Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

Analysis of an integrated cryogenic air separation unit, oxy-combustion

carbon dioxide power cycle and liquefied natural gas regasification
process by exergoeconomic method
Mehdi Mehrpooya , Masood Jalali Zonouz
Renewable Energies and Environment Department, Faculty of New Sciences and Technologies, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Exergoeconomic and sensitivity analyses are performed on the integrated cryogenic air separation unit,
Received 9 October 2016 oxy-combustion Carbon dioxide power cycle and liquefied natural gas regasification process. Exergy
Received in revised form 12 February 2017 destruction, exergy efficiency, cost rate of exergy destruction, cost rate of capital investment and operat-
Accepted 17 February 2017
ing and maintenance, exergoeconomic factor and relative cost difference have been calculated for the
major components of the process. The exergy efficiency of the process is around 67.1% and after mixers,
tees, tank and expansion valves the multi-stream heat exchanger H-3 have the best exergy efficiency
Keywords:
among all process components. Total exergy destruction rate of the process is 1.93
107 kW. Results
Air separation unit (ASU)
Liquefied natural gas (LNG)
of exergoeconomic analysis demonstrates that maximum exergy destruction and capital investment
Exergy operating and maintenance cost rate are related to the multi-stream heat exchanger H-1 and pump P-
Exergoeconomic 1 with the values of 335,144 ($/h) and 12,838 ($/h), respectively. In the sensitivity analysis section the
Carbon dioxide cycle effects of the varying economic parameters, such as interest rate and plant life time are investigated
on the trend of the capital investment operating and maintenance cost rate of the major components
of the process and in another cases the effect of the gas turbine isentropic efficiency on the exergy and
exergoeconomic parameters are studied.
2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
LNG (liquefied natural gas) is a substance with very low tem-
perature (163.15 C) that should be vaporized and brought to a
desired temperature and pressure before entering the pipeline net-
work. In the conventional LNG vaporization terminals cold energy
of LNG is released and wasted into the water or air without any
recovering (about 0.2 kW h kg1). Cold energy is an expression
for describing cryogenic exergy of LNG material stream. The uti-
lization of the cold energy of LNG during vaporization processes
can improve the economic and environmental aspects of these
kinds of processes. Because of its very low temperature, LNG can
be used in different applications such as desalination of sea-
water, deep freezing agro food industry facilities, space condition-
ing in the commercial and residential sector, low temperature
power generation, manufacturing of dry ice, and rubber cryogenic
grinding [1]. A novel integrated power plant using cold of LNG and
solar energy is introduced and analyzed [2]. Also an integrated
oxy-fuel power cycle, high temperature solar system and LNG cold
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mehrpoya@ut.ac.ir (M. Mehrpooya).
recovery is introduced and analyzed. The results show that LNG
flow rate is an important parameter which can affect the process
efficiency. LNG cold energy is used in a combined chemical looping
hydrogen production and power plant with carbon dioxide capture
process [3]. In this study LNG cold energy is used as heat sink to
improve the electrical efficiency of the power cycle. LNG cold
energy is used in an oxy-fuel power cycle which a part of the
required of it is supplied by a solar cycle [4]. The results show that
LNG flow rate can affect the exergy efficiency and net electrical
power of the process significantly. One of these applications is
using cold energy of LNG as refrigeration source of cryogenic air
separation processes [5]. Operating temperature of the air separa-
tion units (ASU) (173 C, 193 C) is lower than the LNG, hence
LNG cold energy can be used with high cold recovery efficiency
compared to other methods [6]. The air separation units have high
degree of power consumption and it is true fact that utilizing of
LNG cold energy is leading to lower power consumption, but how-
ever integrating of air separation units with different types of
power generation cycles can be very efficient. A novel air separa-
tion process based on cold energy of LNG integrated with coal gasi-
fication, transcritical CO2 power cycle is investigated [7]. In these
cycles usually the pure oxygen product of ASU is utilizing instead

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.02.048
0196-8904/ 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
246 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259

Nomenclature

c cost per exergy unit ($/GJ) D destruction

C_ cost rate ($/h) F fuel
e specific exergy (kJ/kg) In input
E_ exergy rate (kW) K kth component
G Gibbs free energy (kJ) Out output
h specific enthalpy (kJ/kg) P product
H annual working hour (h) Ph physical
i interest rate (%) Tot total
m _ mass flow rate (kg/s)
N plant life time (year) Superscripts
Q_ heat duty (kW) standard condition
r relative cost difference (%) CL capital
s specific entropy (kJ/kg C) OM operating & maintenance
T temperature (K)
W_ power (kW)
Abbreviations
x mole fraction LNG liquefied natural gas
Z purchased equipment cost ASU air separation unit
Z_ capital investment and operating and maintenance cost
IGCC integrated gasification combined cycle
rate ($/h) ORC organic Rankine cycle
SPECO specific exergy costing
Greek letters SOFC solid oxide fuel cell
g efficiency (%) CCHP combined cooling, heating and power
e exergetic efficiency (%) NG natural gas
u maintenance factor LHV lower heating value
CRF capital recovery factor
Subscripts
dead state
ch chemical

