Journal Pre-proof

Energy and Environmental Analyses of a

Sustainable Multi-Generation Municipal Solid
Waste-To-Energy Integrated System for Hydrogen
Production

Tao Hai, Farhan A. Alenizi, Abdullah H. Alshahri,

Bhupendra Singh Chauhan, Ahmed Sayed
Mohammed Metwally, Hamad R. Almujibah

PII: S0957-5820(23)00511-6
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2023.06.030
Reference: PSEP4652

To appear in: Process Safety and Environmental Protection

Received date: 2 April 2023
Revised date: 7 June 2023
Accepted date: 9 June 2023
Please cite this article as: Tao Hai, Farhan A. Alenizi, Abdullah H. Alshahri,
Bhupendra Singh Chauhan, Ahmed Sayed Mohammed Metwally and Hamad R.
Almujibah, Energy and Environmental Analyses of a Sustainable Multi-
Generation Municipal Solid Waste-To-Energy Integrated System for Hydrogen
Production, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, (2023)
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2023.06.030
This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance,
such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability,
but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo
additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final
form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article.
Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which
could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
© 2023 Published by Elsevier.
Energy and Environmental Analyses of a Sustainable Multi-Generation

Municipal Solid Waste-To-Energy Integrated System for Hydrogen

Production

Tao Hai

f
oo
School of Computer and Information, Qiannan Normal University for Nationalities, Duyun, Guizhou, 558000, China

Key Laboratory of Complex Systems and Intelligent Optimization of Guizhou, Duyun, Guizhou, 558000, China

Institute for Big Data Analytics and Artificial Intelligence (IBDAAI), Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia.

pr
Farhan A. Alenizi

Electrical Engineering Department, College of engineering, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj 11942, Saudi Arabia
e-
Abdullah H. Alshahri
Pr
Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif City, 21974, Saudi Arabia

Bhupendra Singh Chauhan

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Engineering & Technology, GLA University, Mathura, U.P. 281001, India
al

Ahmed Sayed Mohammed Metwally

n

Department of Mathematics, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia.

Hamad R. Almujibah
ur

Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Taif University, P.O. Box 11099, Taif City, 21974, Saudi Arabia
Jo

Corresponding author: Bhupendra Singh Chauhan

Email address: bhupendrasinghchauhan88@outlook.com

Abstract

Municipal solid waste (MSW) management is a global challenge, and its efficient treatment is

critical to reducing environmental pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. MSW-to-energy

1
systems have emerged as a promising solution for sustainable waste management. Hydrogen

production from MSW offers several benefits, including reducing reliance on fossil fuels,

mitigating climate change, and promoting circular economy principles. The main aim of this

study is to design and model an innovative integrated energy system to convert an MSW stream

to hydrogen in a multi-generation system. In this regard, a gas turbine cycle, a proton exchange

membrane, and a supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycle are integrated and produce

f
hydrogen, power, oxygen, heated air, and heated water. Energy and environmental analyses are

oo
implemented on the system and its performance is multi-objectively optimized using the Taguchi

pr
technique and the signal to noise analysis. The contributions of the input variables on the system

performance are evaluated using the analysis of variance. Municipal solid waste of 1.75 kg/min,
e-
inlet turbine temperature of 850 °C, and pressure ratio of 10 are recognized as the optimum
Pr
conditions. The system produces 472 kW of power, 57.7 g/min of hydrogen, 458 g/min of

oxygen, 480 m3/min of heated air, and 12.2 L/min of heated water in the optimum state. The
al

system presents the efficiency of 79.3% and emits 8.32 g/kW.min of carbon dioxide.
n

Keywords: Environmental sustainability; Waste management; Waste-to-energy; Taguchi;

ur

Hydrogen production
Jo

Nomenclature

𝑚̇s−CO2 Mass flow rate of supercritical CO2 (g/s)

𝑥̇ MSW Molar flow rate of MSW (mol/s)
𝑦̇ steam Molar flow rate of steam agent (mol/s)
ℎ̅ Standard enthalpy (J/mol)
ℎℎ𝑜𝑡 Enthalpy of hot stream (J/mol)
ℎ𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 Enthalpy of cold stream (J/mol)
ℎ𝑠𝑖 ith isentropic enthalpy (J/mol)
𝑃𝑐 Compressor power (W)
𝑃𝑡 Turbine power (W)
𝑄ℎ Heat transfer of heat exchanger (W)

2
 𝜂ℎ Efficiency of heat exchanger (%)
𝜂𝑐 Compressor efficiency (%)
𝜂𝑡 Turbine efficiency (%)
𝜑̇ Exhausted gas molar flow rate (mol/s)
C Carbon
H Hydrogen
N Nitrogen
O Oxygen
𝑥 Molar ratio of component to carbon

f
1. Introduction

oo
Environmental sustainability is the need to maintain the earth's natural resources to meet the

pr
needs of current and especially future generations (Singh et al., 2022). This contains taking

measures to reduce pollution and degradation, while protecting and restoring the natural
e-
environment. There are many ways to achieve environmental sustainability; some key areas to
Pr
focus on include promoting renewable energy sources (Hoang et al., 2021), reducing greenhouse

gas emissions (Alola et al., 2021), improving energy efficiency (Khan et al., 2022a), and
al

conserving water (Shahangian et al., 2022).

n

Waste management has become a major concern in today's world due to the rapidly growing
ur

population and increasing industrialization. The traditional methods of waste disposal, like
Jo

landfilling and incineration, have proved to be harmful to the environment and human health (Le

et al., 2022). Waste-to-energy systems have emerged as a sustainable solution to this problem

(Ghozatfar et al., 2023). These systems convert waste into energy by using various processes like

combustion, gasification and pyrolysis (Hoang et al., 2022a). Waste-to-energy systems not only

help in waste management but also generate renewable energy. The energy generated from these

systems can be used for various purposes like heating, electricity generation and transportation

fuel (Czekała et al., 2023).

3
Municipal solid waste (MSW) is unwanted and discarded materials resulting from daily human

and commercial activities. MSW typically includes a mixture of paper, glass, plastic, metals,

textiles, and food scraps (Khan et al., 2022b). In developed countries such as the United States,

MSW also contains yard waste such as grass clippings and tree leaves. In 2014, the United States

generated about 258 million tons (US short tons) of MSW. Of this amount, 54 percent was

recycled or composted, 35 percent was combusted to generate electricity and heat, and 11

f
percent went to landfills (Scarlat et al., 2019). MSW management is a complex issue, and there is

oo
not any one-size-fits-all solution. The most appropriate technique may be different depending on

pr
the type and quantity of MSW, local conditions, and other factors. However, proper MSW

management is essential to protecting the environment and human health.

e-
MSW-to-energy is the process of converting MSW into usable energy. This can be done through
Pr
a number of different processes, including incineration, gasification, and pyrolysis (Hoang et al.,

2022b). MSW to energy can offer a number of benefits over traditional waste management
al

methods, including reducing greenhouse gas emissions, generating renewable energy, and
n

reducing the amount of solid waste that needs to be landfilled (Varjani et al., 2022). Recent years
ur

have seen a great interest in conducting researches in the field of MSW to energy. For instance,
Jo

Taki and Rohani (2022) conducted a research on application of machine learning algorithms to

estimate the higher heating value of MSW in an MSW to energy system. Khan et al. (2023)

performed an energy and exergy assessment on an MSW to energy power plant. Ravajiri et al.

(2023) optimized a multi-generation system based on MSW to energy technology. Khan et al.

(2022c) integrated an MSW to energy system with a solar thermal system and optimized it.

Hydrogen fuel is an alternative fuel that can be used in place of traditional fossil fuels. Hydrogen

fuel is made by extracting hydrogen from different sources, and then, using it to power vehicles

4
or other machinery (Zhang et al., 2022). Hydrogen production is a promising solution for

reducing carbon emissions and transitioning to clean energy. However, there are several issues

and challenges that need to be addressed (Hoang et al., 2022c). One of the main challenges is the

cost of production, as current methods such as steam methane reforming and electrolysis are still

expensive. Additionally, there is a lack of infrastructure for hydrogen storage and transportation,

which limits its widespread use. Safety concerns also arise due to the high flammability of

f
hydrogen gas. Addressing these issues and challenges will require significant investment in

oo
research and development, as well as collaboration between industries, governments and

pr
academic institutions (Hren et al., 2023).

e-
Hydrogen production from MSW is a promising technology for reducing greenhouse gas

emissions and generating renewable energy. MSW is a significant source of carbon dioxide
Pr
(CO2) which is the main greenhouse gas accountable for climate change. Hydrogen can be

produced from MSW using a variety of technologies, including steam reforming, partial
al

oxidation, combustion, and gasification (Nandhini et al., 2022). These technologies can convert
n

MSW into a variety of useful products, including electricity, heat, and transportation fuels such
ur

as hydrogen. MSW-to-hydrogen systems offer many benefits over traditional fossil fuel-based
Jo

systems (Tak et al., 2022). First, they can significantly reduce CO2 emissions by using MSW as a

feedstock instead of fossil fuels. Second, they can generate renewable energy from MSW, which

would otherwise be sent to landfills. Third, MSW-to-hydrogen systems can be used to create

other valuable products, such as heat and transportation fuels (Ramprakash et al., 2022). Finally,

these systems can help to close the materials loop by recycling MSW into useful products instead

of send it to landfill sites where it emits methane, another potent greenhouse gas (Chen et al.,

2020). There are a number of challenges that must be addressed in order to make MSW-to-

5
hydrogen systems viable on a large scale. First, the process must be made more efficient in order

to reduce costs and increase hydrogen production. Second, the infrastructure for distributing and

using hydrogen must be developed in order to create a market for this new fuel source (Fu et al.,

2021).

