energies

Article
Technical Feasibility Study of Thermal Energy
Storage Integration into the Conventional Power
Plant Cycle
Jacek D. Wojcik * and Jihong Wang
School of Engineering, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK; jihong.wang@warwick.ac.uk
* Correspondence: j.d.wojcik@warwick.ac.uk; Tel.: +44-2476-528142

Academic Editor: Bahman Shabani

Received: 7 December 2016; Accepted: 1 February 2017; Published: 11 February 2017

Abstract: The current load balance in the grid is managed mainly through peaking fossil-fuelled
power plants that respond passively to the load changes. Intermittency, which comes from renewable
energy sources, imposes additional requirements for even more flexible and faster responses from
conventional power plants. A major challenge is to keep conventional generation running closest
to the design condition with higher load factors and to avoid switching off periods if possible.
Thermal energy storage (TES) integration into the power plant process cycle is considered as a possible
solution for this issue. In this article, a technical feasibility study of TES integration into a 375-MW
subcritical oil-fired conventional power plant is presented. Retrofitting is considered in order to avoid
major changes in the power plant process cycle. The concept is tested based on the complete power
plant model implemented in the ProTRAX software environment. Steam and water parameters
are assessed for different TES integration scenarios as a function of the plant load level. The best
candidate points for heat extraction in the TES charging and discharging processes are evaluated.
The results demonstrate that the integration of TES with power plant cycle is feasible and provide
a provisional guidance for the design of the TES system that will result in the minimal influence on
the power plant cycle.

Keywords: thermal energy storage (TES); flexible operation; power plant; efficiency; steam cycle

1. Introduction
To achieve significant CO2 emission reduction, energy networks will face great challenges
in managing large-scale deployment of intermittent renewable generation, increased load from
electrification of transportation and space heating. The amount of electricity generated must be
constantly equal to the load demand, and the entire process must be well controlled and managed.
Constant load balance is managed mainly through fossil-fuelled peaking power plants that respond
passively to the load changes. Any imbalance beyond critical boundary conditions may lead to unstable
operation and possible blackouts. To achieve significant CO2 emission reduction, energy networks are
facing great challenges in managing large-scale deployment of intermittent power generation from
renewable sources [1,2]. Additionally, the total power generation capacity must meet the highest peak
load demand, although the average load demand is much lower. That leads to excessive infrastructure
investment, and consequently many power plants have to work at low load factors with low generation
efficiencies [3,4]. Operating profiles of conventional power plants also significantly changed due to
the increasing share of intermittent renewable generation [5]. Former base load power plants have to
follow rigorous dispatching scenarios, including fast ramp rates, possible low load levels and cycling
operations involving overnight shutdowns [68].

Energies 2017, 10, 205; doi:10.3390/en10020205 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2017, 10, 205 2 of 19

