You are on page 1of 37

To Inlet Condition a Gas Turbine or

Not, That is the Question
&
Discussion on Plant Performance
Testing
By,
Gary Bush & Azim Jivan
Bush Power Group LLC.

Topics covered




Options for inlet air conditioning
Weather Profile
Thermodynamic Model
Performance Analysis
Economic Analysis

Why Inlet Air Condition?
• One of the many options available for
increasing output of a Power Plant
• Other Options for Boosting Power are:
– Supplementary firing in the HRSG
– Water or Steam Injection for Power
Augmentation
– Peak Firing

This results in a more dense and humid air.Options for Inlet Air Conditioning • Evaporative Cooling: Reducing the temperature of the air stream through water evaporation. Types of Evaporative Cooling are: –Evaporative Cooler (wetted-honeycomb medium) –Fogging (spraying of ultra-fine mist) –Overspraying (Evaporative Intercooling) . Energy is drawn from the air stream to convert water from liquid to vapor. The temperature drop is limited by wet bulb temperature.

Options for Inlet Air Conditioning (contd. Types of Inlet Chilling are: –Direct Chillers (Mechanical and Absorption types) –Thermal Storage (Create ice in off-peak hours to chill air during peak hours) . When cold air reaches saturation point then water starts to condense from the air stream.) • Inlet Air Chilling: Cools the air to temperatures lower than the wet bulb temperature.

Air can be cooled down to 45 degF and 95% RH. • Can provide a constant high plant capacity – Cons: • High parasitic loads • Higher cost than evaporative cooling options .Some Pros and Cons • Evaporative Cooling – Pros: • Low parasitic loads • Lower cost than chillers – Cons: • Cooling limited by wet bulb temperature and effectiveness of cooling for the type selected • Inlet Chilling – Pros: • Cooling is not limited by wet bulb temperature.

• The weather profile provides bins with dry bulb temperature.Weather Profile • One of the significant items of information required for evaluation is the weather profile of the power plant location. • Helps to determine the ambient design conditions for the plant . coincident relative humidity or wet bulb and the corresponding annual number of hours at the given temperature range.

Weather Profile for Houston (Coincident Relative Humidity) Houston. TX. Annual Temperature Profile with Coincident Relative Humidity (Data from National Climatic Data Center) 100 70 90 81 82 82 83 84 616 85 81 83 79 80 78 77 78 78 78 78 78 76 76 76 77 78 80 79 79 82 78 74 511 Coincident Relative Humidity (%) 60 81 573 81 494 70 Coincident RH 68 450 432 Hours/Yr 60 71 50 65 59 380 257 257 30 161 170 20 117 187 205 213 45 284 275 231 12 12 23 25 30 38 47 47 27 29 31 33 42 30 231 205 20 178 135 108 91 10 40 49 319 310 40 52 354 345 336 50 56 10 65 56 30 0 0 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 Ambient Dry Bulb Temperature. F 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 .

TX. F 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 . deg F 511 70 60 50 40 30 22 24 25 27 29 31 33 35 36 38 40 42 117 46 47 51 53 187 55 59 61 67 69 74 74 205 213 75 76 76 77 12 12 23 25 30 38 47 27 29 31 47 33 78 50 380 40 354 345 336 319 284 275 30 231 231 205 20 178 135 108 91 10 77 450 310 257 257 161 170 20 44 49 57 65 63 432 72 73 71 494 77 10 65 56 30 0 0 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 Ambient Dry Bulb Temperature.Weather Profile for Houston (Coincident Wet Bulb) Houston. Annual Temperature Profile with Coincident Wet Bulb (Data from National Climatic Data Center) 100 70 Hours/Yr 90 616 Coincident Wet Bulb 60 573 80 Coincident Wet Bulb.

• GTPro is used to design the plant at the selected design conditions • GTMaster is used to simulate performance of the plant at off-design conditions .Thermodynamic Model • The thermodynamic model is created using GTPro and GTMaster software from Thermoflow.

