See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235677820

Investigation of varying dead state

temperatures on energy and exergy efficiencies
in thermal power plant

Dataset February 2013

READS

424

1 author:

Adem Acr
Gazi University
71 PUBLICATIONS 394 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Adem Acr
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 14 August 2016
 Investigation of varying dead state
temperatures on energy and exergy
efficiencies in thermal power plant
A. Acr*1, A. K. Bilginsoy2 and H. Coskun2
In this study, the energy and exergy analysis of a 160 MW C ayrhan thermal power plant, which is
operational in Ankara, Turkey, is performed. The effects of varying dead state temperatures on
energy and exergy in the plant are investigated. Exergy destruction (irreversibility), entropy
generation, per cent ratio to exergy destruction and heat loss, energy and exergy efficiencies are
determined for the dead state temperatures ranging from 5 to 30uC. The varying dead state
temperatures do not have an effect on the energy efficiency (first law efficiency), whereas they
affect the exergy efficiency (second law efficiency). The energy efficiency is computed as 42?76%
for the whole plant. The exergy efficiency values for the whole plant are obtained as 35?62 and
32?97% for varying dead state temperature values between 5 and 30uC respectively. It is
observed that dead state temperatures directly affect the exergy efficiency of the thermal power
plant. In addition, the comparison between heat losses and exergy destruction of the individual
component of the plant shows that the maximum heat losses occur in the condenser, whereas the
maximum exergy destruction occurs in the boiler for all the reference state temperatures.
Furthermore, the analysis shows that the boiler is the major source of irreversibility in the plant.
Keywords: Energy, Exergy, Dead state temperature, Thermal power plant, Irreversibility

List of symbols Introduction

ex
: specific exergy Improvement of the energy efficiency in energy produc-
Ex total exergy rate, kW tion is a key aim of economy, and this trend will
Exd exergy destruction rate (irreversibility), kW continue to increase in the near future. It is known that
h: specific enthalpy, kJ kg21 the most effective way to use energy more efficiently is
I irreversibility, kW through the energy and exergy analysis.14 Exergy can
LHV: lower heat value, kJ kg21 be defined as the maximum useful work that can be
m mass flowrate, kg s21 obtained from the system.18 The exergy analysis
P pressure, kPa method is based on the second law of thermodynamics.
:
Q heat transfer, kW Therefore, it is used to see the various losses qualita-
s: specific entropy, J kg21 K21 tively as well as quantitatively for the design and
S entropy generation, kW K21 analysis of energy systems. On the other hand, energy
T temperature, uC or K analysis is based on the first law analysis, which does not
:
W work rate, W give the qualitative assessment of the various losses
efficiency occurring in the individual component of the plant.19
Therefore, exergy analysis can be used to determine the
Subscripts location, type and true magnitude of exergy loss or
in inlet destruction in system performance.9 In recent years,
I first law many researchers have been performed on energy and
II second law exergy analysis for thermal power plants. In these
out outlet researches, generally, two types of temperature value
0 reference property are taken into consideration. These are fixed and the
varying ambient temperatures of the power plant.
Studies on energy and exergy analyses made to
1
Department of Energy Systems Engineering, Faculty of Technology, Gazi
determine plant efficiency and irreversibility for the
University, Teknikokullar, Ankara, Turkey fixed dead state temperature are given in Refs. 1017.
2
Institute of Science and Technology, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey The main purposes of these studies were to investigate
*Corresponding author, email adema@gazi.edu.tr the energetic and exergetic performance analyses in

2012 Energy Institute

Published by Maney on behalf of the Institute
Received 21 July 2010; accepted 26 April 2011
14 DOI 10.1179/174396711X13116932752074 Journal of the Energy Institute 2012 VOL 85 NO 1

