IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i22p12428-d676260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling of Combined Lead Fast Reactor and Concentrating Solar Power Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Cycles to Demonstrate Feasibility, Efficiency Gains, and Cost Reductions

Author

Listed:
  • Brian T. White

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1415 Engineering Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA)

  • Michael J. Wagner

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1415 Engineering Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA)

  • Ty Neises

    (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Thermal Systems Group, 15013 Denver West Parkway, Golden, CO 80401, USA)

  • Cory Stansbury

    (Westinghouse Electric Company, Lead Fast Reactor Systems Development, 1000 Westinghouse Dr, Cranberry Twp, PA 16066, USA)

  • Ben Lindley

    (Department of Engineering Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1500 Engineering Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA)

Abstract

Solar power has innate issues with weather, grid demand and time of day, which can be mitigated through use of thermal energy storage for concentrating solar power (CSP). Nuclear reactors, including lead-cooled fast reactors (LFRs), can adjust power output according to demand; but with high fixed costs and low operating costs, there may not be sufficient economic incentive to make this worthwhile. We investigate potential synergies through coupling CSP and LFR together in a single supercritical CO 2 Brayton cycle and/or using the same thermal energy storage. Combining these cycles allows for the LFR to thermally charge the salt storage in the CSP cycle during low-demand periods to be dispatched when grid demand increases. The LFR/CSP coupling into one cycle is modeled to find the preferred location of the LFR heat exchanger, CSP heat exchanger, sCO 2 -to-salt heat exchanger (C2S), turbines, and recuperators within the supercritical CO 2 Brayton cycle. Three cycle configurations have been studied: two-cycle configuration, which uses CSP and LFR heat for dedicated turbocompressors, has the highest efficiencies but with less component synergies; a combined cycle with CSP and LFR heat sources in parallel is the simplest with the lowest efficiencies; and a combined cycle with separate high-temperature recuperators for both the CSP and LFR is a compromise between efficiency and component synergies. Additionally, four thermal energy storage charging techniques are studied: the turbine positioned before C2S, requiring a high LFR outlet temperature for viability; the turbine after the C2S, reducing turbine inlet temperature and therefore power; the turbine parallel to the C2S producing moderate efficiency; and a dedicated circulator loop. While all configurations have pros and cons, use of a single cycle offers component synergies with limited efficiency penalty. Using a turbine in parallel with the C2S heat exchanger is feasible but results in a low charging efficiency, while a dedicated circulator loop offers flexibility and near-perfect heat storage efficiency but increasing cost with additional cycle components.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian T. White & Michael J. Wagner & Ty Neises & Cory Stansbury & Ben Lindley, 2021. "Modeling of Combined Lead Fast Reactor and Concentrating Solar Power Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Cycles to Demonstrate Feasibility, Efficiency Gains, and Cost Reductions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-24, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:22:p:12428-:d:676260
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/22/12428/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/22/12428/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wang, Kun & Li, Ming-Jia & Guo, Jia-Qi & Li, Peiwen & Liu, Zhan-Bin, 2018. "A systematic comparison of different S-CO2 Brayton cycle layouts based on multi-objective optimization for applications in solar power tower plants," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 109-121.
    2. Iverson, Brian D. & Conboy, Thomas M. & Pasch, James J. & Kruizenga, Alan M., 2013. "Supercritical CO2 Brayton cycles for solar-thermal energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 957-970.
    3. Wang, Gang & Wang, Cheng & Chen, Zeshao & Hu, Peng, 2020. "Design and performance evaluation of an innovative solar-nuclear complementarity power system using the S–CO2 Brayton cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gabriel J. Soto & Ben Lindley & Ty Neises & Cory Stansbury & Michael J. Wagner, 2022. "Dispatch Optimization, System Design and Cost Benefit Analysis of a Nuclear Reactor with Molten Salt Thermal Storage," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-23, May.