Despite all of these challenges, many studies have investigated the MSW-to-hydrogen

technologies in recent years. Wang et al. (2022) developed an innovative system to produce

f
oo
renewable hydrogen from MSW in a carbon-negative procedure. Tunay et al. (2022) studied an

MSW-to-hydrogen system for hydrogen production from MSW and waste sludge. Borgogna et

pr
al. (2022) investigated an MSW-to-hydrogen system for production of low-carbon hydrogen.
e-
Santos and Hanak (2022) developed a gasification process for hydrogen production from MSW

in an MSW-to-hydrogen production.
Pr
Overall, hydrogen production from MSW offers numerous environmental benefits. Hydrogen is
al

a clean-burning fuel that can be produced from a variety of sources, including MSW. Hydrogen

production from MSW offers several environmental benefits. First, hydrogen production can
n
ur

help to reduce the amount of MSW that is sent to landfill. Second, hydrogen production from

MSW can help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Third, hydrogen production from MSW can
Jo

help to provide a source of renewable energy. Fourth, hydrogen production from MSW can help

to create jobs in the green economy. These benefits make it an attractive option for managing

MSW, and therefore, it is worth further investigation and development. In this regard, a novel

multi-generation energy system is developed in this study as an innovative MSW-to-power-to-

hydrogen technology. This novel multi-generation system produces hydrogen and power,

storages the oxygen, and has capacities to generate hot water and hot air. Although various

MSW-to-energy systems have been developed in recent years, the application of Taguchi

6
analysis on MSW-to-multi-generation energy systems are still growing. As another novelty, the

application of the Taguchi technique is explored on this novel multi-generation system for a

statistical analysis and an optimization procedure.

2. Design of experiments and optimization procedure

Process optimization is the study of techniques to improve the efficiency of a process. This can

be done by reducing the amount of time needed to complete a process, or by reducing the

f
oo
resources used. Process optimization is a key aspect of industrial engineering, and can be applied

to energy, manufacturing, logistics, service industries, and more (Chen et al., 2018). There are

pr
many different approaches that can be taken to process optimization. One common approach is
e-
to use mathematical modeling to identify inefficiencies and potential improvements. Another
Pr
approach is to analyze data from past processes to identify areas where improvements can be

made (Weichert et al., 2019). Process optimization can have a significant impact on the
al

efficiency of a process.
n

Design of experiments (DOE) is a powerful tool that can be used to systematically investigate
ur

the factors that affect a process or product. By designing and conducting carefully planned

experiments, it is possible to identify the key factors that impact the quality of the product or
Jo

process under study. Additionally, DOE can be used to optimize processes by finding the

combination of input variables that produces the desired output (Wang et al., 2023). There are

many different DOE techniques that can be employed, depending on the specific goals of the

experiment. Some common DOE techniques include factorial designs (Ajmal et al., 2020),

response surface methodology (Weremfo et al., 2023), and Taguchi methods (Shokoohi et al.,

2023). Factorial designs are used to investigate the main effects and interactions between

independent variables. Response surface methodology is used to model the relationship between

7
several dependent variables and one or more independent variables. Finally, Taguchi methods

are used to optimize processes by finding the combination of input variables that produces the

best output. When designing an experiment, it is important to consider both the practical

limitations of the study as well as the statistical analysis that will be used to interpret the results.

Careful planning at the design stage will help ensure that data collected during the experiment

can be accurately analyzed and interpreted.

f
oo
The Taguchi technique is a quality improvement method that was developed by Dr. Genichi

Taguchi in the 1950s (Shilpa and Yendapalli, 2022). It is based on the idea that quality can be

pr
improved by minimizing variation in a process. The technique involves designing experiments to
e-
identify the factors that affect quality and then optimizing those factors to produce the best

possible results. The Taguchi technique has been used extensively in manufacturing,
Pr
engineering, and other industries to improve quality and reduce costs (Chen et al., 2022). It is a

powerful tool for optimizing complex processes and has been shown to be particularly effective
al

in reducing defects. The technique is also relatively simple to understand and implement, which
n

makes it accessible to organizations of all sizes. There are four steps in the Taguchi method,
ur

which is a statistical approach to quality engineering. The first step is to identify the key
Jo

characteristics of the product or process that are important to quality. The second step is to

design an experimental setup to test how these key characteristics affect the quality of the

product or process. The third step is to conduct the experiments and analyze the results. The

fourth and final step is to use the results of the experiments to improve the quality of the product

or process (Hasanzadeh et al., 2022).

In signal to noise ratio analysis, Taguchi attempts to minimize the noise-to-signal ratio so as to

obtain a higher signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio. This is important because the higher the S/N ratio, the

8
easier it is to detect the signal (Siddeshware et al., 2022). In other words, Taguchi's goal is to

make the signal more distinct so that it can be more easily detected and analyzed. There are two

types of noise that can affect the S/N ratio: internal noise and external noise (Saidi and

Kadkhodayan, 2021). Internal noise is due to factors within the system being studied, while

external noise is due to factors outside of the system. Many times, external noise is out of the

control of those conducting the analysis, which makes internal noise reduction all the more

f
important. There are several ways to reduce internal noise levels. One way is to increase the size

oo
of the sample or population being studied. This approach works because, with a larger number of

pr
data points, random variation will have less of an impact on overall results. Another way to

reduce internal noise levels is through data pre-processing techniques such as filtering or
e-
smoothing. These methods can help remove outliers and other non-normal data points that could
Pr
skew results. Once internal noise levels have been minimized, Taguchi applies his S/N ratio

analysis in order to maximize the chance of detecting a signal amidst all of the remaining Noise
al

(Gomaa et al., 2021; Nawaz et al., 2020).

n

Generally, there are two types of S/N formulation, the large is better and the smaller is better
ur

types as follows, respectively (Saleem et al., 2022):

Jo

1
∑
2
𝑆⁄ = −10 log 𝑌 (1)
𝑁 𝑛
2
𝑆⁄ = −10 log ∑ 𝑌 (2)
𝑁 𝑛

where Y is the response value and n is the number of observations.

The analysis of variance (ANOVA) in Taguchi is a statistical tool used to assess the impact of

different factors on the performance of a process or system (Yuce et al., 2022). It is based on the

9
comparison of the variability of the results obtained from different treatments. Taguchi's

ANOVA can be used to identify which factors have the biggest impact on the performance of a

system and to optimize the process by minimizing the variability (Dhemla et al., 2022). It is a

powerful tool that can help improve quality and reduce costs.

All of analysis of Taguchi technique is implemented in Minitab software.

3. System portrayal and modeling

f
oo
The combined system proposed in this study is shown in Figure 1.

pr

Cooling water
Water Condenser
Feeding tank e-
PEM electrolyzer
water

Municipal solid waste

Pr
Combustion
chamber Oxygen
Water pump storage
al

Hydrogen storage
Gas turbine
Water heat exchanger & Generator
Seperator
n

Heating air unit

Exhaust gas

ur

PEM heat CO2 turbine

exchanger External heat
exchanger
Jo

Generator
Feeding air

Compressor
Heated air
Internal heat exchanger Feeding water

Heated water
Heating water unit
Figure 1: A schematic representing the system portrayal

The main assumptions considered for system formulation and modeling are (Ajorloo et al., 2022;

Tiktas et al., 2022): i) neglecting the radiation heat transfer through the components, ii) assuming

the gases to be ideal, iii) assuming steady state and thermodynamic equilibrium conditions for all

10
components, iv) neglecting the variations in kinetic and potential energies, and v) considering

pressure of 1 bar and temperature of 25 °C, at ambient conditions.

A municipal solid waste is considered as the feeding stream to the combustion chamber with

specifications provided in Figure 2. This MSW stream includes volatile matter of 53.61 wt%,

fixed carbon of 22.38 wt%, ash content of 16.45 wt%, and moisture of 7.56 wt%. It has also

59.64 wt% of carbon, 32.12 wt% of oxygen, 6.37 wt% of hydrogen, 1.5 wt% of nitrogen, and

f
oo
only 0.37 wt% of sulfur. Its higher heating value and lower heating value are 16.42 MJ/kg and

14.83 MJ/kg, respectively (Mazzoni et al., 2020).

pr
(a)
e-
Pr
n al
ur

(b)
Jo

Figure 2: Specifications of MSW fueled to the system

Since the sulfur content is negligible, the chemical composition of the MSW is considered as

CO𝑥1 H𝑥2 N𝑥3 , where 𝑥𝑖 is the molar ratio of ith component to the carbon. Therefore, the

11
combustion process of the MSW with the steam agent is as follows by considering the exhausted

gas to be included oxygen, nitrogen, steam, and carbon dioxide:

𝑥̇ MSW CO𝑥1 H𝑥2 N𝑥3 + 𝑦̇ steam H2 O → 𝜑̇ 1 O2 + 𝜑̇ 2 N2 + 𝜑̇ 3 H2 O + 𝜑̇ 4 CO2 (3)

where 𝑥̇ MSW and 𝑦̇ steam indicate the molar flow rate of MSW and steam agent, respectively. 𝜑̇

shows the exhausted gas molar flow rate.