order to identify the needed improvement in the
component for the existing coal fired thermal power
plants. Sengupta et al.10 investigated the exergy analysis
of a coal based 210 MW thermal power plant in India.
Ganapathy et al.11 presented the exergy analysis of the
operating lignite fired thermal power plant. The energy
and exergy analysis of the Kostolac power plant in
Serbia was investigated by Mitrovic et al.12 Hussein
et al.13 presented the exergy analysis of a 120 MW
thermal power plant in Malaysia. Oktay14 performed the
energy and exergy analysis of a coal fired Can thermal
power plant in Turkey. Erdem et al.15 analysed compara-
tively the performance of thermal power plants from
energetic and exergetic viewpoints. Rosen16 reported the
energy and exergy based comparisons of coal fired and
nuclear electrical generating stations. Cihan et al.17
presented energyexergy analysis and modernisation
suggestions for a combined cycle power plant.
In addition to this, there are studies based on the
exergy analysis for thermal systems with varying dead
state temperature in Refs. 1830. Dead (reference) state
definitions of exergy analysis have been studied by
Krakow.18 He reported that exergy analysis was an
implicit comparison of the performance of real thermal
systems with the performance of ideal, reversible
thermal systems. Wepfer and Gaggioli19 presented that
exergy analyses of chemical plants are often relatively
insensitive to variations in environment temperature T0
and pressure P0. They have pointed out that small and
reasonable changes in dead state properties have little
effect on the performance of a given system. Al-Muslim
et al.20 studied the effects of varying reference tempera-
ture on the exergy efficiencies of one- and two-stage
crude oil distillation units. They found that an increase
in reference temperature decreases the exergy efficiency
in both one- and two-stage crude oil distillation systems.
Rosen and Dincer21 investigated the actual effects of the
varying dead state properties on the exergy and energy
analysis of thermal systems. The energy and exergy
analyses they made have shown that the results were
insensitive to the variation of these properties.
Regulagadda et al.22 performed a thermodynamic
exergy analysis using design data of an actual power
plant under construction in India. They presented a
parametric study to determine how the system perfor-
mance varies with different operating parameters.
Kopac and Hilalci23 applied an energy and exergy
analysis to investigate the effects of the ambient
temperature of the C atalagz thermal power plant in
Turkey. They found that the highest exergy losses take
place in the boiler, while the highest energy losses occur
in the condenser. They also showed that the exergy
efficiency of the whole power plant components, except
for the condenser, decreases with an increase in ambient
temperature. Aljundi24 presented an energy and exergy
analysis of the Al-Hussein steam power plant in Jordan
for dead state temperature. The maximum exergy
destruction was found in the boiler system followed by
the turbine, whereas the maximum energy loss was
found in the condenser. He also calculated the effect of
the reference state temperature. He also pointed that the
components of the thermal power plant make a slight
exergy efficiency change with the changing dead state
temperature. Vosoogh and Hajidavalloo25 studied the
energy and exergy efficiencies of a supercritical thermal
Acr et al. Energy and exergy efficiencies in thermal power plant
power plant under different ambient conditions. They
summarised that the exergy efficiency of the boiler
decreases with increasing ambient temperature; on the
contrary, the exergy efficiency of the turbine slightly
increases. Ameri et al.26 performed an energy, exergy
and exergoeconomic analysis of a steam power plant to
get high efficiency and economy on the Hamedan steam
power plant. The effects of the load variations and
ambient temperature were calculated, and the exergy
efficiencies of the critical components of a power plant
were investigated at different load and ambient tem-
peratures. In addition, the exergoeconomic analysis was
made to calculate the cost of exergy destruction for each
component of the power plant. The results show that
the boiler has the highest cost and destruction as
regards exergy efficiencies. In another paper, Ameri
and Ahmadi27 studied the thermal and exergy analy-
ses of a 400 MW combined cycle power plant. They
determined the effects of different ambient temperature
variations on the exergy loss for fired and unfired
conditions. They found that the ambient temperature
variation does not influence the heat recovery steam
generator loss in the unfired case greatly. The exergy
analysis of a thermal power cycle system with 300 MW
capacity was performed by Zhao and Chai.28 They
investigated that the exergy efficiency of the system
varies with the change of ambient temperature. They
pointed out that the exergy efficiency decreases with an
increase in ambient temperature. In addition, Guoqiang
et al.29 performed an energy and exergy analysis for a
300 MW thermal system of the Xiaolongton power
plant. They found that the total exergy efficiency for the
overall system stayed the same with varying environ-
mental temperature under certain working conditions.
Kaushik et al.30 provided a detailed review of the energy
and exergy analyses on different thermal power plants.
The main objective of this study is to perform energy
and exergy analyses on the C ayrhan thermal power
plant (C TPP) in Turkey. The energy and exergy
efficiency, energy loss, exergy destruction (irreversibility)
and entropy generation rate in boiler, turbine, con-
denser, feed water heaters, pipes and pumps are
determined. In addition to these studies, exergy analysis
is applied to determine the effect of varying dead state
temperatures for the major plant components of the
power plant. Moreover, the suggestion for major plant
components of the power plant is made to improve the
thermodynamic efficiency of the system.
System description
The C TPP is located in the city of C
ayrhan, Ankara,
Turkey, and has a total installed power capacity of
620 MW. The power house consists of four steam
turbines units (26150z26160) MW. The plant uses
C ayrhan lignite coal with average calories of
y13 000 kJ kg21 as fuel. The systematic diagram of
one 160 MW unit is shown in Fig. 1. As shown in Fig. 1,
the main components of the system are boiler, high
pressure turbine (HPT), intermediate pressure turbine
(IPT), low pressure turbine (LPT), three low pressure
feed water heaters (LPH), two high pressure feed water
heaters (HPH), condenser, pumps and heaters. The
energy released by combustion of coal is transferred to
the water in the boiler. Hence, phase change occurs in
water from liquid to steam. The mass flowrate of coal to
Journal of the Energy Institute 2012 VOL 85 NO 1 15
Acr et al. Energy and exergy efficiencies in thermal power plant