of air in combustion chamber component of power generation
cycle and it is leading to very high efficient combustion process.
These power generation cycles are known as oxy-combustion
or oxy-fuel power plants. In recent years different configurations
of air separation units integrated with oxy-combustion power
plants are introduced. Fu et al. [8] proposed an advanced cryogenic
air separation process integrated with oxy-combustion power
cycle based on self-heat recuperation technology and in contrast
with conventional two distillation columns air separation unit,
they used one column type. The results of this process showed that
power consumption would be reduced by 20.2% compared to other
similar processes. In another work a comparative thermodynamic,
economic and risk analysis of integrated cryogenic and hybrid air
separation unit with oxy-combustion power plant was investi-
gated [9] and similarly, another configurations of hybrid air sepa-
ration units are introduced by Burdyny and Struchtrup [10] and
compared with each other. The thermo-economic analysis of the
oxy-type supercritical power plant integrated with the cryogenic
air separation unit was proposed by Janusz-Szymanska and Dry-
janska [11] and possibilities of improving were investigated. One
of the most common integrated ASU-oxy-combustion units is the
IGCC (integrated gasification combined cycle) plants. In this type
of cycles the output pure oxygen of ASU section enters the compo-
nent which name is gasifier and burning with coal, the output
flue gases are leading to the gas turbine for power generation
intention. Coal is one of the convenient fossil fuels in the matter
of price but its environmental impacts always have been high. For-
tunately integrating of these cycles with CO2 capturing units have
solved this problem [12]. According to the concept of integrating
ASU cycles with oxy-combustion power plants, the application of
transcritical CO2 power cycles can be considered [13]. Carbon diox-
ide power cycles already have been used in different configurations
of recent researches. An integrated molten carbonate fuel
cell-supercritical carbon dioxide is introduced and analyzed [14].
In this study a Brayton cycle is used to recover heat from the cat-
alytic burner exhaust gas.
A novel hybrid three reactor chemical looping, and fuel cell
power plant cycle is introduced and analyzed [15]. Carbon dioxide
is produced in one of these reactors. In one of these studies a tran-
scritical CO2 power cycle which utilizes geothermal wells as its
heat source and LNG cold energy as its heat sink, was studied
[16]. In this very particular configuration chilled water and power
generation in natural gas turbine, were the alternative products
and for further examination also exergoeconomic and multi-
objective optimization had been considered. Vlez et al. [17] exclu-
sively investigated the low temperature heat sources and specially
CO2 transcritical working fluid for power generation and their
results showed that this type of power cycles, integrated or non-
integrated with other cycles would be one of the next generation
of power production cycles. CO2 power cycles also are integrated
with solar energy sources [18]. In Al-Sulaiman and Atif [19]
research study, a thermodynamic comparison of five supercritical
carbon dioxide Brayton cycles integrated with a solar power tower
was studied. In this work the heliostat solar field was optimized for
better optical performance and then configured with the supercrit-
ical CO2 Brayton cycles. In Xia et al. [20] research study a solar-
powered transcritical CO2 power cycle has been employed for
reverse osmosis desalination of sea water and in this very particu-
lar work, LNG cold energy was used as heat sink of the power cycle
process and in the following, LNG is vaporized and employed in
natural gas turbine in order to producing power. Mahmoudi and
Ghavimi [21] was proposed an integrated molten carbonate fuel
cell (MCFC) supercritical CO2 organic Rankine cycle (ORC)
and LNG cold energy as heat sink of the whole process and consid-
ered it in the aspects of thermoeconomic and multi-objective
optimization.
 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259
Self-heat recuperation of cryogenic air separation processes has
high degree of importance for reducing capital and operating and
maintenance costs of additional hot and cold utilities [22]. For
reaching to this purpose, this process has been integrated with
respect to the pinch technology concept [23]. Exergy analysis is
a tool which have been used widely for evaluation of the energy
intensive processes [24]. An integrated molten carbonate fuel cell
power plant and carbon dioxide capturing process is investigated
by exergy analysis method [25]. The results show that exergy
destruction of the combustion chamber is too high. Integrated liq-
uefied natural gas and hydrocarbon recovery process were investi-
gated by exergy analysis method [26]. The results show that
compressors and multi stream heat exchangers have the greatest
exergy distraction. Exergy analysis method is applied on a novel
hydrocarbon recovery process configuration [27]. Based on the
results distillation column and expansion valves have the highest
exergy destruction. Helium extraction from natural process is
investigated by advanced exergy analysis method [28]. Integrated
electrochemical power plants and natural gas liquefaction process
configurations were introduced and investigated [29]. Results of
the exergy analysis show that absorption refrigeration subsystem
has the highest exergy efficiency. A currently in operation hydro-
carbon recovery was investigated by exergy and advanced exergy
analysis methods [30]. Exergy efficiency of the used propane refrig-
eration cycle in the process was about 34%. Also based on the
advanced exergy analysis results there is a good potential for
improvement pf the components performance. A CCHP integrated
fuel cell and ORC power plant was introduced and analyzed by
exergy method [31].
Exergoeconomic analysis is a method that is considered for
evaluation of the integrated ASU CO2 power cycleLNG vaporiza-
tion process. Exergoeconomic method is a combination of thermo-
dynamic and economic concepts. The conventional and advanced
approaches of this method were utilized in different processes.
This method is employed for evaluating of single mixed refrigerant
natural gas liquefaction processes and in particular popular SMR-
Linde and SMR-APCI [32].
The three main exergoeconomic parameters i.e. exergoeco-
nomic factor, relative cost difference and cost of exergy destruction
were calculated for each component of these cycles and the results
are providing the possibility of comparison between process com-
ponents in the sight of exergoeconomic evaluation. Advanced exer-
goeconomic analysis is applied for evaluation of the single mixed
refrigerant LNG processes [33]. Based on the results costs of invest-
ment in most of the process components is endogenous.
Meanwhile the advanced exergoeconomic analysis of the noted
processes and multi stage mixed refrigerant ones, such as C3MR-
Linde, DMR-APCI and MFC-Linde have also been investigated [34].
Also integrated LNG and NGL process was evaluated by exer-
goeconomic analysis [35]. A trigeneration system which uses a
diesel-gas engine was investigated by exergoeconomic analysis
method [36].
The investigation of economic aspects of the air separation units
has been conducted rarely. In authors knowledge no exergoeco-
nomic evaluation for such a highly integrated layout i.e. ASU-CO2
power cycle-LNG vaporization is available. The exergoeconomic
evaluation mostly is being performed on the normal processes
with ordinary layouts but some of the components of this process
have been rarely investigated in exergoeconomic evaluation
method. In one of these researches the energetic, exergetic and
economic assessment of oxygen production from two columns
cryogenic air separation unit were considered and some of the
required equations of purchased equipment costs of the process
were exploited from this research study [37]. In another study
Ghorbani et al. [38] performed exergoeconomic analysis and
multi-objective Pareto optimization on the C3MR natural gas
247
liquefaction process. In this work the total revenue requirement
method is used for exergoeconomic analysis and a coded genetic
algorithm from Matlab software which is linked to HYSYS simula-
tion package is utilized for optimization of the process. Cavalcanti
and Motta [39] utilized exergoeconomic analysis for the solar/fuel
assisted Rankine cycle. They used SPECO (specific exergy costing)
for their results and the parabolic trough collector was the heat
source of their process. Ozbilen et al. [40] performed the exergoe-
conomic and exergoenvironmental analyses on the four-step
CuACl cycle for hydrogen production purposes and one of the most
important results of the analysis i.e. the total cost rate of the pro-
cess was 165 ($/s). Exergoeconomic evaluation was investigated on
a cogeneration plant consisting of a hydrogen-fed SOFC (solid
oxide fuel cell), gas turbine and generator-absorber-heat exchange
absorption refrigeration cycle [41]. The EES (engineering equation
solver) software was used for the solving cost balances. The exer-
goeconomic factor, capital cost rate and the exergy destruction cost
rate of the overall system were the 27.3%, 10.63 ($/h) and 28.3 ($/
h), respectively. A LNG process using a single effect absorption
refrigeration cycle was investigated by advanced exergoeconomic
method [42]. Based on the results process performance can be
improved by considering compressors and air coolers investment
costs. A hydrogen liquefaction process was investigated by
advanced exergoeconomic analysis [43]. A power plant fueled by
natural gas was evaluated by advanced exergoeconomic analysis
method [44]. Based on the results, combustion chamber and
high-pressure steam turbine have great potential for economic
improvement.
In this paper the novel integrated process is employed which is
consisted of air separation unit (ASU), oxy-combustion Carbon
dioxide power cycle and LNG vaporization section [13]. The results
of exergy analysis are the basis of this evaluation which will be
combined with economic concepts. The process is simulated with
HYSYS simulator software package, exergy analysis is conducted
with Matlab codes which is linked to Aspen HYSYS simulator and
exergoeconomic evaluation is performed with EES (engineering
equation solver) software and the method which is utilized for this
purpose is the SPECO (specific exergy costing) method. With the
results of exergoeconomic analysis there is this ability to see the
thermo-economic situation of the process and compare the com-
ponents with each other. This analysis reveals the weak-spots of
the process and gives to engineers this opportunity to resolve
and optimize it.
2. Process description
Fig. 1 shows a schematic diagram of the integrated one column
cryogenic air separation unit (ASU) oxy-combustion Carbon diox-
ide power cycle and LNG regasification process. In this layout the
cold energy of LNG is utilized as refrigeration source in heat
exchanger (H-1) for optimizing air separation section and in heat
exchangers H-8, H-9 and H-10 for integrating power generation
cycle. The whole process of air separation section is integrated
with self-heat recuperation concept and this issue has been elimi-
nated the requirement for additional heat sources. Pure liquid
nitrogen, oxygen and Carbon dioxide, low and high purity of nitro-
gen gas, natural gas for transporting to pipe line network and
finally power, are the all products of this complex integrated
process.
2.1. Air separation unit section (ASU)
The heart of this process is ASU section. This section is con-
sisted of two parts, heat circulation and air separation modules.
Feed air in ambient conditions is passing through compressor
248 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the integrated ASU-CO2 power cycle-LNG regasification process [13].
(CR-1) and after pressurizing is cooled via (H-1 & H-2) heat
exchangers in heat circulation module section. This feed air with
(181 C) temperature and a mixture of gas and liquid phases is
entering to the distillation column for separating to its compo-
nents. In distillation column the high purity nitrogen gas (5) is
divided to two streams (8 & 9). Stream (8) is cooled via two heat
exchangers (H-4 & H-3) and with (187 C) temperature and liq-
uid phase is refluxing to the distillation column as stream (13).
The other stream i.e. (9) is utilizing for self-heat recuperation
purposes and after cooling stream (22) in heat exchanger (H-5)
is returning to the heat circulation module. After passing and
further cooling via heat exchanger (H-2) the stream (24) is
entering to the cascade compression-intercooling procedure
which is consisted of multi stream heat exchanger (H-1) and
four compressors (CR-4, CR-5, CR-6 & CR-7). The output stream
of (CR-7) i.e. (33) is entering to the main multi stream heat
exchanger (H-1) and is being cooled until (180 C). This tem-
perature is reaching to (194 C) via two components (H-6 &
V-3). The high purity liquid nitrogen with (194 C) temperature
is ready to be stored in storage tanks.
From the middle of distillation column, the low purity nitrogen
gas (6) is utilized for self-heat recuperation purposes in (H-3) and
then passes through heat exchangers (H-2 & H-1) as refrigeration
source. This stream is reached to ambient temperature and
becomes one of the desired products i.e. low purity nitrogen gas.
The pure liquid oxygen from the bottom of column (7) is exploited.
This stream is divided into two streams (18 & 19). The stream (19)
is one of the main products, but stream (18) similarly to nitrogen
streams is employed in self-heat recuperation section via (H-4 &
H-5) and is refluxing to the middle of distillation column. Only
one of the air separation products has been remained which name
is high purity nitrogen gas. It is simple, the vaporized nitrogen con-
tents in tank is extracted as stream (38), this stream with
(194 C) temperature is excellent source of refrigeration. After
releasing its cold energy via heat exchangers (H-6 & H-1) it
becomes gaseous and as stream (40) is stored in high purity nitro-
gen gas capsules.
2.2. Oxy-combustion carbon dioxide power cycle
CO2 is the main working fluid of the power generation cycle. This
cycle is the combination of classic Rankine and Brayton power
cycles. The stream (41) after condensation in heat exchanger (H-8)
as the condenser of Rankine part is passing through pump (P-2)
and pressurizing to 3 MPa. The stream (42) with (66.6 C) temper-
ature and high cryogenic exergy is entering to the heat exchanger
(H-1) which is playing the role of the boiler in Rankine layout. This
stream (42) is utilized as refrigeration source in this heat exchanger
and improving the heat circulation module of the ASU section. The
stream (43) is mixing with the prepared pure oxygen gas from the
distillation column. From this point the role of steam turbine of
the classic Rankine cycle is eliminated and Brayton cycle is showing
itself, which means the mixed stream (44) after passing through
recuperation heat exchanger (H-7) and absorbing high degree of
heat from gas turbine exhaust, is burning with vaporized natural
gas of LNG regasification section, as the fuel of combustion process.
The outlet flue gases of combustion chamber component with the
temperature of (900 C) are entering to the gas turbine for power
generation purposes. The stream (47) after releasing high degree
of heat in recuperation heat exchanger (H-7), is more cooled in heat
exchanger (H-9) via LNG cold energy and the existing water of it, is
sequestrated in separator (S-1). The pure Carbon dioxide stream
(50) is then compressed to the condenser pressure with (CR-9)
and with this point the combined oxy-fuel CO2 power cycle, is com-
pleted. In order to supplying liquid Carbon dioxide for the power
cycle the gaseous CO2 with (34 C) temperature and ambient pres-
sure is passing through compressor (CR-10) and then is cooled by
the extracted LNG from (T-3) in heat exchanger (H-10). The liquid
CO2 with proper temperature and pressure is the output of this sec-
tion and after a little pressurizing can be injected in stream (41).
2.3. LNG regasification section
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) after transportation to the usage
terminals should be vaporized and leaded to the pipe line network.
 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259 249

