Hybrid concentrated solar biomass (HCSB) systems for cogeneration: Techno-economic analysis for beef abattoirs in New South Wales, Australia

被引:11
作者
Middelhoff, Ella [1 ]
Furtado, Leandro Andrade [2 ]
Reis Parise, Jose Alberto [2 ]
Ximenes, Fabiano [3 ]
Florin, Nick [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Technol Sydney, Inst Sustainable Futures, POB 123, Ultimo, NSW 2007, Australia
[2] Pontifical Catholic Univ Rio de Janeiro PUC Rio, Dept Mech Engn, BR-22451900 Rio De Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
[3] New South Wales Dept Primary Ind, Forest Sci, Locked Bag 5123, Parramatta, NSW 2150, Australia
关键词
Solar energy; Bioenergy; Hybrid combined cycle; Combined heat and power; Renewable energy; ORGANIC RANKINE-CYCLE; POWER-PLANT; THERMOECONOMIC ANALYSIS; WORKING FLUIDS; COMBINED HEAT; HYBRIDIZATION; PERFORMANCE; EFFICIENCY; STORAGE; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1016/j.enconman.2022.115620
中图分类号
O414.1 [热力学];
学科分类号
摘要
The clean energy transition and commitments to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century are most challenging for energy-intensive industries, like meat processing, that have traditionally relied on fossil fuels for heat and power. This study examines technical design options of combined heat and power (CHP) systems for beef abattoirs. Specifically, we investigate the technical and economic viability of a novel hybrid concentrated solar biomass (HCSB) system for a major beef abattoir in Australia. Two prospective design options are presented: The first considers an organic Rankine cycle (ORC) system integrated to a concentrated solar power (CSP) plant and an existing biomass boiler. The second option consists of a hybrid combined cycle (HCC) system fed by an existing biomass boiler, a solar thermal system and biogas, from anaerobic digestion (AD) of liquid waste streams of the abattoir. The two design options are simulated, considering operational modes and energy demand of the abattoir. Costs of energy generation [AU$/MWh] and emission abatement potential [tCO(2-e)], for different solar field sizes [ha], are discussed for both cases. The simple retrofit ORC HCSB solution is characterized by easy integration, but can only cover a fraction of the required electricity. The more sophisticated HCC HCSB system presents a more economical solution, as it can provide 100% renewable heat at a cost of 66.0 AU$/MWhth; and up to 65% of electricity at a cost of 151.7 AU$/MWh(el). The findings of this study highlight the opportunity for HCSB plants for industries with low- to medium (40-250 degrees C) heating demand.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 85 条
  • [1] ABC News, 2004, ABC NEWS
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2012, C P 18 SOLARPACES C
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2011, WORLD ENG CONV
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2018, DELIV 42
  • [5] Australian Farm Institute, 2018, RES REP IMP EN COSTS
  • [6] A review of working fluid and expander selections for organic Rankine cycle
    Bao, Junjiang
    Zhao, Li
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2013, 24 : 325 - 342
  • [7] Beef Central, 2019, COOT AB BACK MARK 20
  • [8] Beef Central, 2019, JAP FOODS PURCH SO N
  • [9] Pure and Pseudo-pure Fluid Thermophysical Property Evaluation and the Open-Source Thermophysical Property Library CoolProp
    Bell, Ian H.
    Wronski, Jorrit
    Quoilin, Sylvain
    Lemort, Vincent
    [J]. INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH, 2014, 53 (06) : 2498 - 2508
  • [10] Bennouna EG, 2014, THERMAL STORAGE SYST, P1, DOI [10.18086/eurosun.2014.10.02, DOI 10.18086/EUROSUN.2014.10.02]