YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Comparison of Preanode and Postanode Carbon Dioxide Separation for IGFC Systems

    Source: Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power:;2010:;volume( 132 ):;issue: 006::page 61703
    Author:
    Eric Liese
    DOI: 10.1115/1.4000140
    Publisher: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    Abstract: This paper examines the arrangement of a solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) within a coal gasification cycle, this combination generally being called an integrated gasification fuel cell cycle. This work relies on a previous study performed by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) that details thermodynamic simulations of integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) systems and considers various gasifier types and includes cases for 90% CO2 capture (2007, “Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants, Vol. 1: Bituminous Coal and Natural Gas to Electricity,” National Energy Technology Laboratory Report No. DOE/NETL-2007/1281). All systems in this study assume a Conoco Philips gasifier and cold-gas clean up conditions for the coal gasification system (Cases 3 and 4 in the NETL IGCC report). Four system arrangements, cases, are examined. Cases 1 and 2 remove the CO2 after the SOFC anode. Case 3 assumes steam addition, a water-gas-shift (WGS) catalyst, and a Selexol process to remove the CO2 in the gas cleanup section, sending a hydrogen-rich gas to the fuel cell anode. Case 4 assumes Selexol in the cold-gas cleanup section as in Case 3; however, there is no steam addition, and the WGS takes places in the SOFC and after the anode. Results demonstrate significant efficiency advantages compared with IGCC with CO2 capture. The hydrogen-rich case (Case 3) has better net electric efficiency compared with typical postanode CO2 capture cases (Cases 1 and 2), with a simpler arrangement but at a lower SOFC power density, or a lower efficiency at the same power density. Case 4 gives an efficiency similar to Case 3 but also at a lower SOFC power density. Carbon deposition concerns are also discussed.
    keyword(s): Separation (Technology) , Anodes , Fuels , Carbon , Fuel cells , Solid oxide fuel cells , Density , Pressure , Hydrogen , Steam , Syngas , Integrated gasification combined cycle , Temperature , Electric potential , Cycles , Exhaust systems , Water , Carbon dioxide AND Heat ,
    • Download: (515.3Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Comparison of Preanode and Postanode Carbon Dioxide Separation for IGFC Systems

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/143182
    Collections
    • Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power

    Show full item record

    contributor authorEric Liese
    date accessioned2017-05-09T00:37:41Z
    date available2017-05-09T00:37:41Z
    date copyrightJune, 2010
    date issued2010
    identifier issn1528-8919
    identifier otherJETPEZ-27116#061703_1.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/143182
    description abstractThis paper examines the arrangement of a solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) within a coal gasification cycle, this combination generally being called an integrated gasification fuel cell cycle. This work relies on a previous study performed by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) that details thermodynamic simulations of integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) systems and considers various gasifier types and includes cases for 90% CO2 capture (2007, “Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants, Vol. 1: Bituminous Coal and Natural Gas to Electricity,” National Energy Technology Laboratory Report No. DOE/NETL-2007/1281). All systems in this study assume a Conoco Philips gasifier and cold-gas clean up conditions for the coal gasification system (Cases 3 and 4 in the NETL IGCC report). Four system arrangements, cases, are examined. Cases 1 and 2 remove the CO2 after the SOFC anode. Case 3 assumes steam addition, a water-gas-shift (WGS) catalyst, and a Selexol process to remove the CO2 in the gas cleanup section, sending a hydrogen-rich gas to the fuel cell anode. Case 4 assumes Selexol in the cold-gas cleanup section as in Case 3; however, there is no steam addition, and the WGS takes places in the SOFC and after the anode. Results demonstrate significant efficiency advantages compared with IGCC with CO2 capture. The hydrogen-rich case (Case 3) has better net electric efficiency compared with typical postanode CO2 capture cases (Cases 1 and 2), with a simpler arrangement but at a lower SOFC power density, or a lower efficiency at the same power density. Case 4 gives an efficiency similar to Case 3 but also at a lower SOFC power density. Carbon deposition concerns are also discussed.
    publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    titleComparison of Preanode and Postanode Carbon Dioxide Separation for IGFC Systems
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume132
    journal issue6
    journal titleJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power
    identifier doi10.1115/1.4000140
    journal fristpage61703
    identifier eissn0742-4795
    keywordsSeparation (Technology)
    keywordsAnodes
    keywordsFuels
    keywordsCarbon
    keywordsFuel cells
    keywordsSolid oxide fuel cells
    keywordsDensity
    keywordsPressure
    keywordsHydrogen
    keywordsSteam
    keywordsSyngas
    keywordsIntegrated gasification combined cycle
    keywordsTemperature
    keywordsElectric potential
    keywordsCycles
    keywordsExhaust systems
    keywordsWater
    keywordsCarbon dioxide AND Heat
    treeJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power:;2010:;volume( 132 ):;issue: 006
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian