Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

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

Thermodynamic analysis of a novel combined cooling, heating, and power

system consisting of wind energy and transcritical compressed CO2
energy storage
Yuan Zhang a, *, Yiheng Lin a, Fangzi Lin a, Ke Yang b
a
College of Merchant Marine, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai 201306, China
b
Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Due to climate change and the increase in energy demand caused by population growth, considerable attention is
Compressed CO2 Energy Storage (CCES) being given to wind energy and combined cooling, heating, and power (CCHP) systems, which are known for
Combined Cooling, Heating, and Power (CCHP) their high energy utilization. With the rapid growth of wind power generation, the waste heat generated by wind
Thermodynamic analysis
turbines and the intermittency of wind power have emerged as problems to be addressed. Therefore, this paper
Wind power
Wind turbine waste heat
proposes a low-temperature CCHP system based on transcritical compressed CO2 energy storage which utilizes
wind power and wind turbine waste heat. A mathematical model of this system is developed and applied, and
system characteristics are evaluated from the perspective of thermodynamics. The performance indices (system
power efficiency (SPE), system energy efficiency (SENE), and exergy density (ED)) are defined, and sensitivity
analysis of the key factors affecting system performance is conducted. Based on the parameters under the design
condition, the SPE of the system is 0.48, the SENE is 1.19, and the ED is 11.51 kWh/m3. Storage pressure and
waste heat temperature have a great influence on the thermodynamic performance of the system, while ambient
temperature only affects cooling energy, heating energy, and ED. The variation of the pressure difference at the
main throttle valve mainly affects SPE and ED of the system.

HCWTs are facing the problem of frictional heat, generated by me­

chanical friction of the internal parts, and electrical heat during opera­
1. Introduction
tion of the generator, which is considerably high. For example, a 7580-
kW HCWT can generate 231 kW of heating energy at an average wind
With the global spreading of the terms “carbon neutrality” and
speed of 11 m/s [10]. Although this amount of heat is considerable, it is
“carbon peak”, people’s environmental awareness is gradually
rarely utilized as it is considered to be low-grade thermal energy. Xydis
increasing [1]. The concept of combined cooling, heating, and power
et al. [11] proposed a method by which this low-grade heat generated by
(CCHP) system is attracting considerable attention due to its high system
HCWT generators can be transported through the working fluid to areas
and economic efficiency as well as its advantages in reducing green­
that can utilize low-grade heat. Nematollahi et al. [12] proposed a
house gas emissions [2]. The current CCHP systems can be divided into
system that uses the Rankine cycle as the cooling system and investi­
CCHP systems driven by gas turbines [3], geothermal heat [4], solar
gated the influence of seven different Rankine cycle working fluids on
energy [5], and wind energy [6]. Among them, the system driven by gas
system efficiency. Due to the intermittent and unpredictable charac­
turbines can pollute the environment, while CCHP systems combined
teristics of wind power, the reliability of the power system will be
with renewable energy can effectively substitute fossil energy in the
affected [13]. Energy storage technology can solve the intermittent and
future. Among renewable energies, wind energy is considered to be one
unpredictable shortcomings of wind power by regulating power,
of the most economical choices [7], and the proportion of wind power
balancing intermittent renewable energy sources according to the power
generation in total energy consumption is gradually increasing [8].
consumption by users, and storing excess power during off-peak times
The use of high-capacity wind turbines (HCWTs) is a major trend for
[14]. Among many energy storage technologies, compressed air energy
future developments, and studies have shown that such turbines not
storage (CAES) is very suitable for large-scale storage because of its good
only generate more power but are also more economical [9]. However,

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: zhangyuan@shmtu.edu.cn (Y. Zhang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.115609
Received 28 December 2021; Received in revised form 17 March 2022; Accepted 9 April 2022
Available online 21 April 2022
0196-8904/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Zhang et al. Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609

Nomenclature D density
H heating
symbols HE1, HE2,…, HE6 heat exchanger 1, 2, …6
C specific heat (J/kg⋅K) HST high-pressure storage tank
Ex exergy (kW) Is isentropic process
H enthalpy (kJ⋅kg− 1) LST low-pressure storage tank
ṁ mass flow rate (kg/h) T turbine
P pressure (MPa) TV1,TV2,TV3 throttle valve 1,2,3
Q̇ heat transfer rate (kW)
Abbreviations
S entropy (kJ⋅kg− 1K− 1)
AA-CAES Advanced Adiabatic Compressed Air Energy Storage
SENE system energy efficiency
C compressor
SPE system power efficiency
CAES Compressed Air Energy Storage
T temperature (K)
CB combiner
V volume (m3)
CCES Compressed CO2 Energy Storage
Ẇ power (kW)
CCHP combined cooling, heating, and power
Greek symbol CFT cold fluid tank
Н efficiency CS cold storage device
Р density (kg⋅m− 3) HCWT high capacity wind turbine
Δ change quantity HST high-pressure storage tank
IEHS integrated electricity and heating system
Subscripts LST low-pressure storage tank
0, 1, ….. 33 state point SP splitter
C compressor T turbine
CO cooling TCES transcritical CO2 energy storage
CO2 carbon dioxide
CS cold storage device

system performance, mature technology, large-scale application, and
low cost [15].
At present, research has been conducted on CCHP systems based on
CAES utilizing wind power. For example, Li et al. [16] proposed a system
based on an advanced adiabatic CAES system (AA-CAES) and an inte­
grated electricity and heating system (IEHS) using wind power, which
can provide both thermal energy and electrical energy. Their results
show that the integration of AA-CAES can increase the flexibility of IEHS
and significantly reduce operating costs. Mohammadi et al. [6] proposed
a system that combined CAES and wind energy to solve the intermit­
tency problem of wind power. High-temperature air at the outlet of the
expander is simultaneously used to drive the organic Rankine cycle and
the absorption refrigeration of the CCHP system. According to the re­
sults, this system reaches an efficiency of 53.94% and can generate
33.67 kW of power, 2.56 kW of cooling energy, and 1.82 tons of hot
water per day. However, as the reaction involves combustion, the tem­
perature fluctuation of the system is large. Despite the high system ef­
ficiency of the CCHP system which combines CAES and wind power, the
energy density of the CAES system is low, and the large range of tem­
perature fluctuations has an adverse effect on the system components.
Therefore, finding a working medium with high energy density and
limiting the temperature fluctuations so that they are component-
friendly have merged as important topics of research. The critical tem­
perature and pressure of CO2 are 31.1 ◦ C and 73.8 bar, respectively.
Therefore, compared with air, CO2 can be stored in a supercritical state
and in a liquid state to increase energy storage density. In addition, due
to its good fluidity, heat transfer characteristics, and stable chemical
properties, it is very suitable for compressed gas energy storage.
Several studies on compressed CO2 energy storage (CCES) systems
have been reported. For example, Wang et al. [17] proposed a liquid
CCES system that uses a storage tank to store liquid CO2, which can
effectively address the geographical limitation of CCES. Liu et al. [18]
proposed a system that stores high and low-pressure CO2 in saline
aquifer reservoirs at different depths to match the pressure. According to
this research, the transcritical CCES system exhibits higher round-trip
efficiency, exergy efficiency, and energy storage density than the su­
percritical CCES system. Zhang et al. [19] compared CCES systems,
liquid CO2 systems, and AA-CAES systems and established that the
system efficiency of the CCES system is lower than that of the AA-CAES
system but 4.05% higher than that of the liquid CO2 system. Although
the system efficiency of the CCES system is lower than that of the AA-
CAES system, its energy density is 2.8 times higher. Olumayegun et al.
[20] conducted a simulation of preheating supercritical compressed CO2
by industrial flue gas waste heat and showed that changing the turbine
inlet temperature with the waste heat temperature provides the best
efficiency. Song et al. [21] improved the supercritical compressed CO2
system by cascade utilization of cylinder liner water of diesel engine and
exhaust gas. The result shows that the maximum output of the improved
system is 68.4 kW, which is 7.4% higher than that of the original system.
Sun et al. [22] utilized a supercritical CO2 cycle of exhaust heat from the
gas turbine and analyzed the two systems regarding energy, exergy, and
exergy economy. The results showed that the economic performance of
the two systems reached 3.63 cents/kWh and 3.56 cents/kWh, respec­
tively, while guaranteeing thermal performance. Liu et al. [23] proposed
a CCHP system using a transcritical compressed CO2 Rankine cycle with
geothermal energy combined with an ejector-expansion compression
heat pump. The proposed system was also optimized by the authors with
multiple objectives, and the optimization results showed that the ther­
mal efficiency, the exergy efficiency, and the total product unit cost were
122.88%, 37.17%, and 23.53 $/GJ, respectively. The system needs to be
driven by high-grade geothermal energy and is consequently not suit­
able for using low-grade thermal energy. Liu et al. [24] proposed a CCHP
system based on transcritical CCES. Although its system power effi­
ciency (SPE) is lower than that of the comparative CCHP system based
on advanced CAES, its system energy efficiency (SENE) and exergy
density are higher than that of the CAES-based CCHP system. The reason
for the lower SPE of this system compared to advanced CAES systems is
that a portion of the compressed heat is used to supply heating energy to
users, which reduces the output power of the discharging stage, result­
ing in a lower SPE.

2
Y. Zhang et al.
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the combined cooling, heating, and power (CCHP) system based on wind energy and transcritical Compressed Carbon Dioxide Energy
Storage system.
In summary, research and development of novel CCHP systems based
on CCES technology would be significant. However, at present, there is
still a lack of research on the CCHP system that integrates wind energy
utilization (including wind power and wind energy waste heat) and
CCES technology. The performance of the CCHP system is expected to be
improved if the wind energy resources can be better utilized. Therefore,
a novel low-temperature CCHP system based on wind energy (wind
power and wind energy waste heat) and transcritical CCES was proposed
in this paper. The mathematical model of the system was established,
and the effect of five key parameters (i.e., distribution ratio, storage
pressure, ambient temperature, pressure difference at the main throttle
valve and the waste heat temperature) on the system was analyzed from
the perspective of thermodynamics. The purpose of this work is to lay
the foundation for further optimization of the performance of the low-
temperature CCHP system based on wind energy and transcritical
CCES. Based on this study, the utilization of wind energy resources, such
as wind power and wind energy waste heat, can be optimized, and the
efficiency of wind energy utilization can be improved. In addition, this
work also provides a new approach to expand the application of CCES
systems.
This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents an introduction
of a low-temperature CCHP system based on wind energy and tran­
scritical CCES. Section 3 presents the thermodynamic modeling of the
system and the verification of the mathematical model. In section 4, the
impact of five key parameters that affect the system performance is
analyzed in detail. Section 5 presents the conclusions.
3
Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609
2. System description
A schematic diagram of the CCHP system based on transcritical CCES
and using wind power and wind turbine waste heat is presented in Fig. 1.
The components of the system mainly include low-pressure CO2 storage
tank (LST), high-pressure CO2 storage tank (HST), compressor 1 (C1),
compressor 2 (C2), turbine 1 (T1), turbine 2 (T2), cold storage device
(CS), heat exchanger 1 (HE1), heat exchanger 2 (HE2), heat exchanger 3
(HE3), heat exchanger 4 (HE4), heat exchanger 5 (HE5), heat exchanger
6 (HE6), throttle valve 1 (TV1), throttle valve 2 (TV2), throttle valve 3
(TV3), cold fluid tank 1 (CFT1), cold fluid tank 2 (CFT2), cold fluid tank
3 (CFT3), cold fluid tank 4 (CFT4), splitter (SP), combiner 1 (CB1),
combiner 2 (CB2), and combiner 3 (CB3). The operating system includes
the charging stage and the discharging stage. The charging stage is
introduced first.
Charging stage:
Low-temperature liquid CO2 (stream 1) from the LST is throttled by
TV1 and becomes a vapor–liquid mixed state (stream 2) with a simul­
taneous decrease in temperature. To ensure that the inlet stream (stream
3) of C1 is in a gaseous state, a CS is installed. In the CS, CO2 (stream 2)
absorbs heat and is completely converted into a gaseous state at the
outlet. At the same time, the cold energy of stream 2 is preserved and
reused in the discharging stage. The gasified CO2 (stream 3) is com­
pressed by C1 to a high-temperature and high-pressure state (stream 4)
and then passed into HE1 for heat exchange with water of ambient
temperature provided by CFT1 (stream 20). After heat exchange, the
Y. Zhang et al.
Table 1
Governing thermodynamic equations of the components.
Components Equations
C1 WC1 = mCO2 (h4 − h3 )
C2 WC2 = mCO2 (h6 − h5 )
T1 WT1 = mCO2 (h10 − h11 )
T2 WT2 = mCO2 (h12 − h13 )
HE1 QHE1 = mCO2 (h4 − h5 ) = mwater (h21 − h20 )
HE2 QHE2 = mCO2 (h6 − h7 ) = mwater (h23 − h22 )
HE3 QHE3 = mCO2 (h17 − h16 ) = mwater (h24 − h25 )
HE4 QHE4 = mCO2 (h10 − h9 ) = mwater (h26 − h27 )
HE5 QHE5 = mCO2 (h12 − h11 ) = mwater (h28 − h29 )
HE6 QHE6 = mCO2 (h13 − h14 ) = mwater (h31 − h30 )
TV1 h2 = h 1
TV2 h9 = h8
TV3 h16 = h15
CS QCS = mCO2 (h3 − h2 ) = mCO2 (h18 − h19 )
LST h1 = h19 ,p1 = p19
HST h7 = h7′ ,p7 = p7′
SP m7′ = m8 + m15 ,m7′ h7′ = m8 h8 + m15 h15
CB1 m27 h27 + m29 h29 = m33 h33 ,m27 + m29 = m33
CB2 m21 h21 + m23 h23 + m31 h31 = m32 h32 ,m21 + m23 + m31 = m32
CB3 m14 h14 + m17 h17 = m18 h18 ,m14 + m17 = m18
CO2 is cooled to a cooled and high-pressure state (stream 5) while the
water (stream 20) is heated to a high-temperature state (stream 21).
Subsequently, the CO2 (stream 5) enters C2 to further increase its
pressure whereby the state of CO2 becomes supercritical (stream 6).
Afterward, the high-temperature and high-pressure CO2 is further liq­
uefied (stream 7) in HE2 by introducing water of ambient temperature
(stream 22) provided by CFT1, and the obtained liquid CO2 of low-
temperature and high-pressure is finally stored in HST. The water
(stream 22) used in HE2 is heated to a high-temperature state (stream
23). Notably, the power consumed by C1 and C2 in the charging stage of
the system is supplied by wind power, and the temperatures of streams
21 and 23 are still sufficiently high for heating.
Discharging Stage:
The low-temperature and high-pressure liquid CO2 (stream 7′ ) from
the HST is divided into two streams (stream 8 and stream 15) by the SP.
For the subsequent descriptions, the stream that is utilized for power
generation and supplying heating energy is defined as the main stream,
and the stream used to supply cooling energy is defined as the secondary
stream.
The main stream is described first. The low-temperature and high-
pressure CO2 is depressurized by TV2. Then, the pressure is stabilized
at a certain value, and CO2 enters HE4. At the same time, CFT3 supplies
water that, after absorbing the waste heat generated by the wind tur­
bine, increases in temperature (stream 26) and subsequently enters HE4
for heat exchange with CO2. After the heat exchange, the temperature of
CO2 increases (stream 10), while the temperature of the high-
temperature water (stream 25) is still sufficiently high to be used for
heating. After heating, CO2 enters T1 for power generation, and the
pressure of CO2 (stream 11) at the outlet of T1 decreases to an inter­
mediate pressure while its temperature also decreases. Then, CO2 enters
HE5. At the same time, CFT4 supplies water that, after absorbing the
waste heat generated by the wind turbine, increases its temperature
(stream 28) and subsequently enters HE5 to exchange heat with CO2 of
lower temperature. After the heat exchange, CO2 temperature increases
(stream 12) while the water temperature decreases (stream 29). The
water (stream 29) can be utilized for heating, while CO2 enters T2 for
power generation. CO2 (stream 13) at the outlet of T2 is still high in
temperature and enters HE6 to exchange heat with water at ambient
temperature. After heat exchange, the CO2 temperature is decreased,
and the water temperature is increased which can be used for heating.
In the secondary stream, low-temperature and high-pressure CO2
(stream 15) is throttled to a lower temperature and low-pressure state
(stream 16) by TV3 and then enters HE3 for heat exchange with water of
ambient temperature provided by CFT2, which is then cooled to a lower
4
Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609
temperature. After heat exchange, the CO2 increases in temperature
(stream 17) and is then mixed with cooled and low-pressure CO2 (stream
14) in CB3 to obtain low-temperature and low-pressure CO2 (stream 18).
Afterward, CO2 (stream 18) enters CS to obtain cold energy, becomes
liquid, and finally returns to LST for storage.
3. Mathematical models and performance indices
The thermodynamic model of this system is established first, and
several system performance indices are defined to evaluate the perfor­
mance of the system.
3.1. Assumptions
To analyze the operational performance of the system, the following
assumptions are proposed:
1) The system works under steady-state conditions, and the duration of
the charging stage and the discharge stage is the same [25].
2) The pressure drop in the heat exchangers and the CS is negligible
[26].
3) The processes of streams flowing through LST and HST are consid­
ered isothermal [25].
4) Heat dissipation and friction losses of system components and pipes
are negligible [26].
5) The processes of streams flowing through throttle valves are
considered isenthalpic [26].
6) The efficiency of converting the output power of the expander into
electrical energy is assumed to be 100% [27].
7) For the wind turbine waste heat model, the waste heat is assumed to
be a constant heat source that provides a steady supply of heat to the
system, and that the temperature of the working mass remains con­
stant even after heating.
3.2. Thermodynamic modeling
The governing thermodynamic equations for each component are
summarized in Table 1. More information about the components is
described in later sections.
3.2.1. Model of the compressors
As CO2 is successively compressed by the compressors C1 and C2,
and its state is changed from the gas phase to the supercritical state, the
compression process is a power-consuming process. The power
consumed by C1 is shown in Table 1 [28], where Ẇ is the consumed
power of the compressor, ṁ is the mass flow rate, h is the specific
enthalpy, subscript C1 stands for compressor 1, and subscripts 3 and 4
are state numbers shown in Fig. 1. Similarly, the power consumed by C2
is shown in Table 1, where subscript C2 stands for compressor 2, and
subscripts 5 and 6 are state numbers shown in Fig. 1.
Isentropic efficiency is an important performance index of
compressor performance, and according to the definition, the isentropic
efficiency ηC1 of C1 can be expressed as:
ηC1 =
(h4,is − h3 )
(1)
(h4 − h3 )
where is denotes the isentropic compression process.
Similarly, the isentropic efficiency ηC2 of C2 can be expressed as:
(h6,is − h5 )
ηC2 = (2)
(h6 − h5 )
3.2.2. Model of the turbines
During the discharging process, the high-temperature and high-
pressure CO2 enters the turbine, which outputs work and drives the
Y. Zhang et al. Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609