1 Schematic diagram of power plant

boiler is 3000 ton/day. The volumetric flowrate of air to and P0 are taken as 298?15 K and 101?325 kPa
boiler and the combustion products from boiler are respectively. In addition, T0 is considered between 5
400 000 and 600 000 m3 h21 respectively. The exit and 30uC for determining effect of the varying dead state
temperature of the products from boiler is 150uC. of pressure constant at 101?325 kPa.
Water enters to the boiler with a temperature of 230uC General balance equations for a control volume at
and exits as a superheated steam at 538uC and 13?7 MPa steady state process are given below.3,57
and enters HPT. The superheated steam does work on The mass balance equation
the turbine. The total mass flowrate of the steam is X : X :
477 003 kg h21 at the inlet of the HPT. By the time min ~ mout (1)
steam does work on the HPT, its enthalpy decreases,
where :m is the mass flowrate.
and it enters the boiler at 363?6uC for the reheating
The energy balance equation
process. At the exit of the HPT, the mass flowrate of the
X: : X : :
steam is 433 246 kg h21. The difference between the E in zQ~ E out zW (2)
mass flowrate of the steam at the inlet and outlet of in out
the HPT arises from the extraction of the steam for feed
water heaters. After the steam is reheated to 538uC and The entropy balance equation
3?7 MPa in the boiler, it enters IPT and then LPT. It : :
X : X Q : X : X Q
does work on IPT and LPT, and the availability of the Sz zS gen ~ Sz (3)
T out out
T
steam reduces. The exhaust steam enters the condenser, in in
losses heat and becomes liquid phase. The water that is The exergy balance equation of the control volume in a
in liquid phase is heated using the steam extracted from general form can be defined by
turbines and returns to the boiler at 230uC. X : X : X : : :
Exin z ExQ ~ Exout zW zExd (4)
Energy and exergy analysis in
:
out
:
Exergy analysis is based on the first and second where ExQ and Exd are exergy transfer with Q
: :
thermodynamic laws, which are significant tools to and exergy destruction (irreversibility I~Exd ~T0 S gen )
analyse the energy systems. The useful work potential of respectively.
a system at the specified state is called exergy. Exergy is a The exergy by heat
property and is associated with the state of the system
: X 
T0 :
and the environment. A system that is in equilibrium ExQ ~ 1{ Q (5)
with its surroundings has zero exergy and is said to be at T
the dead state.3,57 The temperature and pressure of the where T0 is the dead (reference) state temperature
:
environment are known to be uniform at T0 and P0. In varying between 5 and 30uC, and Q is the output heat
this study, the dead (reference) state values used for T0 transfer rate in the system. The potential and kinetic

16 Journal of the Energy Institute 2012 VOL 85 NO 1

 Acr et al. Energy and exergy efficiencies in thermal power plant

: :
energies in the system are neglected in our calculations. where W net and E fuel are the net work and exergy input
: :
Total exergy rate Ex in the exergy balance equation of rate (LHV mfuel ) to the control volume respectively.
the control volume is written as The exergy efficiency of the power plants can be
: : computed as
Ex~mex (6) :
W net
where ex is the specific exergy. The specific exergy is gII ~ : (9)
given by Exfuel
The exergy input rate can be described by
ex~h{h0 {T0 s{s0 (7)
: : :
where h and s present the specific enthalpy and entropy Exfuel ~LHV mfuel efuel (10)
respectively. :
where mfuel is the mass rate of fuel consumption, and
The thermal efficiency (energy efficiency) of the power : :
efuel is the exergy factor based on the LHV. efuel is given
plants can be calculated as follows as 1?06. 3,24
In addition, the equations of the exergy
:
W net destruction rate and the exergy efficiency in the each
gI ~ : (8)
E fuel component are defined as shown in Table 1 for a steady
Table 1 Exergy destruction rate and exergy efciency state operation of the control volume.
equations for plant components

Com- Exergy Exergy Results and discussion

ponents destruction rate efficiency
In this study, the energy and exergy analysis of the coal
: : : : : : fired C
TPP, whose schematic diagram is given in Fig. 1,
Boiler I boiler ~E xfuel zE xin {E xout : E xout { E xin
gII,boiler ~ : is performed. Table 2 shows thermodynamic properties
: : : : E: xfuel of the cycle at different nodes given in Fig. 1. The energy
Pumps I pump ~E xin {E xout {W pump : I pump
gII,pump ~1{ : and exergy analysis of different components can be
W pump obtained using these data. Enthalpy and entropy values
: : : : :
Heaters I heaters ~ Exin { E xout I heaters are taken from the tables given by C engel and Boles.5
gII,heaters ~1{ :
: : : : Ex:in The T0 and P0 values for the reference environment
Turbine I pump ~E xin {E xout {W el g: I turbine considered in the analysis are taken as 25uC and
II,turbine ~1{ : :
: : : E x :in{ E xout 101?325 kPa respectively. The energy and exergy ana-
Condenser I pump ~E xin {E xout : I condenser
gII,condenser ~1{ : lyses at each state point of the power plant when
E xin To5298?15 K and Po5101?325 kPa are given in