It is very challenging to achieve flexible operation for a conventional power plant with high
energy conversion efficiency and fast dynamic responses at the same time. It becomes an urgent
task to explore the strategy and technologies for achieving flexible and efficient thermal power plant
operation. It is anticipated that the increased unit flexibility might be achieved by Thermal Energy
Storage (TES) integration into the power plant process cycle [9]. Excess thermal energy generated
during low electrical load demand can be stored and reused during high load demand periods of
time, when the electricity price is high [10]. TES should also help to avoid overnight shutdowns by
reducing minimum allowable load level operation. The heat energy released from storage during the
discharging process can boost the power plant output and provide valuable overload capacity for
frequency response. The TES energy buffer should also smooth power plant operation, increasing the
lifetime of power plant components [7].
Energy storage technologies as a key solution for the future secure power system operation
have become a hot topic in recent years. Several review articles assessing the current state of the
art technologies confirming high interest in this area have been published [11,12]. TES conceptual
design has been already investigated in nuclear [13], coal-fired power plants [14], industrial waste heat
recovery systems [15] and also hybrid solutions [16]. Whereas most of the solutions are conceptual
only, currently, the most mature TES technology is applied to concentrated solar power (CSP)
plants [1719], with well-known phase change material properties [20]. In this article, TES integration
into a conventional thermal plant is investigated in depth.
TES integration into a conventional coal-fired power plant has been already investigated by
Pacific Northwest Laboratory (Richland, WA, USA) in 1990 [21,22]. This conceptual design and the
cost estimations of TES integration revealed substantial improvement in the economic attractiveness of
meeting peak and intermediate loads. A sensible heat storage concept with two storage tanks filled
with nitrate salt (60% sodium, 40% potassium) has been selected. The generation of thermal energy
and its conversion to electricity have been temporarily decoupled by the TES system, which requires
substantial changes in the process cycle. The evaluation indicates that TES integration produces
5%20% lower cost power than the conventional cycling plant, and this solution is also feasible for
advanced coal combustion technologies, such as integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) [23,24].
Another simulation work has been conducted by Vandersickel et al. [25]. A latent heat energy
storage integration concept in a coal-fired power plant has been assessed for a commercially
available heat transfer medium, like nitrates solar salt (NaNO3 -KNO3 ), HITEC molten salt
(NaNO3 -NaNO2 -KNO3 ) and others. Several different charging and discharging scenarios have been
assessed, indicating high (over 60%) coal-to-coal efficiency. This feasibility study has been verified
using the power plant model implemented in the EBSILON Professional software package (STEAG
Energy Services GmbH, Essen, Germany; www.steag-energyservices.com) for the design and 40% load
level condition. The concept also requires substantial investment costs, as higher feedwater pressure is
required, and feedwater pumps have to be replaced.
There is also noticeable interest in TES integration in the industry. Peak Power Integrated Solution
concept presented by Alstom Thermal Services (Alstom Power GmbH, Berlin, Germany) is one
example, where a sensible TES system is linked to a low pressure preheating train in the conventional
power plant process cycle [26,27]. Feedwater, as a storage medium, is preheated in parallel to the
process loop during low load demand. The main advantage of this system is that the preheated
feedwater can be discharged almost instantaneously allowing one to increase power plant ramp
rates. The system also offers a 5%10% overload capacity and a 5%15% reduction of the minimum
load. The disadvantages of this solution come from the low energy density and variable discharging
temperature characterising all sensible TES systems.
All previously-presented solutions indicate high potential for successful TES system integration
in the conventional power plant cycle. This task is complex and requires careful parameter assessment,
especially for off-design conditions. The proposed solutions very often require substantial changes to
Energies 2017, 10, 205 3 of 19

the power plant process loop and hardware upgrades. An initial assessment has been also performed
for a limited number of off-design conditions.
This paper reports the recent work in the feasibility study of the integration of TES with the plant
water/steam cycle. Compared to the earlier published work in this area, this assessment brings the
plant Energies
process steam/water
2017, 10, 205 parameters within the entire plants operational load level range,3 of not
19 only
for just one/two off-design operational points previously reported. The feasibility study performed
in thisplant process
paper helps steam/water
to find the parameters withinlocations
most suitable the entire plants
for TESoperational load level range,
system integration not only
for both the TES
for just one/two off-design operational points previously reported.
charging and discharging process. As many of the currently-operating conventional power plantsThe feasibility study performed
in this paper helps to find the most suitable locations for TES system integration for both the TES
might be equipped with a TES system, retrofitting is considered to avoid unnecessary redesign and
charging and discharging process. As many of the currently-operating conventional power plants
additional costs. The proposed solution aims to bring the minimal influence to the power plant process
might be equipped with a TES system, retrofitting is considered to avoid unnecessary redesign and
loop without
additionalmajor
costs.changes in existing
The proposed components
solution aims to bring andthetheir alignment
minimal (hardware).
influence to the power Although
plant no
particular TES material is investigated, the result provides guidance
process loop without major changes in existing components and their alignment (hardware). for thermal engineers to exploit
the full
Although no particular TES material is investigated, the result provides guidance for thermal heat
potential of TES integration, find suitable thermal materials and design TES systems:
exchangers
engineers(HX), storage
to exploit thetanks, etc. Theofpaper
full potential explores and
TES integration, findpresents a new route
suitable thermal to avoid
materials excessive
and design
TES systems:
investments in new heat exchangers
peaking fossil(HX),
fuelstorage
powertanks,
plantsetc. The
that paper
have explores
very low loadand presents a new
factors and to route
allow the
to avoid excessive investments in new peaking fossil fuel power plants that have
power plants to operate closer to their rated power. Finally, the solution leads to a possible route of very low load factors
and topower
improving allow the power plants
generation to operate
efficiency, whilecloser to their rated
it operates power.
flexibly Finally, the
to response solution
load leads to a
changes.
possible route of improving power generation efficiency, while it operates flexibly to response load
In the first section of this paper, a subcritical power plant model is described, and the model
changes.
performance is presented without the TES system. Then, the feasible integration strategies analysis is
In the first section of this paper, a subcritical power plant model is described, and the model
presented for
performance the isTES systemwithout
presented charging theand
TESdischarging
system. Then,processes.
the feasibleThe simulation
integration results
strategies from both
analysis
processes are presented,
is presented for the TES which
systemreveal the plant
charging performance,
and discharging boundary
processes. The conditions and efficiency
simulation results from bothin the
function of the are
processes plant load level.
presented, whichThereveal
best the
candidate location points
plant performance, for theconditions
boundary integration andofefficiency
both processes
in
are assessed.
the functionFurthermore,
of the plantthe loadsteam/water
level. The best parameters are given
candidate location as afor
points function of plantofload
the integration bothlevel,
whichprocesses
could help are assessed. Furthermore,
find the most suitablethe TESsteam/water
design and parameters are given properties
thermal material as a functiontoofget
plant
theload
highest
level, which could help
possible efficiency of the system. find the most suitable TES design and thermal material properties to get the
highest possible efficiency of the system.
2. Power Plant Modelling and Simulation Platform
2. Power Plant Modelling and Simulation Platform
As it is almost impossible to implement any kind of heat extraction experiments without concrete
As it is almost impossible to implement any kind of heat extraction experiments without
pre-studies in a real power plant, mathematical modelling and simulation of the plant process cycle
concrete pre-studies in a real power plant, mathematical modelling and simulation of the plant
can be considered
process as be
cycle can theconsidered
first stepas towards
the first the
stepreal implementation.
towards The mathematical
the real implementation. model was
The mathematical
developed
model for
wasdescribing
developed forthe major process
describing the majorofprocess
the transformation of the
of the transformation of fuel chemical
the fuel chemicalenergy
energy into
thermal energy (heat), then thermal energy into mechanical (rotational) energy and, finally,
into thermal energy (heat), then thermal energy into mechanical (rotational) energy and, finally, electric electric
energy [2830].
energy TheThe
[2830]. structure
structureofofthe
thesystem
systemmodel realisationisisillustrated
model realisation illustrated in Figure
in Figure 1. 1.