This substance has high cryogenic exergy that it would be a disas- Table 2
ter if be wasted. Different processes with different configurations Simulation results of the power components.

have been proposed for LNG regasification and this process is Component Pressure ratio Polytropic efficiency (%) Power (kW)
one of them. In this process LNG is passing through pump (P-1) P-1 66.79 76.24 6.40
105
and in first step approaching to the pipe line network pressure. P-2 4.29 79.16 9.51
103
Remember if the process, pressurize natural gas after vaporization, CR-1 2.97 78.38 5.87
106
the required power of this procedure would be 20 times higher [6]. CR-2 1.67 76.88 3.30
105
CR-3 2.00 77.47 3.24
105
The stream (57) is entering to (H-1) as one of the refrigeration CR-4 15.57 82.75 1.44
106
sources of this 9 sides plate-fin multi stream heat exchanger and CR-5 1.92 77.35 2.39
105
releasing about half of its cryogenic exergy. It then as stream CR-6 1.49 76.07 9.90
104
(58) is divided into three different streams (59, 60 & 61). The CR-7 1.33 75.43 5.43
104
CR-8 12.61 81.42 1.87
103
stream (60) is going to (H-8) as one of the refrigeration sources
CR-9 6.89 79.19 6.16
105
of Rankine part power generation cycle condenser. Stream (61) is CR-10 4.80 78.50 1.39
104
going to heat exchanger (H-10) for liquefaction of Carbon dioxide. GT 26.70 69.40 1.62
106
The streams (59, 62 & 63) are joining together in (M-1) and reach- E-1 2.26 74.13 1.47
105
ing to (32 C). Stream (64) is helping to cooling CO2-water stream E-2 2.27 74.12 3.53
105

in heat exchanger (H-9) and after reaching to (8 C) temperature a

fraction of it, is going to pipe line network and the rest is being uti- Carbon dioxide power cycle is the combination of Rankine and
lized in combustion chamber as the fuel of the combustion process. Brayton layouts with one important difference. This configuration
uses the pure oxygen product of ASU section instead of air in com-
3. Process analysis bustion chamber and this issue increases the efficiency of the cycle.
In Rankine and Brayton parts of the power cycle, H-1 and H-7 heat
In simulation of the process heat loss is ignored and Aspen exchangers have the role of boiler and regenerator, respectively.
HYSYS software package is utilized for simulation of the process
Q_ in Q_ 68 Q_ NG 4
[45]. Comprehensive thermodynamic data bank is one of the
advantages of Aspen HYSYS software. Peng-Robinson equation of
_ net;CO2 W
W _ GT  W
_ CR8  W
_ CR9  W
_ P2 5
state [46] is selected for calculation of thermodynamic properties
of air, LNG and Carbon dioxide streams. Tables 13 present the
simulation results and specification of the process equipment. _ net
W
gCO2 cycle
Q in
3.1. Energy analysis _ CO2 h46  h47  m
m _ O2 h55  h54  m_ CO2 h52  h50  m
_ CO2 h42  h41

_ NG  LHV
m
The total power consumption of the process is related to the ten 6
compressors and two pumps as follows:
The overall energy efficiency of the whole process is the ratio of
_ tot;used W
W _ CR1 W
_ CR2 W
_ CR3 W
_ CR4 W
_ CR5 W
_ CR6 the net generated power and the net output work rate of the LNG
_ _ _ _ _ _ P2 expander to the rate of the required fuel for combustion process
W CR7 W CR8 W CR9 W CR10 W P1 W and recovering of LNG cold energy.
1
_
W _
W
The total produced power of the cycle is associated to the gas gI;ov erall _ net LNG
_ LNG qLNG
7
mNG LHV m
turbine of the power generation cycle and two expanders of the
air separation section: where W _ net is the net generated power of the process, m
_ is the mass
_ tot;produced W
_ GT W
_ E1 W
_ E2 flow rate of the natural gas fuel of the combustion chamber and
W 2
input LNG stream, LHV is the lower heating value parameter of nat-
The amount of LNG cold energy which is absorbed in H-1, H-8, ural gas and qLNG is the specific heat of LNG. The thermodynamic
H-9 and H-10 heat exchangers is obtained from Eq. (3): data of the process streams are available in Table 4.

Q_ LNG m
_ LNG  DhLNG
The overall LNG streams duty of these heat exchangers should
have supplied from external sources if there was not this possibil-
ity to utilizing LNG as refrigeration source.
3
3.2. Exergy analysis
Exergy analysis is an engineering tool which is used for thermo-
dynamic analysis of a process and to determine maximum useful

Table 1
Specifications of the feed and product streams.

Stream name Air (1) LNG (56) NG (67) O2 (l) (19) N2 (g) (40) N2 (l) (37) LP N2 (g) (26) CO2 (l) (71)
6 6 6 5 5 6 6
Flow (kmol/h) 5.01
10 6.50
10 6.50
10 4.34
10 1.97
10 1.20
10 3.17
10 8.18
103
Temperature (C) 25 162 8 172 25 194 25 57
Pressure (kPa) 101.3 104.8 6590 276.3 130 130 111.3 466.5
Components (mol%)
CH4 0 93.50 93.50 0 0 0 0 0
C2H6 0 4.22 4.22 0 0 0 0 0
C3H8 0 0.98 0.98 0 0 0 0 0
i-C4H10 0 0.84 0.84 0 0 0 0 0
N2 79.06 0.46 0.46 0 99.87 99.55 81.07 0
O2 20.94 0 0 100 0.13 0.45 18.93 0
H2O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.11
CO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 93.89
250 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259

Table 3
Specifications of the process heat exchangers.

HEX name H-1 H-2 H-3 H-4 H-5 H-6 H-7 H-8 H-9 H-10
7 3 4 5 5 4 6 6 5
Duty (kW) 1.73
10 15.00
10 3.19
10 1.65
10 2.32
10 2.13
10 1.63
10 4.37
10 1.02
10 9.95
106
LMTD (C) 0.714 10.502 4.643 1.238 15.020 3.111 60.051 35.920 19.081 427.1
Min approach (C) 0.276 0.348 4.239 1.080 15.015 0.234 45.001 8.002 8.003 8.001
Number of sides 9 3 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 2

Table 4
Thermodynamic data of the process streams.