Table 2
Comparison of the system of this work and the reference system.
Parameter Result Reference [24] Error

SPE 0.3625 0.36 0.70%

SENE 1.44 1.34 7.17%
Exergy density (kWh/m3) 15.64 15.04 3.96%

Table 3
Main parameters of the system.
Parameter Unit Value

Ambient temperature K 293.15

Ambient pressure MPa 0.1
Pressure of HST [32] MPa 18.5
Pressure of LST MPa 3.5
ΔPTV1 MPa 0.8
ΔPTV2 MPa 3.5
ΔPTV3 MPa 15
Initial temperature of water K 293.15
Input temperature of hot water K 393.15
Minimum temperature approach in HEXs K 5
Fig. 2. Effect of distribution ratio on power, heating, and cooling energy.
CO2 mass flow rate kg/h 3600
Isentropic efficiency of C1 [26] / 0.85
Isentropic efficiency of C2 / 0.85
Isentropic efficiency of T1 [26] / 0.85
Isentropic efficiency of T2 / 0.85

Table 4
Thermodynamic data at different stream points of the system.
Stream T (K) p (MPa) h (kJ/kg) ṁ (kg/h) s (kJ/kg K)

1 269.40 3.5 − 9265.39 3600 2.14

2 264.40 2.7 − 9265.39 3600 2.15
3 285.85 2.7 − 8990.13 3600 3.19
4 354.79 6 − 8945.17 3600 3.20
5 298.15 6 − 9036.10 3600 2.92
6 390.19 18.5 − 8984.85 3600 2.94
7 298.15 18.5 − 9213.01 3600 2.27
8 298.15 18.5 − 9213.01 2700 2.27
9 296.18 15 − 9213.01 2700 2.29
10 388.15 15 − 8967.40 2700 3.01
11 316.19 6.14 − 9001.18 2700 3.03
12 388.15 6.14 − 8906.14 2700 3.31
13 344.80 3.5 − 8934.53 2700 3.32
14 298.15 3.5 − 8987.03 2700 3.16
15 298.15 18.5 − 9213.01 900 2.27 Fig. 3. Effect of distribution ratio on round-trip efficiencies.
16 273.70 3.5 − 9213.01 900 2.34
17 288.15 3.5 − 8999.43 900 3.11
18 295.60 3.5 − 8990.13 3600 3.15
19 269.40 3.5 − 9265.39 3600 2.14
20 293.15 0.4 − 15909.11 2002 2.91
21 331.03 0.4 − 15745.59 2002 3.43
22 293.15 0.4 − 15909.11 3666 2.91
23 345.00 0.4 − 15685.02 3666 3.61
24 293.15 0.4 − 15909.11 4388 2.91
25 283.00 0.4 − 15952.91 4388 2.76
26 393.15 2 − 15472.36 2000 4.18
27 317.19 2 − 15803.94 2000 3.25
28 393.15 2 − 15472.36 2000 4.18
29 364.04 2 − 15600.67 2000 3.84
30 293.15 0.4 − 15909.11 741 2.91
31 337.45 0.4 − 15717.76 741 3.52
32 339.77 0.4 − 15707.73 6408 3.55
33 340.69 2 − 15702.30 4000 3.56

generator to produce power. The output work of the turbine T1 is shown

in Table 1 [28]. Similarly, the output work of T2 is shown in Table 1,
where T1 and T2 represent turbine 1 and turbine 2, respectively, and
subscripts 10, 11, 12, and 13 are state numbers shown in Fig. 1. Fig. 4. Effect of distribution ratio on net energy and exergy density.
The isentropic efficiency ηT1 of T1 can be expressed as:

5
Y. Zhang et al. Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609

(h10 − h11 )
ηT1 = (3)
(h10,is − h11 )

Similarly, the isentropic efficiency ηT2 of T2 can be expressed as:

(h13 − h12 )
ηT2 = (4)
(h13,is − h12 )

3.2.3. Model of the heat exchangers

Six heat exchangers (i.e., HE1, HE2, HE3, HE4, HE5, HE6) are
adopted in the system. To ensure the accuracy of the calculation results
and avoid errors caused by the change in physical properties of the
working medium during the heat exchange process, the heat exchanger
model is divided into several sub-heat-exchangers [26]. In each sub-
heat-exchanger, the physical properties of the working medium can be
regarded as constant. Consequently, based on the first law of thermo­
dynamics, the nth sub-heat-exchanger satisfies the following equation:

Q̇HE,n = ṁCO2 (hCO2 ,n+1 − hCO2 ,n ) = ṁwater (hwater,n+1 − hwater,n ) (5)

where QHE represents heat energy, the subscript n stands for the inlet of
Fig. 5. Effect of distribution ratio on temperature distribution. the nth section, the subscript n + 1 denotes the outlet of the nth section,
and the subscript ‘water’ stands for the working medium.
Therefore, the total heat energy transferred in each heat exchanger

Fig. 6. Effect of storage pressure on: (a) power consumption and power generation, (b) heating energy, and (c) cooling energy.

6
Y. Zhang et al. Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609

Fig. 7. Effect of storage pressure on: (a) SPE and (b) SENE.

Fig. 8. Effect of storage pressure on temperature distribution with (a) Distribution ratio = 0.2, (b) Distribution ratio = 0.25, (c) Distribution ratio = 0.3 and (d)
Distribution ratio = 0.35.

7
Y. Zhang et al.
Fig. 9. Effect of storage pressure on: (a) Heating exergy, (b) Cooling exergy, and (c) Exergy density.
can be obtained. The data of heat energy transferred in the six heat
exchangers are shown in Table 1, where subscripts HE1 to HE6 stand for
the six heat exchangers, subscripts 4 to 17 are state numbers of CO2
shown in Fig. 1, and subscripts 20 to 31 are state numbers of water
shown in Fig. 1.
Furthermore, to facilitate the evaluation of the impact of changes in
heat exchanger performance on heat transfer, the minimum temperature
difference of a heat exchanger is defined as ΔTmin. More information
about this parameter can be obtained from literature [28].
3.2.4. Model of the throttling valves
In the previous assumptions, the process of throttling is assumed to
be isenthalpic. The outlet enthalpy values of TV1, TV2, and TV3 are
shown in Table 1 [23].
3.2.5. Model of the cold storage device
In this system, the function of the cold storage device CS is to
accomplish the storage of hot and cold energy through the phase change
material. Specifically, in the charging stage, the phase change material is
at a higher temperature and raises the temperature of the low-
temperature CO2 at the outlet of the throttle valve TV1, while the
8
Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609
temperature of CS decreases simultaneously. In the discharging stage,
CO2 is at a high temperature (stream 18), absorbs cold energy from the
storage device, decreases its temperature, and transforms into a liquid
state. After heat absorption, CS returns to its initial high-temperature
state [17]. CS is regarded as a heat exchanger [24], and its interior
meets the first law of thermodynamics. The heat transfer in CS is shown
in Table 1, where the subscript CS stands for the cold storage device.
3.2.6. Model of the storage tanks
According to the assumption, the processes of streams flowing
through LST and HST are considered isothermal. The states of streams 1,
19, 7, and 7′ are shown in Table 1.
3.2.7. Model of the splitter
A splitter is a device that divides a fluid into two or more streams.
The model for the splitter SP satisfies the law of conservation of mass
and energy, which is shown in Table 1.
3.2.8. Model of the combiners
A combiner is a device that combines two or more streams into one
stream. The model for the combiners CB1, CB2, and CB3 satisfies the law
Y. Zhang et al. Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609

Fig. 10. Effect of ambient temperature on: (a) Power consumption and power generation, (b) Heating energy, and (c) Cooling energy.

Fig. 11. Effect of ambient temperature on: (a) SPE and (b) SENE.

9
Y. Zhang et al. Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609

Fig. 12. Effect of ambient temperature on temperature distribution with (a) Distribution ratio = 0.2, (b) Distribution ratio = 0.25, (c) Distribution ratio = 0.3 and (d)
Distribution ratio = 0.35.

of conservation of mass and energy, which is shown in Table 1.

WT1 + WT2
SPE = (6)
WC1 + WC2
3.2.9. Model of the wind turbines
As a secondary function, the wind turbine generates waste heat For CCHP systems, the output of cooling energy, heating energy, and
which is supplied to the CO2 used in the discharging stage. According to power is the focus of attention. System energy efficiency (SENE) [30] is
the literature [29], a high-capacity wind turbine of 7580 kW can defined as the ratio of the total output energy of the system to the total
generate about 122 kW− 270 kW of waste heat at an average wind speed input energy of the system being evaluated:
of 8 m/s− 12 m/s. In this system, it is assumed that two wind turbines are
WT1 + WT2 + Qheat,out + Qcool
used, and the wind turbine waste heat is supplied to the CO2 energy SENE = (7)
WC1 + WC2 + Qheat,in
storage system as hot water at a temperature of 393.15 K and a mass
flow rate of 2000 kg/h. where Qheat,out and Qcool denote the heating energy and cooling energy,
respectively, that is supplied to the user, and Qheat,in represents the
3.3. Performance indices
exhaust heat of the wind turbine.
Specifically, the heating energy generated by the system can be
To evaluate the performance of this system, the following perfor­
expressed as:
mance indices are defined.
System power efficiency (SPE) [17] is a common performance index Q = cwater m (T32 − T0 ) + cwater m (T33 − T0 ) (8)
water,32 water,33
in conventional energy storage systems, which is defined as the ratio of
heat,out

the power generation of the system to its power consumption: The heating energy input to the system is expressed as:

10
Y. Zhang et al. Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609

Fig. 13. Effect of ambient temperature on: (a) Heating exergy, (b) Cooling exergy, and (c) Exergy density.

Q = cwater m (T26 − T27 ) + cwater m (T28 − T29 ) (9) follows [28]:

heat,in water,26 water,28

ex = hi − h0 − T0 (si − s0 ) (11)
where cwater represents the specific heat capacity of water, T represents
temperature, subscript 0 is the state number of the ambient state, and where ex represents the specific exergy, and s is the specific entropy of
subscripts 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, and 33 are the state numbers of water in the stream. The subscript i represents the stream, and the subscript
the corresponding streams shown in Fig. 1. 0 represents ambient temperature.
Similarly, the cooling energy generated by the system can be For a stream with a mass ofṁ, the exergy Ex carried by it can be
expressed as: expressed as:

Q = cwater m (T0 − T25 ) (10) Ex = ṁ[hi − h0 − T0 (si − s0 )] (12)

cool water,24
Therefore, according to the definition of exergy, combined with the
Due to the differences in energy grades of cooling energy, heating
heat exchange process of the system, the exergy Exh of the system cor­
energy, and power, a certain bias is present in the results when the
responding to the heating outputs can be expressed as:
system is evaluated from the energy perspective. Therefore, the evalu­
ation of the system performance from the perspective of exergy is also Exh = m [(h32 − h0 ) − T0 (s32 − s0 )] +
water,32
m [(h33 − h0 ) − T0 (s33 − s0 )]
water,33
required.
(13)
In this system, since the change in kinetic energy and potential en­
ergy is not considered, and there is no chemical reaction process, the Similarly, the system outputs cooling energy, and the exergy Exco
kinetic energy, potential energy, and the exergy corresponding to corresponding to the cooling outputs can be expressed as:
chemical reactions can be neglected. According to the definition of
Exco = m [(h25 − h0 ) − T0 (s25 − s0 )] (14)
exergy, since it is assumed that the operating state of the system is a water,25

steady state, the specific enthalpy carried by stream i can be expressed as Based on the above definitions, the system can be evaluated from the

11
Y. Zhang et al. Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609

Fig. 14. Effect of the pressure difference at the main throttle valve 2 (ΔPTV2) on: (a) Power consumption and power generation, (b) Heating energy, and (c)
Cooling energy.

perspective of exergy. Exergy density is an evaluation standard for the calculations.

energy storage capacity of an energy storage system. It is defined as the
ratio of the total exergy output of the system to the sum of the volume of
the high and low-pressure storage tanks, that is, the capacity of the
system to output exergy per cubic meter volume of the storage tank[31]:
WT1 + WT2 + Exh + Exco
ED = (15)
VLST + VHST
where VLST and VHST represent the volume of the low-pressure and high-
pressure storage tank, respectively.
3.4. Model validation
To verify the reliability of the component model constructed in this
system, Aspen software using the Peng-Robinson property package was
employed to construct the system model in the literature [24], and the
results were compared with the literature [24]. The results are shown in
Table 2, comparing the simulation results with the results of the refer­
ence paper. The results show that the maximum error between the re­
sults simulated by the mathematical model of this work and the
reference results is 7.17%, indicating that the accuracy of the model can
be guaranteed and that this model can be used for subsequent
4. Results and discussion
The main parameters of the system are presented in Table 3. The
selected parameters refer to literature [26,32] for parameter settings,
and these parameters also represent the state-of-the-art of each
component to some extent. Based on the parameters under the design
conditions, the results of the thermodynamic data at different stream
points of the system are presented in Table 4.
It should be noted that the results in Table 4 are based on a distri­
bution ratio of 0.25. The distribution ratio is defined as the ratio of the
CO2 mass flow (CO2, 15) entering the secondary stream for cooling to the
total CO2 mass flow (CO2, 7′ ) of the system. Changes in parameters (such
as distribution ratio, storage pressure, ambient temperature, ΔPTV2, and
waste heat temperature) will directly affect the system performance.
Therefore, to understand the system performance comprehensively,
sensitivity analysis is used to analyze the impact of core parameters.
4.1. Effect of the distribution ratio
In this section, an analysis of the effect of the distribution ratio is