    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. Pan, Lisheng & Shi, Weixiu & Wei, Xiaolin & Li, Teng & Li, Bo, 2020. "Experimental verification of the self-condensing CO2 transcritical power cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    2. Wang, Di & Han, Xinrui & Li, Haoyu & Li, Xiaoli, 2023. "Dynamic simulation and parameter analysis of solar-coal hybrid power plant based on the supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    3. Linares, José I. & Montes, María J. & Cantizano, Alexis & Sánchez, Consuelo, 2020. "A novel supercritical CO2 recompression Brayton power cycle for power tower concentrating solar plants," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    4. Yang, Jingze & Yang, Zhen & Duan, Yuanyuan, 2021. "Load matching and techno-economic analysis of CSP plant with S–CO2 Brayton cycle in CSP-PV-wind hybrid system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    5. Sun, Lei & Liu, Tianyuan & Wang, Ding & Huang, Chengming & Xie, Yonghui, 2022. "Deep learning method based on graph neural network for performance prediction of supercritical CO2 power systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    6. Yang, Jingze & Yang, Zhen & Duan, Yuanyuan, 2020. "Off-design performance of a supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle integrated with a solar power tower system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    7. Ma, Yuegeng & Morozyuk, Tatiana & Liu, Ming & Yan, Junjie & Liu, Jiping, 2019. "Optimal integration of recompression supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle with main compression intercooling in solar power tower system based on exergoeconomic approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 1134-1154.
    8. Guo, Jiangfeng, 2016. "Design analysis of supercritical carbon dioxide recuperator," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 21-27.
    9. Bai, Wengang & Li, Hongzhi & Zhang, Xuwei & Qiao, Yongqiang & Zhang, Chun & Gao, Wei & Yao, Mingyu, 2022. "Thermodynamic analysis of CO2–SF6 mixture working fluid supercritical Brayton cycle used for solar power plants," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    10. Wang, Xiaohe & Liu, Qibin & Bai, Zhang & Lei, Jing & Jin, Hongguang, 2018. "Thermodynamic investigations of the supercritical CO2 system with solar energy and biomass," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 227(C), pages 108-118.
    11. Kim, Min Seok & Ahn, Yoonhan & Kim, Beomjoo & Lee, Jeong Ik, 2016. "Study on the supercritical CO2 power cycles for landfill gas firing gas turbine bottoming cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 893-909.
    12. Wang, Shengpeng & Zhang, Yifan & Li, Hongzhi & Yao, Mingyu & Peng, Botao & Yan, Junjie, 2020. "Thermohydrodynamic analysis of the vertical gas wall and reheat gas wall in a 300 MW supercritical CO2 boiler," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    13. Wang, Kun & He, Ya-Ling & Zhu, Han-Hui, 2017. "Integration between supercritical CO2 Brayton cycles and molten salt solar power towers: A review and a comprehensive comparison of different cycle layouts," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 819-836.
    14. Ma, Teng & Li, Ming-Jia & Xu, Jin-Liang & Cao, Feng, 2019. "Thermodynamic analysis and performance prediction on dynamic response characteristic of PCHE in 1000 MW S-CO2 coal fired power plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 123-138.
    15. Son, Seongmin & Jeong, Yongju & Cho, Seong Kuk & Lee, Jeong Ik, 2020. "Development of supercritical CO2 turbomachinery off-design model using 1D mean-line method and Deep Neural Network," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    16. Ephraim Bonah Agyekum & Tomiwa Sunday Adebayo & Festus Victor Bekun & Nallapaneni Manoj Kumar & Manoj Kumar Panjwani, 2021. "Effect of Two Different Heat Transfer Fluids on the Performance of Solar Tower CSP by Comparing Recompression Supercritical CO 2 and Rankine Power Cycles, China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-19, June.
    17. Zhao, Yongming & Zhao, Lifeng & Wang, Bo & Zhang, Shijie & Chi, Jinling & Xiao, Yunhan, 2018. "Thermodynamic analysis of a novel dual expansion coal-fueled direct-fired supercritical carbon dioxide power cycle," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 480-495.
    18. Li, Hongzhi & Zhang, Yifan & Yao, Mingyu & Yang, Yu & Han, Wanlong & Bai, Wengang, 2019. "Design assessment of a 5 MW fossil-fired supercritical CO2 power cycle pilot loop," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 792-804.
    19. Crespi, Francesco & Gavagnin, Giacomo & Sánchez, David & Martínez, Gonzalo S., 2017. "Supercritical carbon dioxide cycles for power generation: A review," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 152-183.
    20. Al-Sulaiman, Fahad A. & Atif, Maimoon, 2015. "Performance comparison of different supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycles integrated with a solar power tower," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 61-71.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:22:p:12428-:d:676260. 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.