An elemental analysis is applied for the reaction balance for carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and

f
oo
nitrogen as follows:

pr
𝑥̇ MSW × 1 = 𝜑̇ 4 (4)

𝑥̇ MSW × 𝑥2 + 2 × 𝑦̇ steam = 2 × 𝜑̇ 3 (5)

𝑥̇ MSW × 𝑥1 + 𝑦̇ steam = 2 × 𝜑̇ 1 + 𝜑̇ 3
e- (6)
Pr
𝑥̇ MSW × 𝑥3 = 2 × 𝜑̇ 2 (7)

The energy balance for the combustion process of the MSW is considered as follows:
al

𝑥̇ MSW ℎ̅MSW + 𝑦̇ steam ℎ̅steam → 𝜑̇ 1 ℎ̅𝑂2 + 𝜑̇ 2 ℎ̅𝑁2 + 𝜑̇ 3 ℎ̅𝐻2 𝑂 + 𝜑̇ 4 ℎ̅𝐶𝑂2 (8)

n

where ℎ̅i indicates the ith standard enthalpy.

ur

Supercritical carbon dioxide (s-CO2) is a fluid state of carbon dioxide where it is held at or above
Jo

its critical temperature and pressure. In this state, CO2 behaves as both a gas and a liquid,

allowing it to be used as a working fluid in power cycles (Guo et al., 2022). The s-CO2 Brayton

cycle is one such power cycle that has been proposed for use in future power plants. The s-CO2

Brayton cycle uses CO2 as the working fluid in a closed loop system (Li et al., 2022). The CO2 is

compressed to supercritical conditions and then expanded through a turbine to drive a generator.

The exhaust from the turbine is then cooled and condensed back into a liquid before being

recirculated through the system. One advantage of using s-CO2 in the Brayton cycle is that it can

12
operate at higher temperatures than water, meaning that more efficient turbines can be used

(Maher et al., 2022). In addition, s-CO2 has a very low global warming potential, making it a

cleaner option than fossil fuels for power generation (Yang et al., 2022). While there are many

potential advantages to using s-CO2 in the Brayton cycle, there are also some challenges that

need to be overcome (White et al., 2021).

Powers of turbine (𝑃𝑡 ) and compressor (𝑃𝑐 ) are obtained respectively as follows (Hadelu et al.,

f
oo
2022):

𝑃𝑡 = 𝑚̇s−CO2 (ℎ𝑜𝑡 − ℎ𝑖𝑡 ) (9)

pr
𝑃𝑐 = 𝑚̇s−CO2 (ℎ𝑜𝑐 − ℎ𝑖𝑐 ) (10)
e-
where c and t superscripts indicate compressor and turbine and o and i subscripts denote the

outlet and inlet streams. 𝑚̇s−CO2 indicate the mass flow rate of s-CO2 working fluid and h is the
Pr
enthalpy.
al

Isentropic efficiency of turbine (𝜂𝑡 ) and compressor (𝜂𝑐 ) as obtained respectively as follows
n

(Hadelu et al., 2022; Guo et al., 2023):

ur

ℎ𝑖𝑡 − ℎ𝑜𝑡
𝜂𝑡 = 𝑡 𝑡 (11)
ℎ𝑖 − ℎ𝑜,𝑠
Jo

𝑐
ℎ𝑜,𝑠 − ℎ𝑖𝑐
𝜂𝑐 = (12)
ℎ𝑜𝑐 − ℎ𝑖𝑐

𝑖
where ℎ𝑜,𝑠 shows the ith isentropic enthalpy at outlet.

In the heat exchanger, the heat transfer (𝑄ℎ ) and efficiency (𝜂ℎ ) are obtained as follows (Jin et

al., 2023):

𝑄ℎ = 𝑚̇s−CO2 (ℎ𝑖ℎ𝑜𝑡 − ℎ𝑜ℎ𝑜𝑡 ) (13)

13
 ℎ𝑖ℎ𝑜𝑡 − ℎ𝑜ℎ𝑜𝑡
𝜂ℎ = (14)
ℎ𝑜𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 − ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑

where ℎℎ𝑜𝑡 and ℎ𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 show the enthalpy of hot and cold streams, respectively.

A proton exchange membrane (PEM) is a type of polymeric ion-exchange membrane that is used

as an electrolyte in fuel cells. It is also used for electrolysis and other electrochemical processes

(Li et al., 2023). PEMs are made from materials such as porous tantalum, polycarbonate,

f
fluoropolymers, and composite membranes (Tomić et al., 2023). PEMs have a high selectivity

oo
for protons over other ions, which makes them ideal for use in fuel cells. In addition, they are

pr
resistant to poisoning by carbon monoxide, which is a common problem with other types of

electrolytes. PEMs are also capable of operating at very high temperatures, making them suitable
e-
for use in many industrial applications. Hydrogen production is one of the most important uses of
Pr
PEMs (Zhou et al., 2023). Hydrogen can be produced using either electrolysis or steam

reforming. In electrolysis, water is split into hydrogen and oxygen by an electric current. Steam
al

reforming is a process to convert methane into hydrogen and carbon dioxide. PEMs are essential
n

for these processes because they provide an ion-exchange membrane that prevents reactions
ur

between the hydrogen and oxygen gas produced during electrolysis (Prestat 2023).
Jo

PEM electrolysis is a promising technology for the production of hydrogen from water

(Veeramani et al., 2023). Its main advantages over other electrolysis technologies are its high

efficiency, low operating costs, and modular design (Bensmann et al., 2022). PEM electrolysis

operates at much higher efficiencies than other electrolytic processes, making it more cost-

effective. Its modular design also allows for easy scaling and expansion. PEM electrolysis has

been shown to be scalable from small to very large systems. PEM electrolysis is also less

sensitive to impurities in the feed water than other technologies. This makes it an attractive

14
option for areas with less pure water sources. Overall, PEM electrolysis is a very promising

technology for the production of hydrogen from water.

In PEM, water (H2 O(l) ) is decomposed to hydrogen (H2 (g) ) and oxygen (O2 (g) ) using a power

source according to the following general reaction (Pourrahmani et al., 2022):

1
H2 O(l) → H2 (g) + O2 (g) (15)
2

f
Oxidation in the anode and reduction in the cathode occur as the following reactions,

oo
respectively (Pourrahmani et al., 2022):

pr
1
H2 O(l) → O2 (g) + 2H + (aq) + 2e− (16)
2

2H2 O(l) + 2e− → H2 (g) + 2OH − (aq)

e- (17)
Pr
In the mixing chamber, the following reaction occurs (Gong et al., 2022):

2H + (aq) + 2OH − (aq) → 2H2 O(l) (18)

al

To optimize the efficiency of the catalyst, the anion exchange membrane is used for allowing the
n

OH− ions for leaving the electrolyte and remaining neutral. The literature has addressed the
ur

energy analysis of the PEM (Cengel et al., 2011; Esmaili et al., 2012).
Jo

4. Results and discussion

The purpose of a thermodynamic model is to predict the behavior of the system, usually under

specific conditions and assumptions. A model is only as accurate as the assumptions that were

made in its creation. The process of validation is used to verify the accuracy of a model. This

involves comparing the output of the model to experimental data or other accepted values. If

there are discrepancies, the model needs to be adjusted. Validation is essential for any

thermodynamic modeling because it ensures that the results produced by the model are realistic.

15
Without validation, there is no way to know if the predictions made by the model are actually

accurate (Caliste et al., 2012).

For validation of the PEM performance predicted by the model presented in this study, the

results of the cell potential of this study is compared with those reported by Ahmadi et al. (2013)

as presented in Figure 3. The results show that the PEM model of this study can accurately

predict the cell potential in different current density, and therefore, the modeling of this study is

f
oo
validated.

2.2 2.2

pr
2.0 2.0
Cell potential (V)-Ahmadi et al.

Cell potential (V)-This study

1.8
e- 1.8
Pr
1.6 1.6

1.4 1.4
al

1.2 1.2
n

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

ur

Current density (A/m2)

Figure 3: Validating the PEM performance
Jo

For validation of the performance of the s-CO2 Brayton cycle predicted by the model presented

in this study, the pressure ratio obtained by modeling of this study is compared with those

reported by Sarkar and Bhattacharyya (2009) in different processing conditions as presented in

Figure 4. Figure 4-a shows that the results of this modeling are close to the corresponding results

of Sarkar and Bhattacharyya (2009), indicating the accuracy of the model. For a quantitative

comparison, the errors between the results of the modeling the corresponding values are

16
calculated and presented in Figure 4-b. The results reveal that the errors of the modeling are

smaller than 3% and these tiny errors confirm the validation of the model.
(°C) 550 550 750 750 550 550 750

(a)
50

200
50

300

This study
50

200
Sarkar et al.
32

300
32

200

f
oo
32

300
32

200
Tmax
(°C)
T1

Pmax (bar)

pr
0 1 2 3 4 5
Pressure ratio
e-
(°C) 550 550 750 750 550 550 750

(b)
50

200
50

300
Pr
50

200
32

300
al
32

200
32

300
n
32

200
Tmax
(°C)

ur
T1

Pmax (bar)

0 1 2 3 4
Error (%)
Jo

Figure 4: Validation the s-CO2 Brayton cycle performance (a) and the errors (b)

In this section, MSW feeding rate (named MSW), inlet temperature of gas turbine (summarized

as temperature), and pressure ratio are considered as system input variables and their influences

on the system performance are explored.