5”H2O to GT Inlet Losses) • Inlet Air Chilling – (Electric Chiller with its own Auxiliary Cooling Tower. Ultra fine droplets. Add 1”H2O to GT Inlet Losses) • Fogging – (95% Effectiveness.Inlet Conditioning Options Evaluated • Evaporative Cooling – (85% Effectiveness. Add 1”H2O to GT Inlet Losses) . Add 0. Sized to cool inlet air to 50 degF.

• The HRSG. • No supplementary firing in the HRSG • Plant running at baseload .Assumptions • All models created for greenfield installation. • Fuel used is methane only. Steam Turbine and the Cooling System are sized for the given inlet air conditioning option • All performances are for new and clean plant.

Reheat and LP steam. – Single Downdraft exhaust end. – Gas Turbine total exhaust losses are 14” H2O • HRSG is 3 Pressure Reheat Type • Steam Turbine: – 3 induction ports for HP. .Plant Configuration • Combined Cycle: • 1x1 GE7FA with 3 Pressure Reheat Cycle – Gas Turbine inlet losses are 4”H2O plus losses for the inlet air conditioning option selected.

• Design Conditions are 73 degF(DB).Plant Configuration contd. • Wet Mechanical draft Cooling Tower • Fuel to the gas turbine heated to 365 degF.8degF (WB). 68. 81% RH .

92 M 105 T 563. Steam Properties: Thermoflow .1 M 446 M 494.86 M3.58 %N2 12.1 p 1000 T 458.81 p 511 T 450. M[kpph].1 M 53.92 M 122 T LTE HPE1 196 T 3459 M LPB HPE2 IPE1 17.84 M 53.2 p 430 p 1491.6 M 263 316 IPS1 LPS HPE3 HPB1 IPS2 HPS0 RH1 HPS1 RH3 HPS3 1134 T 3459 M IPE2 64.2 M 17. Net Power 245552 kW LHV Heat Rate 6236 BTU/kWh 3459 m 1X GE 7241FA 217.4 p 2414 T 73.78 p 1523.65 p 73 T 81 %RH 3388 m 96 ft elev.391 %H2O 0.8861 %Ar 15.81 p 298 T 60.1 M 446.5 p 73 T 3388 m 89932 kW 50.19 p 209 T 676.1 M 446 M 494.STQUIK 1347 01-18-2003 17:04:22 file=C:\MY DOCUMENTS\AZIM\BPG\ASME\THERMOFLOW\CC WITHOUT PEACE\GE7FA 73F NIC.5 M 111.No Inlet Air Conditioning GT MASTER 10.093 p 105 T 556.1 M 534 537 544 623 894 898 996 p[psia].3 p 459 T 60.1 M 434 M 400.5 p 413.653 %CO2+SO2 9.6 p 1471.3 p 728 T 206.49 %O2 3.8 p 1003 T 112.05 M LPE IPB 459 T 449 T 376 460.3 p 442.589 M 105 T FW 50.9 Azim Jivan 14.1 M 483 455.15 p 1136 T 3459 M 160468 kW 14.3 p 1523.6 M 6. T[F].4 p 61.GTM 1053 1085 1114 1134 .19 p 220 T Plant Model without Inlet Air Conditioning 494.6 p 1509.8 M 57.191 M 58.4 p 702 T 1471.5 M 446 M 60.9 M 209 T CH4 71.8 p 508 T 514 T 589 T 598 T 609 T 823 T 894 T 931 T 1002 T 1003 T 60.16 m LHV 1531236 kBTU/h 77 T 365 T 1450 p 1000 T 446.1 M 1.86 M 450.