Figure
Figure 1.1.Power
Powerplant
plant process
process flowchart.
flowchart.

TES integration analysis requires a detailed power plant model implementation to accurately
TES integration
assess steam/wateranalysis requires
parameters a detailed
in numerous pointspower plantprocess
in the plant modelloop
implementation to accurately
[31]. A broad number of
assessmodelling
steam/water parameters in numerous points in the plant process loop [31]. A broad
tools and platforms can be found for plant and power system operation simulations.number of
modelling toolssimulation
Numerous and platforms can
packages arebe found on
available forthe
plant andsuch
market, power system
as Aspen Plusoperation
and Aspensimulations.
HYSYS
(www.aspentech.com), APROS (www.apros.fi), Autodynamics (www.simulationrsi.com), EBSILON
Professional, gProms (www.psenterprise.com), MATLAB/Simulink (www.mathworks.com), MMS
Energies 2017, 10, 205 4 of 19

Numerous simulation packages are available on the market, such as Aspen Plus and Aspen
HYSYS (www.aspentech.com), APROS (www.apros.fi), Autodynamics (www.simulationrsi.com),
EBSILON Professional, gProms (www.psenterprise.com), MATLAB/Simulink (www.mathworks.com),
MMS (www.nhancetech.com), SIMODIS (SImulation MODeling Integrated System, www.ieav.cta.
br/efa/lev/projeto/simodis), PowerSim (Seoul, Korea) and ProTRAX (TRAX LLC Energy Solutions,
Lynchburg, VA, USA). These packages have different functionality using pre-developed component
libraries for modelling of coal, gas or combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) units.
The ProTRAX Simulation System has been chosen as a simulation platform for power plant
modelling work. This software package is a powerful tool allowing engineers who are already familiar
with the equipment and the entire power plant process to effectively develop high fidelity models
for both process and control system analysis. It is a modular structuring software at the component
level, and an extensive library incorporated in the program allows one to interconnect modules into
any physically-realistic configurations. Mathematical models of modules are based on first principles
conservation relations, the second law of thermodynamics and relations for heat transfer and fluid
mechanics. Mathematical equations describing the model behaviour are not represented generically
by any comprehensive subroutine. For example, the most complex aspect of heat transfer modelling
is based on a module-by-module basis, and the equations are tailored to the effect known to occur
in an individual component. Therefore, it is necessary to study in detail each module description to
accurately simulate the component [32]. Many years of experience using the software can demonstrate
the usability of the tool as a top class real-time simulator for power plant companies, as well as
research institutions. The main advantage of using such a platform is to accurately simulate off-design
conditions, which is highly important in the low load factor operation scenarios considered in this
paper. For the feasibility study, a 375-MW subcritical oil-fired thermal power plant model has been
developed and used in the ProTRAX v7.2 software environment. This case study was selected based
on available documentation. The main parameters of the model are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. The 375 MW oil-fired power plant model parameters.

