Serdar Erkan

GAS TURBINE INLET AIR COOLING FOR POWER AUGMENTATION

Introduction: We understand that Messrs ITOCHU wish to explore the technical/financial feasibility of implementing an Inlet ir Cooling !ystem to boost power output under hot real site conditions for the prospecti"e #ordan $ro%ect& at l'Hussein brown'field !ite( The )promotional natured* offer solicited from $I+ has been re"iewed for this purpose and it has been considered appropriate at this stage to pro"ide you with a concise o"er"iew of a"ailable alternati"es before deliberating further on the pro%ect specific merits of this generic option( $ower$oint presentation file is attached& summari,ing in schematic fashion& the a"ailable technologies( n additional rigorous thermodynamic analysis has also been carried out for the appraisal of ma%or prospecti"e alternati"es and attached herein as an -xcel file( Background: Under hot& off'I!O real !ite conditions& Combustion .as turbine operators face the problem of degradation of turbine generation capacity( The typical hea"y duty .T on a hot summer day& for instance& produces up to 15-20% less power than on a cold winter day( This depri"es the plant operator of this much "aluable additional pea/ing capacity exactly when it is most needed under hot summer conditions& when consumer loads ine"itably hi/e up( dditionally& the net heat-rate also increases, thus correspondingly increasing the cost of kWh produced ( s a result& a number of inlet air cooling techni0ues ha"e been de"eloped o"er the years as a mitigation measure to maximi,e turbine output( (Please refer to Slide 2 in the enclosed Power Point presentation1 The basic theory of inlet air cooling for gas turbines is 0uite straight forward2 the Compressor sections of Combustion turbines are constant olume machines 3 at a gi"en shaft speed they always mo"e the same rate of olume of air 3 but the power output of the expansion turbine section depends on the mass flow rate through it( That4s why on hot days& when air is less dense& power output falls off( 5y feeding cooler& that is denser& air into the Compressor& while the "olumetric rate is still maintained& mass flow is increased& hence resulting in higher power output( n additional enhancement thus achie"ed is the reduction of power consumed by the !"#s compressor$ The wor/ re0uired to compress air is directly proportional to the temperature of the air& so reducing the inlet air temperature reduces the work of compression and there is more wor/ a"ailable at the turbine output shaft( There is& howe"er& a limitation on the amount of inlet air cooling that can safely be accomplished( If the inlet air temperature is reduced unduly& ice can form on the bell'mouth or inlet guide "anes& thus posing the ris/ of this ice fla/ing off and inflicting mechanical impaction 6

Serdar Erkan

damage to the compressor blades( This phenomenon can occur e en when the inlet air temperature is abo e free%ing& because suction at the compressor inlet creates a low pressure 7cool ,one4 at the bell'mouth( To a"oid this problem& most turbine manufacturers recommend that inlet air be /ept abo e around &'C& preferably at around 68 9eg C( Traditionally& either mechanical refrigeration chillers :both direct ammonia circuit and con"entional indirect secondary water circuit types1 or media'type e a!orati e coo"er# ha"e been used to cool combustion turbine inlet air( somewhat later implementation has been the inlet air (ogging !ystem :with or without intercooling1( ;urther de"elopment of absorption type refrigeration chillers& in terms of max achie"able chilling duties& integration of "arious alternati es of heat input :steam& direct gas fired or turbine exhaust ducting1 and the C)* +Coefficient of *erformance, factors enabled the integration of the same into gas turbine plants in the hotter ,ones of the World( (Please refer to Slide 1) While e"aporati"e media cooling and inlet air fogging represent the lowest installation cost alternati"es& at a fraction of the cost of refrigeration chiller systems& their performance is inherently limited by the fact that& "ia these systems can only effect !-+!I5<- cooling& that is& the air stream entering the compressor past the cooling system can only be cooled down to the Wet 5ulb Temperature& which is determined by the relati"e humidity of the air& in addition to the 9ry 5ulb( :!a"ing for its slight dependence on altitude/atmospheric pressure& which is fixed for a gi"en site anyway1( Thus& gi"en a !ite& with => 9eg C 9ry 5ulb at ?8@ AH& the air stream can only be cooled down& theoretically& to the Wet 5ulb temperature of B>(C 9eg C( s also the -C:-"aporati"e Cooling -fficiency& or the )approach to e0uilibrium*1 rarely exceeds D8@& the actual cooled air temperature would be around BD(C degrees& hence achie"ing a cooling effect of only around >(E 9eg C( The same argument goes for Inlet ir fogging& where& instead of passing the inlet air through con"oluted media passages& the water is atomi,ed under "ery high pressure :B888 psia1 into B8 micron si,e droplets and directly sprayed into the air stream( This time howe"er the -Capproached around D>@& hence an o"erall cooling effect of around D(? 9eg C would be achie"able under the abo"e described !ite Conditions :which is so selected to match the .uarantee Conditions in the Client4s MT!1( It should be borne in mind that those differentials and corresponding power augmentation figures :at roughly 8(F @ per 9eg C cooling1 of around total E ' F @ would only be achie"able under such described extreme conditions& which is perhaps encountered for only a few hours per year( ny increase in AH would significantly reduce the cooling differential achie"able( Aefrigeration Chiller systems& on the other hand& do not suffer from these drawbac/s as their cooling differential performance is largely independent of Temperature and Aelati"e Humidity& as they can effect both !-+!I5<- and also < T-+T cooling( That is& such systems are able to further cool down the air stream after reaching down the 9ew/!aturation $oint :which is e"en lower than the Wet 5ulb for AH less than 688@1 by actually cooling the water content in the air into condensate and remo"ing it( In practice& the low point is dictated not by chiller capacity but by to concern of ice formation on Inlet .uide Ganes& thus limiting cooled air temperature to o"er > degrees C( :as e"en at abo"e ,ero temperatures some ice may still form in the low'pressure ,one created in the inlet duct by the suction/"acuum action of the compressor1( Therefore& "ery B