2 M 447 M 534 537 544 623 893 p[psia]. Steam Properties: Thermoflow .07 M 113.08 M 57.gtm 897 995 1052 1083 1113 1133 .7 p 508 T 514 T 589 T 598 T 609 T 823 T 895 T 931 T 1003 T 1003 T 60.76 M3.182 M 59.5 M 112.8 p 1491.STQUIK 1347 01-18-2003 17:05:37 file=C:\My Documents\Azim\BPG\ASME\Thermoflow\CC without PEACE\GE7FA 73F Evap.664 %CO2+SO2 9.2 M 209 T CH4 71.2 M 51.Evaporative Cooling for GT Inlet Air GT MASTER 10.65 p 73 T 81 %RH 3403 m 96 ft elev.1 p 61.54 M 447 M 495.093 p 105 T 558.4 p 413.4 p 1509.6 p 2415 T 73.82 p 512 T 451.54 M 483 455.1 p 429.19 p 209 T 679.76 M 451.7 p 1003 T 0.001 m 3478 m 1X GE 7241FA 218.2 M 434.009 M 122 T LTE HPE1 196 T 3478 M LPB HPE2 IPE1 17.83 p 1523. T[F].79 m LHV 1544845 kBTU/h 77 T 365 T 1449.7 M 399.74 M 54.5 M 263 316 IPS1 LPS HPE3 HPB1 IPS2 HPS0 RH1 HPS1 RH3 HPS3 1133 T 3478 M IPE2 64. M[kpph].2 p 442.9 p 298 T 60.9 p 1000 T 458.19 p 220 T Plant Model with Evaporative Coolers 495.7 M 6.44 %O2 3.95 M LPE IPB 458 T 448 T 377 460 p 459 T 60.4 M 17.544 %H2O 0.5 p 723 T Net Power 247587 kW LHV Heat Rate 6240 BTU/kWh 207.15 p 1135 T 3478 M 162239 kW 14.686 M 105 T 0.2 M 447 M 495.3 p 702 T 1471.46 p 69 T 3406 m 90221 kW 51.9 p 1000 T 447 M 1.54 M 54.57 M 105 T 566.47 %N2 12.57 M FW 0.4 M 447 M 60.8848 %Ar 15.9 Azim Jivan 14. 3.2 p 1523.4 p 1471.

2 p 1523.STQUIK 1347 01-18-2003 17:06:16 file=C:\My Documents\Azim\BPG\ASME\Thermoflow\CC without PEACE\GE7FA 73F Fog.8 M 113.65 p 73 T 81 %RH 3410 m 96 ft elev. Net Power 248227 kW LHV Heat Rate 6238 BTU/kWh 3485 m 1X GE 7241FA 219 p 723 T Fogger 3.09 M 113.01 M 451. T[F].2 M 534 537 544 623 892 p[psia].78 M 55.15 p 1134 T 3485 M 162784 kW 14.688 M 105 T 0.12 M 57.97 m LHV 1548561 kBTU/h 77 T 365 T 1449.82 p 512 T 55.2 M 495.gtm 896 994 429.3 p 1491.45 %N2 12.4 p 1509 p 508 T 514 T 589 T 598 T 609 T 823 T 60.3 p 413.19 p 220 T 451.19 p 209 T 680.7 p 895 T 931 T 1003 T 1003 T 495.9 M Plant Model with Fogger 399.2 M 60.7 p 1003 T 0.9 p 1000 T 458.7 M 447.9 p 1000 T 447.3 p 702 T 1471.01 M3.331 m 208 p 2415 T 73.68 M FW 0.48 p 69 T 3413 m 90325 kW 51.3 M 1.99 M 495.78 M 483 455.034 M 122 T LTE HPE1 196 T 3485 M LPB HPE2 IPE1 17.91 p 298 T 61.4 p 1471.78 M 447.559 %H2O 0.7 M 447.19 M LPE IPB 458 T 448 T 377 460 p 459 T 60.1 M 6.4 M 263 316 IPS1 LPS HPE3 HPB1 IPS2 HPS0 RH1 HPS1 RH3 HPS3 1132 T 3485 M IPE2 64.093 p 105 T 559. Steam Properties: Thermoflow .83 p 1523.2 M 17.9 Azim Jivan 14.3 M 1051 1083 1112 1132 .44 %O2 3.7 M 447.185 M 59.664 %CO2+SO2 9.7 M 434.8846 %Ar 15.2 p 442.4 M 51.68 M 105 T 567 M 209 T CH4 71. M[kpph].Fogging for Cooling GT Inlet Air GT MASTER 10.1 p 61.