Parameter Value Unit

Generated power 375 MW
MSP, Main Steam Pressure 175 bar
MST, Main Steam Temperature 535 C
RHT, Reheater Temperature 537 C
Wfuel, fuel mass flow rate 49.5 kg/s
Wfw, feedwater mass flow rate 327.3 kg/s
Boiler efficiency 92.1 %
Unit efficiency 40.7 %

The power plant model consists of the steam-water loop, fuel-air-flue gas loop, the electrical system
with synchronous generator and the auxiliary system connected to the grid. Each important component
of the process loop is implemented. A master control system is employed with the possibility to work in
two modes: boiler follow (BF) or turbine follow (TF). The fastest BF mode has been selected to ensure
rapid unit response to load changes in the grid. The output power is controlled by main turbine control
valve (CV) throttling action. The model can also work in two pressure control system operation modes:
fixed pressure (FP) or sliding pressure (SP) mode. Local controllers are also implemented to control
the water level in: the boiler drum, condenser, deaerator and two feedwater preheaters. The master
and local control systems are based on the standard proportional-integral (PI) controllers.
The boiler model is depicted in Figure 2. It consists of a waterwall with drum (DRM), a four-stage
superheater (depicted as PR1, PR2, PR3, SSH) and two-stage reheater (RH1, RH2). The main steam
temperature (MST) is controlled by the one-stage superheater attemperator (ATT). The reheater steam
temperature (RHT) is controlled by flue gas circulation in the boiler second pass via two dampers
adjustment (DP4 and DP5).
Energies 2017, 10, 205 5 of 19
Energies 2017, 10, 205 5 of 19

Figure 2. Boiler model implemented in ProTRAX v7.2 software environment, where, VO1VO3: fuel
Figure 2. Boiler model implemented in ProTRAX v7.2 software environment, where, VO1VO3: fuel
control valves; ATT: attemperator valve; FAN: air Fan; RAH: air preheater; DP1DP5: air/flue gas
control valves; ATT: attemperator valve; FAN: air Fan; RAH: air preheater; DP1DP5: air/flue gas
Dampers; BR1BR3: oil Burners; DRM: boiler furnace Drum; PR1PR3, SSH: superheater stages;
Dampers; BR1BR3: oil Burners; DRM: boiler furnace Drum; PR1PR3, SSH: superheater stages;
RH1RH2: reheater stages; MSL: Main steam line; RHL: reheater Line; STK: boiler Stack.
RH1RH2: reheater stages; MSL: Main steam line; RHL: reheater Line; STK: boiler Stack.
The balance of plant model is depicted in Figure 3. It consists of high, intermediate and low
pressure
The balance(HP, IP of and
plantLP) steamis turbine
model depicted stages. The HP
in Figure 3. Itturbine
consists is split into intermediate
of high, three stages inand thelow
simulation
pressure (HP, IP model (depicted
and LP) steamasturbine
GOV, HP1stages.andTheHP2).HPThere
turbine areistwo steam
split into taps
threelocated
stagesininthe
theHP part:
simulation
the (depicted
model first one represents
as GOV, HP1 the overall steam
and HP2). turbine
There are leakages
two steam (TLK),
taps whereas
located in the second
the one the
HP part: supplies
first one
superheated
represents steam steam
the overall to the high pressure
turbine leakages feedwater preheaterthe
(TLK), whereas (HPFP).
second After
oneexpansion in the HP part,
supplies superheated steam
steam is returned to the boiler reheater, heated up to 537 C and directed back to the IP steam turbine.
to the high pressure feedwater preheater (HPFP). After expansion in the HP part, steam is returned to
There are two IP turbine stages (IP1, IP2). Between these stages, another steam tap is located to deliver
the boiler reheater, heated up to 537 C and directed back to the IP steam turbine. There are two IP
steam to the deaerator (DEA). The third steam tap supplying steam to the low pressure feedwater
turbine stages (IP1, IP2). Between these stages, another steam tap is located to deliver steam to the
preheater (LPFP) is located between the IP and LP parts of the turbine. The LP part is represented by
deaerator (DEA). The third steam tap supplying steam to the low pressure feedwater preheater (LPFP)
only one stage (LPT). Superheated steam after expansion is condensed in a condenser (CNDR). The
is located between
steam-water loopthe is IP and LP parts
implemented of the
as the turbine.
complete The LP part
closed-loop is represented
system, by only one
so also, a make-up waterstage
(LPT).
system is implemented (CLC). The feedwater is circulated through a condenser pump (CDP) andloop
Superheated steam after expansion is condensed in a condenser (CNDR). The steam-water
is implemented
preheated in the as the
LPFPcomplete closed-loop
and deaerator. The mainsystem, sofeedwater
boiler also, a make-up waterincreases
pump (BFP) system is implemented
the pressure
(CLC). The feedwater
of feedwater and afteris circulated
heating upthrough
in the HPFPa condenser
is suppliedpump (CDP)
to the anddrum.
boiler preheated
A small in part
the LPFP
of theand
deaerator.
feedwater Theismain
also boiler
directed feedwater pump (BFP)
to the superheater increases the
attemperator to pressure
control the of MST.
feedwater and after
Although thereheating
are
three HPFP and four LPFP stages in the power plant, for simplification,
up in the HPFP is supplied to the boiler drum. A small part of the feedwater is also directed to the only one stage of each one
has been used
superheater in the modelling
attemperator work.
to control the MST. Although there are three HPFP and four LPFP stages in
the power To plant,
fully assess the potential ofonly
for simplification, TESoneintegration,
stage of iteach
is necessary
one has to initially
been usedaccomplish the model
in the modelling work.
performance check without any modifications. According to the distributed
To fully assess the potential of TES integration, it is necessary to initially accomplish the model control system (DCS),
the power plant is able to operate within the 100375-MW load level range. FP control mode implies
performance check without any modifications. According to the distributed control system (DCS),
constant steam pressure of 175 bar of the main steam line over the units load range. High CV
the power plant is able to operate within the 100375-MW load level range. FP control mode implies
throttling action causes substantial energy losses, especially for lower load levels. As the steam
constant steam pressure of 175 bar of the main steam line over the units load range. High CV throttling
turbine requires less steam mass flow rate and less pressure at the lower load levels, consequently
action causes substantial energy losses, especially for lower load levels. As the steam turbine requires
greater efficiency and reduced emission can be achieved in SP mode. On the other hand, reduced
lesspressure
steam mass flow provides
throttling rate andaless pressure
narrower steam at the lower
reserve load
in the levels,
boiler drum,consequently
so the powergreater efficiency
plant will not
andbereduced emission can be achieved in SP mode. On the other hand, reduced
able to provide the modest amount of fast reserve. The difference in boiler efficiency (BLR) and pressure throttling
provides a narrower
unit efficiency steam
(UNIT reserve
) in both modesin are
thepresented
boiler drum, so the4.power plant will not be able to provide
in Figure
the modestTheamount of fast reserve.
boiler efficiency The difference
(BLR) varies between in 87%boiler
andefficiency
92%, and(itBLR is )calculated
and unit efficiency
based on ( UNIT )
the
in both modes
following are presented in Figure 4.
formula:
The boiler efficiency (BLR ) varies between 87% and 92%, and it is calculated based on the
following formula:
Energies 2017, 10, 205 6 of 19
Energies 2017,
Energies 10,10,
2017, 205205 6 of6 19
of 19