Figure 5 shows the variations of power influenced by the interactions of MSW, temperature, and

pressure ratio. The results reveal that there are significant interactions between the input

variables on the power production especially between MSW and pressure ratio. Figure 5-a shows

17
that the simultaneous increase of MSW and decrease of temperature results in improving the

power production. The maximum power in this condition is almost 502 kW. Decreasing MSW

and increasing temperature result in declining the power where the minimum power of 306 kW

is achieved at the high levels of temperature and low values of MSW parameter. The influence of

MSW on power variations is more remarkable at lower temperatures and a more remarkable

influence is detected for temperature on power variations at higher MSW. According to the

f
results, the power is improved with higher values of MSW and Kalilarya et al. (2021) have

oo
recorded a similar result in their study. They have coupled an MSW gasifier system with gas

pr
turbine and organic Rankine cycle to produce power and heat. They have revealed that the power

generation of the combined system was enhanced by increasing MSW. Figure 5-b indicates that
e-
the simultaneous increase of MSW and pressure ratio leads to enhancing the power production.
Pr
The maximum power is attained when both MSW and pressure ratio are at their highest levels. In

this situation, power is 509 kW. The minimum power in the case of interaction of MSW and
al

pressure ratio is almost 258 kW and achieved at the lowest values of these factors. The influence
n

of MSW on the power production is more considerable at higher pressure ratios while a more
ur

notable influence is observed for pressure ratio on the power production at higher MSW. As
Jo

results shows, the pressure ratio increment enhances the power generation in this system where a

same observation is verified by Tozlu et al. (2016). They investigated the effect of compression

ratio on the net power of a re-compression supercritical carbon dioxide cycle. Their findings

indicated that the net power of their system is improved when the system acts at higher

compression ratio. According to the results of Figure 5-c, the power production is improved by

simultaneous decrease of temperature and increase of pressure ratio. When temperature is set at

low levels and pressure ratio is set at high values, the maximum power of 475.5 kW is reached.

18
The minimum power of 289.5 kW is achieved when the temperature is at high values and

pressure ratio is at low levels. Temperature has a more remarkable influence on the power

production at higher pressure ratio and the influence of pressure ratio on the power production is

more significant at lower temperatures.

(a) Power (kW) (b) Power (kW)

1000 502.0 509.0
980 14
477.5 477.6
960

f
453.0 446.3
940 12

oo
920 428.5 414.9
T (°C)

PR
900 404.0 10 383.5

880 379.5 352.1

pr
860 8
355.0 320.8
840
330.5 289.4
820 6

800
1.3 1.4 1.5
MSW (kg/min)
1.6 1.7
306.0
e- 1.3 1.4 1.5
MSW (kg/min)
1.6 1.7
258.0
Pr
(c) Power (kW)
475.5
14
452.3

429.0
12
al

405.8
PR

10 382.5
n

359.3
8
336.0
ur

312.8
6
289.5
Jo

800 820 840 860 880 900 920 940 960 980 1000
T (°C)

Figure 5: Variations of power versus a) MSW and T, b) MSW and PR, and c) T and PR

The variations of hydrogen production influenced by the interactions of MSW, temperature, and

pressure ratio are depicted in Figure 6. The results show that all interactions significantly affect

the hydrogen production especially the interaction of MSW and pressure ratio. Figure 6-a shows

that the simultaneous increase of MSW and decrease of temperature results in improving the

hydrogen production. The optimum hydrogen production of 61.30 g/min is achieved when MSW

is increased and the temperature is reduced. The minimum hydrogen production of 37.40 g/min

19
is achieved when MSW is at low levels and temperature is at high values. The results of Figure

6-b indicate that the simultaneous increase of MSW and pressure ratio leads to improved

hydrogen production and the maximum hydrogen production is at the maximum levels of MSW

and pressure ratio. Hosseini (2020) have applied a gas turbine system as a prime mover of the

combine system to produce power and supply the required power to the electrolyzer. They used a

solid oxide steam electrolyzer to generate hydrogen and oxygen. Their results revealed that the

f
hydrogen flow rate production is improved when the higher mass flow rate of fuel is fed to the

oo
system. Therefore, this finding is in line with the result of present study. When both MSW and

pr
pressure ratio are set at high levels, the optimum hydrogen production of 62.30 g/min is

achieved. Figure 6-c indicates that the simultaneous decrease of temperature and increase of
e-
pressure ratio leads to enhancing the hydrogen production. The influence of pressure ratio at
Pr
different temperatures are the same; however, the influence of MSW on the power production is

more remarkable at higher pressure ratios. When temperature is set at low values and pressure
al

ratio is set at high levels, the maximum hydrogen production of 58.10 g/min is achieved.
n
ur
Jo

20
 (a) Hydrogen (g/min) (b) Hydrogen (g/min)
1000 61.30 62.30
980 14
58.31 58.46
960
55.33 54.63
940 12

920 52.34 50.79

T (°C)

PR
900 49.35 10 46.95

880 46.36 43.11

860 8
43.38 39.28
840
40.39 35.44
820 6
37.40 31.60
800
1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7

f
MSW (kg/min) MSW (kg/min)

oo
(c) Hydrogen (g/min)
58.10
14
55.26

pr
52.43
12
49.59
PR

10 46.75

8
e- 43.91

41.08
Pr
38.24
6
35.40
800 820 840 860 880 900 920 940 960 980 1000
MSWT(kg/min)
(°C)
al

Figure 6: Variations of hydrogen production versus a) MSW and T, b) MSW and PR, and c) T and PR

Figure 7 shows the variations of oxygen production influenced by the interactions of MSW,
n
ur

temperature, and pressure ratio. According to the results, the interactions of all input variables

are significant on the oxygen production especially the interaction of MSW and temperature and
Jo

the interaction of MSW and pressure ratio. Figure 7-a indicates that the simultaneous increase of

MSW and decrease of temperature result in boosting the oxygen production. The influence of

MSW on the oxygen production at different temperatures is the same; however, the influence of

temperature on the oxygen production is more significant at higher MSW. Hosseini (2020) have

illustrated the oxygen flow rate production is diminished when the system works at higher

maximum temperature in their study, although they applied a solid oxide steam electrolyzer

instead of the proton exchange membrane electrolyzer. The maximum oxygen production of

21
486.5 g/min is achieved when MSW is at high levels and temperature is at low values. According

to the results of Figure 7-b, the simultaneous increase of MSW and pressure ratio improves the

oxygen production. When both MSW and pressure ratio are set at high levels, the optimum

oxygen production of 494 g/min is attained. The minimum oxygen production of 251 g/min

occurs by setting both MSW and pressure ratio at their low values. Figure 7-c depicts that the

simultaneous decrease of temperature and increase of pressure ratio lead to enhancing the

f
oxygen production. The influence of temperature on the power production is more considerable

oo
at higher pressure ratios while the influence of pressure ratio on the power production is the same

pr
at different temperatures. When temperature is set at low levels and pressure ratio is set at high

values, the optimum oxygen production of 461 g/min is obtained while the minimum value of
e-
281 g/min is achieved when the conditions are opposite, i.e. the low values of pressure ratio and
Pr
high levels of temperature.
n al
ur
Jo

22
 (a) Oxygen (g/min) (b) Oxygen (g/min)
1000 486.5 494.0
980 14
462.8 463.6
960
439.1 433.3
940 12
920 415.4 402.9
T (°C)

PR
900 391.8 10 372.5
880 368.1 342.1
860 8
344.4 311.8
840
320.7 281.4
820 6
800 297.0 251.0
1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7

f
MSW (kg/min) MSW (kg/min)

oo
(c) Oxygen (g/min)
461.0
14
438.5

pr
416.0
12
393.5
PR

10 371.0

8
e- 348.5

326.0
Pr
303.5
6
281.0
800 820 840 860 880 900 920 940 960 980 1000
MSWT (kg/min)
(°C)
al

Figure 7: Variations of oxygen production versus a) MSW and T, b) MSW and PR, and c) T and PR

The variations of heated air influenced by the interactions of MSW, temperature, and pressure
n
ur

ratio are depicted in Figure 8. According to the results, all interactions have a significant

influence on the heated air. Figure 8-a shows that the simultaneous increase of MSW and
Jo

temperature result in improving the heated air. The influence of MSW on the heated air is more

remarkable at higher temperatures and vice versa. The maximum heated air of 587 m3/min

occurs when both MSW and temperature are set at high levels. When they are set at low levels,

the minimum heated air of 289 m3/min is attained. According to the results of Figure 8-b, the

simultaneous increase of MSW and decrease of pressure ratio lead to enhancing the heated air.

The influence of MSW on the heated air is more significant at lower pressure ratios and a more

considerable influence for pressure ratio on the heated air is observed at higher MSW. Tse et al.

23
(2007) have observed that when the system works at higher compression ratio values, the

thermal capacity of the system is diminished. When MSW is set at high levels and pressure ratio

is set at low values, the maximum heated air of 758 m3/min is achieved. The minimum heated air

of 274 m3/min occurs when MSW is decreased and pressure ratio is increased. Figure 8-c shows

that the simultaneous increase of temperature and decrease of pressure ratio improves the heated

air. According to the results, the influence of temperature on the heated air is more remarkable at

f
higher pressure ratios while the influence of pressure ratio on the heated air is the same for

oo
different temperatures. The maximum heated air of 702 m3/min is obtained when temperature is

pr
increased and pressure ratio is declined. When temperature is set at low levels and pressure ratio

is set at high levels, the minimum heated air of 232 m3/min occurs. e-
(a) Heated air (m3/min) (b) Heated air (m3/min)
1000
Pr
587.0 758.0
980 14
549.8 697.5
960
512.5 637.0
940 12
920 475.3 576.5
al
T (°C)

PR

900 438.0 10 516.0

880 400.8 455.5
n

860 8
363.5 395.0
840
ur

326.3 334.5
820 6
800 289.0 274.0
1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7
Jo

MSW (kg/min) MSW (kg/min)

(c) Heated air (m3/min)
702.0
14
643.2

584.5
12
525.8
PR

10 467.0

408.3
8
349.5

290.7
6
232.0
800 820 840 860 880 900 920 940 960 980 1000
MSW
T ((kg/min)
°C)

