IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v16y2023i15p5676-d1205048.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Thermodynamic Analyses of Sub- and Supercritical ORCs Using R1234yf, R236ea and Their Mixtures as Working Fluids for Geothermal Power Generation

Author

Listed:
  • Qiang Liu

    (National Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Engineering, College of Mechanical and Transportation Engineering, China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249, China)

  • Ran Chen

    (National Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Engineering, College of Mechanical and Transportation Engineering, China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249, China
    The Exploration and Development Research Institute of Huabei Oilfield Company, Renqiu 062552, China)

  • Xinliu Yang

    (National Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Engineering, College of Mechanical and Transportation Engineering, China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249, China)

  • Xiao Xiao

    (National Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Engineering, College of Mechanical and Transportation Engineering, China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249, China)

Abstract

Organic Rankine cycles (ORCs) have been widely used to convert medium-low-temperature geothermal energy to electricity. Proper cycle layout is generally determined by considering both the thermo-physical properties of the working fluid and the geothermal brine temperature. This work investigates saturated, superheated and supercritical ORCs using R1234yf/R236ea for brine temperatures of 383.15 K, 403.15 K and 423.15 K. The evaporation and condensation pressures were optimized to maximize the net power outputs. The thermodynamic characteristics of the cycles at the optimal conditions were analyzed. The saturated ORCs produced slightly more net power than superheated cycles for the R1234yf mole fraction less than 0.2 due to lower exergy losses in the evaporator and condenser; however, the limited evaporation pressure by the turning point at the higher R1234yf mole fraction led to excessive exergy losses in the evaporator. Two R1234yf mole fractions maximized the net power and exergy efficiency in a superheated cycle, with the maximum net power output occurring at the R1234yf mole fraction of 0.8 for brine temperatures of 383.15 K and 403.15 K. The exergy losses for evaporation were reduced by 6–12.7% due to the use of an IHE, while those for condensation were reduced up to 42% in a superheated cycle for a brine temperature of 423.15 K, resulting in a 1–17.8% increase in the exergy efficiency. A supercritical cycle with an IHE using R1234yf/R236ea (0.85/0.15) generated the maximum net power output for a brine temperature of 423.15 K, 8.2–17.5% higher than a superheated cycle with an IHE.