% = 100
(%) = 100 energy input
energy output
% = 100
BLR (1)

= 100 = 100 WSSH HSSH +WRH2 HRH2 W
CRP HCRP W
FW HFW
WATT HATT (1) (1)
= 100 WBR1 HBR1 +WBR2 HBR2 +WBR3
HBR3 +WFAN HFAN

where W,W, mass
mass flow;
flow; H, enthalpy; points
points on the
the Figure 2:2: SSH,
SSH, Superheater
Superheater outlet;
outlet; RH2,
RH2, Reheater
Reheater
where
where W, mass flow;H,H,enthalpy;
enthalpy; points on
on the Figure
Figure 2: SSH, Superheater outlet; RH2, Reheater
outlet; CRP,
outlet; CRP,reheater
reheater inlet;
inlet; FW,FW, Feedwater
Feedwater inlet;inlet; ATT,
ATT,ATT, superheater
superheater Attemperator
Attemperator inlet; BR1BR3,
inlet;inlet;
BR1BR3, Burner
outlet; CRP, reheater inlet; FW, Feedwater inlet; superheater Attemperator BR1BR3,
Burner
fuel fuel inlet;
inlet; fuel
Burner FAN, FAN,
FanFAN,
inlet; Fan inlet.
inlet.Fan inlet.