Table 2 Energy and exergy analysis of power plant when To5298?15 K and Po5101?3 kPa
Point Mass Enthalpy Entropy Specific Energy Exergy
Temperature Pressure flowrate h/kJ kg21 s/kJ kg21 exergy flowrate flowrate
: :
T/uC P/MPa m/ton h21 K21 ex/kJ kg21 E /kW Ex /kW

1 41.6 1.4 395.099 174.250 0.594 2 19 124 204

2 72.3 395.099 302.600 0.983 14 33 210 1565
3 72.8 1.4 395.099 304.700 0.989 15 33 441 1596
4 100.1 395.099 419.460 1.308 34 46 036 3746
5 100.1 1.4 395.099 419.460 1.308 34 46 036 3746
6 134.5 395.099 565.240 1.682 68 62 035 7517
7 167 18.300 477.003 710.100 1.992 121 94 089 16 031
8 194 477.003 825.510 2.274 152 109 381 20 162
9 190 18.300 477.003 807.620 2.236 146 107 010 19 301
10 234 477.003 1008.900 2.647 224 133 680 29 742
11 230 16.900 477.003 990.200 2.610 217 131 202 28 714
12 538 13.720 477.003 3428.430 6.535 1485 454 270 196 736
13 363 3.870 433.246 3128.230 6.652 1149 376 470 138 338
14 538 3.700 433.246 3535.350 7.236 1383 425 466 166 396
15 306 0.720 395.099 3071.110 7.310 896 337 053 98 377
16 41.6 0.06 335.023 2373.200 7.707 80 220 855 7448
17 39 0.039 395.099 163.380 0.559 1 17 931 146
18 208 4.707 43.757 890.400 2.410 177 10 823 2147
19 172.3 1.863 62.727 729.320 2.065 118 12 708 2064
20 105.1 0.343 23.336 440.560 1.364 39 2856 250
21 77.8 0.149 41.122 325.650 1.049 18 3720 201
22 45 0.06 60.076 188.450 0.634 4 3145 69
23 380 4.707 43.757 3150.390 6.601 1187 38 292 14 429
24 440 1.863 18.970 3337.550 7.284 1170 17 587 6167
25 310 0.640 19.174 3081.440 7.379 886 16 412 4719
26 245 0.343 23.336 2955.860 7.437 743 19 161 4818
27 155 0.149 17.786 2782.700 7.472 560 13 748 2764
28 100 0.039 18.954 2683.880 7.902 333 14 131 1751
29 163 0.666 687.420 1.983 101
30 22 0.200 10 000 92.320 0.325 0 256 444 199
31 34 0.200 10 000 142.500 0.492 1 395 833 1528

Journal of the Energy Institute 2012 VOL 85 NO 1 17

Acr et al. Energy and exergy efficiencies in thermal power plant

Table 3 Comparative results of exergy and energy analysis of various components for To5298?15 K and Po5101?3 kPa

Components Heat loss/kW Irreversibility/kW Heat loss/% Exergy loss/% gI/% gII/%

Boiler 37 935 276 876 8.43 58.05 82.69 41.95

Turbine 4377 27 074 0.97 5.68 81.46 83.40
Condenser 206 069 2744 45.8 0.58 91.99 64.44
Pumps 4198 1808 0.933 0.38 98.38 58.69
HPH 1 619 522 0.145 0.11 98.33 75.81
HPH 2 289 663 0.064 0.14 99.42 85.61
HPH 3 305 797 0.067 0.17 99.53 90.69
Dearatore 71 919 0.002 0.19 99.92 93.57
LPH 1 410 2119 0.09 0.44 99.67 91.30
LPH 2 800 1841 0.18 0.39 99.45 94.54
Pipe 2478 1889 0.55 0.40
Overall plant 257 550 317 252 57.24 66.52 42.76 33.48

