Optimal Design and Operation of a Polygeneration System in ...

Åbo Akademi University - Thermal and Flow Engineering Lab, Biskopsgatan 8, FI-20500, Åbo, Finland

1

Optimal Design and Operation of a

Polygeneration System

in a Steel Plant

H. Ghanbari


2

Motivation Model Description Case study Remarks

7-Nov-13 Åbo Akademi University - Thermal and Flow Engineering Biskopsgatan 8, FI-20500, Åbo, Finland

3

Sustainable Development

Motivation

Sustainable Process Design

Society

Enviroment

Economy

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Economic development Individual predictive model Dynamic model with more degree of freedom: flexibility General tools to consider design, operation, logistic, environmental and social legislation Supply chain: secondary small technology barrier industry/biorefinery/CHP


4

Looking for holistic approach to process design and operation

that emphasizes the unity of the process and optimizes its

design and operation

Motivation JR

C report by N

. Pardo et al, 2012

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Examples of Specific Performance Targets:   Minimum heating and cooling utilities   Process cogeneration/CHP   Heat induced separation networks   Maximum usage of process MSAs/minimum cost of MSAs for mass-exchange networks   Wastewater minimization   Hydrogen management   Maximum recycle of process resources   Minimum usage of fresh resources/discharge of waste   Reactors and reactive separators   Maximum process yield TARGET New technologies Moderate cost modification (Equipment replacement/addition| Material substitution) No cost/low cost strategies (minor structural mofification such as mixing, recycling| change in operation condition)


5

Numerous alternative

A systematic methodology to extract optimum solution

Process must be treated as an integrated system

BIG PICTURE FIRST,

DEATAILS LATER

Flexibility

Expenses

Motivation

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Energy Integration+Mass Integration+ Property Integration=Process Integration DESIGN CHALLENGES • Should a stream (source) be segregated and split? To how many fractions? What should be the flowrate of each split? • Should streams or splits of streams be mixed? To what extent? • What should be the optimum feed entering each sink? What should be its composition? • What is the minimum amount of fresh resource to be used? • What is the minimum discharge of unused process sources?

CP: Coke Plant, SP: Sinter Plant, ST: Hot Stoves, CCP: CO2 Capturing Plant, BF: Blast Furnace, BOF: Basic Oxygen Furnace and CHP: Combined Heat and Power Plant, GR: Gas Reforming unit, MP: Methanol Plant


6

Model Description

PC/


7

Superstructure for suggested Integrated Steelmaking with polygeneration plant.

Model Description


8

Model Description

Mathematical Programming

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Reduce the bilinear terms


9

𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑡𝑡𝑓𝑓

∨ �𝑌𝑌(𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡ℎ, 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑡𝑡𝑓𝑓, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖)ℎ𝑚𝑚�𝑓𝑓𝑗𝑗 ,𝑥𝑥𝑗𝑗 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖�ℎ𝑡𝑡�𝑓𝑓𝑗𝑗 ,𝐻𝐻𝑗𝑗 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖�

� = 0

𝐴𝐴𝑗𝑗 𝑓𝑓(𝑗𝑗, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 𝑏𝑏𝑗𝑗 ℎ𝑡𝑡�𝑓𝑓𝑗𝑗 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖� = 0

⎣⎢⎢⎢⎡

𝑌𝑌(𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖)ℎ𝑚𝑚(𝑓𝑓𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴 ,𝑅𝑅𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 0

ℎ𝑝𝑝(𝑓𝑓𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴 , 𝑥𝑥𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴 ,𝑅𝑅𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴 ,𝛽𝛽𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 0ℎ𝑡𝑡(𝑓𝑓𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴 ,𝑇𝑇𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 0ℎ𝑡𝑡(𝑓𝑓𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 0 ⎦

⎥⎥⎥⎤

∨

⎣⎢⎢⎢⎢⎡

𝑌𝑌(𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖)𝐴𝐴𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓(𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 𝑏𝑏𝑓𝑓

ℎ𝑝𝑝(𝑓𝑓𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 , 𝑥𝑥𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 0ℎ𝑡𝑡(𝑓𝑓𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 ,𝑇𝑇𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 0