Figure 3. Balance of Plant model implemented in ProTRAX v7.2 software environment, where: CRP,
Figure 3. Balance
Figure 3. Balance of
of Plant
Plant model
model implemented
implemented in in ProTRAX
ProTRAX v7.2 software environment,
v7.2 software environment, where:
where: CRP,
CRP,
reheater inlet pipe; CV, main Control Valve; GOV, HP1 (High Pressure), HP2, IP1 (Intermediate
reheater inlet pipe; CV, main Control Valve; GOV, HP1 (High Pressure), HP2,
reheater inlet pipe; CV, main Control Valve; GOV, HP1 (High Pressure), HP2, IP1 (Intermediate IP1 (Intermediate
Pressure), IP2, LPT (Low Pressure) steam turbine stages; VACP, Vacuum Pump; CDP, Condenser
Pressure),
Pressure), IP2,
IP2,LPT
LPT(Low
(Low Pressure)
Pressure)steam
steamturbine stages;
turbine VACP,
stages; Vacuum
VACP, Pump;Pump;
Vacuum CDP, Condenser Pump;
CDP, Condenser
Pump; BFP, Boiler Feedwater Pump; DEA, Deaerator; CNDR, Condenser; CLC, make-up water
BFP,
Pump;Boiler
BFP,Feedwater
Boiler Pump; DEA,
Feedwater Deaerator;
Pump; DEA, CNDR, Condenser;
Deaerator; CNDR, CLC, make-up water control valve;
control valve; LPDV, Low Pressure Preheater level control Valve; Condenser;
HPDV, HighCLC, make-up
Pressure water
Preheater
LPDV,
controlLow Pressure
valve; LPDV, Preheater level
Low Pressure control Valve; HPDV, High Pressure Preheater level control Valve;
level control Valve; DLV, DeaeratorPreheater levelValve;
Level control control
FWV,Valve;
drum HPDV, High Pressure
level control Preheater
valve; R1, RS1
DLV,
level Deaerator LevelDLV,
control Valve; FWV, drum level control valve; R1,level
RS1RS3, steam/water pipe
RS3,control Valve;
steam/water Deaerator
pipe with Level
thermal lag; control
TLK, steamValve;
turbineFWV, drum
leakage. control valve; R1, RS1
with thermal lag; TLK, steam turbine leakage.
RS3, steam/water pipe with thermal lag; TLK, steam turbine leakage.
(a) (b) 41
92
(a) (b) 41
40
92
91 40
39

38
39
91
(%) (%)
BLR (%)

90 37
38
UNITUNIT
BLR (%)

90 36
37
89
35
36
89 34
88 FP 35
FP
SP 33
34 SP
88 FP
87 32 FP
100 150 200 250 300 SP
350 33
100 150 200 250 300 350 SP
87 Load level (MW) 32 Load level (MW)
100 150 200 250 300 350 100 150 200 250 300 350
Figure 4. Boiler efficiency ( (MW)
Load level ) (a) and unit efficiency ( ) (b) in fixed pressure
Load (FP) and sliding
level (MW)
pressure (SP) operating mode.
Figure 4.
4. Boiler
Boiler efficiency
efficiency(( )) (a)
(a) and
and unit
unitefficiency
efficiency(( ) (b) in fixed pressure (FP) and sliding
Figure BLR UN IT ) (b) in fixed pressure (FP) and sliding
pressure
The total
pressure (SP) operating mode.
unit generation
(SP) operating mode. efficiency (UNIT) also takes into consideration auxiliary power
consumption in the plant, and it is calculated based on the following equation:
The total unit generation efficiency (UNIT) also takes into consideration auxiliary power

The %
total
consumption= inunit
100 generation
plant,
the
efficiency (
and it is calculated UNIT
) also takes into consideration auxiliary power
based on the following equation:

consumption in the plant, and it is calculated based on thefollowing equation: (2)

% = 100 = 100
energy output
UN IT (%)=100 energy input (2)
==100 (2)
100 WBR1 HBR1 +WBR2 H
PGEN PAUX

