressor, combustion chamber and gas
turbine. From SP to TP, exergetic loss associated to heat transfer in-
ẆNet = WGT
̇ − Ẇ AC (46)
crease with rate of steam generation by HRSG. Hence, causing exhaust
exergetic loss to reduce. In the isentropic expansion of steam turbine,
exergetic loss is affected by the amount of steam flow. As higher pres- ṁ g = ṁ f + ṁ a (47)
sure level of HRSG produce greater steam flow, exergetic flow rises with
the pressure level, which indirectly increases the condenser exergetic where cp, g is assumed as a temperature variable function:
loss as well. Overall, total exergetic losses show a decreasing pattern 6.99703T 2.7129T 2 ⎞ ⎛ 1.22442T 3 ⎞
from SP to TP of the HRSG. c p, g = 0.991615+⎛ ⎞+⎛ ⎜ − ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
5
⎝ 10 ⎠ ⎝ 107 ⎠ ⎝ 1010 ⎠ (48)

3.3. Dual pressure (DP) combined cycle power plant

• Duct burner:
To find the optimum parameters of the system from the view of the To rise the exhaust gas temperature of the GT that entering the

844
T.K. Ibrahim et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850

Fig. 8. Exergy efficiency of the CCPP cycle with: a) single pressure HRSG; b) dual pressure HRSG; and c) triple pressure HRSG [180].

845
T.K. Ibrahim et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850

Fig. 9. Schematic representation of a dual pressure (DP) CCPP cycle [153].

Table 3 ṁ g cp (T13 − T14 ) = ṁ S, HP (h8 − h7) (52)

Exergy destruction and exergy efficiency of the CCPP components.
LP superheater:
Components Exergy destruction Exergy efficiency
ṁ g cp (T14 − T15) = ṁ S, LP (h6 − h5) (53)
HRSG EḊ , HRSG = ∑i, E ̇ − ∑o E ̇ ̇ + E6̇ − E1̇
E10
ηHRSG = ̇ − E18
E11 ̇ LP evaporator:
ST EḊ , ST = ∑i, E ̇ − ∑o E ̇ − Ẇ WSṪ
ηST = ṁ g cp (T15 − T16) = ṁ S, LP (h5 − h4 )
Ei̇ − Eȯ (54)
Pump EḊ , P = Ei̇ − Eȯ + ẆP Ei̇ − Eȯ
ηP =
EṖ Deaerator evaporator:
Comp. EḊ , AC = EȦ − EḂ − Ẇ AC E2̇ − E1̇
ηAC =
Ẇ AC ṁ g cp (T16 − T17) = ṁ S, LP (h3 − h2) (55)
CC EḊ , CC = EḂ − EĊ + Eḟ , CC ̇
EC
ηCC = ̇ − Eḟ , CC
EB Condensate pre-heater:
GT EḊ , GT = EĊ − EḊ − WGT
̇ ̇
WGT
ηGT =
EC ̇ − ED ̇ ṁ g cp (T17 − T18) = ṁ S, LP (h2 − h1) (56)
Duct burner EḊ , DB = EḊ − E11
̇ + Eḟ , DB ̇
E11
ηDB = ̇ ̇
ED − Ef , DB After solving the numerical mass balance and energy equations,
Cond. EḊ , C = ∑i, E ̇ − ∑o E ̇ ̇ , Cond
ED
ηCond = 1− temperature-transferred heat diagram of HRSG in term of gas and
∑in Cond E ̇
water/steam flow is produced.

HRSG, additional fuel is burnt in supplementary combustor. • Steam turbine:

̇ = ṁ w, HP h10 + ṁ w, HP h6 − ṁ w h19
WST (57)
ṁ g hD + ṁ f , DB LHV = (ṁ g + ṁ f , DB ) h11+ (1−ηDB ) ṁ f , DB LHV

(49) ̇ ,a
WST
ηST =
̇ ,s
WST (58)
• Heat recovery steam generator (HRSG): In order to determine the performance of the CCPP, overall thermal
efficiency must include the efficiency of the GT cycle and the ST cycle.
In this case studied, configuration of HRSG is dual pressure. Energy
balance equations for the exhaust gases and water in each point are ̇ − WAC
WGT
ηGT =
used to calculate gases temperature and water properties. ̇
Qin (59)
HP superheater:
̇ − WP
WST
ṁ w, HP h10 + ṁ w, LP h6
̇
− ṁ w h19 = WST (50) ηST =
̇
Qin (60)
HP evaporator:
̇ − WAC + WST
WGT ̇ − WP
ηCCPP =
ṁ g cp (T12 − T13) = ṁ S, HP (h9 − h8) (51) ̇
Qin (61)
HP economizer: There are a few assumptions made in conducting this analysis

846
T.K. Ibrahim et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850

[181,182]: the hot exhaust gas and working fluid. Table 3 summarized the exergy
destruction rate and the exergy efficiency for each component of the
a) All the flows are in steady flow. CCPP with effect dual pressure HRSG [153]. Therefore, the calculation
b) In this study the researcher consider the air and combustion pro- of exergy destruction and exergy efficiency will be very sample and
ducts as an ideal-gas mixture. help to develop the mathematical model for the effect of dual pressure
c) Natural gas is used as the fuel. HRSG on the performance of CCPP.
d) In combustion chamber, heat loss is deduced to be 3% of the LHV of
the fuel [183]. However, all other components are assumed adia- 4. Conclusion
batic.