Stream no. T (C) P (kPa) Flow rate (kmol/h) Stream no. T (C) P (kPa) Flow rate (kmol/h)
1 25 101 5.01
106 37 194 130 1.20
106
2 168 301 5.01
106 38 194 130 1.97
105
3 165 301 5.01
106 39 180 130 1.97
105
4 181 301 5.01
106 40 25 130 1.97
105
5 187 251 3.84
106 41 68 700 3.08
105
6 183 253 3.17
106 42 67 3000 3.08
105
7 172 276 1.85
106 43 8 2940 3.08
105
8 187 251 2.45
106 44 8 2940 3.09
105
9 187 251 1.40
106 45 429 2884 3.09
105
10 168 420 2.45
106 46 900 2884 3.09
105
11 181 429 2.45
106 47 548 108 3.09
105
12 186 271 2.45
106 48 70 106 3.09
105
13 187 251 2.45
106 49 40 103 3.09
105
14 195 111 1.40
106 50 0 103 3.09
105
15 187 111 1.40
106 51 0 103 3.40
102
16 191 111 3.17
106 52 181 710 3.09
105
17 191 111 3.17
106 53 172 276 5.55
102
18 172 276 1.42
106 54 25 238 5.55
102
19 172 276 4.34
105 55 417 3000 5.55
102
20 182 111 1.42
106 56 162 105 6.50
106
21 174 111 1.42
106 57 158 7000 6.50
106
22 143 222 1.42
106 58 76 6800 6.50
106
23 172 276 1.41
106 59 76 6800 1.30
106
24 191 111 1.40
106 60 76 6800 2.60
106
25 191 111 3.17
106 61 76 6800 2.60
106
26 25 111 3.17
106 62 176 6680 2.60
106
27 54 1733 1.40
106 63 17 6660 2.60
106
28 160 1733 1.40
106 64 32 6660 6.50
106
29 130 3336 1.40
106 65 33 6590 6.50
106
30 147 3336 1.40
106 66 8 6590 6.50
106
31 134 4978 1.40
106 67 8 6590 6.50
106
32 142 4978 1.40
106 68 8 6590 1.64
102
33 137 6600 1.40
106 69 34 101 8.18
103
34 180 6600 1.40
106 70 177 487 8.18
103
35 181 6600 1.40
106 71 57 467 8.18
103
36 194 130 1.40
106

work achievable by a certain amount of input energy. By combin- of each process streams have been presented in Table 5. Exergy
ing the first and second laws of thermodynamics, exergy analysis destruction and exergy efficiency of the process components are
has become one of the most powerful tools for conducting qualita- the most important parameters of the exergy analysis which are
tive and quantitative investigations of energy consumption in pro- obtained from exergy balance of each component. The exergy
cesses. Two important parameters are introduced in exergy destruction term is used in exergoeconomic analysis for obtaining
analysis, exergy destruction rate and exergy efficiency [47]. Exergy cost rate of exergy destruction. These terms are shown in detail in
rate of the process streams consists of four different terms: physi- Table 6.
cal, chemical, kinetic and potential exergy. The kinetic and poten-
tial terms are usually being ignored in exergy calculations. The E_ D E_ F  E_ P 11
relations have been given in the following [48]:
E_ E_
e eph ech 8 gII _ P 1  _ D 12
EF EF
eph h  h0  T 0 s  s0 9 Likewise energy analysis section, the overall exergy efficiency of
X X the plant can be calculated as follows [47]:
ech xi e0i G  xi Gi 10 P _
E_ E
gII;ov erall 1  D;tot 1P k D;k
13
where h and s are the specific enthalpy and entropy respec- E_ F _ used m
W _ LNG  eLNG
tively, subscript 0 is related to the thermodynamic dead state
i.e. 25 C and 101.325 kPa. The term xi is the mole fraction of stream In this equation the E_ D;tot is the summation of exergy destruc-
P _
components, e0i is the standard chemical exergy of the stream com- tion of all process components, Wused is the overall power con-
ponents which is attainable from different references [49] and G is sumption of pumps and compressors, m _ is the mass flow rate of
the Gibbs free energy. The physical, chemical and total exergy rate input LNG stream and e is the specific exergy of LNG stream.
 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259 251

Table 5
Exergy results of the process streams.

Stream no. E_ ph kW E_ ch kW E_ tot kW Stream no. E_ ph kW E_ ch kW E_ tot kW

5 5 6 5
1 0 1.46
10 1.46
10 37 6.92
10 2.11
10 7.13
106
2 4.83
106 1.46
105 4.98
106 38 3.10
105 3.66
104 3.47
105
3 8.30
106 1.46
105 8.45
106 39 2.58
105 3.66
104 2.94
105
4 9.71
106 1.46
105 9.86
106 40 3.37
104 3.66
104 7.03
104
5 7.36
106 6.87
105 8.05
106 41 9.12
105 1.69
106 2.60
106
6 5.82
106 9.49
104 5.91
106 42 9.18
105 1.69
106 2.61
106
7 9.57
106 2.04
106 1.16
107 43 6.82
105 1.69
106 2.38
106
8 4.68
106 4.37
105 5.12
106 44 6.83
105 1.69
106 2.38
106
9 2.68
106 2.50
105 2.93
106 45 1.28
106 1.69
106 2.97
106
10 4.77
106 4.37
105 5.21
106 46 2.73
106 1.69
106 4.42
106
11 1.29
107 4.33
105 1.33
107 47 8.96
105 1.69
106 2.59
106
12 1.29
107 4.33
105 1.33
107 48 2.01
104 1.69
106 1.71
106
13 1.29
107 4.33
105 1.33
107 49 4.68
103 1.69
106 1.70
106
14 2.34
106 2.50
105 2.59
106 50 7.07
103 1.69
106 1.70
106
15 1.85
106 2.48
105 2.10
106 51 8.12 2.96
102 3.04
102
16 5.03
106 9.49
104 5.13
106 52 5.17
105 1.69
106 2.21
106
17 5.03
106 9.51
104 5.13
106 53 9.36
102 6.12
102 1.55
103
18 7.33
106 1.56
106 8.89
106 54 3.26
102 6.12
102 9.37
102
19 2.24
106 4.78
105 2.72
106 55 1.98
103 6.12
102 2.59
103
20 7.29
106 1.56
106 8.85
106 56 3.13
107 1.61
109 1.64
109
21 1.51
106 1.56
106 3.08
106 57 3.13
107 1.61
109 1.64
109
22 1.65
106 1.56
106 3.21
106 58 2.22
107 1.61
109 1.63
109
23 2.37
106 1.55
106 3.92
106 59 4.45
106 3.21
108 3.26
108
24 1.97
106 2.48
105 2.22
106 60 8.89
106 6.43
108 6.51
108
25 4.44
106 9.51
104 4.53
106 61 8.89
106 6.43
108 6.51
108
26 2.05
105 9.51
104 3.00
105 62 8.18
106 6.43
108 6.51
108
27 2.88
106 2.48
105 3.13
106 63 7.33
106 6.43
108 6.50
108
28 4.16
106 2.48
105 4.41
106 64 1.80
107 1.61
109 1.62
109
29 4.27
106 2.48
105 4.52
106 65 1.80
107 1.61
109 1.62
109
30 4.97
106 2.48
105 5.22
106 66 1.80
107 1.61
109 1.62
109
31 5.02
106 2.48
105 5.27
106 67 1.80
107 1.61
109 1.62
109
32 5.62
106 2.48
105 5.86
106 68 4.55
102 4.05
104 4.10
104
33 5.64
106 2.48
105 5.89
106 69 6.17
101 4.32
104 4.33
104
34 7.54
106 2.48
105 7.79
106 70 1.15
104 4.32
104 5.48
104
35 7.59
106 2.48
105 7.84
106 71 2.19
104 4.32
104 6.51
104
36 7.23
106 2.48
105 7.48
106

Table 6
Definitions of the exergetic efficiency of process components [47].

Component Exergy destruction Exergetic efficiency

P_ P_ P_
Pumps E_ D Ein W _  P E_ out Eout  Ein
e _
P P _ WP _
Compressors E_ D _  P E_ out
E_ in W Eout  Ein
e W _
P P
Gas turbine E_ D E_ in  E_ out  W_ e P E_ W_P E_ out
in
P P
Expanders E_ D E_ in  E_ out  W_ e P E_ W_P E_ out
in
 Pn   Pm  
Heat exchangers _ED P E_ in  P E_ out E_ E_
e1 Pn1 _  Pm1 _
Q Q
1 h 1 c
P_ P
Combustion chamber E_ D Ein  E_ out e
E_ flue E_ O2 CO2
E_ NG
P_ P
Distillation column E_ D Ein  E_ out _ _ _
e E5E_4 E6E_13E7 E_ 23E53
_

P_ P P_
Separators/mixers E_ D Ein  E_ out E
e P _out Ein
P_ P
E_ D Ein  E_ out
DP
ein DP
Valves e eeDoutT e DT
in out
Pn
Cycle E_ Dtot _
k1 ED;k , n = number of devices e 1  Pm W_ ED;tot
_
_
1 consumed ELNG

X X
3.3. Exergoeconomic analysis C_ in C_ Q Z_ C_ out C_ W 14
in out

Exergoeconomic is the branch of engineering that combines

exergy analysis and economic principles. In this method a cost bal- C_ cE_ 15
ance is written around each component of the process. With this
evaluation the cost rate of the process streams are determined and C_ Q cE_ Q 16
these results are being utilized for optimization of the whole pro-
cess. This type of analysis is very crucial for design and performance C_ W cW
_ 17
of expensive systems [50]. The equation of cost balance is as follows:
252 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259