Figure 8: Variations of heated air versus a) MSW and T, b) MSW and PR, and c) T and PR

24
The influences of interactions of MSW, temperature, and pressure ratio on the variations of

heated water are depicted in Figure 9. The results confirm that all interactions are significant on

the heated water. Figure 9-a shows that the simultaneous increase of MSW and temperature

boost the heated water. The influence of MSW at all temperatures is the same while the influence

of temperature is more considerable at higher MSW. The heated water is maximized when MSW

and temperature are set at high levels. The maximum heated water is 13.5 L/min in this

f
condition. Figure 9-b indicates that the simultaneous increase of MSW and decrease of pressure

oo
ratio result in improving the heated water. A more remarkable influence of MSW on the heated

pr
water is detected at higher pressure ratios; however, the influence of pressure ratio is the same on

the heated water versus different MSW. The heated water is maximized when MSW is increased
e-
and pressure ratio is decreased. At high levels of MSW and low levels of pressure ratio, the
Pr
maximum heated water of 17.5 L/min is obtained. Similar findings have been achieved in the

results of Haseli et al. (2008). They have investigated a gas turbine unit coupled with a solid
al

oxide fuel cell. Their findings showed that the thermal capacity of their system is reduced by
n

increasing compression ratio. According to the results of Figure 9-c, the simultaneous increase of
ur

temperature and decrease of pressure ratio lead to advancing the heated water. The heated water
Jo

is optimized when temperature is increased and pressure ratio is decreased. At high levels of

temperature and low levels of pressure ratio, the optimized heated water of 15.70 L/min is

attained.

25
 (a) Heated water (L/min) (b) Heated water (L/min)
1000 13.50 17.50
980 14
12.75 16.22
960
12.00 14.94
940 12
920 11.25 13.66
T (°C)

PR
900 10.50 10 12.38
880 9.750 11.09
860 8
9.000 9.813
840
8.250 8.531
820 6
800 7.500 7.250

f
1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7

oo
MSW (kg/min) MSW (kg/min)
(c) Heated water (L/min)
15.70
14
14.64

pr
13.58
12
12.51
e-
PR

10 11.45

10.39
8
Pr
9.325

8.262
6
7.200
800 820 840 860 880 900 920 940 960 980 1000
al

T ((kg/min)
MSW °C)

Figure 9: Variations of heated water versus a) MSW and T, b) MSW and PR, and c) T and PR
n

The variations of efficiency influenced by the interactions of MSW, temperature, and pressure
ur

ratio are represented in Figure 10. The results reveal that the interaction of MSW and
Jo

temperature and the interaction of MSW and pressure ratio are not significant on the efficiency

while temperature and pressure ratio have a significant interaction on the efficiency. Figure 10-a

shows that decreasing temperature improves the efficiency and changing MSW does not affect

the efficiency. A similar observation has been presented in the study of Palsson et al. (2000).

Palsson et al. (2000) have integrated a solid oxide fuel cell with a gas turbine unit to generate

power. They have indicated that when the inlet turbine temperature increased, the efficiency of

the integrated system was dropped. Regardless of MSW value, the optimum efficiency of

26
83.55% is achieved at low levels of temperature. Also, the efficiency is enhanced by increasing

pressure ratio while it does not change with the MSW, according to the results of Figure 10-b.

The optimum efficiency of 85.10% is obtained when the pressure ratio is set at high levels for all

MSW values. The interaction of temperature and pressure ratio is the only significant interaction

on the efficiency, as depicted in Figure 10-c. According to the results, the simultaneous decrease

of temperature and increase of pressure ratio result in advancing the efficiency. The influence of

f
temperature on the efficiency is more notable at higher pressure ratios while pressure ratio has

oo
the same influence at different temperatures. When temperature is decreased and pressure ratio is

pr
increased, the efficiency is maximized and reaches 93.60%.

1000
980
(a) e-
Efficiency (%)
83.55

81.89
14
(b) Efficiency (%)
85.10

81.66
Pr
960
80.24 78.23
940 12
920 78.58 74.79
T (°C)

900 76.93
PR

10 71.35
al

880 75.27 67.91

860 8
73.61 64.48
n

840
71.96 61.04
820 6
ur

800 70.30 57.60

1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7
MSW (kg/min) MSW (kg/min)
(c)
Jo

Efficiency (%)
93.60
14
88.55

83.50
12
78.45
PR

10 73.40

68.35
8
63.30

58.25
6
53.20
800 820 840 860 880 900 920 940 960 980 1000
T (kg/min)
MSW (°C)

Figure 10: Variations of efficiency versus a) MSW and T, b) MSW and PR, and c) T and PR

27
Figure 11 shows the variations of emission influenced by the interactions of MSW, temperature,

and pressure ratio. According to the results, there is only a significant interaction on the emission

which is the interaction of temperature and pressure ratio and the interaction of MSW and

temperature and the interaction of MSW and pressure ratio are not significant on the emission.

Figure 11-a shows that the emission is declined by decreasing the temperature and changing the

MSW does not affect the emission. According to the results of Figure 11-b, the increase of

f
pressure ratio reduces the emission and the emission does not change with the MSW. The reason

oo
of this phenomenon is that when more MSW is fed to the system, the higher power is produced

pr
and also more carbon dioxide is released to the environment. As a consequence, the emission

value variation is reduced because of the carbon dioxide mass flow rate to power generation ratio
e-
is diminished. This result was also observed in the publication of Haseli et al. (2008). They also
Pr
showed when the pressure ratio is raised, the emission is reduced in the system contain gas

turbine. Figure 11-c shows that the simultaneous decrease of temperature and increase of
al

pressure ratio decreases the emission. The results confirm that the influence of pressure ratio on
n

the emission is slightly more remarkable at higher temperatures while the influence of
ur

temperature is the same at different pressure ratios.

Jo

28
 Emission (g/kW.min) (b) Emission (g/kW.min)
(a)
1000 9.445 11.51
980 14
9.258 11.05
960
9.071 10.58
940 12
8.884 10.12
920
T (°C)

PR
900 8.698 10 9.655

880 8.511 9.191

860 8
8.324 8.728
840
8.137 8.264
820 6
7.950 7.800
800

f
1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7

oo
MSW (kg/min) MSW (kg/min)
(c) Emission (g/kW.min)
12.46
14
11.79

pr
11.12
12
10.45
e-
PR

10 9.780

9.110
Pr
8
8.440

7.770
6
7.100
800 820 840 860 880 900 920 940 960 980 1000
al

T (kg/min)
MSW (°C)

Figure 11: Variations of emission versus a) MSW and T, b) MSW and PR, and c) T and PR
n

MSW, temperature, and pressure ratio are selected as the input variables and the orthogonal array
ur

of the Taguchi technique is utilized for designing the trials for analysis and optimization of the
Jo

process. Table 1 shows the conditions of different trials based on L25 orthogonal array. These

trials are implemented and the results are extracted.

S/N values are obtained through the signal to noise ratio analysis for each response and presented

in Table 2. It should be noted that the larger is better type of analysis is implemented for power,

hydrogen, oxygen, heated air, heated water, and efficiency because their higher values are

preferable while the smaller is better type of analysis is implemented for emission because its

lower values are desirable.

29
Table 1: Input variable conditions for L25 orthogonal array of Taguchi technique

Trial MSW (kg/min) T (°C) PR

1 1.250 800 5.0
2 1.250 850 7.5
3 1.250 900 10.0
4 1.250 950 12.5
5 1.250 1000 15.0
6 1.375 800 7.5

f
7 1.375 850 10.0

oo
8 1.375 900 12.5
9 1.375 950 15.0

pr
10 1.375 1000 5.0
11 1.500 800 10.0
12
13
1.500
1.500
e- 850
900
12.5
15.0
Pr
14 1.500 950 5.0
15 1.500 1000 7.5
16 1.625 800 12.5
al

17 1.625 850 15.0

18 1.625 900 5.0
n

19 1.625 950 7.5

ur

20 1.625 1000 10.0

21 1.750 800 15.0
Jo

22 1.750 850 5.0

23 1.750 900 7.5
24 1.750 950 10.0
25 1.750 1000 12.5

30
Table 2: S/N values for responses

S/N
Trial Power Hydrogen Oxygen Heated air Heated water Efficiency Emission
1 49.0050 30.7513 48.7423 26.0024 21.3786 36.0732 -20.3740
2 49.9248 31.6708 49.6632 24.6274 19.9407 37.1406 -19.3022
3 50.3281 32.0737 50.0649 23.8023 19.0945 37.6071 -18.8362
4 50.5242 32.2684 50.2590 23.2935 18.5761 37.8341 -18.6088
5 50.6168 32.3610 50.3545 22.9763 18.2540 37.9437 -18.4990

f
6 51.1525 32.8966 50.8888 24.9868 20.2988 37.5842 -18.8580

oo
7 51.5084 33.2533 51.2459 24.1303 19.4218 37.9964 -18.4462
8 51.6640 33.4086 51.4015 23.6267 18.9094 38.1793 -18.2636

pr
9 51.7250 33.4696 51.4621 23.3324 18.6108 38.2540 -18.1890
10 48.4878 30.2323 48.2223 27.6247 23.1612 34.5329 -21.9104
11
12
52.6613
52.7718
34.4048
34.5150
52.3986
52.5083
e-
24.2630
23.7756
19.5508
19.0558
38.4348
38.5659
-18.0084
-17.8775
Pr
13 52.7937 34.5378 52.5309 23.5164 18.7934 38.5976 -17.8452
14 49.5250 31.2696 49.2629 28.1850 23.7391 34.8592 -21.5836
15 50.5578 32.3022 50.2936 27.0790 22.4966 36.0719 -20.3740
al