e) The ambient conditions are T0 = 293.15 K and P0 = 1.01 bar. In this study, a comprehensive investigation of modelling and per-
formance assessment has been conducted on the CCPP plant. Review of
The previous studies divided the exergy to four main groups as: the technical methods of energy and exergy analysis from previous
physical, chemical, kinetic and potential exergy. Most studies assumed published journals and articles has permit a significant comparison of
the kinetic and potential exergy to be insignificant components through various configurations of the CCPP plant, specifically in term of heat
the analysis. On the other hand, the physical and chemical exergy recovery steam generator. The fact is combination of energy and exergy
consider being the significant components of the exergy through the analysis has been widely used for improvement not attainable by en-
analysis [113,161,184,185]. The chemical exergy of a substance is the ergy methods. The results obtained from exergy analysis seem to be
most extreme work that can be gotten from it by taking it to the similar with the actual practice of the CCPP generation system. As the
equilibrium of chemical composite with the standard conditions at matter of fact, exergy efficiency has successfully provided a more
constant pressure and temperature (1 atm and 298.15 K respectively) practical comparison between distinct configurations of cogeneration
[162,186,187]. Therefore in the combustion process the chemical ex- systems. Energy efficiencies can be non-intuitive or even deceptive
ergy represent the most important part. The deviation of the pressure [190]. Part of it is because it does not demonstrate a measure of ide-
and temperature of any system compared to the standard conditions led ality. Moreover, energy losses during operation process can be large
to generate the physical exergy. Physical exergy shows maximum work amount of quantity, yet it is thermodynamically negligible due to its
potential of system at initial conditions [162]. By applying the first and low quality. On the other hand, exergy efficiencies and destruction
second law of thermodynamics, the exergy balance can be obtained. provide measures of approach to ideality. Such results provide great
opportunities for improvement. Nonetheless, unavoidable irreversi-
Eẋ Q + ∑ ṁ i exi = ∑ ṁ e exe + Eẋ W + Eẋ D bility or losses are present due to technological, physical, and economic
i e (62)
constraints [50]. Among the system of the CCPP, HRSG system has the
Subscript i and e are indicating the inlet and outlet of process flow. mainly remarkable source of exergy destruction due to the chemical
Exergy destruction is defined as Eẋ D . reaction between compressed air and fuel input. The main factors that
affecting are the excess air fraction exist in the combustion and air inlet
T
Eẋ Q = ⎛1− 0 ⎞ Qi̇
⎜ ⎟
temperature. Improvement can achieve by reducing the air-fuel ratio
⎝ Ti ⎠ (63)
and preheating the combustion air. In overall, exergy methods able to
Eẋ W = Ẇ (64) guarantee the tremendous benefits reasonably attainable, which will
likely be beneficial to manufacturers, engineers and designers of the
ex ph = (h − h 0) − T0 (s − s0) (65) CCPP generation systems in plant design, manufacturing, analysis, and
optimization formula, and most importantly, determine the suitable
n n type of system for different conditions and applications.
ch
ex mix = ⎡∑ Xi ex ich + RT0 ∑ Xi ln Xi + G E⎤
⎢ i=1 i=1 ⎥ (66)
⎣ ⎦
Acknowledgements
where Eẋ Q and Eẋ W is the exergy of heat transfer and work respectively.
G E is the excess free Gibbs energy which is negligible at low pressure in The authors would like to thank Tikrit University for providing la-
a gas mixture. Subscripts 0 represent the dead-state conditions. In order boratory facilities and financial.
to analyze exergetic performance, equation of total exergy rate is uti-
lized. References
Eẋ = Eẋ ph + Eẋ ch (67)
[1] Jonathan GK. Worldwide electricity used in data centers. Environmental Research
Fuel exergy, ex f is determine by the ratio of simplified exergy as Letters 2008;3:034008.
[2] Noor M, Wandel AP, Yusaf T. A review of MILD combustion and open furnace
below [62,134,188]:
design consideration. International Journal of Automotive and Mechanical
ex f Engineering. 2012;6:730–54.
ξ= [3] Arrieta FRP, Lora EES. Influence of ambient temperature on combined-cycle
LHVf (68) power-plant performance. Applied Energy. 2005;80:261–72.
[4] Kim T, Hwang S. Part load performance analysis of recuperated gas turbines
Since most of fuel is in gaseous form, the ratio is normally close to considering engine configuration and operation strategy. Energy. 2006;31:260–77.
unity [134,181]. [5] Ameri M, Ahmadi P, Hamidi A. Energy, exergy and exergoeconomic analysis of a
steam power plant: a case study. International Journal of Energy Research.
ξCH4 = 1.060 2009;33:499–512.
[6] Urzúa IA, Olmedo JC, Sauma EE. Impact of intermittent non-conventional re-
newable generation in the costs of the Chilean main power system. Renewable and
ξ H2 = 0.985 Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2016;60:810–21.
[7] Izadyar N, Ong HC, Chong WT, Leong KY. Resource assessment of the renewable
Exergy analysis of the plant is done by calculating the exergy rate at energy potential for a remote area: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
all states of the process for each components. The change in the exergy Reviews. 2016;62:908–23.
is considered as the exergy losses. In previous studies, combustion [8] Arbon I. Worldwide use of biomass in power generation and combined heat and
power schemes. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part A:
chamber is determined to be the component with maximum exergy Journal of Power and Energy 2002;216:41–57.
destruction (or irreversibility). This is mainly due to fuel combustion [9] Sorrell S. Reducing energy demand: A review of issues, challenges and approaches.
process and thermal losses [181,189]. On the other hand, the exergy Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2015;47:74–82.
[10] Valdés Lucas JN, Escribano Francés G, San Martín González E. Energy security and
destruction in HRSG is due to the large temperature difference between

847
T.K. Ibrahim et al.
renewable energy deployment in the EU: Liaisons Dangereuses or Virtuous Circle?
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2016;62:1032–46.
[11] Wang K, Sanders SR, Dubey S, Choo FH, Duan F. Stirling cycle engines for re-
covering low and moderate temperature heat: A review. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2016;62:89–108.
