Hybrid Hybrid Wet/Dry Wet/Dry Cooling Cooling for for Power Power Plants Plants

Parabolic Trough Technology Workshop February 14, 2006 Chuck Kutscher Aaron Buys Chris Gladden NREL

NREL/PR-550-40026 NREL/PR-550-40026 Presented at the 2006 Parabolic Trough Technology Workshop held on February 14-16, 2006, in Incline Village, Nevada.

Disclaimer and Government License

This work has been authored by Midwest Research Institute (MRI) under Contract No. DE-AC36-99GO10337 with the U.S. Department of Energy (the DOE). The United States Government (the Government) retains and the publisher, by accepting the work for publication, acknowledges that the Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this work, or allow others to do so, for Government purposes. Neither MRI, the DOE, the Government, nor any other agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe any privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of the authors and/or presenters expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of MRI, the DOE, the Government, or any agency thereof.

Outline Outline
Overview of cooling options Analysis of evaporative enhancement of air-cooled geothermal power plants Field measurements at geothermal plant Preliminary analysis of trough plant Improvements to air-cooled condensers

Water-Saving Water-Saving Options Options

Approach ACC + WCC in Series Pros - ACC can handle desuperheating load - Simple design - Improves approach to dry bulb - Can achieve good approach to wet bulb on inlet air - Simple, low cost of nozzles - Low pressure drop Cons - Cost of dual equipment - Condensate temp. very limited - Condensate temp. limited by dry bulb - Cost of media - Pressure drop lowers flow rate and LMTD - Overspray and water waste - Cost of water treatment or mist eliminator - Nozzle maintenance - Potential damage to finned tubes - Water treatment or protective coating needed

ACC + WCC in Parallel

ACC w/ Evap Media

ACC w/ Spray Nozzles

Deluge of ACC

- Highest enhancement

Relevance Relevance
Air-cooled geothermal plants especially susceptible to high ambient temperature Plant power decreases ~1% of rated power for every 1F rise in condenser temperature Output of air-cooled plant can drop > 50% in summer, when electricity is highly valued
Unit 200 Performance Data
3,000 2,500 Net Output - kW 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 Ambient Temperature F (@weather station)

Spreadsheet Spreadsheet Model Model of of Evaporative Evaporative Enhancements Enhancements to to Existing Existing Air-Cooled Air-Cooled Plants Plants

System System 1 1 -- Spray Spray Cooling Cooling

Low cost, low air pressure drop High water pressure Over-spray and carryover or cost of mist eliminator Nozzle clogging

System System 2 2 -- Munters Munters Cooling Cooling

High efficiency, minimum carryover High air pressure drop (reduces air flow rate and decreases LMTD) High cost

System System 3 3 Hybrid Hybrid Cooling Cooling

Inexpensive and simple, used in poultry industry Over-spray, carryover, and nozzle cleaning

System System 4 4 Deluge Deluge Cooling Cooling

Excellent performance Danger of scaling and deposition without pure water

Example Example Analysis: Analysis: Net Net Power Power Produced Produced
Total Kilowatt-hours Produced
900,000

Kilowatt-hours

800,000

700,000 No Enhancement Spray Cooling Munters Cooling Deluge Cooling Hybrid Cooling Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

600,000

500,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

Example Example Cost Cost Results Results

Incremental Cost of Added Electricity
Discount Rate = 10%, Plant Life = 25 years

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 Cents/kWh 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 5.2 6.4 7.6 7.2 8.5

9.9 8.7 7.2 5.7

$0/kgal $0.5/kgal $1/kgal

4.9 4.2 3.5

System 1 - Spray System 2 System 3 Cooling Munters Cooling Hybrid Cooling

System 4 Deluge Cooling

Note: Note:Value Valueof ofelectricity electricitywill willbe beaffected affectedby bytime-of-day time-of-dayrates rates and andcapacity capacitypayments. payments.

Geothermal Geothermal Analysis Analysis Conclusions Conclusions

Deluge most attractive if scaling/corrosion issues can be addressed Systems 1 to 3 obtain ~40 kWh/kgal of water; deluge can produce an average of ~60 kWh/kgal Results very sensitive to water costs, electric rate structure, installation costs

Coated Coated Fin Fin Test Test Results Results

OMP-coated fin unaffected by salt spray

Plain fin pitted

Measurements Measurements at at Mammoth Mammoth

Measurements Measurements at at Mammoth Mammoth Binary-Cycle Binary-Cycle Geothermal Geothermal Power Power Plant Plant
Munters system Hybrid spray/Munters system

Mammoth Mammoth Measurement Measurement Results: Results: 2001 2001

Field instrumentation: Type T thermocouples, optical dew point (chilled mirror) hygrometer, handheld anemometer Munters had 79% saturation efficiency; hybrid was 50% Flow rate with Munters dropped 22-28% Munters increased net power 62% (800 kW to 1,300 kW) at 78F ambient

Munters Munters Performance Performance at at Mammoth Mammoth

Unit 200 Performance Data
3,000 2,500 Net Output - kW 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 Ambient Temperature F (@weather station)
before Munters after Munters

Mammoth Mammoth Measurement Measurement Results: Results: 2002 2002

Munters system modified, brine used for cooling water. Munters efficiency dropped from 79% to 66%