BR2 +WBR3 HBR3 +WFAN HFAN +WCLC HCLC

Energies 2017, 10, 205 7 of 19
Energies 2017, 10, 205 7 of 19

where
where PGENis isthe
PGEN thepower
powerplant plantoutput
output power
power (electrical);
(electrical); PAUX
AUXthe
theauxiliary
auxiliarypower
power(feedwater,
(feedwater,
condenser
condenser pumps
pumps andandairairfan);
fan);W,
W,the
themass
massflow;
flow; H,H, the
the enthalpy;
enthalpy;BR1BR3,
BR1BR3,Burner
Burner fuel inlet;
fuel FAN,
inlet; FAN,
Fan inlet; CLC, makeup
Fan inlet; CLC, makeup water inlet. water inlet.
Whereas
Whereas therethere is difference
is no no difference in unit
in unit efficiencies
efficiencies for designed
for the the designed condition
condition (full (full
load),load), it is
it is clearly
clearly seen that the unit in SP operating mode is able to reach up to 1% higher
seen that the unit in SP operating mode is able to reach up to 1% higher efficiency than in FP mode efficiency than in FPfor
mode for the lowest load levels.
the lowest load levels.
The effective power plant operational range is restricted by steam parameters, as steam
The effective power plant operational range is restricted by steam parameters, as steam
temperatures at the main steam line and reheater line decrease below the rated values for certain
temperatures at the main steam line and reheater line decrease below the rated values for certain
conditions. In Figure 5, it is clearly seen that MST and RHT decrease below the rated values for low
conditions. In Figure 5, it is clearly seen that MST and RHT decrease below the rated values for low load
load levels. The minimum load level is restricted to 155 MW in FP mode and 110 MW in SP mode.
levels. The minimum load level is restricted to 155 MW in FP mode and 110 MW in SP mode. Therefore,
Therefore, the minimum load level should be maintained above these values for secure power plant
theoperation,
minimumas load anylevel
rapidshould
loadbe maintained
change abovesteep
can cause thesetemperature
values for secure power
gradients, plantinoperation,
result severe
as any rapid load change can cause steep temperature gradients, result in severe
component thermal stresses and equipment lifetime decrease. Higher unit efficiency and increased component thermal
stresses and equipment lifetime decrease. Higher unit efficiency and increased
plant operational range at low load levels make SP control mode more preferred and widely used plant operational range
at low load levels make SP control mode more preferred and widely used in industry.
in industry.

540

530
Temperature (oC)

520

510

500

490 MST-FP
MST-SP
480
RHT-FP
470 RHT-SP

100 150 200 250 300 350

Load level (MW)

Figure 5. Main Steam Temperature (MST) and Reheater Temperature (RHT) as a function of load level
Figure 5. Main Steam Temperature (MST) and Reheater Temperature (RHT) as a function of load level
in FP and SP operation modes.
in FP and SP operation modes.

3. Analysis of Feasible Integration Strategies

3. Analysis of Feasible Integration Strategies
The principals of each TES system are to store heat (or cold) to be used later and overcome the
The
mismatchprincipals
betweenofenergy
each TES systemand
generation areenergy
to storeuseheat (or cold)
[10,33]. to be used
The general laterofand
concept TESovercome
integrationthe
mismatch
in the power plant cycle is to take the heat out from the plant process cycle during low load demand in
between energy generation and energy use [10,33]. The general concept of TES integration
theand
powersendplant
it tocycle is toThe
storage. takeheat
the heat
shouldoutbefrom the plant
returned backprocess
to the cycle during
process loop low
when load
it isdemand and
required,
send it to storage.
usually during highThe heat
loadshould
demand, be returned
when theback to the price
electricity process
is loop
high.when it is required,
The general idea ofusually
TES
during high load
integration intodemand,
the plant when
cycle isthe electricity
briefly priceinisFigure
explained high. 6.
The general idea of TES integration into
the plant Incycle is briefly
this article, explainedTES
no particular in Figure
scheme6.is considered, as the main aim is to assess the influence
ofIn
a hypothetical
this article, noTESparticular
system onTES the scheme
plant process cycle. Theas
is considered, authors intention
the main aim is is
tonot to consider
assess any
the influence
of aspecific TES technology,
hypothetical TES system although
on the thisplant
has significant influence
process cycle. Theon the feasibility
authors of the
intention is entire
not toconcept.
consider
anyRecently,
specific there has been highalthough
TES technology, interest in TEShas
this technology,
significant and many new
influence onarticles are focused
the feasibility on new
of the entire
concept. Recently, there has been high interest in TES technology, and many new articles areart
TES materials, their parameters and design concepts. By investigating the current state of the TES
focused
on system,
new TESwe would be
materials, limited
their by its current
parameters and designparameters.
concepts.Consequently,
By investigatingthe the
storage
currentphase is of
state notthe
discussed in the paper, and two main TES processes are simulated: the charging
art TES system, we would be limited by its current parameters. Consequently, the storage phase is and discharging
process. In the plant process cycle, the superheated steam is used as the heat transfer fluid (HTF) and
not discussed in the paper, and two main TES processes are simulated: the charging and discharging
the source of heat. As it is not possible to effectively keep the superheated steam in a storage tank,
process. In the plant process cycle, the superheated steam is used as the heat transfer fluid (HTF) and
the heat from the superheated steam should be exchanged with suitable thermal material filling the
the source of heat. As it is not possible to effectively keep the superheated steam in a storage tank,
storage tank in the TES charging process. Usually, the most cost effective solutions can be achieved
the heat from the superheated steam should be exchanged with suitable thermal material filling the
using retrofitting; therefore, only relatively easily accessible points for steam extraction from the plant
storage tank in the TES charging process. Usually, the most cost effective solutions can be achieved
process loop are considered. Extraction points could be located at the inlet and outlet from the steam
using retrofitting;
turbine and alsotherefore,
at steam onlytaps relatively
to feedwatereasily accessibleSeven
preheaters. points for steam
different extraction
possible fromfor
locations theTES
plant
process loop are considered. Extraction points could be located at the inlet and outlet from the steam
Energies 2017, 10, 205 8 of 19