16 53.8622 35.6063 53.5995 23.7007 18.9761 38.9995 -17.4431

17 53.8375 35.5818 53.5740 23.5010 18.7744 38.9810 -17.4629
n

18 50.5345 32.2789 50.2723 28.6543 24.2171 35.2190 -21.2215

ur

19 51.5383 33.2816 51.2744 27.5004 22.9226 36.3922 -20.0520

20 52.0107 33.7541 51.7475 26.7518 22.1238 36.9416 -19.5022
Jo

21 54.8765 36.6207 54.6124 23.2280 18.4959 39.4116 -17.0313

22 51.5314 33.2740 51.2672 29.0469 24.6090 35.6207 -20.8200
23 52.4960 34.2395 52.2323 27.8244 23.2453 36.7467 -19.6959
24 52.9379 34.6816 52.6734 27.0530 22.4246 37.2569 -19.1856
25 53.1640 34.9077 52.9006 26.5614 21.9104 37.5209 -18.9222

Table 3 shows the contribution of the input variables on the responses using the analysis of

variance. According to the results, power production is considerably affected by MSW and

pressure ratio. It is slightly influenced by temperature. MSW affects by 44.7% and pressure ratio

31
contributes by 43.5% on the power production while temperature contributes by 11.2% to the

power production. The error contribution is only by 0.6%. According to the results, the hydrogen

production is mainly affected by MSW and pressure ratio. MSW influences the hydrogen

production by 44.6% and the pressure ratio contributes the hydrogen production by 43.6%. The

temperature has smaller influence on the hydrogen by 11.2% and the error contribution as low as

0.6%. Similar to the power production and hydrogen production, MSW and pressure ratio have

f
more significant contributions to the oxygen production. MSW affects the oxygen production by

oo
44.6% and pressure ratio influenced the oxygen production by 43.6%. The temperature

pr
contributes 11.2% to the oxygen production and the error contribution is 0.6% and negligible.

Based on the results of analysis of variance, the heated air is mainly affected by pressure ratio
e-
and temperature and MSW have smaller influences. Pressure ratio contributes to the heated air
Pr
by 67.8% while temperature influences the heated air by 17.3% and MSW affects it by 14.0%.

The error contribution is almost 0.9%. According to the results, the heated water is mainly
al

influenced by pressure ratio and MSW. Pressure ratio affects the heated water by 67.3% while
n

contribution of MSW is 21.8%. Temperature contributes to the heated water by 10.0% and the
ur

error contribution is tiny by 0.9%. The results confirm that the efficiency is affected mainly by
Jo

pressure ratio and it contributes to the efficiency by 82.0%. According to the results, temperature

influences the efficiency by 17.7%. It is noteworthy to mention that the error contribution is as

low as 0.2% and the influence of MSW on the efficiency is negligible and is only 0.1%. This

outcome is in accordance with the results of previous sections. The emission is mainly affected

by pressure ratio and is slightly influenced by temperature with no significant contribution of

MSW. According to the results, the pressure ratio contributes to the emission by 84.5% and the

temperature influences the emission by 15.1%. The error contribution is as low as 0.3% and it is

32
note mentioning that the MSW contribution is negligible by 0.1%. The insignificant contribution

of MSW to the emission is also addressed in the previous sections.

Table 3: Contributions of parameters on responses

Contribution (%)
Parameter
Power Hydrogen Oxygen Heated air Heated water Efficiency Emission
MSW 44.7 44.6 44.6 14.0 21.8 0.1 0.1
Temperature 11.2 11.2 11.2 17.3 10.0 17.7 15.1
PR 43.5 43.6 43.6 67.8 67.3 82.0 84.5
Error 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.9 0.2 0.3

f
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

oo
Multi-objective optimization is implemented by conditions presented in Table 4. MSW,

temperature, and pressure ratio are the input variables. MSW ranges from 1.25-1.75 kg/min,

pr
temperature ranges from 800-1000 °C, and pressure ratio ranges from 5-15. Power, hydrogen
e-
production, oxygen production, heated air, heated water, efficiency, and emission are decision
Pr
variables. Minimization of emission and maximization of other decision variables are the goals

of optimization procedure.
al

Table 4: Input information for the optimization procedure

n

Input variable Range Decision variable Goal

ur

Low High
MSW (kg/min) 1.25 1.75 Power Maximum
Jo

Temperature (°C) 800 1000 Hydrogen Maximum

Pressure ratio 5 15 Oxygen Maximum
- - - Heated air Maximum
- - - Heated water Maximum
- - - Efficiency Maximum
- - - Emission Minimum

Figure 12 shows the results for the optimization procedure implemented using the Taguchi

technique. According to the results, MSW of 1.75 kg/min, temperature of 850 °C, and pressure

ratio of 10 are the optimum condition of input variables. In this condition, the system produces

33
471.8 kW of power, hydrogen production is 57.7 g/min, and oxygen production is 457.7 g/min.

The heated air production is 479.8 m3/min and the system has capability for heated water

production of 12.2 L/min. The optimum system efficiency is high as 79.3% and the system emits

8.3 g/kW.min of normalized carbon dioxide in its optimum conditions.

Optimal MSW (kg/min) T (°C) PR

High 1.75 1000 15
D: 0.6285
Cur 1.75 850 10
Predict Low 1.25 800 5

f
oo
Composite
Desira bility
D: 0.6285

pr
Emission
Minimum
y = 8.3240 e-
d = 0.77237

Efficie ncy
Pr
Maximum
y = 79.2684
d = 0.64687

He ate d water
al

Maximum
y = 12.2142
d = 0.45745
n

He ate d air
ur

Maximum
y = 479.820
d = 0.46592
Jo

Oxyge n
Maximum
y = 457.660
d = 0.71389

Hydroge n
Maximum
y = 57.6644
d = 0.71364

Power
Maximum
y = 471.7680
d = 0.71378

Figure 12: Results of multi-objective optimization

34
5. Conclusions

The technologies of MSW-to-energy and specifically MSW-to-hydrogen are still in the early

stages of development and need to be further explored. There are many challenges associated

with hydrogen production from MSW such as that MSW is a complex mixture of different

materials, which makes it difficult to produce a uniform product. Despite these challenges,

hydrogen production from MSW in energy systems holds great promise. If successful, these

f
oo
technologies could play a major role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating

climate change. In this study, a multi-generation energy system was modeled to produce

pr
hydrogen, power, oxygen, heated air and water from an MSW stream. The Taguchi technique
e-
was utilized for optimization of the system performance in a multi-objective procedure. All of

the products of the system were significantly affected by the interactions of the input variables
Pr
while the system efficiency and the system emission were not markedly influenced by all

interactions. The analysis of variance showed that power, hydrogen and oxygen productions
al

were mainly influence by MSW feeding rate. However, pressure ratio contributed the most
n

influence to the heated air and water. The system performance and the system emission were
ur

mainly affected by pressure ratio and inlet gas turbine temperature and the contribution of the
Jo

pressure ratio was tiny. MSW feeding rate of 1.75 kg/min, temperature of 850 °C, and pressure

ratio of 10 were the optimal conditions recognized by multi-objective optimization procedure. In

this condition, the system produced 472 kW of power, 57.7 g/min of hydrogen, 458 g/min of

oxygen, 480 m3/min of heated air, and 12.2 L/min of heated water with efficiency of 79.3% and

emission of 8.32 g/kW.min. Municipal solid waste-to-energy systems can be an effective

solution to address waste management issues. These systems convert waste into energy and

reduce the amount of waste that needs to be landfilled or incinerated. By implementing MSW-to-

35
energy systems, municipalities can reduce their dependence on fossil fuels and promote

renewable energy sources. Moreover, waste-to-energy plants can create job opportunities and

contribute to local economic development. However, it is important to note that waste reduction,

recycling, and reuse should still be prioritized over waste-to-energy as they are more sustainable

solutions. Overall, municipal solid waste-to-energy systems can play a significant role in

managing waste and promoting sustainable development.

f
oo
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

a. This research was funded by Key Laboratory of Advanced Manufacturing Technology of

pr
the Ministry of Education of Guizhou University (GZUAMT2022KF[07]), the National
e-
Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No.61862051; the Science and

Technology Foundation of Guizhou Province under Grant No’s[2022]549; the Natural

Pr
Science Foundation of Education of Guizhou province under Grant No’s([2019]203,
al

KY[2019]067); the program of Qiannan Normal University for Nationalities under Grant

Nos.(qnsy2018003, qnsy2019rc09)
n
ur

b. This work was funded by the Researchers Supporting Project No.(RSP2023R363), King

Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Jo

References

Ahmadi, P., Dincer, I. and Rosen, M.A., 2013. Energy and exergy analyses of hydrogen

production via solar-boosted ocean thermal energy conversion and PEM

electrolysis. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 38(4), pp.1795-1805.

36
Ajmal, M., Aiping, S., Awais, M., Ullah, M.S., Saeed, R., Uddin, S., Ahmad, I., Zhou, B. and

Zihao, X., 2020. Optimization of pilot-scale in-vessel composting process for various

agricultural wastes on elevated temperature by using Taguchi technique and compost quality

assessment. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 140, pp.34-45.

Ajorloo, M., Ghodrat, M., Scott, J. and Strezov, V., 2022. Recent advances in thermodynamic

analysis of biomass gasification: A review on numerical modelling and simulation. Journal

f
oo
of the Energy Institute, 102, pp.395-419.

Alola, A.A., Akadiri, S.S. and Usman, O., 2021. Domestic material consumption and greenhouse

pr
gas emissions in the EU-28 countries: Implications for environmental sustainability targets.