Table 7 situations the relations are solved with auxiliary equations. The
Parameters involved in the simulation of the integrated process. auxiliary equations are obtained with respect to the fuel and pro-
Parameter Value duct concept of exergy streams. For a control volume fuel is the
Ambient temperature (C) 25 source of exergy which is consumed to generate the product and
Ambient pressure (kPa) 101.3 is different with actual fuel, such as natural gas, gasoline, diesel,
Interest rate (%) 10 etc. Also the product is the desired result generated by using the
Plant life time (year) 20 fuel. Table 9 shows the cost balances and auxiliary equations of
Maintenance factor () 1.06
Plant annual working hour (h) 7446
the process components.
Cost per exergy unit of LNG ($/GJ) [32] 13.69 For the component k as a control volume always there are the
Cost per exergy unit of electricity ($/GJ) [51] 25 fuel and product streams and the average cost per exergy unit of
LNG inlet temperature (C) 162 these streams is one of the most important parameters which are
LNG pressure (kPa) 104.8
resulted in exergoeconomic evaluation.
LNG mass flow rate (kg s1) 31,269

C_ F;k
Isentropic efficiency of pumps (%) 75
Isentropic efficiency of compressors (%) 75 cF;k 21
Isentropic efficiency of gas turbine (%) 75 E_ F;k

where C_ denotes a cost rate associated with an exergy stream:
stream of matter, power or heat transfer while the variable Z_ repre-
sents all remaining costs. Also c is the cost per unit of exergy, E_ is
the exergy of material streams, E_ Q is the exergy of heat transfer
and W_ is the generated or consumed power of process components
which is the pure exergy. The term Z_ is considering the capital
investment and operating and maintenance costs of the process
components. Eq. (19) shows the terms which are utilizing for calcu-
lating Z_ variable. The term Z is the purchased equipment cost of
each component, CRF is the capital recovery factor which is related
to the capital investment costs, u is the maintenance factor which is
related to the operating and maintenance costs and finally H is the
annual working hour of the plant. In order to calculating CRF term, i
is the interest rate and N is the life time of the integrated plant. The
required economic parameters and other assumptions which are
utilizing in the analysis are presented in Table 7.
Z_ Z_ CL Z_ OM 18
C_ P;k
cP;k 22
E_ P;k
Relative cost difference of component k rk is defined based on
the average cost per exergy unit of fuel and product streams and is
a useful variable for evaluating and optimizing of a system
component.
cP;k  cF;k
rk 23
cF;k
This parameter represents the difference between the average cost
of products and fuels which is due to the destruction and the invest-
ment cost.
As mentioned before exergy destruction is one of the most
important indicators of the exergy analysis and definitely the cost
rate of this term has the greatest impact in the analysis, because
this term determines the waste dollars of the components and
whole process and gives us this scope to improving the weakest
components and finally improving the overall plant.

C_ D;k cF;k E_ D;k 24

Z  CRF  u
Z_ 19 The exergoeconomic factor is the final indicator which is deter-
H
mines the ratio of the contribution of the capital investment and
N operating and maintenance costs and cost rate of exergy destruc-
i1 i
CRF N
20 tion of the process components. The high value of this parameter
1 i  1
shows that the share of capital investment and operating and
The cost balance of each component is a linear equation that maintenance costs is higher and the low value shows that the
should be solved for obtaining desired parameters, but in some exergy destruction has the higher impact in cost rates of process
of these equations there is more than one unknown term. In these components.

Table 8
Purchased equipment cost functions of the process components.

Component Purchased equipment cost functions

Pumps _ 0:1538logW
log Z 3:3892 0:0536 logW _ 2 [16]
Compressors 71:1m_ in [52]
Z 0:92gis r p lnrp
 
Gas turbine & expanders _g
479:34m Pin [52]
Z 0:92gis ln Pout 1 exp0:036T in  54:41
Multi-stream heat exchangers Z FC A
UC
C1 [53]
FC = Fixed cost of MHEX, A = Total heat transfer area, UC = Unit cost of the MHEX material, C1 = 0.055
Combustion chamber _ air
46:08m [52]
Z 0:995Pout =P in 1 exp0:018T out  26:4
Distillation column Z Z v essel Z tray [37]
0:87 1:23 2
Z v essel 1780l d 2:86 1:694F M 10:01  7:408 ln P 1:395ln P 
2
Z tray N act 193:04 22:72d 60:38d 
l = Length of the column, d = Diameter of the column, FM = Material factor, P = Column mean pressure, Nact = Actual number of trays
Separator Z FM Cb Ca [54]
2
C b 1:218 exp9:1  0:2889 ln W 0:04576ln W 
C a 300D0:7396 L0:7066
Tank Z 1:218F M exp11:662  0:6104 ln V 0:04536ln V 
2 [54]
V = Volume of tank
 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259 253

Table 9
Cost balances and related auxiliary equations of the process components.

Component Cost balance Auxiliary equation (fuel rule)

P-1 C_ 56 C_ W Z_ P1 C_ 57 None
P-2 C_ 41 C_ W Z_ P2 C_ 42 None
CR-1 C_ 1 C_ W Z_ CR1 C_ 2 c1 0
CR-2 C_ 8 C_ W Z_ CR2 C_ 10 None
CR-3 C_ 21 C_ W Z_ CR3 C_ 22 None
CR-4 C_ 24 C_ W Z_ CR4 C_ 27 None
CR-5 C_ 28 C_ W Z_ CR5 C_ 29 None
CR-6 C_ 30 C_ W Z_ CR6 C_ 31 None
CR-7 C_ 32 C_ W Z_ CR7 C_ 33 None
CR-8 C_ 54 C_ W Z_ CR8 C_ 55 None
CR-9 C_ 50 C_ W Z_ CR9 C_ 52 None
CR-10 C_ 69 C_ W Z_ CR10 C_ 70 None
GT C_ 46 Z_ GT C_ 47 C_ W c46 c47
E-1 C_ 9 Z_ E1 C_ 14 C_ W c9 c14
E-2 C_ 6 Z_ E2 C_ 16 C_ W c6 c16
C_ 27 C_ 29 C_ 31 C_ 33 C_ 2 C_ 25 C_ 39 C_ 42 C_ 57 Z_ H1
H-1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
c57 c58 , c42 c43 , c39 c40 , c25 c26 CE_ 3 C2
E_
CE_ 34  C 33
E_
CE_ 32 C 31
E_
CE_ 30 C 29
E_
CE_ 28  C 27
E_
C_ 28 C_ 30 C_ 32 C_ 34 C_ 3 C_ 26 C_ 40 C_ 43 C_ 58
3 2 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27

C_ 3 C_ 15 C_ 17 Z_ H2 C_ 4 C_ 24 C_ 25
H-2 _ C_ 15 C_ 4 C_ 3
c17 c25 , CE_ 24  _ E_ 4 E_ 3
24 E15

H-3 C_ 12 C_ 16 Z_ H3 C_ 13 C_ 17 c16 c17

H-4 C_ 10 C_ 20 Z_ H4 C_ 11 C_ 21 c20 c21
H-5 C_ 14 C_ 22 Z_ H5 C_ 15 C_ 23 c14 c15
H-6 C_ 34 C_ 38 Z_ H6 C_ 35 C_ 39 c38 c39
H-7 C_ 44 C_ 47 Z_ H7 C_ 45 C_ 48 c47 c48
C_ 52 C_ 53 C_ 60 C_ 65 Z_ H8 C_ 41 C_ 54 C_ 63 C_ 66
H-8 _ _ _ _
c53 c54 , c60 c63 CE_ 66 C 65
E_
CE_ 41  C 52
E_
66 65 41 52

H-9 C_ 48 C_ 64 Z_ H9 C_ 49 C_ 65 c48 c49

H-10 C_ 61 C_ 70 Z_ H10 C_ 62 C_ 71 c61 c62
CC C_ 45 C_ 68 Z_ CC C_ 46 None
DC C_ 4 C_ 13 C_ 23 Z_ DC C_ 5 C_ 6 C_ 7 C_ 53 c4 c13 , c13 c23 , c23 c53
M-1 C_ 59 C_ 62 C_ 63 C_ 64 None
M-2 C_ 43 C_ 55 C_ 44 None
T-1 C_ 5 C_ 8 C_ 9 c8 c9
T-2 C_ 7 C_ 18 C_ 19 c18 c19
T-3 C_ 58 C_ 59 C_ 60 C_ 61 c59 c60 , c60 c61
T-4 C_ 66 C_ 67 C_ 68 c67 c68
S-1 C_ 49 Z_ S1 C_ 50 C_ 51 c51 0
Tank C_ 36 Z_ Tank C_ 37 C_ 38 c37 c38
V-1 C_ 11 C_ 12 None
V-2 C_ 18 C_ 20 None
V-3 C_ 35 C_ 36 None

