Energy, exergy, exergoeconomic, and exergoenvironmental analyses and multi-objective optimization of a CPC driven solar combined cooling and power cycle with different working fluids

Abstract

This paper aims to provide comprehensive 4E (energy, exergy, exergoeconomic, and exergoenvironmental) and advanced exergy analyses of the Refrigeration Cycle (RC) and Heat Recovery Refrigeration Cycle (HRRC) and comparison of the performance with R744 (CO2) and R744A (N2O) working fluids. Moreover, multi-objective optimization of the systems has been considered to define the optimal conditions and the best cycle from various perspectives. In HRRC, heat recovery is used as a heat source for an organic Rankine cycle. The energy and exergy analysis results show that utilizing HRRC with both refrigerants increases the coefficient of performance (COP) and exergy efficiency. COP and exergy efficiency for HRRC-R744 have been obtained 2.82 and 30.7%, respectively. Due to the better thermodynamic performance of HRRC, other analyses have been performed on this cycle. Exergoeconomic analysis results show that using R744A leads to an increase in the total product cost. Total product cost with R744 and R744A have been calculated by 1.56 $/h and 1.96$/h, respectively. Additionally, to obtain the processes' environmental impact, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is used. Exergoenvironmental analysis showed that using R744A increases the product environmental impact by 32%. Owning to the high amount of endogenous exergy destruction rate in the compressor and ejector compared to other equipment, they have more priority for improvement. Multi-objective optimization has been performed with exergy efficiency and total product cost objective functions as well as COP and product environmental impact for both refrigerants, which indicates that HRRC-R744 has better performance economically and environmentally. In optimal condition, the value of exergy efficiency, total product cost, COP, and the product environmental impact have been accounted for by 28.51%, 1.44 $/h, 2.76, and 149.01 mpts/h, respectively.

Comparative Evaluation for Selected Gas Turbine Cycles

“…Using equation. (10), the exergy flow rate for each system component can be determined [30]. Equation.…”

“…Significant energy losses to the ecosystem arise from incomplete combustion processes and the rapid expansion of high-temperature, high-pressure exhaust gases, resulting in environmental pollution and contributing to global warming [10], [11]. A study by Ibrahim et al [15] studied simplified gas turbine model through energy and exergy assessments found that the combustion chamber was the primary locus of exergy destruction.…”

A review of conventional and exergetic life cycle assessments of organic Rankine cycle plants exploiting various low-temperature energy resources

“…Zandi et al. ( Zandi et al., 2021 ) applied the exergoenvironmental method to assess the environmental impact of a solar-driven ORC plant integrated with the refrigeration cycle for the production of cooling. The ecoindicator 99 approach was employed in the LCA phase of the study to allocate environmental impact points to the system components and streams.…”

Technoeconomic Analysis of 1 MWp Grid Connected Solar Power Plant in Konya (Türkiye)

“…Solar energy investment increased by 33% in the first half of 2021, reaching 120 billion dollars. China became the world's largest investor in solar energy in 2022, with a 173% increase and 41 billion dollars [12][13][14]. It is making serious investments in renewable energy resources in Europe.…”