Sustainable Development, 29(2), pp.388-397.

e-
Pr
Bensmann, B., Rex, A. and Hanke-Rauschenbach, R., 2022. An engineering perspective on the

future role of modelling in proton exchange membrane water electrolysis development.

al

Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering, 36, 100829.

n

Borgogna, A., Centi, G., Iaquaniello, G., Perathoner, S., Papanikolaou, G. and Salladini, A.,
ur

2022. Assessment of hydrogen production from municipal solid wastes as competitive route
Jo

to produce low-carbon H2. Science of The Total Environment, 827, 154393.

Caliste, J.P., Truyol, A. and Westbrook, J.H. eds., 2012. Thermodynamic modeling and materials

data engineering. Springer Science & Business Media.

Cengel, Y.A., Boles, M.A. and Kanoğlu, M., 2011. Thermodynamics: an engineering approach

(Vol. 5, p. 445). New York: McGraw-hill.

37
Chen, G., Jamro, I.A., Samo, S.R., Wenga, T., Baloch, H.A., Yan, B. and Ma, W., 2020.

Hydrogen-rich syngas production from municipal solid waste gasification through the

application of central composite design: an optimization study. International Journal of

Hydrogen Energy, 45(58), pp.33260-33273.

Chen, W.H., Uribe, M.C., Kwon, E.E., Lin, K.Y.A., Park, Y.K., Ding, L. and Saw, L.H., 2022. A

comprehensive review of thermoelectric generation optimization by statistical approach:

f
oo
Taguchi method, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and response surface methodology

(RSM). Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 169, p.112917.

pr
Chen, Y., Yuan, Z. and Chen, B., 2018. Process optimization with consideration of
e-
uncertainties—An overview. Chinese journal of chemical engineering, 26(8), pp.1700-
Pr
1706.

Czekała, W., Łukomska, A., Pulka, J., Bojarski, W., Pochwatka, P., Kowalczyk-Juśko, A.,
al

Oniszczuk, A. and Dach, J., 2023. Waste-to-energy: Biogas potential of waste from coffee
n

production and consumption. Energy, 276, 127604.

ur

Dhemla, P., Somani, P., Swami, B.L. and Gaur, A., 2022. Optimizing the design of sintered fly
Jo

ash light weight concrete by Taguchi and ANOVA analysis. Materials Today: Proceedings,

62, pp.495-503.

Esmaili, P., Dincer, I. and Naterer, G.F., 2012. Energy and exergy analyses of electrolytic

hydrogen production with molybdenum-oxo catalysts. International Journal of Hydrogen

Energy, 37(9), pp.7365-7372.

38
Fu, Q., Wang, D., Li, X., Yang, Q., Xu, Q., Ni, B.J., Wang, Q. and Liu, X., 2021. Towards

hydrogen production from waste activated sludge: Principles, challenges and perspectives.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 135, 110283.

Ghozatfar, A., Yaghoubi, S. and Bahrami, H., 2023. A novel game-theoretic model for waste

management with waste-to-energy and compost production under government intervention:

A case study. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 173, pp.729-746.

f
oo
Gomaa, H.E., Alotaibi, A.A., Gomaa, F.A., Bajuayfir, E., Ahmad, A. and Alotaibi, K.M., 2021.

Integrated ion exchange-based system for nitrate and sulfate removal from water of different

pr
matrices: analysis and optimization using response surface methodology and Taguchi
e-
experimental design techniques. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 153, pp.500-
Pr
517.

Gong, C., Xing, L., Liang, C. and Tu, Z., 2022. Modeling and dynamic characteristic simulation
al

of air-cooled proton exchange membrane fuel cell stack for unmanned aerial vehicle.
n

Renewable Energy, 188, pp.1094-1104.

ur

Guo, J.Q., Li, M.J., He, Y.L., Jiang, T., Ma, T., Xu, J.L. and Cao, F., 2022. A systematic review
Jo

of supercritical carbon dioxide (S-CO2) power cycle for energy industries: technologies, key

issues, and potential prospects. Energy Conversion and Management, 258, 115437.

Guo, Y., Guo, X., Wang, J., Guan, Z., Wang, Z., Zhang, Y., Wu, W. and Wang, X., 2023.

Performance analysis and multi-objective optimization for a hybrid system based on solid

oxide fuel cell and supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle with energetic and ecological objective

approaches. Applied Thermal Engineering, 221, 119871.

39
Hadelu, L.M., Noorpoor, A., Boyaghchi, F.A. and Mirjalili, S., 2022. Exergoeconomic, carbon,

and water footprint analyses and optimization of a new solar-driven multigeneration system

based on supercritical CO2 cycle and solid oxide steam electrolyzer using various phase

change materials. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 159, pp.393-421.

Hasanzadeh, R., Mojaver, P., Chitsaz, A., Mojaver, M., Jalili, M. and Rosen, M.A., 2022.

Biomass and low-density polyethylene waste composites gasification: Orthogonal array

f
oo
design of Taguchi technique for analysis and optimization. International Journal of

Hydrogen Energy, 47(67), pp.28819-28832.

pr
Haseli, Y., Dincer, I. and Naterer, G.F., 2008. Thermodynamic modeling of a gas turbine cycle
e-
combined with a solid oxide fuel cell. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 33(20),
Pr
pp.5811-5822.

Hoang, A.T., Goldfarb, J.L., Foley, A.M., Lichtfouse, E., Kumar, M., Xiao, L., Ahmed, S.F.,
al

Said, Z., Luque, R., Bui, V.G. and Nguyen, X.P., 2022a. Production of biochar from crop
n

residues and its application for anaerobic digestion. Bioresource Technology, 363, 127970.
ur

Hoang, A.T., Huang, Z., Nižetić, S., Pandey, A., Nguyen, X.P., Luque, R., Ong, H.C., Said, Z.
Jo

and Le, T.H., 2022c. Characteristics of hydrogen production from steam gasification of

plant-originated lignocellulosic biomass and its prospects in Vietnam. International Journal

of Hydrogen Energy, 47(7), pp.4394-4425.

Hoang, A.T., Ong, H.C., Fattah, I.R., Chong, C.T., Cheng, C.K., Sakthivel, R. and Ok, Y.S.,

2021. Progress on the lignocellulosic biomass pyrolysis for biofuel production toward

environmental sustainability. Fuel Processing Technology, 223, 106997.

40
Hoang, A.T., Varbanov, P.S., Nižetić, S., Sirohi, R., Pandey, A., Luque, R. and Ng, K.H., 2022b.

Perspective review on Municipal Solid Waste-to-energy route: Characteristics, management

strategy, and role in circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 359, 131897.

Hosseini, S.E., 2020. Design and analysis of renewable hydrogen production from biogas by

integrating a gas turbine system and a solid oxide steam electrolyzer. Energy Conversion

and Management, 211, 112760.

f
oo
Hren, R., Vujanović, A., Van Fan, Y., Klemeš, J.J., Krajnc, D. and Čuček, L., 2023. Hydrogen

production, storage and transport for renewable energy and chemicals: An environmental

pr
footprint assessment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 173, 113113.
e-
Jin, C., Ding, H., Zhang, W., Weng, T., Hong, G. and Zhang, Y., 2023. Influence of compressor
Pr
inlet correction on simulation of supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycle. Annals of

Nuclear Energy, 185, 109711.

al

Khalilarya, S., Chitsaz, A. and Mojaver, P., 2021. Optimization of a combined heat and power
n

system based gasification of municipal solid waste of Urmia University student dormitories
ur

via ANOVA and taguchi approaches. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 46(2),
Jo

pp.1815-1827.

Khan, M.S., Cui, J., Ni, Y., Yan, M. and Ali, M., 2023. Techno-economic and exergo-economic

evaluation of a novel solar integrated waste-to-energy power plant. Applied Thermal

Engineering, 223, 119929.

Khan, M.S., Huan, Q., Lin, J., Zheng, R., Gao, Z. and Yan, M., 2022c. Exergoeconomic analysis

and optimization of an innovative municipal solid waste to energy plant integrated with

solar thermal system. Energy Conversion and Management, 258, 115506.

41
Khan, S., Anjum, R., Raza, S.T., Bazai, N.A. and Ihtisham, M., 2022b. Technologies for

municipal solid waste management: Current status, challenges, and future perspectives.

Chemosphere, 288, 132403.

Khan, S., Murshed, M., Ozturk, I. and Khudoykulov, K., 2022a. The roles of energy efficiency

improvement, renewable electricity production, and financial inclusion in stimulating

environmental sustainability in the Next Eleven countries. Renewable Energy, 193, pp.1164-

f
oo
1176.

Le, H.S., Chen, W.H., Ahmed, S.F., Said, Z., Rafa, N., Le, A.T., Ağbulut, Ü., Veza, I., Nguyen,

pr
X.P., Duong, X.Q., Huang, Z., Hoang, A.T., 2022. Hydrothermal carbonization of food
e-
waste as sustainable energy conversion path. Bioresource Technology, 363, 127958.
Pr
Li, X.L., Tang, G.H., Fan, Y.H. and Yang, D.L., 2022. A performance recovery coefficient for

thermal-hydraulic evaluation of recuperator in supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycle.

al

Energy Conversion and Management, 256, 115393.

n

Li, Z., Wang, Y., Mu, Y., Wu, B., Jiang, Y., Zeng, L. and Zhao, T., 2023. Recent advances in the
ur

anode catalyst layer for proton exchange membrane fuel cells. Renewable and Sustainable
Jo

Energy Reviews, 176, 113182.