167 M 64.36 m LHV 1621588 kBTU/h 77 T 365 T 1449.4 M 449.89 p 298 T 65.3 p 1471 p 510 T 516 T 589 T 598 T 610 T 822 T 893 T 930 T 1002 T 1001 T 65.9 M 537 539 p[psia].. Net Power 257143 kW LHV Heat Rate 6306 BTU/kWh 3634 m 1X GE 7241FA 228.14 p 1120 T 3634 M 172932 kW 14.5 p 1508.4 M 119. M[kpph].Inlet Air Chilling GT MASTER 10.82 p 1522.GTM 546 623 885 889 983 1039 1070 1099 1118 .4 p 442.29 M 449.29 M 483 454.7 M 437.4 M 17.2 p 999 T 449.9 M 502.18 M 454.8947 %Ar 15.7 M 449.7 p 2422 T 74.7 M 57.1 p 459 T 65.4 p 1522.29 %N2 12.3 M 209 T CH4 75.9 Azim Jivan 14.9 M 6.8 p 514 T 59.34 M 316 459 T 449 T 379 460.7 M 449.4 p 701 T 1471 p 1001 T Plant Model with Chillers 115.29 M 59.696 %CO2+SO2 8.52 %H2O 0.1 p 710 T 216.19 p 220 T 454.3 p 1490.18 M3.65 p 73 T 81 %RH 3581 m 96 ft elev.E7FA 73F CHILL MANUALLY SIZED.46 p 50 T 3559 m 91624 kW 53.91 M 122 T LTE HPE1 198 T 3634 M LPB HPE2 IPE1 17.9 M 502.8 p 61.4 M 399.8 p 999 T 458.9 M 65.91 M 105 T 578.16 M 502.6 p 413. Steam Properties: Thermoflow .19 p 209 T 694 M LPE 265 IPB IPS1 LPS HPE3 HPB1 IPS2 HPS0 RH1 HPS1 RH3 HPS3 1118 T 3634 M IPE2 64. T[F].9 M 1.701 M 105 T FW 53..093 p 105 T 570.3 p 424.STQUIK 1347 01-20-2003 09:02:18 file=C:\MY DOC.6 %O2 3.

Performance Analysis • Plant output is the main economic factor during peak power demand period • Plant efficiency is the main economic factor during non-peak periods • Thus need to evaluate cumulative performance and economic returns over a wide range of temperatures rather than design and high ambient temperatures .

• Simulate the performance of the plant with different inlet air cooling options at each temperature bin shown on the annual weather profile • Calculate the Megawatt hours. Fuel and Water Consumption for each temperature bin to get the annual cumulative totals .Performance Analysis contd.

Cooling Fogging Chilling Base Case 90 100 . Ambient Temperature for Different Inlet Air Cooling Options (Base Case has No Inlet Air Conditioning) 100 90 80 deg F 70 60 50 40 30 20 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Ambient Temp Evap.Compressor Inlet Temperature vs.

000 250.000 230.000 240. Cooling Fogging Chilling Base Case 90 100 .000 270.000 220.000 kW 260.Net Power vs. Ambient Temperature for Different Inlet Air Cooling Options (Base Case has No Inlet Air Conditioning) 280.000 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Ambient Temp Evap.

Cooling Fogging Chilling Base Case 90 100 .08 1.98 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Ambient Temp Evap.14 1.10 1. Base Case for Different Inlet Air Cooling Options (Base Case has No Inlet Air Conditioning) 1.06 1.04 1.12 1.Comparison of Fuel Consumption vs.02 1.00 0.

Heat Rate vs.260 6.320 6.240 6.380 Btu/kWh (LHV) 6.220 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Ambient Temp Evap.360 6.420 6.340 6. Cooling Fogging Chilling Base Case 90 100 .300 6.400 6.280 6. Ambient Temperature for Different Inlet Air Cooling Options (Base Case has No Inlet Air Conditioning) 6.

Cooling Fogging Chilling Base Case 90 100 . Ambient Temperature for Different Inlet Air Cooling Options (Base Case has No Inlet Air Conditioning) 11.000 4.000 kW 8.000 7.000 6.000 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Ambient Temp Evap.Plant Auxiliary Load plus Transformer Losses vs.000 9.000 10.000 5.