[12] Spitler JD, Gehlin SEA. Thermal response testing for ground source heat pump
systems—An historical review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2015;50:1125–37.
[13] Vidal A, Best R, Rivero R, Cervantes J. Analysis of a combined power and re-
frigeration cycle by the exergy method. Energy. 2006;31:3401–14.
[14] Carotenuto A, Ciccolella M, Massarotti N, Mauro A. Models for thermo-fluid dy-
namic phenomena in low enthalpy geothermal energy systems: A review.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2016;60:330–55.
[15] Murugan S, Horák B. A review of micro combined heat and power systems for
residential applications. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2016;64:144–62.
[16] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M. Thermal impact of operating conditions on the perfor-
mance of a combined cycle gas turbine. Journal of applied research and tech-
nology. 2012;10:567–77.
[17] Padilla RV, Demirkaya G, Goswami DY, Stefanakos E, Rahman MM. Analysis of
power and cooling cogeneration using ammonia-water mixture. Energy.
2010;35:4649–57.
[18] Erdinc O, Paterakis NG, Catalão JPS. Overview of insular power systems under
increasing penetration of renewable energy sources: Opportunities and challenges.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2015;52:333–46.
[19] Bao J, Zhao L. A review of working fluid and expander selections for organic
Rankine cycle. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2013;24:325–42.
[20] Wang T, Zhang Y, Peng Z, Shu G. A review of researches on thermal exhaust heat
recovery with Rankine cycle. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2011;15:2862–71.
[21] Wang J, Dai Y, Zhang T, Ma S. Parametric analysis for a new combined power and
ejector–absorption refrigeration cycle. Energy. 2009;34:1587–93.
[22] Manjunath K, Kaushik SC. Second law thermodynamic study of heat exchangers: A
review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2014;40:348–74.
[23] Raj NT, Iniyan S, Goic R. A review of renewable energy based cogeneration
technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2011;15:3640–8.
[24] Arshad M, Ahmed S. Cogeneration through bagasse: A renewable strategy to meet
the future energy needs. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2016;54:732–7.
[25] Antonanzas J, Jimenez E, Blanco J, Antonanzas-Torres F. Potential solar thermal
integration in Spanish combined cycle gas turbines. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews. 2014;37:36–46.
[26] Corsini A, Rispoli F, Santoli Ld, Pantaleo AM, Camporeale S, Fortunato B. 70th
Conference of the Italian Thermal Machines Engineering Association,
ATI2015Small scale biomass CHP: Techno-economic performance of steam vs gas
turbines with bottoming ORC. Energy Procedia. 2015;82:825-32.
[27] Park SR, Pandey AK, Tyagi VV, Tyagi SK. Energy and exergy analysis of typical
renewable energy systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2014;30:105–23.
[28] Fallah M, Mahmoudi SMS, Yari M, Akbarpour Ghiasi R. Advanced exergy analysis
of the Kalina cycle applied for low temperature enhanced geothermal system.
Energy Conversion and Management. 2016;108:190–201.
[29] Som SK, Datta A. Thermodynamic irreversibilities and exergy balance in com-
bustion processes. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science. 2008;34:351–76.
[30] Meng F, Chen L, Sun F. A numerical model and comparative investigation of a
thermoelectric generator with multi-irreversibilities. Energy. 2011;36:3513–22.
[31] Si M, Thompson S, Calder K. Energy efficiency assessment by process heating as-
sessment and survey tool (PHAST) and feasibility analysis of waste heat recovery
in the reheat furnace at a steel company. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews. 2011;15:2904–8.
[32] Dunham MT, Iverson BD. High-efficiency thermodynamic power cycles for con-
centrated solar power systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2014;30:758–70.
[33] Talbi M, Agnew B. Exergy analysis: an absorption refrigerator using lithium bro-
mide and water as the working fluids. Applied Thermal Engineering.
2000;20:619–30.
[34] Selwynraj AI, Iniyan S, Polonsky G, Suganthi L, Kribus A. Exergy analysis and
annual exergetic performance evaluation of solar hybrid STIG (steam injected gas
turbine) cycle for Indian conditions. Energy. 2015;80:414–27.
[35] Mehrpooya M. Conceptual design and energy analysis of novel integrated liquefied
natural gas and fuel cell electrochemical power plant processes. Energy.
2016;111:468–83.
[36] Ahmadi MH, Ahmadi MA, Pourfayaz F, Hosseinzade H, Acıkkalp E, Tlili I, et al.
Designing a powered combined Otto and Stirling cycle power plant through multi-
objective optimization approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2016;62:585–95.
[37] Taillon J, Blanchard RE. Exergy efficiency graphs for thermal power plants.
Energy. 2015;88:57–66.
[38] Hasti S, Aroonwilas A, Veawab A. Exergy Analysis of Ultra Super-critical Power
Plant. Energy Procedia. 2013;37:2544–51.
[39] Gakkhar N, Soni MS, Jakhar S. Second law thermodynamic study of solar assisted
distillation system: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2016;56:519–35.
[40] Makhanlall D, Liu LH. Second law analysis of coupled conduction–radiation heat
transfer with phase change. International Journal of Thermal Sciences.
2010;49:1829–36.
848
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850
[41] Daud R, Hasfa N, Tomadi S, Hassan M, Kadirgama K, Noor M, et al. Prediction of
chatter in CNC machining based on dynamic cutting force for ball end milling.
Proceedings of the International Multi-Conference of Engineers and Computer
Scientists2009.
[42] BoroumandJazi G, Rismanchi B, Saidur R. A review on exergy analysis of industrial
sector. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2013;27:198–203.
[43] Rosen MA, Dincer I. Effect of varying dead-state properties on energy and exergy
analyses of thermal systems. International Journal of Thermal Sciences.