Suggested Citation

  • Qiang Liu & Ran Chen & Xinliu Yang & Xiao Xiao, 2023. "Thermodynamic Analyses of Sub- and Supercritical ORCs Using R1234yf, R236ea and Their Mixtures as Working Fluids for Geothermal Power Generation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-22, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:15:p:5676-:d:1205048
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/15/5676/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/15/5676/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhang, Cheng & Liu, Chao & Xu, Xiaoxiao & Li, Qibin & Wang, Shukun & Chen, Xi, 2018. "Effects of superheat and internal heat exchanger on thermo-economic performance of organic Rankine cycle based on fluid type and heat sources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 482-495.
    2. Xu, Weicong & Deng, Shuai & Su, Wen & Zhang, Ying & Zhao, Li & Yu, Zhixin, 2018. "How to approach Carnot cycle via zeotropic working fluid: Research methodology and case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 576-586.
    3. Liu, Qiang & Duan, Yuanyuan & Yang, Zhen, 2014. "Effect of condensation temperature glide on the performance of organic Rankine cycles with zeotropic mixture working fluids," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 394-404.
    4. Heberle, Florian & Preißinger, Markus & Brüggemann, Dieter, 2012. "Zeotropic mixtures as working fluids in Organic Rankine Cycles for low-enthalpy geothermal resources," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 364-370.
    5. Florian Heberle & Dieter Brüggemann, 2016. "Thermo-Economic Analysis of Zeotropic Mixtures and Pure Working Fluids in Organic Rankine Cycles for Waste Heat Recovery," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, March.
    6. Chys, M. & van den Broek, M. & Vanslambrouck, B. & De Paepe, M., 2012. "Potential of zeotropic mixtures as working fluids in organic Rankine cycles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 623-632.
    7. Braimakis, Konstantinos & Mikelis, Angelos & Charalampidis, Antonios & Karellas, Sotirios, 2020. "Exergetic performance of CO2 and ultra-low GWP refrigerant mixtures as working fluids in ORC for waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    8. Costante M. Invernizzi & Abubakr Ayub & Gioele Di Marcoberardino & Paolo Iora, 2019. "Pure and Hydrocarbon Binary Mixtures as Possible Alternatives Working Fluids to the Usual Organic Rankine Cycles Biomass Conversion Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-17, October.
    9. Xinxin Zhang & Yin Zhang & Min Cao & Jingfu Wang & Yuting Wu & Chongfang Ma, 2019. "Working Fluid Selection for Organic Rankine Cycle Using Single-Screw Expander," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-23, August.
    10. Feng, Yongqiang & Zhang, Yaning & Li, Bingxi & Yang, Jinfu & Shi, Yang, 2015. "Sensitivity analysis and thermoeconomic comparison of ORCs (organic Rankine cycles) for low temperature waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 664-677.
    11. Miao, Zheng & Zhang, Kai & Wang, Mengxiao & Xu, Jinliang, 2019. "Thermodynamic selection criteria of zeotropic mixtures for subcritical organic Rankine cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 484-497.
    12. Florian Heberle & Dieter Brüggemann, 2015. "Thermo-Economic Evaluation of Organic Rankine Cycles for Geothermal Power Generation Using Zeotropic Mixtures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-28, March.
    13. Liu, Qiang & Shen, Aijing & Duan, Yuanyuan, 2015. "Parametric optimization and performance analyses of geothermal organic Rankine cycles using R600a/R601a mixtures as working fluids," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 410-420.
    14. Shuang Wang & Wei Zhang & Yong-Qiang Feng & Xin Wang & Qian Wang & Yu-Zhuang Liu & Yu Wang & Lin Yao, 2020. "Entropy, Entransy and Exergy Analysis of a Dual-Loop Organic Rankine Cycle (DORC) Using Mixture Working Fluids for Engine Waste Heat Recovery," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-25, March.
    15. Invernizzi, Costante & Bombarda, Paola, 1997. "Thermodynamic performance of selected HCFS for geothermal applications," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 22(9), pages 887-895.
    16. Chen, Huijuan & Goswami, D. Yogi & Rahman, Muhammad M. & Stefanakos, Elias K., 2011. "A supercritical Rankine cycle using zeotropic mixture working fluids for the conversion of low-grade heat into power," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 549-555.
    17. Song, Chongzhi & Gu, Mingyan & Miao, Zheng & Liu, Chao & Xu, Jinliang, 2019. "Effect of fluid dryness and critical temperature on trans-critical organic Rankine cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 97-109.
    18. Luo, Xianglong & Wang, Yupeng & Liang, Junwei & Qi, Ji & Su, Wen & Yang, Zhi & Chen, Jianyong & Wang, Chao & Chen, Ying, 2019. "Improved correlations for working fluid properties prediction and their application in performance evaluation of sub-critical Organic Rankine Cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 122-137.
    19. Chen, Qicheng & Xu, Jinliang & Chen, Hongxia, 2012. "A new design method for Organic Rankine Cycles with constraint of inlet and outlet heat carrier fluid temperatures coupling with the heat source," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 562-573.
    20. Shi, Lingfeng & Shu, Gequn & Tian, Hua & Deng, Shuai, 2018. "A review of modified Organic Rankine cycles (ORCs) for internal combustion engine waste heat recovery (ICE-WHR)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 95-110.
    21. Anderson, Austin & Rezaie, Behnaz, 2019. "Geothermal technology: Trends and potential role in a sustainable future," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C), pages 18-34.