Maher, S.D., Sarvghad, M., Olivares, R., Ong, T.C., Will, G. and Steinberg, T.A., 2022. Critical

components in supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle power blocks for solar power systems:

Degradation mechanisms and failure consequences. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells,

242, 111768.

Mazzoni, L., Janajreh, I., Elagroudy, S. and Ghenai, C., 2020. Modeling of plasma and entrained

flow co-gasification of MSW and petroleum sludge. Energy, 196, 117001.

42
Nandhini, R., Berslin, D., Sivaprakash, B., Rajamohan, N. and Vo, D.V.N., 2022.

Thermochemical conversion of municipal solid waste into energy and hydrogen: a review.

Environmental Chemistry Letters, 20(3), pp.1645-1669.

Nawaz, R., Hussain, I., Noor, S., Habib, T. and Omair, M., 2020. The significant impact of the

economic sustainability on the cement industry by the assessment of the key performance

indicators using Taguchi signal to noise ratio. Cogent Engineering, 7(1), 1810383.

f
oo
Palsson, J., Selimovic, A. and Sjunnesson, L., 2000. Combined solid oxide fuel cell and gas

turbine systems for efficient power and heat generation. Journal of Power Sources, 86(1-2),

pr
pp.442-448.
e-
Pourrahmani, H., Siavashi, M., Yavarinasab, A., Matian, M., Chitgar, N., Wang, L. and Van
Pr
Herle, J., 2022. A review on the long-term performance of proton exchange membrane fuel

cells: From degradation modeling to the effects of bipolar plates, sealings, and
al

contaminants. Energies, 15(14), 5081.

n

Prestat, M., 2023. Corrosion of structural components of proton exchange membrane water
ur

electrolyzer anodes: A review. Journal of Power Sources, 556, p.232469.

Jo

Ramprakash, B., Lindblad, P., Eaton-Rye, J.J. and Incharoensakdi, A., 2022. Current strategies

and future perspectives in biological hydrogen production: A review. Renewable and

Sustainable Energy Reviews, 168, 112773.

Ravajiri, E.S., Jalali, A. and Houshfar, E., 2023. Multi-objective optimization and 4E analysis of

an integrated system based on waste-to-energy, solar PV, power-to-gas, and HDH-RO

desalination. Energy Conversion and Management, 277, 116677.

43
Saidi, M. and Kadkhodayan, H., 2021. Process development for sodium permanganate

production by waste management of industrial sludge of zinc oxide ores recovery plants:

experimental and simulation study. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 148,

pp.1254-1263.

Saleem, S., Haider, H., Hu, G., Hewage, K. and Sadiq, R., 2022. Continuous performance

improvement of aquatic centres: A Taguchi-based optimization approach towards

f
oo
sustainability. Journal of Building Engineering, 54, 104576.

Santos, M.P. and Hanak, D.P., 2022. Techno-economic feasibility assessment of sorption

pr
enhanced gasification of municipal solid waste for hydrogen production. International
e-
Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 47(10), pp.6586-6604.
Pr
Sarkar, J. and Bhattacharyya, S., 2009. Optimization of recompression S-CO2 power cycle with

reheating. Energy Conversion and Management, 50(8), pp.1939-1945.

al

Scarlat, N., Fahl, F. and Dallemand, J.F., 2019. Status and opportunities for energy recovery
n

from municipal solid waste in Europe. Waste and Biomass Valorization, 10(9), pp.2425-
ur

2444.
Jo

Shahangian, S.A., Tabesh, M., Yazdanpanah, M., Zobeidi, T. and Raoof, M.A., 2022. Promoting

the adoption of residential water conservation behaviors as a preventive policy to

sustainable urban water management. Journal of Environmental Management, 313, 115005.

Shilpa, M.K. and Yendapalli, V., 2022. Surface roughness estimation techniques for drilled

Surfaces: A review. Materials Today: Proceedings, 52, pp.1082-1091.

44
Shokoohi, R., Rahmani, A., Asgari, G., Ashrafi, M. and Ghahramani, E., 2023. Removal of algae

using hydrodynamic cavitation, ozonation and oxygen peroxide: Taguchi optimization (case

study: Raw water of sanandaj water treatment plant). Process Safety and Environmental

Protection, 169, pp.896-908.

Siddeshware, G., Khichade, V. and Lokavarapu, B.R., 2022. Optimization of the parameters

influencing the fuel efficiency of SI engine using taguchi method. Materials Today:

f
oo
Proceedings, 50, pp.2152-2159.

Singh, E., Mishra, R., Kumar, A., Shukla, S.K., Lo, S.L. and Kumar, S., 2022. Circular

pr
economy-based environmental management using biochar: Driving towards sustainability.
e-
Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 163, pp.585-600.
Pr
Tak, S.S., Shetye, O., Muley, O., Jaiswal, H. and Malik, S.N., 2022. Emerging technologies for

hydrogen production from wastewater. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 47(88),

al

pp.37282-37301.
n

Taki, M. and Rohani, A., 2022. Machine learning models for prediction the Higher Heating
ur

Value (HHV) of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) for waste-to-energy evaluation. Case
Jo

Studies in Thermal Engineering, 31, 101823.

Tiktas, A., Gunerhan, H. and Hepbasli, A., 2022. Single and multigeneration rankine cycles with

aspects of thermodynamical modeling, energy and exergy analyses and optimization: a key

review along with novel system description figures. Energy Conversion and Management:

X, 14, 100199.

Tomić, A.Z., Pivac, I. and Barbir, F., 2023. A review of testing procedures for proton exchange

membrane electrolyzer degradation. Journal of Power Sources, 557, 232569.

45
Tozlu, A., Abuşoğlu, A. and Özahi, E., 2018. Thermoeconomic analysis and optimization of a

Re-compression supercritical CO2 cycle using waste heat of Gaziantep Municipal Solid

Waste Power Plant. Energy, 143, pp.168-180.

Tse, L., Galinaud, F. and Martinez-Botas, R.F., 2007. Integration of solid oxide fuel cells into a

gas turbine cycle. ASME Turbo Expo Power for Land, Sea and Air.

Tunay, D., Yildirim, O., Ozkaya, B. and Demir, A., 2022. Effect of organic fraction of municipal

f
oo
solid waste addition to high rate activated sludge system for hydrogen production from

carbon rich waste sludge. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 47(62), pp.26284-

pr
26293.
e-
Varjani, S., Shahbeig, H., Popat, K., Patel, Z., Vyas, S., Shah, A.V., Barceló, D., Ngo, H.H.,
Pr
Sonne, C., Lam, S.S. and Aghbashlo, M., 2022. Sustainable management of municipal solid

waste through waste-to-energy technologies. Bioresource Technology, 355, 127247.

al

Veeramani, K., Janani, G., Kim, J., Surendran, S., Lim, J., Jesudass, S.C., Mahadik, S., Kim,
n

T.H., Kim, J.K. and Sim, U., 2023. Hydrogen and value-added products yield from hybrid
ur

water electrolysis: A critical review on recent developments. Renewable and Sustainable

Jo

Energy Reviews, 177, 113227.

Wang, S., Yang, H., Shi, Z., Zaini, I.N., Wen, Y., Jiang, J., Jönsson, P.G. and Yang, W., 2022.

Renewable hydrogen production from the organic fraction of municipal solid waste through

a novel carbon-negative process concept. Energy, 252, 124056.

Wang, Z., Su, Z., Goyal, V., Kumar, N.B., Dahari, M., Abdulwahab, A., Algelany, A.M.,

Aouaini, F., Rajab, H. and Ali, H.E., 2023. Optimization and evaluation of a municipal solid

waste-to-energy system using taguchi technique in a tri-generation system based on gas

46
 turbine with air and steam agents. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 173,

pp.461-471.

Weichert, D., Link, P., Stoll, A., Rüping, S., Ihlenfeldt, S. and Wrobel, S., 2019. A review of

machine learning for the optimization of production processes. The International Journal of

Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 104(5-8), pp.1889-1902.

Weremfo, A., Abassah-Oppong, S., Adulley, F., Dabie, K. and Seidu-Larry, S., 2023. Response

f
oo
surface methodology as a tool to optimize the extraction of bioactive compounds from plant

sources. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 103(1), pp.26-36.

pr
White, M.T., Bianchi, G., Chai, L., Tassou, S.A. and Sayma, A.I., 2021. Review of supercritical
e-
CO2 technologies and systems for power generation. Applied Thermal Engineering, 185,
Pr
116447.

Yang, J., Yang, Z. and Duan, Y., 2022. A review on integrated design and off-design operation
al

of solar power tower system with S–CO2 Brayton cycle. Energy, 246, 123348.
n

Yuce, B.E., Nielsen, P.V. and Wargocki, P., 2022. The use of Taguchi, ANOVA, and GRA
ur

methods to optimize CFD analyses of ventilation performance in buildings. Building and

Jo

Environment, 225, 109587.

Zhang, Y., Salem, M., Elmasry, Y., Hoang, A.T., Galal, A.M., Nguyen, D.K.P. and Wae-hayee,

M., 2022. Triple-objective optimization and electrochemical/technical/environmental study

of biomass gasification process for a novel high-temperature fuel

cell/electrolyzer/desalination scheme. Renewable Energy, 201, pp.379-399.

47
Zhou, Y., Liu, S., Hu, X., Ge, Y., Shi, C., Wu, H., Zhou, T., Li, Z. and Qiao, J., 2023.

Facilitating the proton conductivity of polyvinyl alcohol based proton exchange membrane

by phytic acid encapsulated Zn-azolate MOF. Process Safety and Environmental Protection,

172, pp.48-56.

f
oo
pr
Declaration of Competing Interest

e-
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Pr
n al
ur
Jo

48