Table 2. The energy balance, irreversibility, per cent
ratio to heat loss and exergy destruction and first and
second law efficiencies for each component of the plant
are given in Table 3. It is found that the highest heat loss
is obtained at the condenser as 45?8% because of the
cooling down to lower temperature from steam tempera-
ture. The heat loss from boiler, which is after the
condenser, is obtained as 8?43%, while the heat loss for
the other components is small. It is seen that about half of
the total heat loss of the plants occur in the condenser
only, and this energy loss cannot be practically utilised for
power generation. According to the results in Table 3, the
energy analysis based on the first law of thermodynamics
evaluates on its quantity only. Therefore, the quality of
the energy for each state point of the individual plant
component cannot be determined from the energy
analysis. However, the quality as well as the quantity
can be determined by the exergy analysis in the plant.
The major irreversibility (276?876 MW) for the over-
all plant efficiency is in the boiler, which is followed by
the turbine (27?074 MW), whereas the irreversibility of
the other components is small, as presented in Table 3
for To5298?15 K and Po5101?325 kPa. The per cent
exergy loss versus the irreversibility for the boiler and
the turbine are 58?05 and 5?68% respectively. The exergy
analysis indicates that the boiler has to the maximum
exergy loss (58?05%) for the overall plant due to the
chemical reaction between air and fuel in the combus-
tion process. The obtained energy and exergy results are
in good agreement compared to the previous studies.1029
In addition, comparative results of the first and second
law efficiencies of various components for To5298?15 K
and Po5101?325 kPa are given, as shown in Table 3. The
first and second law efficiencies for the overall power
plant are determined as 42?76 and 33?48% respectively.
Note that the exergy efficiencies are lower than the energy
efficiency in all of the steps.
In addition, the effects of the varying dead state
temperatures ranging from 5 to 30uC at constant
101?325 kPa pressure on the energy and exergy efficiency
are investigated. The irreversibility, per cent exergy loss,
entropy generation rates and exergy efficiency at each
component of the thermal power plant depending on the
varying dead state temperatures are calculated and also
tabulated in Table 4. The: changes in irreversibility and
entropy generation rates S gen of each component of the

Table 4 Exergy analysis results for main components of thermal power plant at varying dead state temperatures

Temperatures/K

Components 278.15 283.15 288.15 293.15 298.15 303.15

Boiler Irreversibility/kW 262 793 266 313 269 834 273 355 276 876 280 397
Entropy rates/kW K21 944.79 940.54 936.44 932.48 928.65 924.94
Exergy loss/% 55.10 55.84 56.58 57.32 58.05 58.79
gII/% 44.90 44.16 43.42 42.68 41.95 41.21
Turbine Irreversibility/kW 25 758 26 087 26 416 26 745 27 074 27 403
Entropy rates/kW K21 92.61 92.13 91.67 91.23 90.81 90.39
Exergy loss/% 5.40 5.47 5.54 5.61 5.68 5.75
gII/% 84.21 84.00 83.80 83.60 83.40 83.20
Condenser Irreversibility/kW 8157 7063 6166 4144 2744 1275
Entropy rates/kW K21 29.33 24.94 21.40 14.14 9.20 4.21
Exergy loss/% 1.71 1.48 1.29 0.87 0.58 0.27
gII/% 63.84 61.39 57.33 62.66 64.44 73.13
Heaters Irreversibility/kW 6563 6638 6712 6786 6861 6935
Entropy rates/kW K21 23.595 23.44 23.29 23.14 23.01 22.87
Exergy loss/% 1.38 1.39 1.41 1.42 1.44 1.45
gII/% 94.18 93.74 93.27 92.75 92.18 91.56
Pumps Irreversibility/kW 1689 1711 1734 1757 1808 1831
Entropy rates/kW K21 6.07 6.04 6.02 5.99 6.06 6.04
Exergy loss/% 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.38 0.38
gII/% 61.42 60.90 60.37 59.85 58.69 58.17
Plant Irreversibility/kW 307 047 309 850 312 851 314 727 317 252 319 681
Entropy rates/kW K 1103.89 1094.30 1085.72 1073.60 1064.07 1054.53
Exergy loss/% 64.38 64.97 65.60 65.99 66.52 67.03
gII/% 35.62 35.03 34.40 34.01 33.48 32.97