2004;43:121–33.
[44] Edwards J, Bindra H, Sabharwall P. Exergy analysis of thermal energy storage
options with nuclear power plants. Annals of Nuclear Energy. 2016;96:104–11.
[45] Sreeramulu M, Gupta A, Srinivas T. Energy and Exergy Analysis of Gas
Turbine–Fuel Cell Based Combined Cycle Power Plant. ASME 2011 9th
International Conference on Fuel Cell Science, Engineering and Technology col-
located with ASME 2011 5th International Conference on Energy Sustainability:
American Society of Mechanical Engineers; 2011. p. 85-94.
[46] Li C, Gillum C, Toupin K, Donaldson B. Biomass boiler energy conversion system
analysis with the aid of exergy-based methods. Energy Conversion and
Management. 2015;103:665–73.
[47] Rosen MA, Dincer I, Kanoglu M. Role of exergy in increasing efficiency and sus-
tainability and reducing environmental impact. Energy policy. 2008;36:128–37.
[48] Ezzat MF, Dincer I. Energy and exergy analyses of a new geothermal–solar energy
based system. Solar Energy. 2016;134:95–106.
[49] Romero JC, Linares P. Exergy as a global energy sustainability indicator. A review
of the state of the art. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2014;33:427–42.
[50] Aljundi IH. Energy and exergy analysis of a steam power plant in Jordan. Applied
Thermal Engineering. 2009;29:324–8.
[51] Gupta MK, Kaushik SC, Ranjan KR, Panwar NL, Reddy VS, Tyagi SK.
Thermodynamic performance evaluation of solar and other thermal power gen-
eration systems: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2015;50:567–82.
[52] Kanogˇlu M, Kazım Işık S, Abuşogˇlu A. Performance characteristics of a Diesel
engine power plant. Energy Conversion and Management. 2005;46:1692–702.
[53] Arriola-Medellín A, Manzanares-Papayanopoulos E, Romo-Millares C. Diagnosis
and redesign of power plants using combined Pinch and Exergy Analysis. Energy.
2014;72:643–51.
[54] Li Y, Liu L. Exergy analysis of 300MW coal-fired power plant. Energy Procedia.
2012;17:926–32.
[55] Sengupta S, Datta A, Duttagupta S. Exergy analysis of a coal‐based 210 MW
thermal power plant. International Journal of Energy Research 2007;31:14–28.
[56] Wang J, Dai Y, Gao L. Exergy analyses and parametric optimizations for different
cogeneration power plants in cement industry. Applied Energy. 2009;86:941–8.
[57] Saidi MH, Ehyaei MA, Abbasi A. Optimization of a combined heat and power PEFC
by exergy analysis. Journal of Power Sources. 2005;143:179–84.
[58] Kamate SC, Gangavati PB. Exergy analysis of cogeneration power plants in sugar
industries. Applied Thermal Engineering. 2009;29:1187–94.
[59] Utlu Z, Hepbasli A. A review on analyzing and evaluating the energy utilization
efficiency of countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2007;11:1–29.
[60] Yingjian L, Abakr YA, Qi Q, Xinkui Y, Jiping Z. Energy efficiency assessment of
fixed asset investment projects – A case study of a Shenzhen combined-cycle power
plant. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2016;59:1195–208.
[61] Liu M, Steven Tay NH, Bell S, Belusko M, Jacob R, Will G, et al. Review on con-
centrating solar power plants and new developments in high temperature thermal
energy storage technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2016;53:1411–32.
[62] Dincer I, Al‐Muslim H. Thermodynamic analysis of reheat cycle steam power
plants. International Journal of Energy Research 2001;25:727–39.
[63] Karatayev M, Clarke ML. A review of current energy systems and green energy
potential in Kazakhstan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2016;55:491–504.
[64] Badran OO. Gas-turbine performance improvements. Applied Energy.
1999;64:263–73.
[65] Carcasci C, Facchini B. Comparison between two gas turbine solutions to increase
combined power plant efficiency. Energy Conversion and Management.
2000;41:757–73.
[66] Huang F. Performance evaluation of selected combustion gas turbine cogeneration
systems based on first and second-law analysis. Journal of Engineering for Gas
Turbines and Power 1990;112:117–21.
[67] Verkhivker G, Kosoy B. On the exergy analysis of power plants. Energy Conversion
and Management. 2001;42:2053–9.
[68] Marrero I, Lefsaker A, Razani A, Kim K. Second law analysis and optimization of a
combined triple power cycle. Energy Conversion and Management.
2002;43:557–73.
[69] Bilgen E. Exergetic and engineering analyses of gas turbine based cogeneration
systems. Energy. 2000;25:1215–29.
[70] Sue D-C, Chuang C-C. Engineering design and exergy analyses for combustion gas
turbine based power generation system. Energy. 2004;29:1183–205.
[71] Ersayin E, Ozgener L. Performance analysis of combined cycle power plants: A case
study. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2015;43:832–42.
[72] Yan B, Xue S, Li Y, Duan J, Zeng M. Gas-fired combined cooling, heating and
power (CCHP) in Beijing: A techno-economic analysis. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews. 2016;63:118–31.
[73] Athari H, Soltani S, Rosen MA, Gavifekr MK, Morosuk T. Exergoeconomic study of
gas turbine steam injection and combined power cycles using fog inlet cooling and
biomass fuel. Renewable Energy. 2016;96(Part A):715–26.
T.K. Ibrahim et al.
[74] Yağlı H, Koç Y, Koç A, Görgülü A, Tandiroğlu A. Parametric optimization and
exergetic analysis comparison of subcritical and supercritical organic Rankine
cycle (ORC) for biogas fuelled combined heat and power (CHP) engine exhaust gas
waste heat. Energy. 2016;111:923–32.
[75] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M. Optimum performance improvements of the combined
cycle based on an intercooler–reheated gas turbine. Journal of Energy Resources
Technology. 2015;137:061601.
[76] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M. EFFECTS OF ISENTROPIC EFFICIENCY AND ENHANCING
STRATEGIES ON GAS TURBINE PERFORMANCE. Journal of Mechanical
Engineering and Sciences (JMES). 2013;4:14.
[77] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M. Effect of compression ratio on the performance of dif-
ferent strategies for the gas turbine. International Journal of Automotive and
Mechanical Engineering 2014;9:1747.
[78] Basrawi F, Ibrahim TK, Habib K, Yamada T. Effect of operation strategies on the
economic and environmental performance of a micro gas turbine trigeneration
system in a tropical region. Energy. 2016;97:262–72.
[79] Vundela Siva R, Subash Chndra K, Sudhir Kumar T, Narayanlal P. An approach to
analyse energy and exergy analysis of thermal power plants: a review. Smart Grid
and Renewable Energy 2010;2010.
[80] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M. Parametric study of a two-shaft gas turbine cycle model of
power plant IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering IOP
Publishing; 2012. p. 012024.
[81] Ibrahim TK, Mohammed MN. Thermodynamic Evaluation of the Performance of a
Combined Cycle Power Plant. International Journal of Energy Science and
Engineering. 2015;1:10.
[82] Ibrahim Tk, Mohammed MK, Awad OI, Rahman MM, Najafi G, Basrawi F, et al.
The optimum performance of the combined cycle power plant: A comprehensive
review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017;79:459–74.
[83] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M, Sharma K. International Conference on Mechanical and
Electrical Technology, 3rd,(ICMET-China 2011). Influence of operation conditions
on performance of combined cycle gas turbine Volumes 1–3. ASME Press; 2011.
[84] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M, Abdalla AN. Gas turbine configuration for improving the
performance of combined cycle power plant. Procedia Engineering.
2011;15:4216–23.
[85] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M. Effects of isentropic efficiencies on the performance of
combined cycle power plants. International Journal of Automotive & Mechanical
Engineering. 2015:12.
[86] Ibrahim TK, Rahman MM. Study on effective parameter of the triple-pressure re-
heat combined cycle performance. Therm Sci. 2013;17:497–508.
[87] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M, Mohammed M, Basrawi F. Statistical analysis and op-
timum performance of the gas turbine power plant International Journal of
Automotive and Mechanical Engineering (IJAME). 2016;13:11.
[88] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M, Ali OM, Basrawi F, Mamat R. Optimum Performance
Enhancing Strategies of the Gas Turbine Based on the Effective Temperatures.
MATEC Web of Conferences: EDP Sciences; 2016.
[89] Ibrahim TK. the Life Cycle Assessments of Gas Turbine using Inlet Air Cooling
System. Tikrit Journal of Engineering Science (TJES). 2015;22:69–75.
[90] Klein S. Engineering equation solver (EES), F-Chart Software (2006).
[91] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M. Effective Parameters on Performance of Multipressure
Combined Cycle Power Plants. Advances in Mechanical Engineering.
2014;6:781503.
[92] Ibrahim TK, Rahman MM. Thermal Impact of Operating Conditions on the
Performance of a Combined Cycle Gas Turbine. Journal of applied research and
technology. 2012;10:567–77.
[93] Varma GVP, Srinivas T. Power generation from low temperature heat recovery.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017;75:402–14.
[94] Zeb K, Ali SM, Khan B, Mehmood CA, Tareen N, Din W, et al. A survey on waste
heat recovery: Electric power generation and potential prospects within Pakistan.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017;75:1142–55.
[95] Yari M. Exergetic analysis of various types of geothermal power plants. Renewable
Energy. 2010;35:112–21.
[96] Nag P, Gupta A. Exergy analysis of the Kalina cycle. Applied Thermal Engineering.
1998;18:427–39.
[97] DiPippo R. Second law assessment of binary plants generating power from low-
temperature geothermal fluids. Geothermics. 2004;33:565–86.
[98] Ibrahim TK, Rahman M. Effects of cycle peak temperature ratio on the perfor-
mance of combined cycle power plant. International Journal of Automotive and
Mechanical Engineering 2016;13:3389.
[99] Rahbar K, Mahmoud S, Al-Dadah RK, Moazami N, Mirhadizadeh SA. Review of
organic Rankine cycle for small-scale applications. Energy Conversion and
Management. 2017;134:135–55.
[100] Iglesias Garcia S, Ferreiro Garcia R, Carbia Carril J, Iglesias Garcia D. Critical
review of the first-law efficiency in different power combined cycle architectures.
Energy Conversion and Management. 2017;148:844–59.
[101] Zhang G, Zheng J, Yang Y, Liu W. Thermodynamic performance simulation and
concise formulas for triple-pressure reheat HRSG of gas–steam combined cycle
under off-design condition. Energy Conversion and Management.
2016;122:372–85.
[102] Aminov Z, Nakagoshi N, Xuan TD, Higashi O, Alikulov K. Evaluation of the energy
efficiency of combined cycle gas turbine. Case study of Tashkent thermal power
plant, Uzbekistan. Applied Thermal Engineering. 2016;103:501–9.
[103] Mohtaram S, Chen W, Zargar T, Lin J. Energy-exergy analysis of compressor
pressure ratio effects on thermodynamic performance of ammonia water com-
bined cycle. Energy Conversion and Management. 2017;134:77–87.
[104] Lara Y, Petrakopoulou F, Morosuk T, Boyano A, Tsatsaronis G. An Exergy-Based
Study on the Relationship between Costs and Environmental Impacts in Power
849
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850
Plants. Energy.
[105] Aali A, Pourmahmoud N, Zare V. Exergoeconomic analysis and multi-objective
optimization of a novel combined flash-binary cycle for Sabalan geothermal power
plant in Iran. Energy Conversion and Management. 2017;143:377–90.
[106] Zare V, Hasanzadeh M. Energy and exergy analysis of a closed Brayton cycle-based
combined cycle for solar power tower plants. Energy Conversion and
Management. 2016;128:227–37.
[107] Kopac M, Hilalci A. Effect of ambient temperature on the efficiency of the re-
generative and reheat Çatalağzı power plant in Turkey. Applied Thermal
Engineering. 2007;27:1377–85.
[108] Qureshi BA. Thermoeconomic considerations in the allocation of heat transfer
inventory for irreversible power systems. Applied Thermal Engineering.
2015;90:305–11.
[109] Gadalla M, Saghafifar M. Energy and exergy analyses of pulse combustor in-
tegration in air bottoming cycle power plants. Applied Thermal Engineering.
2017;121:674–87.
[110] Gürtürk M, Oztop HF. Exergy analysis of a circulating fluidized bed boiler co-
generation power plant. Energy Conversion and Management. 2016;120:346–57.
[111] Noroozian A, Mohammadi A, Bidi M, Ahmadi MH. Energy, exergy and economic
analyses of a novel system to recover waste heat and water in steam power plants.
Energy Conversion and Management. 2017;144:351–60.
[112] Adibhatla S, Kaushik SC. Exergy and thermoeconomic analyses of 500MWe sub
critical thermal power plant with solar aided feed water heating. Applied Thermal
Engineering. 2017;123:340–52.
[113] Rostamzadeh H, Ebadollahi M, Ghaebi H, Amidpour M, Kheiri R. Energy and
exergy analysis of novel combined cooling and power (CCP) cycles. Applied
Thermal Engineering. 2017;124:152–69.
[114] Kalina J. Techno-economic assessment of small-scale integrated biomass gasifi-
cation dual fuel combined cycle power plant. Energy. 2017.
[115] Atif M, Al-Sulaiman FA. Energy and exergy analyses of solar tower power plant
driven supercritical carbon dioxide recompression cycles for six different loca-
tions. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017;68:153–67.
[116] Terzi R, Tükenmez İ, Kurt E. Energy and exergy analyses of a VVER type nuclear
power plant. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2016;41:12465–76.
[117] Blanco-Marigorta AM, Lozano-Medina A, Marcos JD. A critical review of defini-
tions for exergetic efficiency in reverse osmosis desalination plants. Energy. 2017.
[118] Bai T, Yu J, Yan G. Advanced exergy analysis on a modified auto-cascade freezer
cycle with an ejector. Energy. 2016;113:385–98.
[119] Ahmadi GR, Toghraie D. Energy and exergy analysis of Montazeri steam power
plant in Iran. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2016;56:454–63.
[120] Boyaghchi FA, Molaie H. Investigating the effect of duct burner fuel mass flow rate
on exergy destruction of a real combined cycle power plant components based on
advanced exergy analysis. Energy Conversion and Management.
2015;103:827–35.
[121] Zhang T, Liu X, Jiang Y. Performance investigation and exergy analysis of enthalpy
recovery device using liquid desiccant. Applied Thermal Engineering.
2016;106:76–86.
[122] Tu R, Liu X-H, Hwang Y, Ma F. Performance analysis of ventilation systems with
desiccant wheel cooling based on exergy destruction. Energy Conversion and
Management. 2016;123:265–79.
[123] Madlool NA, Saidur R, Rahim NA, Islam MR, Hossian MS. An exergy analysis for
cement industries: An overview. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
2012;16:921–32.
[124] Hinderink A, Kerkhof F, Lie A, Arons JDS, Van Der Kooi H. Exergy analysis with a
flowsheeting simulator—I. Theory; calculating exergies of material streams.
Chemical Engineering Science. 1996;51:4693–700.
[125] Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G. Thermal design and optimization. John Wiley & Sons;
1996.
[126] Li G. Organic Rankine cycle performance evaluation and thermoeconomic as-
sessment with various applications part I: Energy and exergy performance eva-
luation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2016;53:477–99.
[127] Yazici H. Energy and exergy based evaluation of the renovated Afyon geothermal
district heating system. Energy and Buildings. 2016;127:794–804.
[128] Mukherjee S, Kumar P, Yang A, Fennell P. Energy and exergy analysis of chemical
looping combustion technology and comparison with pre-combustion and oxy-fuel
combustion technologies for CO2 capture. Journal of Environmental Chemical
Engineering. 2015;3:2104–14.
[129] Bilgen S, Sarıkaya İ. Exergy for environment, ecology and sustainable develop-
ment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2015;51:1115–31.
[130] Santo DBdE. An energy and exergy analysis of a high-efficiency engine trigen-
eration system for a hospital: A case study methodology based on annual energy
demand profiles. Energy and Buildings. 2014;76:185–98.
[131] Nguyen T-V, Voldsund M, Elmegaard B, Ertesvåg IS, Kjelstrup S. On the definition
of exergy efficiencies for petroleum systems: Application to offshore oil and gas
processing. Energy. 2014;73:264–81.
[132] Li G. Sensible heat thermal storage energy and exergy performance evaluations.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2016;53:897–923.
[133] Yucer CT. Thermodynamic analysis of the part load performance for a small scale
gas turbine jet engine by using exergy analysis method. Energy. 2016;111:251–9.
[134] Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Elsevier; 2013.
[135] Sharma M, Singh O. Exergy analysis of dual pressure HRSG for different dead
states and varying steam generation states in gas/steam combined cycle power
plant. Applied Thermal Engineering. 2016;93:614–22.