Z_ k stream heat exchanger (H-3) and distillation column (DC) compo-

fk
Z_ k C_ D;k
For evaluation the cost rate of the whole process Eq. (26) is
being employed, in this equation C_ L;tot is the cost rate of exergy
losses which are related to the heat transfer or material stream
from the plant to the environment.
C_ P;tot C_ F;tot  C_ L;tot Z_ tot
4. Results and discussion
In this section the exergy, exergoeconomic and sensitivity anal-
yses results of the process are being discussed and after that the
general evaluation of the process components is achievable.
4.1. Exergy analysis
Exergy efficiency and exergy destruction are the most impor-
tant parameters of the exergy analysis. The results of exergy effi-
ciency are presented in Fig. 2 and as you can see after mixers,
tees, tank and expansion valves with highest values the multi-
25
nents with 95.1% and 94.4% values have the best performance
respectively. On the other hand the lowest values of exergy effi-
ciency of the process components are related to multi-stream heat
exchanger (H-10) and pump (P-1). Fig. 3 shows the percentage
contribution of exergy destruction of the components type, propor-
tional to overall exergy destruction of the process. Heat exchangers
and compressors with 59.82% and 11.97% respectively have the
26 highest share of the overall exergy destruction of the process.
The significant point is related to combustion chamber component
which is supposed to have the high exergy destruction rate but
oxy-fuel concept has improved the performance of the equipment.
The exergy destruction rate of CC is 158,344 kW which is very low
in relation with other components of the process. Exergy efficiency
for expansion valves is lower than it should be, however they also
have lower exergy destruction rate compared to other units. This
demonstrates that in order to examine performance and efficiency
of an element of a system, both exergy efficiency and exergy
destruction rate must be taken into consideration. Finally the over-
all exergy efficiency of the integrated ASU-CO2 power cycle-LNG
regasification process is 67.1% which is the excellent value com-
pared to similar processes.
254 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259
Fig. 2. Exergy efficiency of the integrated ASU-CO2 power cycle-LNG regasification components.
Fig. 3. Percentage distribution of exergy destruction.
4.2. Exergoeconomic analysis
Exergoeconomic analysis combines thermodynamic and eco-
nomic concepts simultaneously. In this method a cost balance is
written for each component of the process and solved simultane-
ously with the help of auxiliary equations (Table 9). The cost rate
of capital investment and operating and maintenance is one of
the input cost rates of the cost equations (see Fig. 4). After solving
cost equations, cost per exergy unit and cost rate of each stream
are calculated as shown in Table 10. Finally exergoeconomic factor
and relative cost difference are the most important parameters
which are evaluating process in the sight of exergoeconomic anal-
ysis (Table 11). Exergoeconomic factor determines the contribution
of capital investment and operating and maintenance cost rate
against exergy destruction cost rate for each component of the pro-
cess. Large exergoeconomic factor indicates that the share of capi-
tal investment and operating and maintenance cost is higher than
exergy destruction cost and for reducing the system cost, cost of
elements must be reduced. Small exergoeconomic factor determi-
nes this fact that for decreasing system cost, performance and effi-
ciency of the system components must be improved. Results for
integrated ASU-CO2 power cycle-LNG regasification process
demonstrate that combustion chamber has the highest exergoeco-
nomic factor (36.14%) and after that pump P-1 with the value of
20.18% therefore for reducing total system cost, costs of combus-
tion chamber (CC) and P-1 should be minimized. Also the smallest
exergoeconomic factors are related to the distillation column
(0.027%) and H-5 multi-stream heat exchanger (0.224%) and for
reducing the process cost, the performance and efficiency of these
components should be maximized. The relative cost difference is a
description of relative increase in exergy cost of product with
respect to exergy cost of fuel in an element which plays significant
role in evaluating and optimizing of the system. After evaluation
the highest relative cost difference is related to H-10 heat exchan-
ger (6769) and the lowest value is related to the H-3 heat exchan-
ger (0.066). Magnitudes of exergy cost of fuel and product
determine cost of exergy rate in an element. Maximum cost per
exergy unit of fuel streams is related to expander E-1 and tee T-1
(38.28 $/GJ) while the maximum product cost per exergy unit is
related to H-10 multi-stream heat exchanger (941.1 $/GJ) and
pump P-1 (229.7 $/GJ). Exergy destruction cost rate determines
the current performance of the process elements. In this process
heat exchanger H-1 with 335,144 ($/h) has the highest value and
compressor CR-8 with 19.53 ($/h) has the lowest exergy destruc-
tion cost rate among all the process components.
4.3. Sensitivity analysis
One of the most important methods for process optimization is
adjusting constant parameters and operating conditions of differ-
ent units of a process. Sensitivity analysis of the important
parameters in an energy system can determine the effectiveness
of the decision variables on the objective function. Fig. 5 shows
the variation of capital investment and operating and mainte-
nance cost rates of the major components of the process with
respect to the variation of interest rate as one of the most impor-
tant economic parameters across the world countries. In this case
the plant life time of the process has been considered constant. As
you can see pump P-1 and multi-stream heat exchanger H-1 have
 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259 255

Fig. 4. Cost rate distributions among investment-O&M and exergy destruction for major components of the process.

Table 10
Cost rate and unit exergy cost of the process streams.
$   $  
Stream no. C_ h

103 c $
GJ
Stream no. C_ h

103 c $
GJ

1 0 0 37 875.8 34.10
2 529.0 29.51 38 42.6 34.10
3 877.8 28.87 39 36.1 34.10
4 917.1 25.84 40 8.6 34.10
5 1109 38.28 41 273.4 29.15
6 405.4 19.05 42 274.2 29.18
7 1006 24.05 43 249.5 29.18
8 705.5 38.28 44 249.8 29.21
9 403.2 38.28 45 325.3 30.44
10 735.3 39.20 46 380.4 23.90
11 1238 25.76 47 222.8 23.90
12 1238 25.83 48 147.4 23.90
13 1238 25.84 49 146.1 23.90
14 357.3 38.28 50 146.5 23.93
15 289.7 38.28 51 0 0
16 351.8 19.05 52 202.3 25.42
17 351.8 19.05 53 0.1 25.84
18 769.9 24.05 54 0.1 25.84
19 235.7 24.05 55 0.3 27.52
20 770.0 24.16 56 80,714 13.69
21 267.6 24.16 57 80,777 13.70
22 296.9 25.69 58 80,328 13.70
23 364.5 25.84 59 16,066 13.70
24 292.9 36.70 60 32,131 13.70
25 310.9 19.05 61 32,131 13.70
26 20.6 19.05 62 32,096 13.70
27 425.4 37.79 63 32,054 13.70
28 554.4 34.93 64 80,238 13.72
29 575.9 35.38 65 80,236 13.72
30 646.4 34.38 66 80,238 13.72
31 655.5 34.56 67 80,236 13.72
32 715.2 33.88 68 2.0 13.72
33 720.2 33.97 69 0 0
34 911.7 32.50 70 1.3 6.35
35 918.4 32.54 71 36.4 155.30
36 918.3 34.10
256 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259

Table 11
Exergy and exergoeconomic results of the integrated process.
     $
Component E_ F (kW) E_ P (kW) E_ D (kW) cF $
cP $ C_ D h$ Z_ h
e % r% f %
GJ GJ