18 Journal of the Energy Institute 2012 VOL 85 NO 1


2 Irreversibility of components versus varying dead state
temperatures
3 Entropy generation rate of components versus varying
dead state temperatures
power plant for the varying dead state temperatures are
shown in Figs. 2 and 3 respectively. From Table 4 and
Fig. 2, the exergy analysis indicates that the irreversibility
rates and per cent exergy loss in the boiler, turbine,
heaters, pumps and plant are increased with increasing
dead state temperatures, whereas the irreversibility rates
and per cent exergy: loss of the condenser are decreased.
In addition, the Sgen as a function of exergy destruction or
irreversibility of all the components is decreased with
increasing dead state temperatures, as illustrated in Fig. 3
and Table 4. The results for the irreversibility of the
boiler are much higher than the other components, as
shown in Fig. 4. Generally, the irreversibility and entropy
generation rates for the entire component except the
condenser with varying dead state temperatures have
little change, as shown in Figs. 2 and 3. However, the
condenser has too much deviation of the irreversibility
and entropy generation rates with varying dead state
temperatures, as shown in Figs. 2 and 3. The irreversi-
bility of the condenser with increasing dead state
temperatures is decreased. Hence, the exergy efficiency
with decreasing temperature difference between the
exhaust steam and the cooling water in the condenser is
increased from 63?84 to 73?13% with varying dead state
temperature, as shown in Fig. 4. On the other hand, the
exergy efficiency values of the boiler are lower than the
other components, and the exergy efficiency is decreased
from 44?9 to 41?21% for dead state temperatures between
278?15 and 303?15 K, as illustrated in Fig. 4. The exergy
efficiency of the turbine, heaters and pumps are decreased
Acr et al. Energy and exergy efficiencies in thermal power plant
4 Exergy efciencies of components versus varying dead
state temperatures
5 Efciency defect, energy efciency and exergy efciencies
of overall plant versus varying dead state temperatures
from 84?21 to 83?20, 94?18 to 91?56 and 61?42 to 58?17%
respectively for varying dead state temperatures between
278?15 and 303?15 K.
From the exergy analysis summarised in Table 4, the
irreversibility of the overall plant is increased from 307 to
319?68 MW, whereas the entropy generation rate is
decreased from 1104 to 1055 kW K21 with dead state
temperatures between 278?15 and 303?15 K. The power
plant energy efficiency, exergy efficiency and per cent exergy
loss versus varying dead state temperature are shown in
Fig. 5. The varying dead state temperature does not have an
effect on the energy efficiency, but it affects the exergy
efficiency, as shown in Fig. 5. The total exergy efficiency of
the overall plant system is decreased from 35?62 to 32?97%
for the dead state temperature changing from 278?15 to
303?15 K respectively at constant pressure of 101?325 kPa,
as shown in Fig. 5. On the other hand, the total exergy loss
(exergy efficiency defect) in the plant is increased from 64?38
to 67?03% for the same reference conditions. The obtained
analysis results have shown that varying dead state
temperatures have an effect on the exergy efficiency of the
thermal power plant. Hence, the obtained exergy efficiency
results can greatly contribute to improvements in the overall
system performance and the plant components.
The exergy balance diagrams (Grassmann diagram) of
the thermal power plant are given in Fig. 6. The
Grassmann diagram is a graphical analysis tool that
shows the input and output relations of the exergy
balance.3 It is also called the exergy flow diagram. The
exergy input, output and irreversibility of the thermal
Journal of the Energy Institute 2012 VOL 85 NO 1 19
Acr et al. Energy and exergy efficiencies in thermal power plant

6 Exergy balance diagrams (Grassmann diagram) of thermal power plant with reference state of 25uC temperature and
101?325 kPa pressure: (I) boiler, (II) turbine, (III) condenser, (IV) heaters, (V) pipes and (VI) pumps

power plant are clearly shown in Fig. 6. The investiga-
tion of the exergy flow diagram given in Fig. 6 shows
that 66?52% of the exergy entering the system is lost,
whereas the remaining 33?48% is utilised effectively. The
major source of irreversibility (58?05%) is the boiler,
which is followed by the turbine (5?68%).
The comparison of energy and exergy efficiencies and
losses in C TPP with other works available in the
literature is given in Table 5.1113,21,22,24,26,28,29 The
results showed that the energy and exergy results in
C TPP found by this study are similar when compared to
the literature. It is observed from Table 5 that in all of
the plants found in the literature, the maximum exergy
destruction is obtained in the boiler followed by turbine.
It is seen that combustion in the boiler is the major
source of irreversibility. It can be pointed out that the
losses in the boiler may be due to the incomplete
combustion, heat loss and chemical reaction between air
and fuel in the combustion process. This loss affects the
overall efficiency. From these results, it can be said that
the boiler requires modifications for a decrease in exergy
destruction. These modifications will lead to the largest
improvement in overall plant efficiency. Improvements
in the fuel combustion and preheating stages in the
combusted air can greatly contribute to the improvement
of the boiler and overall plant performance. The
insulation of the turbine, pipes and heaters as regards
reducing the heat loss will significantly benefit the power
plant performance. The exergy efficiency increases with
decreasing temperature difference between the steam and
the cooling water in the condenser. In addition, overall
plant efficiency increase is achieved by decreasing the
ambient temperatures of the power plants in this study
and the other studies in the literature.2124,2629 The
varying dead state temperature has a great effect on the
operational performance of the system. The exergy
efficiency increases under low ambient temperature,
whereas the efficiency decreases under high ambient
temperature. It can be concluded that the exergetic
efficiency of thermal power is provided by low ambient
temperature. It can be said that the units should run at a
high load to improve the performance of the power plant
under low ambient temperature. In addition, it can be
suggested that co-generation systems can be used in these
stages in order to benefit from waste heat for an effective
energy saving system of industrial applications.
In addition, C TPP in Turkey and some thermal power
plants in the world are compared from the configura-
tion, efficiency and output point of views. In C TPP, the
chemically aggressive content of lignite coal with low