[136] Anvari S, Jafarmadar S, Khalilarya S. Proposal of a combined heat and power plant
hybridized with regeneration organic Rankine cycle: Energy-Exergy evaluation.
Energy Conversion and Management. 2016;122:357–65.
T.K. Ibrahim et al.
[137] Boyaghchi FA, Molaie H. Advanced exergy and environmental analyses and multi
objective optimization of a real combined cycle power plant with supplementary
firing using evolutionary algorithm. Energy. 2015;93(Part2):2267–79.
[138] Mohammadi Khoshkar Vandani A, Joda F, Bozorgmehry Boozarjomehry R.
Exergic, economic and environmental impacts of natural gas and diesel in op-
eration of combined cycle power plants. Energy Conversion and Management.
2016;109:103–12.
[139] Esen H, Inalli M, Esen M, Pihtili K. Energy and exergy analysis of a ground-coupled
heat pump system with two horizontal ground heat exchangers. Building and
Environment. 2007;42:3606–15.
[140] Rosen MA, Tang R. Improving steam power plant efficiency through exergy ana-
lysis: effects of altering excess combustion air and stack-gas temperature.
International Journal of Exergy. 2008;5:31–51.
[141] Kaushik S, Reddy VS, Tyagi S. Energy and exergy analyses of thermal power
plants: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2011;15:1857–72.
[142] Ghaebi H, Amidpour M, Karimkashi S, Rezayan O. Energy, exergy and thermo-
economic analysis of a combined cooling, heating and power (CCHP) system with
gas turbine prime mover. International Journal of Energy Research.
2011;35:697–709.
[143] Wei Z, Zhang B, Wu S, Chen Q, Tsatsaronis G. Energy-use analysis and evaluation
of distillation systems through avoidable exergy destruction and investment costs.
Energy. 2012;42:424–33.
[144] Li Z, Li ZM, Yan ZL. Energy and Exergy Analysis for Three Type 500MW Steam
Power Plants. Applied Mechanics and Materials: Trans Tech Publ 2012:1131–6.
[145] Chen Q, Han W, Zheng J-j, Sui J, Jin H-g. The exergy and energy level analysis of a
combined cooling, heating and power system driven by a small scale gas turbine at
off design condition. Applied Thermal Engineering. 2014;66:590–602.
[146] Wang N, Wu D, Yang Y, Yang Z, Fu P. Exergy Evaluation of a 600MWe
Supercritical Coal-fired Power Plant Considering Pollution Emissions. Energy
Procedia. 2014;61:1860–3.
[147] Ray TK, Ganguly R, Gupta A. Exergy analysis for performance optimization of a
steam turbine cycle. Power Engineering Society Conference and Exposition in
Africa, 2007 PowerAfrica'07 IEEE: IEEE; 2007. p. 1-8.
[148] Rashad A, El-Maihy A. Energy and Energy Analysis of a Steam Power Plant in
Egypt. 13th International Conference on Aerospace Science and Aviation
Technology (ASAT-13), Cairo, Egypt, May2009. p. 26-8.
[149] Eskin N, Gungor A, Özdemir K. Thermodynamic analysis of a FBCC steam power
plant. Energy Conversion and Management. 2009;50:2428–38.
[150] Regulagadda P, Dincer I, Naterer G. Exergy analysis of a thermal power plant with
measured boiler and turbine losses. Applied Thermal Engineering. 2010;30:970–6.
[151] Mitrović D, Zivkovic D, Laković M. Energy and exergy analysis of a 348.5 MW
steam power plant. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and
Environmental Effects. 2010;32:1016–27.
[152] Guoqiang L, Hua W, Wenhui M, Chunwei Y. Energy and exergy analysis for
300MW thermal system of Xiaolongtan power plant. Computer Distributed Control
and Intelligent Environmental Monitoring (CDCIEM), 2011 International
Conference on: IEEE; 2011. p. 180-4.
[153] Ahmadi P, Dincer I. Thermodynamic analysis and thermoeconomic optimization
of a dual pressure combined cycle power plant with a supplementary firing unit.
Energy Conversion and Management. 2011;52:2296–308.
[154] Kaviri AG, Jaafar MNM. Thermodynamic modeling and exergy optimization of a
gas turbine power plant. Communication Software and Networks (ICCSN), 2011
IEEE 3rd International Conference on: IEEE; 2011. p. 366-370.
[155] Adibhatla S, Kaushik S. Energy and exergy analysis of a super critical thermal
power plant at various load conditions under constant and pure sliding pressure
operation. Applied thermal engineering. 2014;73:51–65.
[156] Đorđević M, Mančić M, Mitrović D. Energy and exergy analysis of coal fired power
plant. Facta universitatis-series: Working and Living Enviromental Protection.
2014;11:163–75.
[157] Rosen MA. Energy-and exergy-based comparison of coal-fired and nuclear steam
power plants. Exergy, An International Journal. 2001;1:180–92.
[158] Bolatturk A, Coskun A, Geredelioglu C. Thermodynamic and exergoeconomic
analysis of Cayırhan thermal power plant. Energy Conversion and Management.
2015;101:371–8.
[159] Djordjevic M, Mančić M, Mitrović D. ENERGY AND EXERGY ANALYSIS OF COAL
FIRED POWER PLANT. Facta Universitatis, Series: Working and Living
Environmental Protection. 2015:163–75.
[160] Suresh M, Reddy K, Kolar AK. ANN-GA based optimization of a high ash coal-fired
supercritical power plant. Applied energy. 2011;88:4867–73.
[161] Abuelnuor AAA, Saqr KM, Mohieldein SAA, Dafallah KA, Abdullah MM, Nogoud
YAM. Exergy analysis of Garri “2” 180MW combined cycle power plant.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2017;79:960–9.