12
Y. Zhang et al.
Fig. 15. Effect of the pressure difference at the main throttle valve 2 (ΔPTV2) on: (a) SPE and (b) SENE.
performed. The distribution ratio directly affects the CO2 mass flow rate
in the main stream and secondary stream, which in turn affects the
overall system performance. It should be noted that to ensure that the
inlet streams of the compressor and turbine are in a gas phase state, the
distribution ratio needs to be adjusted accordingly. Therefore, a distri­
bution ratio between 0.2 and 0.4 is assumed for the following analysis.
Figure 2 shows the effect of the change in the distribution ratio on the
power, heating energy, and cooling energy of the system. When the
distribution ratio increases from 0.2 to 0.4, the power consumption of
the system remains basically unchanged (96 kW), and the power gen­
eration decreases from 49.74 kW to 37.31 kW. This is because the in­
crease in the distribution ratio does not exert an effect on the power
consumption of the compressor in the charging stage but leads to a
decrease in the mass flow and power generation of the turbine.
Regarding heating energy, although the mass flow rate of the main
stream decreases, the heating energy of the system increases from
570.46 kW to 624.41 kW because the temperature and mass flow of the
water of the supply system that comes from wind turbines do not
decrease. Regarding cooling energy, the increase in the distribution ratio
increases the mass flow of CO2 that can be used for cooling, so the system
can supply more cooling energy, which increases from 42.56 kW to
85.12 kW.
For the total energy supply, although the increase in the distribution
ratio results in a decrease in power generation, the increase in cooling
energy and heating energy is more prominent. Hence, the total energy
supply increases from 662.76 kW to 746.84 kW.
Figure 3 demonstrates the effect of the change in distribution ratio on
the round-trip efficiency of the system. When the distribution ratio in­
creases from 0.2 to 0.4, the SPE of the system decreases from 0.52 to
0.39, and the SENE increases from 1.15 to 1.30. The decrease in SPE is
mainly related to the trend of the power consumption and power gen­
eration of the system, that is, the power consumption remains almost
unchanged, and power generation is reduced. Regarding SENE,
although the power generation of the system decreases with the increase
in distribution ratio, the cooling energy and heating energy of the system
increases, and the combined increase is greater than the decrease in the
power generation of the system.
It should be noted that heating energy and cooling energy are
regarded as valuable as electrical power, neglecting the grade inequi­
valence between the different energy types. As a consequence, SENE can
be greater than 1.
In general, increasing the distribution ratio contributes to increasing
13
Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609
the heating energy supply, the cooling energy supply, and the total en­
ergy output of the system, but it also decreases the power generation of
the system. Furthermore, since the system generates much more heating
energy than cooling energy, this system is more applicable in areas
where the demand is larger for heating energy than for cooling energy.
Figure 4 shows the effect of the variation of the distribution ratio on
power, heating exergy, and cooling exergy. When the distribution ratio
increases from 0.2 to 0.4, the power generation decreases from 49.74
kW to 37.31 kW, while the heating exergy and cooling exergy increase
from 40.34 kW to 49.16 kW and from 0.75 kW to 1.49 kW, respectively.
The trends of heating and cooling exergy are consistent with their trends
observed from an energy perspective. Based on the change in these three
factors, the trend and the specific values of the exergy density can be
obtained. When the distribution ratio increases from 0.2 to 0.4, the
exergy density decreases from 11.63 kWh/m3 to 11.26 kWh/m3 since
the reduction in power generation is greater than the sum of the increase
in the corresponding heating exergy and cooling exergy. However, the
reduction of the system exergy density decreases as the distribution ratio
increases. When the distribution ratio increases from 0.2 to 0.3 and then
from 0.3 to 0.4, the reduction in exergy density is first 0.24 kWh/m3 and
then 0.13 kWh/m3. The reason for this phenomenon is that the cooling
exergy as well as the power generation of the system do not change with
the increase in the distribution ratio, while the increment of the heating
exergy increases. This results in an overall decline in the decrement of
exergy density with the increase in distribution ratio.
Figure 5 shows the effect of distribution ratio on temperature dis­
tribution. With the increase in the distribution ratio, the temperatures of
streams 3, 4, and 21 decrease, that is, the inlet and outlet temperature of
C1 and the outlet temperature of HE3 decrease, which indicates that the
increase in the distribution ratio reduces the power consumption of C1
and the heating energy of HE1. However, at the same time, the increase
in distribution ratio leads to an increase in the temperatures of streams
27, 29, and 33. The rise in the stream temperature in this part is
conducive to increasing the heating energy of the system. Therefore, the
increase in distribution ratio has a more pronounced effect on reducing
the power consumed by C1 and increasing the heating energy of the
system.
4.2. Effect of storage pressure
The pressure in the HST also affects the system performance, and the
effect varies for different distribution ratios. In this section, four
Y. Zhang et al.
Fig. 16. Effect of the pressure difference at the main throttle valve 2 (ΔPTV2) on temperature distribution with (a) Distribution ratio = 0.2, (b) Distribution ratio =
0.25, (c) Distribution ratio = 0.3 and (d) Distribution ratio = 0.35.
operating points with storage pressures of 18.0, 18.5, 19.0, and 19.5
MPa are analyzed.
Figure 6 shows the effect of storage pressure on the power, heating
energy, and cooling energy of the system as a function of the distribution
ratio. As shown in Fig. 6(a), when the storage pressure increases from
18.0 MPa to 19.5 MPa at a distribution ratio of 0.2, the power generation
of the system increases by 3.1% from 49.17 kW to 50.67 kW while the
power consumption increases by 4.9% from 94.79 kW to 99.47 kW.
Since the storage pressure of the LST is constant, the power consumption
of the system increases with the increase in HST pressure. The system
power generation increases because the pressure difference through TV2
is constant and the increase in storage pressure leads to an increase in
the inlet pressure of T1 and an increase in the output work of the turbine.
As shown in Fig. 6(b), the heating energy of the system increases from
569.08 kW to 572.59 kW when the storage pressure increases from 18.0
MPa to 19.5 MPa at a distribution ratio of 0.2, which is attributed to the
increased compression heat caused by the increase in storage pressure.
As shown in Fig. 6(c), the increase in storage pressure has little effect on
the cooling energy of the system.
14
Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609
Figure 7 demonstrates the effect of storage pressure on round-trip
efficiency. As seen from Fig. 7(a), at a constant distribution ratio of
0.2, the SPE of the system decreases from 0.52 at an HST pressure of
18.0 MPa to 0.51 at a pressure of 19.5 MPa. However, SENE does not
change with the change in storage pressure, as evident from Fig. 7(b).
The decrease in SPE is mainly related to the trend of the system power
consumption and power generation, where the increase in power con­
sumption is greater than that of power generation. For SENE, the heating
energy and power generation of the system increase with storage pres­
sure. However, the power consumption of the system also increases with
storage pressure, while the cooling energy output and heating energy
input of the system are not affected by it. Based on the changes of these
five parameters, it can be concluded that the SENE of the system is not
affected by storage pressure.
Figure 8 shows the effect of storage pressure on the temperature
distribution at different distribution ratios. At the same distribution
ratio, the temperatures of streams 6 and 27 increase with the increase in
storage pressure while the temperatures of streams 11 and 29 decrease.
The change in temperature of these four streams directly affects the
Y. Zhang et al.
Fig. 17. Effect of the pressure difference at the main throttle valve 2 (ΔPTV2) on: (a) Heating exergy, (b) Cooling exergy and (c) Exergy density.
heating energy generated by the system.
The effect of the variation of storage pressure on heating exergy,
cooling exergy, and exergy density is shown in Fig. 9 for the various
distribution ratios. As seen from Fig. 9(a) and Fig. 9(b), at a distribution
ratio of 0.2, the heating exergy increases from 40.41 kW to 40.54 kW
when the storage pressure is raised from 18.0 MPa to 19.5 MPa while the
cooling exergy increases from 0.75 kW to 0.76 kW. The trends of heating
exergy and cooling exergy are consistent with their trends observed from
an energy perspective. Based on the cooling exergy, heating exergy, and
the previous study on power generation, the trend of exergy density can
be obtained as shown in Fig. 9(c). Increasing the storage pressure from
18.0 MPa to 19.5 MPa at a distribution ratio of 0.2 causes the exergy
density to increase from 11.54 kWh/m3 to 11.83 kWh/m3, which can be
explained as follows. As the storage pressure increases, power genera­
tion and heating exergy of the system as well as CO2 density in the high-
pressure tank increase, which means that the volume of the storage tank
decreases. Therefore, the exergy density of the system demonstrates an
upward trend.
4.3. Effect of ambient temperature
At different distribution ratios, the ambient temperature
15
Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609
considerably influences the performance of the system, especially the
cooling and heating energy. In this section, four operating points with
ambient temperatures of 290.15 K, 291.15 K, 292.15 K, and 293.15 K
are analyzed.
Figure 10 shows the effect of the change in ambient temperature on
the power, heating energy, and cooling energy of the system as a func­
tion of the distribution ratio. As shown in Fig. 10(a), when the ambient
temperature decreases from 293.15 K to 290.15 K at a distribution ratio
of 0.2, the power generation of the system remains unchanged (49.74
kW), and the power consumption slightly decreases from 96.38 kW to
96.17 kW. This is because, the change in ambient temperature has no
effect on the output power of the turbine during the discharging stage,
while a decrease in ambient temperature causes a decrease in the inlet
temperature of C1, which reduces the power consumption of the
compressor. At the same distribution ratio and ambient temperature as
above, the heating energy of the system increases from 570.46 kW to
585.15 kW due to the effect of the reduced ambient temperature, as
shown in Fig. 10(b). Simultaneously, the cooling energy of the system
increases from 42.56 kW to 43.17 kW, as indicated in Fig. 10(c). Since
the reduction in ambient temperature reduces the HE3 temperature
difference between stream 24 and stream 25, the mass flow of stream 25
is increased, and the system can supply more cooling energy.
Y. Zhang et al. Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609

Fig. 18. Effect of waste heat temperature on: (a) Power consumption and power generation, (b) Heating energy, and (c) Cooling energy.

