Diseño de una unidad de recuperación de calor basada en un ciclo rankine orgánico para Termonorte Axia
Termonorte is a triple fuelled thermal power station with 93 MW of installed capacity, located in troncal del caribe, Santa Marta, Magdalena. The electrical dispatch of this power plant is subject to the stock selling price of their kW. Their operation is characterized by fluctuating dispatch due to...
- Autores:
-
Henao Barraza, Erick Gerardo
Zambrano Zambrano, Camilo Andrés
- Tipo de recurso:
- Fecha de publicación:
- 2020
- Institución:
- Universidad del Norte
- Repositorio:
- Repositorio Uninorte
- Idioma:
- eng
- OAI Identifier:
- oai:manglar.uninorte.edu.co:10584/8888
- Acceso en línea:
- http://hdl.handle.net/10584/8888
- Palabra clave:
- ORC
Ciclo Rankine Orgánico
Recuperación de calor
Caldera
Fuente de calor
Energía eléctrica
Central térmica
Organic Rankine Cycle
Waste heat recovery
Boiler
Heat source
Thermal power station
Electrical energy
- Rights
- License
- Universidad del Norte
Summary: | Termonorte is a triple fuelled thermal power station with 93 MW of installed capacity, located in troncal del caribe, Santa Marta, Magdalena. The electrical dispatch of this power plant is subject to the stock selling price of their kW. Their operation is characterized by fluctuating dispatch due to the high costs of the used fuels, their most frequent values for their dispatch in the last year were 0 MW, 72 MW and 27 MW respectively with an operating time of 39,9%, 24,32% and 19,48%. 3 alternatives were proposed in order to increase the efficiency of their operation using the waste heat from a boiler in operation. The available space and the initial costs are presented as the main aspects to focus when evaluating alternatives as a result from the QFD process. Three ORC alternatives are proposed: a first one using air cooling and toluene as working fluid, a second one using air cooling and n-penthane as working fluid and a third one using a cooling tower and solkatherm as a working fluid and as a result of the AHP process the second alternative was chosen. This alternative is composed by a shell and tube heat exchanger, air coolers to avoid the unavailability of water, a chemical resistant pump, a closed pipe circuit and a refrigerant compatible turbine. The results obtained from the Aspen HYSYS simulations and a brief economic analysis showcases the non-viability of the project as recovering 354.3kW as the net energy gain and increasing the efficiency of the whole process by 2,8% is not enough. all of the above is reflected in the IRR of -16% calculated for a 20-year base. It is suggested to revisit the project when the technology has advanced and the necessary investment have dropped due to the massification. |
---|