P-1 6.40
105 7.58
104 5.64
105 25 229.7 5.08
104 12838 11.9 818.6 20.21
P-2 9.51
103 5.55
103 3.96
103 25 43.3 3.56
102 18.2 58.4 73.0 4.86
CR-1 5.87
106 4.83
106 1.03
106 25 30.4 9.31
104 909.4 82.4 21.6 0.97
CR-2 3.30
105 9.09
104 2.39
105 25 91.0 2.15
104 114.2 27.6 264 0.53
CR-3 3.24
105 1.33
105 1.91
105 25 61.1 1.72
104 121.5 41.1 144.3 0.70
CR-4 1.44
106 9.10
105 5.27
105 25 40.5 4.74
104 3254 63.4 61.8 6.43
CR-5 2.39
105 1.13
105 1.26
105 25 53.0 1.13
104 95.8 47.2 111.9 0.84
CR-6 9.90
104 4.59
104 5.31
104 25 55.0 4.78
103 45.4 46.4 120.2 0.94
CR-7 5.43
104 2.45
104 2.97
104 25 55.5 2.68
103 28.5 45.2 121.9 1.05
CR-8 1.87
103 1.66
103 2.17
102 25 28.5 1.95
101 1.1 88.4 13.9 5.33
CR-9 6.16
105 5.10
105 1.06
105 25 30.4 9.54
103 349.2 82.8 21.6 3.53
CR-10 1.39
104 1.15
104 2.40
103 25 30.3 2.16
102 5.1 82.7 21.4 2.30
GT 1.83
106 1.62
106 2.13
105 23.9 27.1 1.83
104 581.4 88.4 13.6 3.08
E-1 3.33
105 1.47
105 1.87
105 38.3 87.7 2.57
104 418.0 44.0 129.1 1.60
E-2 7.82
105 3.53
105 4.29
105 19.1 43.0 2.94
104 979.9 45.1 125.6 3.22
H-1 1.38
107 7.95
106 5.84
106 15.9 27.9 3.35
105 8370 57.6 75.3 2.44
H-2 1.53
106 5.96
105 9.31
105 7.7 19.1 2.59
104 1788 39.0 146.8 6.46
H-3 8.19
106 7.78
106 8.33
103 30.1 30.1 9.02
102 7.3 95.1 0.1 0.80
H-4 8.14
106 5.78
106 2.36
106 17.2 24.2 1.46
105 425.9 71.0 40.9 0.29
H-5 7.08
105 4.91
105 2.17
105 26.5 38.3 2.08
104 46.7 69.3 44.3 0.22
H-6 5.24
104 4.72
104 5.25
103 34.1 39.1 6.44
102 62.9 90.0 14.8 8.89
H-7 8.76
105 5.94
105 2.83
105 23.9 35.4 2.43
104 78.0 67.8 47.9 0.32
H-8 1.56
106 4.29
105 1.13
106 13.7 47.1 5.59
104 227.7 27.5 243.8 0.41
H-9 3.84
104 1.54
104 2.30
104 13.7 23.9 1.14
103 25.7 40.1 74.2 2.21
H-10 7.11
105 1.04
104 7.00
105 13.7 941.1 3.45
104 107.7 1.5 6769 0.31
CC 1.61
106 1.45
106 1.58
105 9.0 10.5 5.14
103 2907 90.2 16.9 36.12
DC 2.71
107 2.56
107 1.51
106 25.8 27.4 1.40
105 37.6 94.4 5.9 0.03
S-1 1.71
106 1.70
106 9.64
103 23.8 23.9 8.26
102 3.0 99.4 0.6 0.36

Fig. 5. Effect of the different interest rates on the capital investment and operating and maintenance cost rate of some important components.

the steeper slope and the increasing of interest rate has the more
impact on the associated cost rate. On the other hand compressor
CR-4 and combustion chamber have the gentle slope and conse-
quently with increasing interest rate, the capital investment and
operating and maintenance cost rates are changing smoothly. In
another economic case the plant life time of the process is varying
from 15 years to 30 years and as it has been expected the increas-
ing of this term is leading to the reduction of capital investment
and operating and maintenance cost rate. Likewise previous case,
pump P-1 and heat exchanger H-1 are more sensitive in relation
with plant life time variation, against this trend the curves of
compressor CR-4 and combustion chamber are similar to horizon-
tal straight lines and have the less sensitivity. The curves of sec-
ond economic case are presented in Fig. 6. In order to
considering sensitivity analysis in the process elements, the gas
turbine component has been chosen. This equipment produces
power for the process and has a key role in the plant. Fig. 7 shows
the variation of exergoeconomic factor and exergy efficiency by
changing the isentropic efficiency of the gas turbine. The exergoe-
conomic factor first has a gentle trend but suddenly the slope of
the curve becomes steeper which means the exergy destruction
cost rate has been decreased significantly. The exergy efficiency
of the component has the normal trend and differing almost lin-
early by changing the isentropic efficiency. In the final case of
sensitivity analysis, with respect to Fig. 8 the variation of exergy
destruction and capital investment and operating and mainte-
nance cost rate, have been investigated. It is obvious that by
increasing isentropic efficiency the exergy destruction cost rate
will be reduced, but the interesting point is the linear trend of
this variation. Table 8 shows the purchased equipment cost of
 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259 257

Fig. 6. Effect of the different plant life time economic term on the capital investment and operating and maintenance cost rate of some important components.

Fig. 7. Effect of the gas turbine isentropic efficiency on its exergoeconomic factor and exergy efficiency.

Fig. 8. Effect of the gas turbine isentropic efficiency on its exergy destruction and capital investment and operating and maintenance cost rate.