ℎ𝑡𝑡(𝑓𝑓𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 0 ⎦⎥⎥⎥⎥⎤

𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡∨

⎣⎢⎢⎡

𝑌𝑌(𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖)𝐴𝐴𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡 𝑓𝑓(𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 𝑏𝑏𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑡𝑡(𝑓𝑓𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡 ,𝑇𝑇𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 0ℎ𝑡𝑡(𝑓𝑓𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 0 ⎦

⎥⎥⎤

𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝∨

⎣⎢⎢⎢⎡

𝑌𝑌(𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖)𝐴𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 𝑓𝑓(𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 𝑏𝑏𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝

ℎ𝑡𝑡�𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 ,𝑇𝑇𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖� = 0ℎ𝑡𝑡�𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖� = 0 ⎦

⎥⎥⎥⎤

⎣⎢⎢⎡

𝑌𝑌(𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖)𝐴𝐴𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑓𝑓(𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 𝑏𝑏𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀ℎ𝑡𝑡(𝑓𝑓𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 ,𝑇𝑇𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 0ℎ𝑡𝑡(𝑓𝑓𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 0 ⎦

⎥⎥⎤∨ �

¬𝑌𝑌𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑓𝑓𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 = 0ℎ𝑡𝑡 = 0ℎ𝑡𝑡 = 0

�

𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝∨

⎣⎢⎢⎢⎢⎡

𝑌𝑌(𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖)𝐴𝐴𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 𝑓𝑓(𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝, 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖) = 𝑏𝑏𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝

ℎ𝑝𝑝�𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 ,𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖� = 0ℎ𝑡𝑡�𝑓𝑓𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 ,𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 ,𝑃𝑃𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖� = 0

ℎ𝑡𝑡�𝑓𝑓𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 . , 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖� = 0 ⎦⎥⎥⎥⎥⎤

𝑗𝑗 ∈ {𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵,𝐶𝐶𝐻𝐻𝑃𝑃,𝑃𝑃𝑌𝑌𝑅𝑅𝑃𝑃}

𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑡𝑡𝑓𝑓 ∈ {𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶,𝐵𝐵𝑀𝑀,𝐶𝐶𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂,𝑁𝑁𝐶𝐶,𝑃𝑃𝐶𝐶𝑂𝑂} 𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡ℎ ∈ {𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐. 1, 𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐. 2, 𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐. 3}

𝑗𝑗 ∈ � 𝐴𝐴𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃,𝑊𝑊𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃,𝐶𝐶𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃,𝐶𝐶1,𝐶𝐶7,

𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝐶𝐶𝐻𝐻,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶,𝐵𝐵𝐶𝐶𝐵𝐵,𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃,𝐻𝐻𝑃𝑃� 𝑗𝑗 ∈ {𝐴𝐴𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃,𝑊𝑊𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃,𝐶𝐶𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃,𝐶𝐶1,𝐶𝐶7,𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝐶𝐶𝐻𝐻}

∀ 𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡.∈ {𝑃𝑃𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑅,𝐶𝐶𝐷𝐷𝑅𝑅,𝑃𝑃𝐶𝐶𝑅𝑅} ∀ 𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡.∈ {𝑂𝑂𝑃𝑃𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝐶𝐶𝐻𝐻,𝐶𝐶𝑃𝑃𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝐶𝐶𝐻𝐻}

∀ 𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 ∈ {𝑇𝑇𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑅𝑅𝑀𝑀} ∀ 𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 ∈ {𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝑀𝑀}