Table 5 Comparison of energy and exergy efciencies with different thermal power plants

Per cent exergy destruction Exergy efficiency gII/%

Power plants Capacity/MW Boiler Turbine Boiler Turbine Overall

C
ayrhan, Turkey (this study) 160 58.05 5.68 41.95 83.40 33.48
Neyveli, India11 50 57.35 41.72 81.2 26.95
Kostolac, Serbia12 348.5 88.2 9.5 46.4 86.8 35.80
Uniten, Malaysia13 120 71.45 14.14 55.43 85
NGS, Canada21 500 49.51 35.81
Chennai, India22 32 86.76 7.60 25.39
Zarqa, Jordan24 396 76.75 12.99 43.8 73.5 24.80
Hamedan, Iran26 250 53 92.25 36.80
Beijing, China28 300 91.98 2.09 48.55 92.71 44.07
Xiaolongtan, China29 300 67.78 18.54 51.88

20 Journal of the Energy Institute 2012 VOL 85 NO 1


calorific value is used, whereas a high calorific pulverised
coal is used in the US and other European power plants.31
Therefore, a lignite powered power plant has a low
efficiency than the other power plants compared in USA
and Europe. The C TPP thermal power plant and the
other power plants in Turkey are different than in the US
and other European power plants as regard to efficien-
cies, operational characteristics and maintenance activ-
ities because of the fuel used. In terms of plant output,
Turkish power plants have lower availability and capacity
factors due to the undesired features of the lignite coal
used. The typical revision periods at power plants are
much higher than that used in the US and Europe.
Conclusions
The main results of this study are summarised below.
1. The highest heat loss is obtained at the condenser as
45?80%, followed by the boiler as 8?43%. It is seen that about
half of the total plant heat losses occur in the only condenser,
and these heat losses cannot be of practical utilisation.
2. The major exergy loss and the irreversibility (58%)
of the thermal power plant occur in the boiler because of
the irreversibility of the fuel combustion reaction. The
second exergy loss and the irreversibility (y5?7%) are
found in the turbine.
3. The varying dead state temperature does not have
an effect on the energy efficiency, whereas it affects the
exergy efficiency.
4. Exergy efficiency results have decreased with increas-
ing dead state temperatures in the power plant cycle.
5. Exergy destruction rates and per cent exergy loss have
increased with the increase in varying dead state tempera-
tures, whereas the entropy generation rates have decreased.
6. The changes of irreversibility, entropy rate and per
cent exergy loss of the boiler are higher than the other
components.
7. The calculated energy efficiency of the power plant
is 42?76%, whereas the exergy efficiencies of the overall
thermal power plant system are decreased from 35?62 to
32?97 respectively at the varying dead state temperature
from 5 to 30uC.
As a result, C TPP in Turkey is rather old, and some
devices that are used in the plant need to be rebuilt and
designed with respect to these analyses results. The
energy and exergy results in this study will help in the
rehabilitation, improvement of the efficiency and reduc-
tion on investment and production cost.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to the management and staff of
C
TPP for their support and contributions. In addition, the
authors also appreciate the constructive comments of the
referees that have helped improve the quality of the paper.
References
1. G. Wall: Exergy a useful concept, PhD thesis, Chalmers
University of Technology, Goteborg, Sweden, 1986.
2. G. Wall: Exergy flows in industrial processes, Energy, 1998, 13, (2), 197208.
3. T. J. Kotas: The exergy method of thermal plant analysis; 1995,
Malabar, Krieger Publishing Company.
4. I. Dincer: The role of exergy in energy policy making, Energy
Policy, 2002, 30, (2), 137149.
5. A. Y. C
engel and M. A. Boles: Thermodynamics: an engineering approach,
New Media Version, 6th edn; 2008, New York, McGraw Hill, Inc.
Acr et al. Energy and exergy efficiencies in thermal power plant
6. A. Bejan: Advanced engineering thermodynamics; 1988, New
York, John Wiley and Sons Inc.
7. A. Bejan, G. Tsatsaronis and M. Moran: Thermal design and
optimization; 1996, New York, Wiley.
8. N. Singh S. C. Kaushik and R. D. Misra: Exergetic analysis of a solar
thermal power plant system, Renewable Energy, 2000, 1913519143.