Cooling Fogging Chilling Demin H2O for Foging 90 100 . Ambient Temperature for Different Inlet Air Conditioning Options (Base Case has No Inlet Air Conditioning) 30 The water condensed from the Chiller Coils is recovered for Potable Makeup 25 20 kpph 15 10 5 Difference of Demineralized water Makeup from the Base Case required for Fogging 0 -5 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Ambient Temp Evap.Difference of Potable Makeup Water Flow from the Base Case vs.

Ambient Temperature for Different Inlet Air Conditioning Options (Base Case has No Inlet Air Conditioning) 7000 6000 Megawatt Hours 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 -1000 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Ambient Temp Evap. Cooling Fogging Chilling 90 100 .Difference of Megawatt Hours from the Base Case vs.

Economic Analysis • • • • • • • Electricity rate structure Fuel cost structure Water cost O&M Costs Capacity Payments Degradation of the plant Tax Implications .

90F 70F .80F 70F and below .Assumptions made for current Economic Analysis: • Electricity Rate Structure: $/MWh $80 $50 $40 $30 Temperature range 90F and above 80F .

Assumptions made for current Economic Analysis: • Fuel Cost Structure: $/MMBtu $4.90F 70F .50 $3.00 $3.50 $3.1096 .50 Temperature range 90F and above 80F .80F 70F and below • HHV/LHV Ratio = 1.

00 $3.Assumptions made for current Economic Analysis: • Water Cost: $/kpph $1.00 Water Type City or Potable Water Demineralized Water • Interest rate: 15% • Life of Plant: 20 years .

Factors not considered for current Economic Analysis: • O&M Costs – These costs vary widely from plant to plant. Can be a significant economic boost for plants with inlet air chillers because of ability to produce constant output regardless of ambient conditions. . Can use a conservative estimate of $0.005 per kilowatt generated • Capacity Payments – These payments will be unique to each plant.

Factors not considered for current Economic Analysis: • Degradation of the plant – The plant degradation factors have not been included to adjust the power output and heat rate over the life of the plant. • Tax Implications .

544.032.341 (Discount rate: 15%) 441.218.438.955 $ 474.920 13.085 .399.209 13.097 2.579.807 14.766.138.029 MMBtu/hr 13.677 2.161.028.166.827 Annual Incremental Potable Water from Base Case kpph 222 124 190 Annual Incremental Demin Water from Base Case kpph 1 140 3 Annual Incremental revenue from the Base Case $ $ Net Present Value of the Annual Incremental revenue over life of plant $ $ 2.558 $ 6.Annual Cumulative Data Units Annual Megawatt Hours Annual Fuel Consumption (LHV) Evaporative Coolers Base Case Foggers Chillers MWhrs 2.417 $ 1.398 $ 2.969.989 2.

000.000.000.000.000.000 $3.000.000.000 $2.000 Discount Rate = 15% $5.000 $6.NPV of the Incremental Annual Cash Flow due to Different Cooling Options over the life of Power Plant $7.000 Chiller Fogger $1.000 $0 Inlet Air Cooling Option 1 Evaporative Cooler .000 $ $4.

166.955 $ 474.028.827 Annual Incremental Potable Water from Base Case kpph 222 124 190 Annual Incremental Demin Water from Base Case kpph 1 140 3 Annual Incremental revenue from the Base Case $ $ Net Present Value of the Annual Incremental revenue over life of plant $ $ 3.097 2.609 (Discount rate: 10%) 441.032.821 $ 1.399.029 MMBtu/hr 13.544.920 13.398 $ 4.762.038.756.579.218.138.558 $ 8.677 2.161.807 14.694 .989 2.209 13.Annual Cumulative Data Units Annual Megawatt Hours Annual Fuel Consumption (LHV) Evaporative Coolers Base Case Foggers Chillers MWhrs 2.

000 $2.000.000.000 $4.000.000 $9.000.000 $7.000.NPV of the Incremental Annual Cash Flow due to Different Cooling Options over the life of Power Plant $10.000 Chiller Fogger $1.000.000.000 $5.000 $0 Inlet Air Cooling Option 1 Evaporative Cooler .000 $ $6.000.000 Discount Rate = 10% $8.000 $3.000.000.