∀ 𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 ∈ {𝐶𝐶2:𝐶𝐶6}

𝑌𝑌𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 ⇒ �𝑃𝑃𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑖𝑛𝑛 ≤ 𝑃𝑃𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 ≤ 𝑃𝑃𝑚𝑚𝑟𝑟𝑥𝑥 , 𝑇𝑇𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑖𝑛𝑛 ≤ 𝑇𝑇𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 ≤ 𝑇𝑇𝑚𝑚𝑟𝑟𝑥𝑥 � 𝑌𝑌𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡 ⇒ (𝑃𝑃𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑖𝑛𝑛 ≤ 𝑃𝑃𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡 ≤ 𝑃𝑃𝑚𝑚𝑟𝑟𝑥𝑥 , 𝑇𝑇𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑖𝑛𝑛 ≤ 𝑇𝑇𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡 ≤ 𝑇𝑇𝑚𝑚𝑟𝑟𝑥𝑥 ) ¬ 𝑌𝑌𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 ⇒ 𝑌𝑌𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 ¬ 𝑌𝑌𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡 ⇒ 𝑌𝑌𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 𝑌𝑌𝐶𝐶𝑃𝑃𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝐶𝐶𝐻𝐻 ⇒ 𝑌𝑌𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑌𝑌𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 ,𝑌𝑌𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 ,𝑌𝑌𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡 ,𝑌𝑌𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 ,𝑌𝑌𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴 ,𝑌𝑌𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 ,𝑌𝑌𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑡𝑡𝑓𝑓 ∈ {𝑇𝑇𝑟𝑟𝑓𝑓𝑡𝑡,𝐵𝐵𝑟𝑟𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡} 𝑓𝑓𝑂𝑂 ≤ 𝑓𝑓 ≤ 𝑓𝑓𝑃𝑃 𝑥𝑥𝑂𝑂 ≤ 𝑥𝑥 ≤ 𝑥𝑥𝑃𝑃

∀ 𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝 ∀ 𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡

∀ 𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝, 𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝 ∀ 𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡, 𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝

∀ 𝑠𝑠𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝, 𝑡𝑡𝑐𝑐𝑚𝑚𝑝𝑝, 𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑡𝑡, 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑡𝑡𝑓𝑓,𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐴𝐴,𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀,𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀,𝐶𝐶𝐻𝐻𝑃𝑃,𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵


10

HS BF GS Air

O2 State no.2

O2

HS BF GS Air

O2 State no.1

O2

HS BF GS

State no.3 Air+O2

State Hot Stoves

State NO. 1 TGR+BL

State NO. 2 BL

State NO. 3 TGR

Model Description


11

Case study

Model Description

- GDP transferred to MINLP using bigM

- 86 binary variables

- 2797 continuous variables

- 4475 constraints

- GMAS/Solvers

Piece wise linear regression approach

- Three level of oxygen enrichment and top gas recycling

from 21-32% (blast enrichment) to full oxygen operation

- conventional blast to high TGR rate


12

Case study

Comparison of polygeneration properties in cold (S1) and warm (S2) season


13

Carbon flow percentage in the system for liquid steel production rate of 170 t/h for cold (S1) and warm season (S2). The percentage of emission from non-fossil fuels carbon carrier is excluded.

Case study


14

Variable (S1) (S2) Oxygen volume [km3n/h] 34.4 35.6 Specific coke rate [kg/thm] 270 261 Specific oil rate [kg/thm] 120 42.1 Specific pellet rate [kg/thm] 456 456 Coal flow rate [t/h] 81.5 81.5 Ore flow rate [t/h] 153 153 Limestone Rate [t/h] 21.3 21.3 Quartzite Rate [t/h] 1.1 9.6 Sinter flow rate [t/h] 160 160 Flame temperature [ºC] 2067 1800 Blast/Recycled top gas temp. [ºC] 1200 1200 Recycled top gas volume [km3n/h] 86 180 Bosh gas volume [km3n/h] 162 181 Top gas temperature [ºC] 115 194 Burden residence time [h] 8.5 8.7 Slag rate [kg/thm] 211 213 COG volume [km3n/h] 17.5 17.5

Optimal process variables for the system for cold (S1) and warm (S2) season. Boldface denotes values at their constraints.

Case study

Thermal and Flow Engineering Lab, Åbo Akademi University, Biskopsgatan 8, FI-20500, Åbo, Finland

15

- The model is implemented in GAMS considering different Objective Functions

(a) minimize specific carbon dioxide emission,

(b) maximize net present value,

(c) minimize carbon dioxide emission based on fossil fuels.

- OBF concept

- Model has 29 binary variables, 1174 continuous variables and 2009

constraints.

- GAMS/BARON is used as global solver to find the optimal solution.

Case study


16

Optimal design and main flow for gasification, CCS and methanol plant for Max

NPV; Min Emission, CDR reactor replacing POR with stream CO2 (dottedline)

Case study


17

Carbon flow percentage in the system for liquid steel production rate of 170 t/h for (a) minimum specific

emission, (b) maximum net present value, and (c) minimum specific emission for fossil fuels. For cases a

and b, the percentage of emission from non-fossil fuels carbon carrier is excluded.