[162] Ibrahim TK, Basrawi F, Awad OI, Abdullah AN, Najafi G, Mamat R, et al. Thermal
performance of gas turbine power plant based on exergy analysis. Applied Thermal
Engineering. 2017;115:977–85.
850
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 90 (2018) 835–850
[163] Adibhatla S, Kaushik SC. Energy, exergy and economic (3E) analysis of integrated
solar direct steam generation combined cycle power plant. Sustainable Energy
Technologies and Assessments. 2017;20:88–97.
[164] Khoshgoftar Manesh M, Rosen M. Combined Cycle and Steam Gas-Fired Power
Plant Analysis through Exergoeconomic and Extended Combined Pinch and
Exergy Methods. Journal of Energy Engineering. 2018;144:04018010.
[165] Parikhani T, Ghaebi H, Rostamzadeh H. A novel geothermal combined cooling and
power cycle based on the absorption power cycle: Energy, exergy and ex-
ergoeconomic analysis. Energy. 2018.
[166] Sadreddini A, Fani M, Ashjari Aghdam M, Mohammadi A. Exergy analysis and
optimization of a CCHP system composed of compressed air energy storage system
and ORC cycle. Energy Conversion and Management. 2018;157:111–22.
[167] Lucia U. Entropy and exergy in irreversible renewable energy systems. Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2013;20:559–64.
[168] Biserni C, Garai M. First and second law analysis applied to building envelope: A
theoretical approach on the potentiality of Bejan’s theory. Energy Reports
2015;1:181–3.
[169] Bassily AM. Numerical cost optimization and irreversibility analysis of the triple-
pressure reheat steam-air cooled GT commercial combined cycle power plants.
Applied Thermal Engineering. 2012;40:145–60.
[170] Lemmon EW, Huber ML, McLinden MO. NIST reference fluid thermodynamic and
transport properties–REFPROP. version; 2002.
[171] Chirico RD, Steele WV, Kazakov AF. Thermodynamic properties of indan:
Experimental and computational results. The Journal of Chemical
Thermodynamics. 2016;96:41–51.
[172] Zainal Z, Ali R, Lean C, Seetharamu K. Prediction of performance of a downdraft
gasifier using equilibrium modeling for different biomass materials. Energy con-
version and management. 2001;42:1499–515.
[173] Soltani S, Yari M, Mahmoudi S, Morosuk T, Rosen M. Advanced exergy analysis
applied to an externally-fired combined-cycle power plant integrated with a bio-
mass gasification unit. Energy. 2013;59:775–80.
[174] Szargut J, Styrylska T. Approximate evaluation of the exergy of fuels. Brennst
Wärme Kraft. 1964;16:589–96.
[175] Moran MJ, Shapiro HN, Boettner DD, Bailey MB. Fundamentals of engineering
thermodynamics. John Wiley & Sons; 2010.
[176] Jarungthammachote S, Dutta A. Thermodynamic equilibrium model and second
law analysis of a downdraft waste gasifier. Energy. 2007;32:1660–9.
[177] Rakopoulos C, Giakoumis E. Second-law analyses applied to internal combustion
engines operation. Progress in Energy and Combustion science. 2006;32:2–47.
[178] Dincer I, Rosen MA. Exergy: energy, environment and sustainable development.
Newnes; 2012.
[179] Som S, Datta A. Thermodynamic irreversibilities and exergy balance in combus-
tion processes. Progress in energy and combustion science. 2008;34:351–76.
[180] Srinivas T, Gupta A, Reddy B. Thermodynamic Modeling and Optimization of
MultiPressure Heat Recovery Steam Generator in Combined Power Cycle. J Sci Ind
Res. 2008;67:827–34.
[181] Ahmadi P, Najafi A, Ganjehei A. Thermodynamic modeling and exergy analysis of
a gas turbine plant (case study in Iran). Proceedings of the 16th International
Conference of Mechanical Engineering2008.
[182] Avval H, Ahmadi P. Thermodynamic modeling of combined cycle power plant
with gas turbine blade cooling. Proc of the second Iranian thermodynamic con-
gress, Isfahan, Iran2007.
[183] Meigounpoory MR, Ahmadi P, Ghaffarizadeh AR, Khanmohammadi S.
Optimization of combined cycle power plant using sequential quadratic pro-
gramming. ASME 2008 Heat Transfer Summer Conference collocated with the
Fluids Engineering, Energy Sustainability, and 3rd Energy Nanotechnology
Conferences: American Society of Mechanical Engineers; 2008. p. 109-114.
[184] Li Q, Lin Y. Exergy analysis of the LFC process. Energy Conversion and
Management. 2016;108:348–54.
[185] Maheshwari M, Singh O. Exergy analysis of intercooled reheat combined cycle
with ammonia water mixture based bottoming cycle. Applied Thermal
Engineering. 2017;121:820–7.
[186] Lee W-S, Lee J-C, Oh H-T, Baek S-W, Oh M, Lee C-H. Performance, economic and
exergy analyses of carbon capture processes for a 300 MW class integrated gasi-
fication combined cycle power plant. Energy. 2017;134:731–42.
[187] Kumar R. A critical review on energy, exergy, exergoeconomic and economic (4-E)
analysis of thermal power plants. Engineering Science and Technology, an
International Journal. 2017;20:283–92.
[188] Ameri M, Ahmadi P, Khanmohammadi S. Exergy analysis of a 420 MW combined
cycle power plant. International Journal of Energy Research. 2008;32:175–83.
[189] Ameri M, Ahmadi P. The study of ambient temperature effects on exergy losses of
a heat recovery steam generator. Challenges of Power Engineering and
Environment: Springer 2007:55–60.
[190] Rosen MA. Clarifying thermodynamic efficiencies and losses via exergy. Exergy, an
International Journal. 2002;2:3–5.