the gas turbine and as you can see the isentropic efficiency is in the value of overall equation is becoming larger. The curve at
the denominator of the equation which means with increasing the beginning has the smooth trend but gradually the slope
the isentropic efficiency the denominator becoming smaller and of the curve becomes steeper.
258 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259
5. Conclusions
Exergy, exergoeconomic and sensitivity analyses are performed
on the integrated cryogenic air separation unit, Carbon dioxide
oxy-combustion power cycle and LNG regasification process.
Results of exergy analysis shows that after mixers, tees, tank and
expansion valves with highest exergy efficiency, the multi-
stream heat exchanger H-3 with 95.1% and distillation column
with 94.4% have the best exergy performance. The contribution
of the multi-stream heat exchangers from the overall exergy
destruction of the process with the value of 59.82% is the highest
percentage. The overall exergy efficiency of the integrated process
is 67.1% which is a brilliant efficiency for such a complicated pro-
cess like this. The results of exergoeconomic analysis are as
follows:
1. The multi-stream heat exchanger H-1 which has 9 sides is the
worst component in the sight of exergy destruction cost rate
with the value of 335,144 ($/h) and after that heat exchanger
H-4 with 146,230 ($/h) and distillation column with 140,252
($/h) have the second and third places.
2. The lowest exergy destruction cost rate of the process compo-
nents is related to compressor CR-8 with 19.6 ($/h), compressor
CR-10 with 216 ($/h) and pump P-2 with 356 ($/h),
respectively.
3. The highest capital investment and operating-maintenance cost
rate of the process components is related to pump P-1 with
12,838 ($/h), heat exchanger H-1 with 8370 ($/h) and compres-
sor CR-4 with 3254 ($/h), respectively.
4. Exergoeconomic factor in combustion chamber and pump P-1
with 36.1% and 20.2% values respectively, is higher than other
elements and in order to reducing total system cost, cost of
these elements must be minimized.
5. Exergoeconomic factor in distillation column, compressors and
heat exchangers compared to other elements of the system,
except a few exceptions is negligible and in order to reducing
total system cost, performance and efficiency of these elements
must be maximized.
References
[1] Romero Gmez M, Ferreiro Garcia R, Romero Gmez J, Carbia Carril J. Review of
thermal cycles exploiting the exergy of liquefied natural gas in the
regasification process. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;38:78195.
[2] Mehrpooya M, Sharifzadeh MMM, Rosen MA. Energy and exergy analyses of a
novel power cycle using the cold of LNG (liquefied natural gas) and low-
temperature solar energy. Energy 2016;95:32445.
[3] Mehrpooya M, Moftakhari Sharifzadeh MM, Rajabi M, Aghbashlo M, Tabatabai
M, Hosseinpour S, et al. Design of an integrated process for simultaneous
chemical looping hydrogen production and electricity generation with CO2
capture. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2017.
[4] Mehrpooya M, Sharifzadeh MMM. A novel integration of oxy-fuel cycle, high
temperature solar cycle and LNG cold recovery-energy and exergy analysis.
Appl Therm Eng 2016.
[5] Stefanie Tesch TM, Tsatsaronis George. Advanced exergy analysis applied to
the process of regasification of LNG (liquefied natural gas) integrated into an
air separation process. Energy 2016.
[6] Mehrpooya Mehdi, Kalhorzadeh Masoud, Chahartaghi Mahmood. Investigation
of novel integrated air separation processes, cold energy recovery of liquefied
natural gas and carbon dioxide power cycle. J Cleaner Prod 2016;113:41125.
[7] Mehrpooya M, Esfilar R, Moosavian SMA. Introducing a novel air separation
process based on cold energy recovery of LNG integrated with coal gasification,
transcritical carbon dioxide power cycle and cryogenic CO2 capture. J Cleaner
Prod 2017;142(Part 4):174964.
[8] Fu Qian, Kansha Y, Song Chunfeng, Liu Yuping, Ishizuka Masanori, Tsutsumi
Atsushi. A cryogenic air separation process based on self-heat recuperation for
oxy-combustion plants. Appl Energy 2016;162:111421.
[9] Anna Skorek-Osikowska B, Kotowicz Janusz. A comparative thermodynamic,
economic and risk analysis concerning implementation of oxy-combustion
power plants integrated with cryogenic and hybrid air separation units. Energy
Convers Manage 2015;92:42130.
[10] Burdyny Thomas, Struchtrup Henning. Hybrid membrane/cryogenic
separation of oxygen from air for use in the oxy-fuel process. Energy
2010;35:188497.
[11] Janusz-Szymanska Katarzyna, Dryjanska Aleksandra. Possibilities for
improving the thermodynamic and economic characteristics of an oxy-type
power plant with a cryogenic air separation unit. Energy 2015;85:4561.
[12] Qian Fu YK, Song Chunfeng, Liu Yuping, Ishizuka Masanori, Tsutsumi Atsushi.
An elevated-pressure cryogenic air separation unit based on self-heat
recuperation technology for integrated gasification combined cycle systems.
Energy 2016;103:4406.
[13] Mehdi Mehrpooya MMMS, Rosen Marc A. Optimum design and exergy
analysis of a novel cryogenic air separation process with LNG (liquefied
natural gas) cold energy utilization. Energy 2015;90:204769.
[14] Mehrpooya M, Bahramian P, Pourfayaz F, Rosen MA. Introducing and analysis
of a hybrid molten carbonate fuel cell-supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton
cycle system. Sustain Energy Technol Assessments 2016;18:1006.
[15] Aghaie M, Mehrpooya M, Pourfayaz F. Introducing an integrated chemical
looping hydrogen production, inherent carbon capture and solid oxide fuel cell
biomass fueled power plant process configuration. Energy Convers Manage
2016;124:14154.
[16] Mohammad MM, Ahmadi H, Pourfayaz Fathollah. Exergoeconomic analysis
and multi objective optimization of performance of a carbon dioxide power
cycle driven by geothermal energy with liquefied natural gas as its heat sink.
Energy Convers Manage 2016;119:42234.
[17] Vlez Fredy, Segovia Jos, Chejne Farid, Antoln Gregorio, Quijano Ana, Carmen
Martn M. Low temperature heat source for power generation: Exhaustive
analysis of a carbon dioxide transcritical power cycle. Energy
2011;36:5497507.
[18] Pramod Kumar PD, Srinivasa Murthy Srikantiah, Srinivasan Kandadai. Solar
driven carbon dioxide Brayton cycle power generation with thermal
compression. Appl Therm Eng 2016.
[19] Al-Sulaiman FA, Atif M. Performance comparison of different supercritical
carbon dioxide Brayton cycles integrated with a solar power tower. Energy
2015;82:6171.
[20] Xia Guanghui, Sun Qingxuan, Cao Xu, Wang Jiangfeng, Yu Yizhao, Wang
Laisheng. Thermodynamic analysis and optimization of a solar-powered
transcritical CO2 (carbon dioxide) power cycle for reverse osmosis
desalination based on the recovery of cryogenic energy of LNG (liquefied
natural gas). Energy 2014;66:64353.
[21] Mahmoudi SMS, Ghavimi AR. Thermoeconomic analysis and multi objective
optimization of a molten carbonate fuel cell supercritical carbon dioxide
organic Rankin cycle integrated power system using liquefied natural gas as
heat sink. Appl Therm Eng 2016;107:121932.
[22] Fu Qian, Kansha Yasuki, Song Chunfeng, Liu Yuping, Ishizuka Masanori,
Tsutsumi Atsushi. An advanced cryogenic air separation process based on self-
heat recuperation for CO2 separation. Energy Procedia 2014;61:16736.
[23] Kemp IC. Pinch analysis and process integration: a user guide on process
integration for the efficient use of energy. 2nd ed. Oxford: Elsevier; 2007.
[24] Tirandazi B, Mehrpooya M, Vatani A, Ali Moosavian SM. Exergy
analysis of C+2 recovery plants refrigeration cycles. Chem Eng Res Des
2011;89:67689.
[25] Yazdanfar J, Mehrpooya M, Yousefi H, Palizdar A. Energy and exergy analysis
and optimal design of the hybrid molten carbonate fuel cell power plant and
carbon dioxide capturing process. Energy Convers Manage 2015;98:1527.
[26] Mehrpooya M, Hossieni M, Vatani A. Novel LNG-based integrated process
configuration alternatives for coproduction of LNG and NGL. Ind Eng Chem Res
2014;53:1770521.
[27] Mehrpooya M, Vatani A, Sadeghian F, Ahmadi MH. A novel process
configuration for hydrocarbon recovery process with autorefrigeration
system. J Natl Gas Sci Eng 2015.
[28] Mehrpooya M, Shafaei A. Advanced exergy analysis of novel flash based
Helium recovery from natural gas processes. Energy 2016;114:6483.
[29] Mehrpooya M. Conceptual design and energy analysis of novel integrated
liquefied natural gas and fuel cell electrochemical power plant processes.
Energy 2016;111:46883.
[30] Mehrpooya M, Lazemzade R, Sadaghiani MS, Parishani H. Energy and advanced
exergy analysis of an existing hydrocarbon recovery process. Energy Convers
Manage 2016;123:52334.
[31] Mehrpooya M, Dehghani H, Moosavian SMA. Optimal design of solid oxide fuel
cell, ammonia-water single effect absorption cycle and Rankine steam cycle
hybrid system. J Power Sources 2016;306:10723.
[32] Mehdi Mehrpooya HA. Exergoeconomic evaluation of single mixed refrigerant
natural gas liquefaction processes. Energy Convers Manage 2015;99:40013.
[33] Mehrpooya M, Ansarinasab H. Advanced exergoeconomic evaluation of single
mixed refrigerant natural gas liquefaction processes. J Natl Gas Sci Eng
2015;26:78291.
[34] Mehrpooya M, Ansarinasab H. Advanced exergoeconomic analysis of the
multistage mixed refrigerant systems. Energy Convers Manage
2015;103:70516.
[35] Ansarinasab H, Mehrpooya M. Evaluation of novel process configurations for
coproduction of LNG and NGL using advanced exergoeconomic analysis. Appl
Therm Eng 2017.
[36] Akkalp E, Aras H, Hepbasli A. Advanced exergoeconomic analysis of a
trigeneration system using a diesel-gas engine. Appl Therm Eng
2014;67:38895.
 M. Mehrpooya, M.J. Zonouz / Energy Conversion and Management 139 (2017) 245259
[37] Armin Ebrahimi MM, Reyhani Hamed Akbarpour, Pourali Omid, Amidpour
Majid. Energetic, exergetic and economic assessment of oxygen production
from two columns cryogenic air separation unit. Energy 2015;90:1298316.
[38] Ghorbani Bahram, Hamedi Mohammad-Hossein, Shirmohammadi Reza,
Hamedi Mohsen, Mehrpooya Mehdi. Exergoeconomic analysis and multi-
objective Pareto optimization of the C3MR liquefaction process. Sustain
Energy Technol Assessments 2016;17:5667.
[39] Cavalcanti Eduardo JC, Motta Henrique Pereira. Exergoeconomic analysis of a
solar-powered/fuel assisted Rankine cycle for power generation. Energy
2015;88:55562.
[40] Ozbilen Ahmet, Dincer Ibrahim, Rosen Marc A. Development of a four-step Cu
Cl cycle for hydrogen production Part I: exergoeconomic and
exergoenvironmental analyses. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2016;41:781425.
[41] Khani Leyla, Mahmoudi S Mohammad S, Chitsaz Ata, Rosen Marc A. Energy and
exergoeconomic evaluation of a new power/cooling cogeneration system
based on a solid oxide fuel cell. Energy 2016;94:6477.
[42] Ansarinasab H, Mehrpooya M. Advanced exergoeconomic analysis of a novel
process for production of LNG by using a single effect absorption refrigeration
cycle. Appl Therm Eng 2016.
[43] Ansarinasab H, Mehrpooya M, Mohammadi A. Advanced exergy and
exergoeconomic analyses of a hydrogen liquefaction plant equipped with
mixed refrigerant system. J Cleaner Prod 2017;144:24859.
[44] Akkalp E, Aras H, Hepbasli A. Advanced exergoeconomic analysis of an
electricity-generating facility that operates with natural gas. Energy Convers
Manage 2014;78:45260.
259
[45] Klemes J. Handbook of process integration (PI): minimisation of energy and
water use, waste and emissions. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing; 2013.
[46] Peng Ding-Yu, Robinson Donald B. A new two-constant equation of state. Ind
Eng Chem Fundamentals 1976;15:5964.
[47] Yunus MAB, Cengel A. Thermodynamics: an engineering approach. 7th
ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2011.
[48] Vatani A, Mehrpooya M, Palizdar A. Energy and exergy analyses of five
conventional liquefied natural gas processes. Int J Energy Res
2014;38:184363.
[49] Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Malabar,
Florida: Krieger Publishing Company; 1995.
[50] Adrian Bejan GT, Moran Michael. Thermal design and optimization. United
States of America: John Wiley & Sons; 1996.
[51] Hasan Ozcan ID. Exergoeconomic optimization of a new four-step
magnesiumchlorine cycle. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2016.
[52] Khaljani RKSM, Bahlouli K. Comprehensive analysis of energy, exergy and
exergoeconomic of cogeneration of heat and power in a combined gas turbine
and organic Rankine cycle. Energy Convers Manage 2015;97:15465.
[53] Hamidreza Najafi BN, Hoseinpoori Pooya. Energy and cost optimization of a
plate and fin heat exchanger using genetic algorithm. Appl Therm Eng
2011;31:183947.
[54] Couper James R, Roy Penney W, Fair James R, Walas Stanley M. Chemical
process equipment: selection and design. 2nd ed. United States of
America: Elsevier; 2010.