Case study


18

Increase in Net Present Value. Lower specific emission. Flexibility of integrated system to get higher profit. Methanol production is estimated 7 times more for warm

season in compare to cold season.

Remarks

Current Works

Modify model for all possible reducing agent BF injection Integrate with a torrefaction process.


19

Thank you very much for your attention!


20

Variable (a) (b) (c) Oxygen volume [km3n/h] 39.7 34.7 37.0 Specific coke rate [kg/thm] 214.3 213.1 319.5 Specific fuel rate [kg/thm] 120 120 0.0 Specific pellet rate [kg/thm] 544.9 457.5 521.1 Coal flow rate [t/h] 81.5 81.5 81.5 Ore flow rate [t/h] 140.16 153.6 143.8 Limestone Rate [t/h] 20.30 21.3 20.6 Quartzite Rate [t/h] 0.42 1.57 0.1 Sinter flow rate [t/h] 146 160 149.8 Flame temperature [ºC] 1800 1847.1 1877 Recycled top gas temperature [ºC] 1059 1112 1104 Recycled top gas volume [km3n/h] 164.6 160 176.9 Bosh gas volume [km3n/h] 173.5 169 185.1 Top gas temperature [ºC] 170.9 150.8 124.8 Burden residence time [h] 9.5 9.5 7.3 Slag rate [kg/thm] 193.1 207.8 202.1 COG volume [km3n/h] 17.58 17.58 17.58 BOFG volume [km3n/h] 6.15 6.15 6.15 Aux. fuel excluding BF [t/h] 19.4 20 8.85 CO2 Sequestrated [t/h] 107.3 101.9 110.8 Sold coke [t/h] 16.47 15.99 0.7 Sold methanol [t/h] 16.8 14.8 12.9 Sold electricity [MW] 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sold district heat [MW] 0.0 0.0 0.0


21

Pareto frontiers for maximization of net present value and minimization of specific emission rate for a steel plant integrated with a polygeneration system, at a hot metal production rate of 150 thm/h and constant costs of emission and sequestration of (52 and 26 $/ tCO2).

Case study


22

Results from the model for four selected point in the frontier diagram Data is estimated by using MINLP solvers in GAMS and maximum NPV is reported.

1 2 3 4

NPV (G$) 0.49 1.28 1.89 2.04 Specific emission

(tCO2/tls) 0.45 0.55 0.75 0.975

Coal flow rate

(t/h) 0.0 0.0 80.1 80.16

Ore flow rate

(t/h) 133.1 133.1 153.6 153.6

External Coke

Rate (t/h) 56.14 52.6 0.0 0.0

Limestone Rate

(t/h) 25.13 24.8 23.5 23.5

Quartzite Rate

(t/h) 0.012 0.07 0.03 0.03

Pellet Rate (t/h) 90.0 90.0 70.2 70.2 Air Volume Rate

(knm3/h) 106.5 113.0 113.0 113.0

Oxygen flow

Rate (knm3/h) 21.96 17.3 17.8 18.7

Slag Rate

(kg/thm) 220 218.4 216.2 216.2

Scrap Rate (t/h) 37.5 37.5 37.5 37.5 Nitrogen flow

rate (t/h) 47.2 56.0 56.0 56.0

DME flow rate

(t/h) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6

Oil flow rate

(t/h) 21.64 21.9 18.0 18.0

CO2

Sequestrated

(t/h)

148.7 118.8 116.1 81.6

Methanol

production (t/h) 23.38 20.86 21.15 19.34

Steel Cost ($/tls) 358.4 355.1 300.3 311.0

Case study


23

Some Results

Optimal specific emission at different carbon dioxide emission and sequestration cost for the hot metal production rate of 𝟏𝟏𝟏 𝒕𝒉𝒉/𝒉.


24

Some Results (Sensitivity Analysis)

Optimal net present value for a ±100 $ change in main raw material and products at constant hot metal production rate of 150 thm/h and cost of emission and sequestration of 10 $/tCO2.


25

Conceptual Design of Polygeneration System

Superstructure for suggested polygeneration plant.

Date post:	16-Oct-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	0 times

Optimal Design and Operation of a Polygeneration System in ...

Documents