Geothermal Geothermal Conclusions Conclusions

All operators of air-cooled plants interested in evaporative enhancement Costs at existing plants are site-specific and negotiable; $0.50 to $2.00 per thousand gallons Reclaimed water becoming more widely available Two-Phase Engineering showed successful use of nozzles with brine Can reduce average cost of electricity by about 0.3 /kWh, depending on cost of water Capacity payments can be as high as 30 /kWh and lower average cost of electricity by 23 /kWh

Parabolic Parabolic Trough Trough Plant Plant Preliminary Preliminary Analysis Analysis
UW UWEES EESModel Model Power Out and Ht. Power Out and Ht.Rejection Rejection vs. Condenser vs. Condenser Pressure Pressureand andField FieldFlowrate Flowrate

Excelergy Excelergy Field FieldFlowrate Flowratevs. vs. TMY2 Radiation TMY2 Radiation

NREL NRELHour-by-hour Hour-by-hour EES EESModel Model Of Condenser Of CondenserTypes Typesand and Evap Cooling Evap Cooling

NREL NRELExcel Excel Model Model Of Costs Of Costs

Cases Cases Examined Examined

Air-Cooled Water-Cooled Air-Cooled with Spray Enhancement

General General Assumptions Assumptions

30 MWe SEGS plant, Daggett weather $0.18/kWh electricity (0.15/kWh) Water at $1.95/kgal ($515/m3, 430/m3) 15% interest rate 30-year life

Water-Cooled Water-Cooled Plant Plant

Shell-and-tube condenser + cooling tower Twb = 68F (20C) Approach = 10F (5.6C) Range = 20F (11.1C) Pinch = 5F (2.8C) U = 400 Btu/h-ft2-F (2270 W/m2-C)

Air-Cooled Air-Cooled Plant Plant

Finned tube condenser Tdb = 104F (40C) ITD = 40F (22C) Pinch = 5F (2.8C) U = 150 Btu/h-ft2-F (850 W/m2-C)

Evaporative Evaporative Pre-Cooling Pre-Cooling

300 psig spray nozzles 70% evaporation efficiency 80% saturation efficiency Munters DRIFdek mist eliminator

Net Electricity Produced Per Year for Different Condenser Types

100000 90000 Yearly Electricity Produced [MWe-hr] 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 Water Cooled Air Cooled Evaporatively Pre-Cooled

12000

10000

Electricity Produced [MWe-hr]

8000

6000

4000

2000

Water Cooled Evaporatively Pre-cooled Air Cooled

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Month Number

6.0%

Effect of Purchase Price of Electricity on Yearly Revenue (Water Cost = $2/kgal)

Water Cooled Evaporatively Pre-cooled

Percent Increase in Yearly Revenue (Compared to Air-Cooled)

4.0%

2.0%

0.0% 0.00

0.04

0.08

0.12

0.16

0.20

0.24

-2.0%

-4.0% Price of Electricity [$/kWh]

6.0%

Effect of Water Price on Yearly Revenue (Electricity Price = $0.18/kWh)

Water Cooled Evaporatively Pre-cooled

Percent Increase in Yearly Revenue

5.0%

4.0%

3.0%

2.0%

1.0%

0.0% 0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

Price of Water [$/1000 gallons]

Water Use for Different Condenser Types

90 80 Millions of Gallons of Water Per Year 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Water Cooled Evaporatively Pre-cooled

Next Next Steps Steps

Evaluate potential for water restrictions Develop full plant EES model Improve cost estimation Analyze parallel wet-dry system

Brief Brief Review Review of of NREL NREL R&D R&D on on Advanced Advanced Fins Fins for for Air-Cooled Air-Cooled Condensers Condensers

McElroy McElroy Enhanced Enhanced Fins Fins

Test Test Section Section

Heat Transfer vs. Hydraulic Power

Different Fin Types (Staggered Array)
30.00

Heat Transfer / Tube Area (kW/m^2)

28.00

26.00

24.00

22.00

20.00

18.00

Plain Fin Staggered

16.00

Perforated Fin Staggered

Perforated Fin 2 Staggered

14.00 0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

140.00

160.00

180.00

200.00

Hydraulic Power / Bare Tube Area (kW SL / m^2)

Tabbed Tabbed Fin Fin Concept Concept

Tabbed TabbedPlate PlateFin Fin

Tabbed Tabbed Plate Plate Fin Fin Heat Heat Exchanger Exchanger

Individual Individual Fins Fins

GEA GEAfins finsw/spacers w/spacers

NREL NREL tabbed tabbed circular circular fin fin

Detailed Detailed CFD CFD Model Model Isometric Isometric Views: Views: Heat Heat Flux Flux and and Total Total Pressure Pressure

Surface Surface Heat Heat Flux Flux

Total Total Pressure Pressure

Recent Recent Tabbed Tabbed Fin Fin CFD CFD Results Results
Heat Transfer Vs. Hydraulic Power (Sea Level) 30 25 Heat Transfer (kW) 20 15 10 5 0 0 25 50 75 100 125 Hydraulic Power (Watts) v2.2 v2.4 v2.6 Plain X-fin (Approximated) v2.3 v2.5 v2.7 Plain/Ribbed