Serdar Erkan

large temperature differentials of around B?'B> 9eg C are achie"able with such systems& resulting in significant power augmentation( Installation cost wise& though& chiller systems are extremely expensi"e in comparison to e"aporati"e or fogging systems( They also consume parasitic electric power& mechanical chillers typically re0uiring around ?'E MWs for say a hea"y duty .T such as .- D6F6 -& at the abo"e described worst site conditions& whereas absorption type of chillers re0uiring only around B MWs( bsorption chillers& howe"er& re0uire a heat input source either in the form of steam/hotwater from a HA!.& direct fuel firing :+at gas or distillate1 or direct turbine exhaust ducting( gain& these power consumption figures are directly determined by the actual !ite conditions and the power augmentation percentages sought( bsorption chillers are either !team/hotwater heated'single effect type low CO$ machines or 9irect ;ired 9ouble -ffect high CO$ machines( 9;9- systems cost about 6?@ more than !H!systems and C8@ more than mechanical chillers( Howe"er& an appraisal of the le"eli,ed life cycle costs of these alternati"es is not straightforward linear exercise& as se"eral competing factors such as pea/ power augmentation a"ailability& a"erage annual production increase& C $-H costs& OIM costs& additional cost of supplying steam or exhaust duct heating& their effect on HA!. output and thus !team Turbine performance& additional heat rate enhancements etc(& must all be factored in( dditionally& se"eral modifications to the turbine air inlet structure& the inlet duct and plenum may be re0uired for almost all these systems to "arying degrees( Choosing the right system has ne"er been an easy exercise and most public utilities are /nown to ha"e shied away from this augmentation techni0ue due to its perception as an operational nuisance& which perhaps explains the surprising rarity of power plant installations with inlet air cooling( n I$$& operating in a competiti"e en"ironment& howe"er& should indeed in"estigate its feasibility and must decide on the best systems or a combination of hybrid systems( I personally belie"e that the implementation of any of the abo"e systems& e"entually& will guarantee a reasonable return on the marginal in"estment( Howe"er& the return on in"estment is not the only criterion& as sometimes the most expensi"e energy is the una"ailable energy& especially in an en"ironment with large pea/ing factors in hot humid summer conditions& whereby the "ery una"ailability& irrespecti"e of the cost effecti"eness or le"eli,ed cost of marginal production& of excess pea/ing capacity may ha"e disastrous conse0uences for the I$$( s for the -$C contractor& on the other hand& this option can not be employed as a winning gambit in the competiti"e contracting en"ironment& as in all li/elihood& the Client will tend to normali,e competing offers& paying no due regard to the percei"ed added benefits of this option( -specially& this should ne"er be used as a fundamental tool to meet !ite .uarantee Conditions( The Client should be presented with a 5 !- !J!T-M that is capable of achie"ing real site ambient conditions performance criteria w/o the benefit of such augmentation/pea/ing systems(