Fig. 19. Effect of waste heat temperature on: (a) SPE and (b) SENE.

16
Y. Zhang et al.
Fig. 20. Effect of waste heat temperature on temperature distribution with (a) Distribution ratio = 0.2, (b) Distribution ratio = 0.25, (c) Distribution ratio = 0.3 and
(d) Distribution ratio = 0.35.
Figure 11 demonstrates the effect of the change in ambient temper­
ature on round-trip efficiency. As shown in Fig. 11(a) and Fig. 11(b), at a
distribution ratio of 0.2, when the ambient temperature decreases from
293.15 K to 290.15 K, both SPE and SENE of the system remain un­
changed with values of 0.517 and 1.15, respectively. A change in SPE is
mainly related to the changing trend of power consumption and power
generation of the system. Since the power consumption is almost un­
changed and the power generation remains unchanged, the change in
ambient temperature does not affect the SPE of the system. Although the
cooling energy and heating energy of the system increase with the
decrease in ambient temperature, the change in ambient temperature
does not affect the SENE of the system because the increase in heating
energy input of the system with the decrease in ambient temperature is
equal to the sum of cooling energy and heating energy output of the
system.
Figure 12 shows the effect of ambient temperature on the tempera­
ture distribution at different distribution ratios. When the ambient
temperature decreases from 293.15 K to 290.15 K at the same distri­
bution ratio, the temperatures of the HST inlet stream (stream 7) and of
streams 32 and 33 also decrease. Although the decrease in temperature
of streams 32 and 33 reduces the heating energy of the system, the
performed analysis indicates that, at the same distribution ratio, the
17
Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609
heating energy of the system increases with the decrease in ambient
temperature. This trend can be explained as follows. Although the
temperature of the two streams decreases with decreasing ambient
temperature, the temperature differences between each stream and the
ambient temperature simultaneously increase. Therefore, the heating
energy output of the system increases with the decrease in ambient
temperature.
The effects of ambient temperature on heating exergy, cooling
exergy, and exergy density are shown in Fig. 13. As seen from Fig. 13(a)
and Fig. 13(b), at a distribution ratio of 0.2, the heating exergy increases
from 40.34 kW at 293.15 K to 45.67 kW at 290.15 K while the cooling
exergy decreases from 0.75 kW to 0.54 kW. The trends of heating exergy
and cooling exergy are consistent with their trends noted from an energy
perspective. Based on the cooling exergy, heating exergy, and the pre­
vious study on power generation, the exergy density values are calcu­
lated and plotted as a function of the distribution ratio, as shown in
Fig. 13(c). At a distribution ratio of 0.2, the exergy density increases
from 11.63 kWh/m3 to 12.42 kWh/m3 when the ambient temperature is
reduced from 293.15 K to 290.15 K. Although the ambient temperature
has no effect on the system power generation, a decrease in ambient
temperature results in a greater increase in heating exergy than the
decrease in the cooling exergy. Consequently, the system exergy density
Y. Zhang et al.
Fig. 21. Effect of waste heat temperature on: (a) Heating exergy, (b) Cooling exergy and (c) Exergy density.
exhibits an upward trend.
4.4. Effect of the pressure difference at the main throttle valve
The pressure difference of CO2 entering the main stream from the
outlet of the HST through TV2, the main throttle valve, is denoted
ΔPTV2. The state of CO2 entering the main stream is directly affected by
ΔPTV2. In this section, four operating points with pressure differences of
3.0 MPa, 3.5 MPa, 4.0 MPa, and 4.5 MPa are selected for analysis. The
effects of increasing ΔPTV2 from 3.0 MPa to 4.5 MPa at the same dis­
tribution ratio of 0.2 are further discussed.
As shown in Fig. 14, the system power, heating energy, and cooling
energy are plotted over the distribution ratio for the investigated ΔPTV2
values. It can be seen from Fig. 14(a) that the power consumption of the
system remains unchanged (96.38 kW) and the power generation de­
creases from 50.22 kW to 48.57 kW. This is because a change in ΔPTV2
does not affect the power consumption of the compressor in the charging
stage of the system, and the increase in value of ΔPTV2 causes a decrease
in the inlet pressure of T1 and thereby a decrease in the power gener­
ation of the turbine. As shown in Fig. 14(b), the heating energy of the
system increases from 569.74 kW to 571.38 kW since the increase in
ΔPTV2 reduces the heat transfer of heat exchanger HE5. The cooling
energy of the system remains unchanged (42.56 kW), as evident from
18
Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609
Fig. 14(c), because ΔPTV2 mainly affects the main stream that is used for
the generation of power and heating energy.
Figure 15 demonstrates the effect of ΔPTV2 on the system round-trip
efficiency at the various distribution ratios. As shown in Fig. 15(a) and
(b), the SPE of the system decreases from 0.52 to 0.50 while the SENE of
the system (1.154) is not affected. The decrease in SPE is mainly related
to the trend of the power consumption of the system, which does not
change, and its power generation, which decreases with the increase in
ΔPTV2. SENE is almost unaffected by the increase in ΔPTV2 since the
increase in heating energy is almost the same as the decrease in power
consumption.
Figure 16 shows the effect of ΔPTV2 on the temperature of each
stream at selected distribution ratios. Only streams 9, 11, 27, and 29 are
affected. At the same distribution ratio, the temperature decreases for
stream 9 and increases for streams 11 and 29 when ΔPTV2 increases from
3.0 MPa to 4.5 MPa. Since the increase in ΔPTV2 causes a temperature
decrease of stream 9 and a reduction in the pressure difference between
the inlet and outlet of T1, the temperature of stream 11 increases
accordingly, which in turn causes the temperature increase of stream 29.
The heating exergy, cooling exergy, and exergy density are plotted
over the distribution ratio for the four investigated ΔPTV2 values in
Fig. 17. As seen from Fig. 17(a) and (b), the heating exergy of the system
increases from 40.24 kW to 40.46 kW while the cooling exergy remains
Y. Zhang et al. Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609

Table 5
The increments of evaluation criteria when parameters increase by a unit.
Distribution ratio Parameters Range of parameter variation Per unit change in parameters

SPE SENE Exergy density

0.2 Storage pressure 18.0 MPa-19.5 MPa − 0.62 %/MPa − 0.01%/MPa 19.79%/MPa
Ambient temperature 290.15 K-293.15 K − 0.04%/K 0.06%/K − 117.58%/K
ΔPTV2 3 MPa-4.5 MPa − 1.14%/MPa 0.00%/MPa − 12.26%/MPa
Waste heat temperature 388.15 K-403.15 K 0.34%/K − 0.01%/K 12.16%/K

0.25 Storage pressure 18.0 MPa-19.5 MPa − 0.59%/MPa − 0.01%/MPa 18.88%/MPa

Ambient temperature 290.15 K-293.15 K − 0.04%/K 0.07%/K − 180.39%/K
ΔPTV2 3 MPa-4.5 MPa − 1.07%/MPa 0.00%/MPa − 11.37%/MPa
Waste heat temperature 388.15 K-403.15 K 0.32%/K − 0.13%/K 12.36%/K

0.3 Storage pressure 18.0 MPa-19.5 MPa − 0.56%/MPa − 0.01%/MPa 18.01%/MPa

Ambient temperature 290.15 K-293.15 K − 0.05%/K 0.08%/K − 183.40%/K
ΔPTV2 3 MPa-4.5 MPa − 1.00%/MPa 0.00%/MPa − 10.51%/MPa
Waste heat temperature 388.15 K-403.15 K 0.29%/K − 0.16%/K 12.58%/K

0.35 Storage pressure 18.0 MPa-19.5 MPa ¡0.51%/MPa − 0.01%/MPa 17.35%/MPa

Ambient temperature 290.15 K-293.15 K − 0.05%/K 0.09%/K − 186.60%/K
ΔPTV2 3 MPa-4.5 MPa − 0.93%/MPa 0.00%/MPa − 9.66%/MPa
Waste heat temperature 388.15 K-403.15 K 0.27%/K − 0.19%/K 12.79%/K