9. M. A. Rosen and I. Dincer: On exergy and environmental impact,
Int. J. Energy Res., 1997, 21, 643654.
10. S. Sengupta, A. Datta and S. Duttagupta: Exergy analysis of a coal-
based 210MW thermal power plant, Int. J. Energy Res. 2007, 31, 1428.
11. T. Ganapathy, N. Alagumurthi, R. P. Gakkhar and K. Murugesan:
Exergy analysis of operating lignite fired thermal power plant,
J. Eng. Sci. Technol. Rev., 2009, 2, (1), 123130.
12. D. Mitrovic, D. Zivkovic and M. S. Lakovic: Energy and exergy analysis of
a 348?5 MW steam power plant, Energy Sources A, 2010, 32A, 10161027.
13. I. B. Hussein, M. Z. Yusoff and M. H. Boosroh: Exergy analysis of a
120 MW thermal power plant, Proc. BSME-ASME Int. Conf. on
Thermal engineering, Dhaka, Bangladesh, December 2001, 177182,
http://dspace.uniten.edu.my/.
14. Z. Oktay: Investigation of coal fired power plants in Turkey and a
case study: Can plant, Appl. Therm. Eng., 2009, 29, 550557.
15. H. H. Erdem, A. V. Akkaya, B. Cetin, A. Dagdas, S. H. Sevilgen,
B. sahin, I. Teke, C. Gungor and S. Atas: Comparative energetic
and exergetic performance analyses for coal-fired thermal power
plants in Turkey, Int. J. Therm. Sci., 2009, 48, 21792186.
16. M. A. Rosen: Energy and exergy-based comparison of coal-fired and
nuclear steam power plants, Int. J. Exergy, 2001, 1, (3), 180192.
17. A. Cihan, O. Hachafzoglu and K. Kahveci: Energyexergy
analysis and modernization suggestions for a combined-cycle
power plant, Int. J. Energy Res., 2006, 30, 115126.
18. K. I. Krakow: Exergy analysis, dead state definition, ASHRAE
Trans. Res., 1988, 36, 3478:328.
19. W. J. Wepfer and R. A. Gaggioli: Reference datums for available
energy, in Thermodynamics: second law analysis, (ed. R. A.
Gaggioli), ACS Symposium Series, Vol. 122, 7792; 1980,
Washington, DC, American Chemical Society.
20. H. Al-Muslim, I. Dincer and S. M. Zubair: Effect of reference state
on exergy efficiencies of one- and two-stage crude oil distillation
plants, Int. J. Therm. Sci., 2005, 44, 6573.
21. M. Rosen and I. Dincer: Effect of varying dead-state properties on energy
and exergy analyses of thermal systems, Int. J. Therm. Sci., 2004, 43, 121133.
22. P., Regulagadda, I. Dincer and G. F. Naterer: Exergy analysis of a
thermal power plant with measured boiler and turbine losses, Appl.
Therm. Eng., 2010, 30, 970976.
23. M. Kopac and A. Hilalci: Effect of ambient temperature on the
efficiency of the regenerative and reheat C atalagz power plant in
Turkey, Appl. Therm. Eng., 2007, 27, 13771385.
24. I. H. Aljundi: Energy and exergy analysis of a steam power plant
in Jordan, Appl. Therm. Eng., 2009, 29, 324328.
25. A. Vosoogh and E. Hajidavalloo: Effect of variable condenser
pressure, dry and wet bulb ambient temperature on the energy and
exergy efficiencies of a power plant, Proc. 8th IASME/WSEAS Int.
Conf. on Heat transfer, thermal engineering and environment, New
aspects of fluid mechanics, heat transfer and environment, Book
Series: WSEAS Mechanical Engineering Series Pages: 199-208: 2010.
26. M. Ameri, P. Ahmadi and A. Hamidi: Energy, exergy and
exergoeconomic analysis of a steam power plant: a case study, Int.
J. Energy Res. 2009, 33, 499512.
27. M. Ameri and P. Ahmadi: The study of ambient temperature
effects on exergy losses of a heat recovery steam generator,
Challenges Power Eng. Environ., 2007, 12, 5560.
28. H. Zhao and Y. Chai: Exergy analysis of a power cycle system
with 300 MW capacity, Proc. Int. Conf. on Advances in energy
engineering, Beijing, China, June 2010, IEEE, 247250.
29. L. Guoqiang, W. Hua, M. Wenhui and Y. Chunwei: Energy and
exergy analysis for 300 MW thermal system of Xiaolongton Power
Plant, Proc. Int. Conf. on Computer distributed control and intelligent
environmental monitoring, Changsa, China, February 2011, 180184,
http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/CDCIEM.2011.180.
30. S. C. Kaushik, V. S. Reddy and S. K. Tyagi: Energy and exergy
analyses of thermal power plants: a review, Renewable Sustainable
Energy Rev., 2011, 15, 18571872.
31. O. Mayer-Spohn and I Ellersdorfer: EUSUSTEL WP3 report on
coal-fired technologies, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven,
Belgium, 2011, http://www.eusustel.be/public/documents_publ/WP/
WP3/Coal-Fired-Technologies_Report_2005_11_25.pdf.
Journal of the Energy Institute 2012 VOL 85 NO 1 21