MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2957860091 · doi:10.1002/er.4694

Water usage and energy penalty of different hybrid cooling system configurations for a natural gas combined cycle power plant—Effect of carbon capture unit integration

2019· article· en· W2957860091 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Saif W. Mohammed Ali, Nasser Vahedi, Carlos E. Romero, Arindam Banerjee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Energy Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Energy Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPartenariat Canadien Contre Le CancerHigher Committee for Education Development in IraqUniversity of Kufa
KeywordsWater coolingCondenser (optics)Air coolingProcess engineeringEnvironmental scienceNatural gasHybrid systemActive coolingHybrid powerElectricity generationNuclear engineeringPower (physics)EngineeringMechanical engineeringWaste managementComputer scienceThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electric power generation from thermoelectric power plants is associated with a negative impact on water availability, referenced as the water-energy nexus, which is aggravated by climate change. In the present study, the effect of four different hybrid cooling system configurations on water usage and power penalty of a natural gas combined cycle has been investigated. The hybrid cooling system with a parallel connected indirect dry cooling system and wet cooling system is the most conventional studied hybrid cooling system in the literature, while the other studied hybrid configurations in the present study are novel regarding their effect on water requirement and power penalty. Simulations were conducted using the COCO 3.3 software and have been validated using data sets from a reference natural gas combined cycle plant, both with and without carbon capture unit, which is available in the literature. Four hybrid cooling system configurations were explored to evaluate their water requirements and power penalty. Other conventional cooling systems such as closed cooling, once-through, and direct and indirect dry cooling methods were simulated with and without postcombustion carbon capture (PCCC) integration for comparison. It was found that the hybrid configuration, including indirect air-cooled condenser and natural draft wet cooling tower, has the best performance as compared to the other conventional and hybrid cooling systems, amounting to 2.038 (gal/min)/MWnet, 1.573 (gal/min)/MWnet, and 12.29 MW for water withdrawal, consumption, and energy penalty, respectively, for the case of a unit without PCCC unit and 3.9 (gal/min)/MWnet, 2.928 (gal/min)/MWnet, and 15.177 MW for water withdrawal, consumption, and energy penalty, respectively, for a unit with carbon capture unit. It was confirmed that the PCCC integration approximately doubles the water withdrawal and consumption for all cooling systems. In addition, the indirect air-cooled condenser and wet cooling tower is still the best performing cooling system with PCCC integration.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Energy ResearchSame topicIntegrated Energy Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207