0.40 Storage pressure 18.0 MPa-19.5 MPa − 0.48%/MPa − 0.01%/MPa 16.56%/MPa

Ambient temperature 290.15 K-293.15 K − 0.06%/K 0.10%/K − 189.97%/K
ΔPTV2 3 MPa-4.5 MPa − 0.86%/MPa 0.00%/MPa − 8.83%/MPa
Waste heat temperature 388.15 K-403.15 K 0.25%/K − 0.22%/K 13.01%/K

the inlet temperature of turbine, which increases the power generation

Table 6
Comparison of the proposed CCHP system with other CCHP systems.
System SPE SENE Exergy density (kWh/m3)
Proposed system 0.48 1.19 11.51
TCES-based system [24] 0.36 1.34 15.04
CAES-based system [31] 0.48 0.91 3.85
unchanged (0.75 kW) when ΔPTV2 increases from 3.0 MPa to 4.5 MPa at
a distribution ratio of 0.2. The trends of heating exergy and cooling
exergy are consistent with their trends observed from an energy
perspective. The exergy density values are calculated as explained
earlier and are shown in Fig. 17(c) for the four ΔPTV2 values as a function
of the distribution ratio. With the specified ΔPTV2 increase, the exergy
density decreases from 11.68 kWh/m3 to 11.50 kWh/m3 because the
decrease in power generation of the system is greater than the sum of the
increase in heating exergy and cooling exergy. Notably, when the dis­
tribution ratio is 0.2, the difference in exergy density between a ΔPTV2 of
3.0 MPa and 4.5 MPa is 0.18, which decreases to 0.13 when the distri­
bution ratio is increased to 0.4. This decrease demonstrates that a higher
distribution ratio will reduce the influence of ΔPTV2 on exergy density.
4.5. Effect of the waste heat temperature
The waste heat temperature affects the system performance, and the
effect varies for different distribution ratios. In this section, four oper­
ating points with waste heat temperatures of 388.15 K, 393.15 K,
398.15 K, and 403.15 K are analyzed.
Figure 18 shows the effect of waste heat temperature on the power,
heating energy, and cooling energy of the system as a function of the
distribution ratio. As shown in Fig. 18(a), when the waste heat tem­
perature increases from 388.15 K to 403.15 K at a distribution ratio of
0.2, the power consumption of the system remains basically unchanged
(96.38 kW), and the power generation increases from 48.07 kW to
52.93 kW. This is because, the change in waste heat temperature has no
effect on the power consumption of the compressor in the charging
stage, while an increase in waste heat temperature causes an increase in
in the discharging stage. At the same distribution ratio and waste heat
temperature as above, the heating energy of the system increases from
547.62 kW to 616.49 kW due to the increased waste heat temperature,
as shown in Fig. 18(b). The cooling energy of the system remains un­
changed (42.56 kW), as evident from Fig. 18(c), because waste heat
temperature mainly affects the main stream that is used for generation of
power and heating energy.
Figure 19 demonstrates the effect of waste heat temperature on
round-trip efficiency. As seen from Fig. 19(a), at a constant distribution
ratio of 0.2, the SPE of the system increases from 0.50 at a waste heat
temperature of 388.15 K to 0.55 at a waste heat temperature of 403.15
K. However, SENE decreases from 1.16 to 1.14, as evident from Fig. 19
(b). The increase in SPE is mainly related to the trend of the power
consumption and power generation of the system, that is, the power
consumption remains unchanged and power generation increases.
Regarding SENE, the heating energy and power generation of the system
increase with waste heat temperature. However, the heating input of the
system also increases with waste heat temperature, while the cooling
energy and power consumption are not affected by it. Based on the
changes of these five parameters, it can be inferred that the SENE of the
system decreases with the increase in waste heat temperature.
Figure 20 shows the effect of waste heat temperature of each stream
at selected distribution ratios. At the same distribution ratio, the tem­
peratures of turbine inlet and outlet (stream 10, stream 11, stream 12,
stream 13), stream 27, stream 29 and stream 31 increase with the in­
crease in waste heat temperature. The change in temperature of streams
10 and 12 directly affects the power generation, while the change in
temperature of streams 27, 29 and 31 directly affects the heating energy.
The effects of waste heat temperature on heating exergy, cooling
exergy, and exergy density are shown in Fig. 21. As seen from Fig. 21(a)
and (b), at a distribution ratio of 0.2, the heating exergy increases from
37.42 kW at 388.15 K to 46.80 kW at 403.15 K while the cooling exergy
remains unchanged (0.75 kW). The trends of heating exergy and cooling
exergy are consistent with their trends observed from an energy
perspective. Based on the cooling exergy, heating exergy, and the pre­
vious study on power generation, the exergy density values are calcu­
lated and plotted as a function of the distribution ratio, as shown in

19
Y. Zhang et al.
Fig. 21(c). At a distribution ratio of 0.2, the exergy density increases
from 11.05 kWh/m3 to 12.87 kWh/m3 when the waste heat temperature
increases from 388.15 K to 403.15 K. This is because, when the waste
heat temperature increases, power generation as well as heating exergy
of the system increase while the cooling exergy remains unchanged.
Therefore, the exergy density of the system demonstrates an upward
trend.
4.6. Discussion for the results of sensitivity analysis
In summary, it can be seen that the variations of the five evaluated
parameters have different effects on each performance index of the
system. The effects of distribution ratio, storage pressure, ambient
temperature, pressure difference at the main throttle valve, and waste
heat temperature on the performance of the system are monotonic.
Furthermore, Table 5 shows the effect of each parameter on system
performance indices in the range of the studied parameter values. The
negative sign indicates that the system performance index decreases
when a studied parameter increases. Taking the storage pressure as an
example, when the storage pressure increases from 18.0 to 19.5 MPa at a
distribution ratio of 0.2, system performance indices show monotonic
trends. Specifically, when the storage pressure increases by a unit, SPE
decreases by 0.62%, SENE decreases by 0.006%, and the exergy density
increases by 19.79%.
Consequently, it can be found from Table 5 that variations of
different parameters have different effects on the system performance.
Hence, the parameters can be optimized in a more targeted manner to
improve the system performance.
4.7. System comparison
The system proposed in this paper is compared with other CCHP
systems based on TCES and CAES, as shown in Table 6. The CCHP system
based on TCES is a new trigeneration system based on transcritical
compressed carbon dioxide energy storage system, which uses com­
pressed heat to participate in the process of heating and power gener­
ation. The CCHP system based on CAES is also a trigeneration system,
which is based on advanced adiabatic compressed air energy storage
system and uses compressed heat for the process of heating and power
generation. These CCHP systems all operate at full load with no surplus
of energies. The system in this work has higher SPE than other reported
TCES-based CCHP systems, but it is still slightly deficient in terms of
exergy density and SENE. The SPE compares well to the published CAES-
based CCHP systems but the proposed system demonstrates better per­
formance in terms of exergy density and SENE than those systems.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, a low-temperature CCHP system based on wind energy
and transcritical CCES is proposed. The mathematical model of this
system is established, and the influence of five key parameters on the
system is analyzed from the perspective of thermodynamics. The main
conclusions obtained are as follows.
1) Under the designed conditions, SPE, SENE, and exergy density of
0.48, 1.19, and 11.51 kWh/m3, respectively, are achieved at an LST
pressure of 3.5 MPa, an HST pressure of 18.5 MPa, a pressure dif­
ference through TV2 of 3.5 MPa, an ambient temperature of 293.15
K, and a distribution ratio of 0.25.
2) When the distribution ratio increases from 0.2 to 0.4, the heating
energy and cooling energy of the system increase from 570.46 kW
and 42.56 kW to 624.41 kW and 85.12 kW, respectively. However,
the power generation of the system decreases from 49.74 kW to
37.31 kW while the power consumption of the system decreases from
96.37 kW to 95.72 kW. Therefore, this system is more applicable in
20
Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609
areas where the demand is larger for heating energy than for cooling
energy.
3) The storage pressure has a great influence on the thermodynamic
performance of the system. At a certain distribution ratio, as the
storage pressure increases, the power consumption, power genera­
tion, heating energy, and exergy density of the system also increase.
The change in ΔPTV2 predominantly affects the main stream that is
used for power generation, while it has little effect on the heating
energy of the system and no effect on its cooling energy.
4) The change in ambient temperature has a great impact on the cooling
energy and heating energy of the system but has almost no impact on
its SPE. Furthermore, despite its considerable effects on cooling and
heating energy, the ambient temperature only exhibits a slight effect
on the SENE of the system. Besides, a higher waste heat temperature
is conducive to raising SPE and exergy density, while lowering SENE.
In conclusion, the research in this paper provides an important
reference for realizing the integration and optimal design of wind tur­
bine waste heat and CCES systems, which is beneficial to promote the
development and application of energy storage technology. However, a
limitation of this research is that pressure loss and heat loss of pipelines,
heat exchangers, and high and low-pressure tanks are not considered.
Therefore, in the subsequent work, more accurate component models
need to be developed and the dynamic performance of the system should
be analyzed. In addition, since economic and environmental perfor­
mance are important indicators of such systems, relevant research is also
worth conducting in the future.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Yuan Zhang: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing
– original draft, Writing – review & editing. Yiheng Lin: Formal anal­
ysis, Investigation, Software, Writing – original draft, Writing – review &
editing. Fangzi Lin: Data curation, Formal analysis, Validation. Ke
Yang: Formal analysis, Visualization.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (Grant No. 51806136), Shanghai Sailing Program (Grant No.
18YF1409700), Shanghai Frontiers Science Center of “Full penetration”
far-reaching offshore Ocean energy and power, the Science & Technol­
ogy Commission of Shanghai Municipality and Shanghai Engineering
Research Center of Ship Intelligent Maintenance and Energy Efficiency
(Grant No. 20DZ2252300), and Shanghai High-level Local University
Innovation Team (Maritime safety & technical support). The authors
also appreciate the anonymous referees for their valuable suggestions
and guidance to this manuscript.
References
[1] Zhao X, Ma X, Chen B, Shang Y, Song M. Challenges toward carbon neutrality in
China: strategies and countermeasures. Resour Conserv Recycl 2022;176:105959.
[2] Liu M, Shi Y, Fang F. Combined cooling, heating and power systems: a survey.
Renew Sust Energ Rev 2014;35:1–22.
[3] Zhao H, Jiang T, Hou H. Performance analysis of the SOFC–CCHP system based on
H2O/Li–Br absorption refrigeration cycle fueled by coke oven gas. Energy 2015;91:
983–93.
[4] Ghiasirad H, Asgari N, Khoshbakhti Saray R, Mirmasoumi S. Thermoeconomic
assessment of a geothermal based combined cooling, heating, and power system,
integrated with a humidification-dehumidification desalination unit and an
absorption heat transformer. Energy Convers Manage 2021;235:113969.
Y. Zhang et al.
[5] Zarei A, Liravi M, Babaie Rabiee M, Ghodrat M. A Novel, eco-friendly combined
solar cooling and heating system, powered by hybrid Photovoltaic thermal (PVT)
collector for domestic application. Energy Convers Manage 2020;222:113198.
[6] Mohammadi A, Ahmadi MH, Bidi M, Joda F, Valero A, Uson S. Exergy analysis of a
combined cooling, heating and power system integrated with wind turbine and
compressed air energy storage system. Energy Convers Manage 2017;131:69–78.
[7] Memarzadeh G, Keynia F. A new optimal energy storage system model for wind
power producers based on long short term memory and Coot Bird Search
Algorithm. J Energy Storage 2021;44:103401.
[8] Zendehbad M. Full-scale assessment of impact of unfavourable upstream conditions
on the performance and loads of wind turbines. Switzerland: ETH Zürich; 2017.
[9] Furuse M, Fuchino S, Okano M, Natori N, Yamasaki H. Development of a cooling
system for superconducting wind turbine generator. Cryogenics 2016;80:199–203.
[10] Khalilzadeh S, Hossein Nezhad A. Utilization of waste heat of a high-capacity wind
turbine in multi effect distillation desalination: energy, exergy and
thermoeconomic analysis. Desalination 2018;439:119–37.
[11] Xydis G, Pechlivanoglou G, Nayeri N. Wind turbine waste heat recovery—A short-
term heat loss forecasting approach. Challenges 2015;6(2):188–201.
[12] Nematollahi O, Hajabdollahi Z, Hoghooghi H, Kim KC. An evaluation of wind
turbine waste heat recovery using organic Rankine cycle. J Cleaner Prod 2019;214:
705–16.
[13] He Q, Liu H, Hao Y, Liu Y, Liu W. Thermodynamic analysis of a novel supercritical
compressed carbon dioxide energy storage system through advanced exergy
analysis. Renew Energ 2018;127:835–49.
[14] Briola S, Di Marco P, Gabbrielli R, Riccardi J. A novel mathematical model for the
performance assessment of diabatic compressed air energy storage systems
including the turbomachinery characteristic curves. Appl Energ 2016;178:758–72.
[15] Zhang L, Liu L, Zhang C, He X, Zhang Y, Yang T. Performance analysis of an
adiabatic compressed air energy storage system with a pressure regulation
inverter-driven compressor. J Energy Storage 2021;43:103197.
[16] Li Y, Miao S, Yin B, Han J, Zhang S, Wang J, et al. Combined Heat and Power
dispatch considering Advanced Adiabatic Compressed Air Energy Storage for wind
power accommodation. Energy Convers Manage 2019;200:112091.
[17] Wang M, Zhao P, Yang Y, Dai Y. Performance analysis of energy storage system
based on liquid carbon dioxide with different configurations. Energy 2015;93:
1931–42.
[18] Liu H, He Q, Borgia A, Pan L, Oldenburg CM. Thermodynamic analysis of a
compressed carbon dioxide energy storage system using two saline aquifers at
different depths as storage reservoirs. Energy Convers Manage 2016;127:149–59.
21
Energy Conversion and Management 260 (2022) 115609
[19] Zhang Y, Yang K, Hong H, Zhong X, Xu J. Thermodynamic analysis of a novel
energy storage system with carbon dioxide as working fluid. Renew Energ 2016;99:
682–97.
[20] Olumayegun O, Wang M. Dynamic modelling and control of supercritical CO2
power cycle using waste heat from industrial processes. Fuel 2019;249:89–102.
[21] Song J, Li X-S, Ren X-D, Gu C-W. Performance improvement of a preheating
supercritical CO2 (S-CO2) cycle based system for engine waste heat recovery.
Energy Convers Manage 2018;161:225–33.
[22] Sun L, Wang D, Xie Y. Energy, exergy and exergoeconomic analysis of two
supercritical CO2 cycles for waste heat recovery of gas turbine. Appl Therm Eng
2021;196:117337.
[23] Liu Z, Yang X, Liu X, Yu Z, Chen Y. Performance assessment of a novel combined
heating and power system based on transcritical CO2 power and heat pump cycles
using geothermal energy. Energy Convers. Manage 2020;224:113355.
[24] Liu Z, Cao F, Guo J, Liu J, Zhai H, Duan Z. Performance analysis of a novel
combined cooling, heating and power system based on carbon dioxide energy
storage. Energy Convers Manage 2019;188:151–61.
[25] Hao Y, He Q, Zhou Q, Du D. Modeling and techno-economic analysis of a novel
trans-critical carbon dioxide energy storage system based on life cycle cost method.
J Energy Storage 2020;28:101273.
[26] Liu Z, Yang X, Jia W, Li H, Yang X. Justification of CO2 as the working fluid for a
compressed gas energy storage system: a thermodynamic and economic study.
J Energy Storage 2020;27:101132.
[27] Li S, Dai Y. Thermo-economic comparison of Kalina and CO2 transcritical power
cycle for low temperature geothermal sources in China. Appl Therm Eng 2014;70:
139–52.
[28] Liu Z, Liu B, Guo J, Xin X, Yang X. Conventional and advanced exergy analysis of a
novel transcritical compressed carbon dioxide energy storage system. Energy
Convers Manage 2019;198:111807.
[29] Khalilzadeh S, Hossein Nezhad A. Using waste heat of high capacity wind turbines
in a novel combined heating, cooling, and power system. J Cleaner Prod 2020;276:
123221.
[30] Yao E, Wang H, Wang L, Xi G, Maréchal F. Multi-objective optimization and
exergoeconomic analysis of a combined cooling, heating and power based
compressed air energy storage system. Energy Convers Manage 2017;138:199–209.
[31] Han Z, Guo S. Investigation of operation strategy of combined cooling, heating and
power(CCHP) system based on advanced adiabatic compressed air energy storage.
Energy 2018;160:290–308.
[32] Liu S, Wu S, Hu Y, Li H. Comparative analysis of air and CO2 as working fluids for
compressed and liquefied gas energy storage technologies. Energy Convers Manage
2019;181:608–20.