Page 191 - Advanced Gas Turbine Cycles
P. 191

Chapter 8. Novel gas turbine cycles          151

          Of  course,  there  is  no  methane at  exit  from  the  PO  reactor,  and  no  oxygen. The
       hydrogen content is quite high, over 15% and comparable to that in Lloyd’s example of the
       steam/TCR cycle, but  the CO content is also nearly  8%. It is  interesting to note that
       the calculated equilibrium concentrations of these combustible products from the reactor
       are reduced through the PO turbine (because of  the fall in temperature) before they are
       supplied to the gas turbine combustor where they are fully combusted, but it is more likely
       that the concentrations would be frozen near the entry values.
          Newby et al. found that increasing the PO turbine pressure resulted in higher steam flow
       (for a given pinch point temperature difference in the HRSG), increased PO turbine power
       and  overall plant  efficiency. However, at  the  highest pressure of  100 bar  attempts to
       increase the steam flow further resulted in incomplete combustion in the main combustor
       and the overall thermal efficiency did not increase substantially at this pressure level.


       PO  plant  with  Cot  removal  (02). Lozza  and  Chiesa  [I31  have  proposed  a  partial
       oxidation CCGT plant with carbon dioxide removal, Cycle D2 of Table 8. lD, and this is
       shown in  Fig.  8.19. Now  the  syngas from a  first PO  reactor is  cooled and  fed to  an
       additional shift reactor and then to a chemical or physical absorption plant. C02 can thus
       be removed and hydrogen rich syngas fed to the main combustion chamber of the gas
       turbine plant, the exhaust gases from which pass through an HRSG, producing steam for a
       bottoming steam cycle and the Po reactor. Lozza and Chiesa calculated a hydrogen molal
       fraction of nearly 50% after the shift reaction and CO2 removal. The plant efficiency drops
       to 48.5% from the figure of 56.1  % for a basic CCGT plant. The cost of electricity produced
       was estimated to be  comparable to that  of  the  semi-closed plant of  Cycle A2, i.e. an
       increase of about 40% on that of the electricity produced by the basic CCGT plant.


       Complex cycle with partial oxidation and reforming (03). An ingenious cycle has been
       proposed  by  Harvey  et  al.  [I41  which  combines  both  successive PO  and  chemical
       recuperation in a semi-closed cycle, as illustrated in Fig. 8.20. Recycled exhaust gases
       containing C02, H20 and N2 act as oxygen camers. Partial combustion (or oxidation)
       takes place in successive combustors to which air is admitted (three in the proposed cycle,
       but only two, for illustration, in the figure). Expansion downstream of  the combustors
       takes place through successive turbines. The exhaust gas from the last turbine is then
       recycled to a ‘FG’ reformer to which methane is admitted (the gas has been compressed
       and  evaporatively  water-cooled in  three  stages). However Rabovitser et  al.  171, in  a
       discussion of this cycle, argued that since the water content of the exhaust gas streams is
       high (5.25 mol of H20, 1 mol of C02 and 7.52 mol of N2 per mole of Cb supplied) the
       reformer is more a steam reformer than a FG reformer.
         The  cycle  is  complex  but  highly  efficient.  This  high  efficiency  comes  from  the
       nature  of  the  cycle  (essentially  a  complex  version  of  the  intercooled,  reheated,
       recuperative CICICIBTBTBTX plant  described in Chapter 3). As Harvey et al. argue,
       the combustion irreversibility is reduced in the  successive partial combustion steps, a
       move  towards reversible isothermal combustion.
         Harvey et al. gave a parametric calculation of the thermal efficiency of this plant, as a
       function of  turbine inlet temperature, the reformer pinch point  temperature difference
       and  the  pressure  level  in  the  reformer  (the  compressor  overall  pressure  ratio,  r).
   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196