    22. Li, Chengyu & Wang, Huaixin, 2016. "Power cycles for waste heat recovery from medium to high temperature flue gas sources – from a view of thermodynamic optimization," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 707-721.
    23. Chen, Huijuan & Goswami, D. Yogi & Stefanakos, Elias K., 2010. "A review of thermodynamic cycles and working fluids for the conversion of low-grade heat," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(9), pages 3059-3067, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xu, Weicong & Zhao, Ruikai & Deng, Shuai & Zhao, Li & Mao, Samuel S., 2021. "Is zeotropic working fluid a promising option for organic Rankine cycle: A quantitative evaluation based on literature data," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    2. Feili, Milad & Rostamzadeh, Hadi & Ghaebi, Hadi, 2022. "Thermo-mechanical energy level approach integrated with exergoeconomic optimization for realistic cost evaluation of a novel micro-CCHP system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 630-657.
    3. Xu, Weicong & Zhao, Li & Mao, Samuel S. & Deng, Shuai, 2020. "Towards novel low temperature thermodynamic cycle: A critical review originated from organic Rankine cycle," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 270(C).
    4. Magdalena Santos-Rodriguez, M. & Flores-Tlacuahuac, Antonio & Zavala, Victor M., 2017. "A stochastic optimization approach for the design of organic fluid mixtures for low-temperature heat recovery," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 145-159.
    5. Braimakis, Konstantinos & Mikelis, Angelos & Charalampidis, Antonios & Karellas, Sotirios, 2020. "Exergetic performance of CO2 and ultra-low GWP refrigerant mixtures as working fluids in ORC for waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    6. Miao, Zheng & Zhang, Kai & Wang, Mengxiao & Xu, Jinliang, 2019. "Thermodynamic selection criteria of zeotropic mixtures for subcritical organic Rankine cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 484-497.
    7. Braimakis, Konstantinos & Grispos, Victoras & Karellas, Sotirios, 2021. "Exergetic efficiency potential of double-stage ORCs with zeotropic mixtures of natural hydrocarbons and CO2," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    8. Bamorovat Abadi, Gholamreza & Kim, Kyung Chun, 2017. "Investigation of organic Rankine cycles with zeotropic mixtures as a working fluid: Advantages and issues," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1000-1013.
    9. Li, Jian & Ge, Zhong & Duan, Yuanyuan & Yang, Zhen & Liu, Qiang, 2018. "Parametric optimization and thermodynamic performance comparison of single-pressure and dual-pressure evaporation organic Rankine cycles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 409-421.
    10. Bao, Junjiang & Zhao, Li, 2013. "A review of working fluid and expander selections for organic Rankine cycle," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 325-342.
    11. Jesper G. Andreasen & Martin R. Kærn & Leonardo Pierobon & Ulrik Larsen & Fredrik Haglind, 2016. "Multi-Objective Optimization of Organic Rankine Cycle Power Plants Using Pure and Mixed Working Fluids," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-15, April.
    12. Kajurek, Jakub & Rusowicz, Artur & Grzebielec, Andrzej & Bujalski, Wojciech & Futyma, Kamil & Rudowicz, Zbigniew, 2019. "Selection of refrigerants for a modified organic Rankine cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 1-8.
    13. Oyeniyi A. Oyewunmi & Christos N. Markides, 2016. "Thermo-Economic and Heat Transfer Optimization of Working-Fluid Mixtures in a Low-Temperature Organic Rankine Cycle System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-21, June.
    14. Sun, Xiaocun & Shi, Lingfeng & Tian, Hua & Wang, Xuan & Zhang, Yonghao & Yao, Yu & Sun, Rui & Shu, Gequn, 2022. "Analysis of an ideal composition tunable combined cooling and power cycle with CO2-based mixture," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    15. Feng, Yongqiang & Hung, TzuChen & Zhang, Yaning & Li, Bingxi & Yang, Jinfu & Shi, Yang, 2015. "Performance comparison of low-grade ORCs (organic Rankine cycles) using R245fa, pentane and their mixtures based on the thermoeconomic multi-objective optimization and decision makings," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(P2), pages 2018-2029.
    16. Dai, Baomin & Li, Minxia & Ma, Yitai, 2014. "Thermodynamic analysis of carbon dioxide blends with low GWP (global warming potential) working fluids-based transcritical Rankine cycles for low-grade heat energy recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 942-952.
    17. Satanphol, K. & Pridasawas, W. & Suphanit, B., 2017. "A study on optimal composition of zeotropic working fluid in an Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) for low grade heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 326-339.
    18. Mohan, Sooraj & Dinesha, P. & Campana, Pietro Elia, 2022. "ANN-PSO aided selection of hydrocarbons as working fluid for low-temperature organic Rankine cycle and thermodynamic evaluation of optimal working fluid," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    19. Li, Zhouhang & Tang, Guoli & Wu, Yuxin & Zhai, Yuling & Xu, Jianxin & Wang, Hua & Lu, Junfu, 2016. "Improved gas heaters for supercritical CO2 Rankine cycles: Considerations on forced and mixed convection heat transfer enhancement," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 126-141.
    20. Savvas L. Douvartzides & Aristidis Tsiolikas & Nikolaos D. Charisiou & Manolis Souliotis & Vayos Karayannis & Nikolaos Taousanidis, 2022. "Energy and Exergy-Based Screening of Various Refrigerants, Hydrocarbons and Siloxanes for the Optimization of Biomass Boiler–Organic Rankine Cycle (BB–ORC) Heat and Power Cogeneration Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-26, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:15:p:5676-:d:1205048. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.