Research Papers: Energy Systems Analysis

Power Generation From Coal Mill Rejection Using Kalina Cycle

[+] Author and Article Information
Goutam Khankari

Mejia Thermal Power Station,
Damodar Valley Corporation,
West Bengal 722183, India
e-mail: goutam_khankari@yahoo.co.in

Sujit Karmakar

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
National Institute of Technology Durgapur,
West Bengal 713209, India
e-mail: sujitkarmakar@yahoo.com

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Advanced Energy Systems Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received May 21, 2015; final manuscript received April 13, 2016; published online May 5, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Gunnar Tamm.

J. Energy Resour. Technol 138(5), 052004 (May 05, 2016) (11 pages) Paper No: JERT-15-1192; doi: 10.1115/1.4033425 History: Received May 21, 2015; Revised April 13, 2016

This paper proposes an ammonia–water Kalina cycle driven by low-grade waste energy released from the combustion reactions of mill's rejection which is coupled with 500 MWe coal-fired thermal power plant to quantify the additional electrical power. Energy of combustion for mill rejection is computed by combustion modeling equations. A thermodynamic property calculator for the binary mixture and a computer simulation program have been developed by MS-Excel and Visual Basic for Application (VBA) to calculate and optimize the Kalina cycle operating parameters based on thermodynamic modeling equations. Variation of key operating parameters, namely, turbine inlet pressure, mass flow rate of binary mixture, and ammonia mass fraction in mixture is studied and filters the optimum value accordingly to maximize the cycle efficiency. Techno-commercial feasibility is also done through economic analysis. The results show that about 562.745 kWe power generation can be added with total plant generation for organization profit. This will enhance the combined plant efficiency from 38.559% to 38.604%. Maximum net Kalina cycle efficiency of 24.74% can be achieved with ammonia mass fraction of 0.4 at condenser back pressure of 1.957 bar and turbine inlet pressure and temperature of 20 bar and 442.40 K, respectively. Ammonia mass fraction of 0.4 is the optimum choice for 20 bar turbine inlet pressure to get maximum output after maintaining minimum 50 K degree of superheat compared to ammonia mass fraction of 0.3. The cycle performance at ammonia mass fraction of 0.4 is better than 0.5 due to less condenser back pressure. Kalina cycle operating with less mass flow rate performs higher cycle efficiency when dryness fraction at turbine exhaust is less than 1 and performance deteriorates at above 1. This deterioration is due to higher condenser energy loss carried away by cooling water (CW) flow. The simple payback period of this system is around 5.5 years if the system is running with 80% plant availability factor and 100% plant load factor.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Kalina cycle coupled with main plant boiler

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) Simulation algorithm for optimizing the Kalina cycle operating parameters. (b) Simulation algorithm for optimizing the Kalina cycle operating parameters.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Effect of turbine inlet pressure on KCS

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Effect of turbine inlet pressure on Kalina cycle performance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Effect of Kalina cycle turbine inlet pressure on inlet temperature and dryness fraction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Effect of mass flow rate on Kalina cycle performance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Effect of mass flow rate on condenser performance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Effect of mass flow rate of binary mixture on Kalina cycle at NH3 mass fraction of 0.5, 0.4, and 0.3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Effect of NH3 mass fraction on Kalina cycle at 20 bar turbine inlet pressure and mass flow rate of 1.483 kg/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Effect of mill rejection sample on KCS output

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Use of mill rejection on combined plant performance




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In