turbine and
Energies also
2017, at steam taps to feedwater preheaters. Seven different possible locations for TES
10, 205 steam
8 of 19
extraction points are considered in the steam-water loop for the TES charging process. These points
steam extraction
(T0AT5) are shown points are considered
in Figure in the
6, which also steam-water
corresponds toloop for3:
Figure the TES charging process. These
points (T0AT5) are shown in Figure 6, which also corresponds to Figure 3:
OnOn thethe
main
main steam
steamline,
line,just
justbefore
beforeand
and after the main
after the maincontrol
controlvalve
valve(T0A
(T0Aand
and T0B
T0B respectively);
respectively);
AtAt thethe
inlet and outlet from the boiler reheater (T2 and T3 respectively);
inlet and outlet from the boiler reheater (T2 and T3 respectively);
AtAt the the
steam taps to
steam feedwater
taps preheaters:
to feedwater HPFP, the
preheaters: deaerator
HPFP, the and LPFP (T1,
deaerator andT4LPFP
and T5, respectively).
(T1, T4 and
T5, respectively).

Figure 6. Thermal energy storage (TES) general description, where, HTF: heat transfer fluid; LPFP:
Figure 6. Thermal energy storage (TES) general description, where, HTF: heat transfer fluid; LPFP: low
low pressure feedwater preheater; HPFP: high pressure feedwater preheater; HX: heat exchanger;
pressure feedwater preheater; HPFP: high pressure feedwater preheater; HX: heat exchanger; T0AT5,
T0AT5, C, D: these corresponds to the points in Figure 3.
C, D: these corresponds to the points in Figure 3.
Superheated steam used in the TES charging process should be promptly returned back to the
Superheated
steam-water loop,steam used
as the loopinisthe TES
very charging
sensitive to process should be
any imbalances. promptly
Return pointsreturned
are locatedback
at to
thethe
steam-water
deaerator and condenser (D and C in Figure 3). There are direct-contact type HX that allow for directthe
loop, as the loop is very sensitive to any imbalances. Return points are located at
steam and
deaerator and water mixing,(D
condenser soand
it is C
possible to return
in Figure steam
3). There areordirect-contact
water from thetype
TESHXcharging process.
that allow for The
direct
return
steam andpoint
water is chosen
mixing, based
so iton is the minimal
possible pressure
to return difference
steam between
or water fromTEStheextraction
TES charging and return
process.
Thepoints
returntopoint
avoidisany unnecessary
chosen based onpressure throttling
the minimal pressureon difference
the TES control valve.
between TESThe deaerator
extraction (D)
and is
return
chosen as the return point for extraction points T0AT3, whereas the condenser
points to avoid any unnecessary pressure throttling on the TES control valve. The deaerator (D) is (C) is selected for
extraction
chosen as the points
return T4point
and T5.for extraction points T0AT3, whereas the condenser (C) is selected for
extraction points T4 and T5.to find a suitable way to reuse the heat in the power plant process cycle.
Another challenge is
Heat stored in TES tank can be used in the feedwater preheating process; therefore, another HX
Another challenge is to find a suitable way to reuse the heat in the power plant process cycle.
should be integrated in the TES tank for the discharging process. A bypass can be built around
Heat stored in TES tank can be used in the feedwater preheating process; therefore, another HX
feedwater preheaters, and the heat from the TES system can be used instead. In this case, superheated
should be integrated in the TES tank for the discharging process. A bypass can be built around
steam extraction from the steam turbine to the bypassed feedwater preheater is no longer required.
feedwater preheaters, and the heat from the TES system can be used instead. In this case, superheated
Consequently, more steam flows through the steam turbine and generates more electricity. This is
steam extraction from the steam turbine to the bypassed feedwater preheater is no longer required.
highly important for grid frequency support, as the TES discharging process can provide additional
Consequently,
power boost,more steam
and the powerflows through
plant is ablethe steam turbine
to generate above and generates capacity.
the registered more electricity.
LPFP and/orThis is
highly important for grid frequency support, as the TES discharging process
HPFP bypassing has been considered. The deaerator, which is also a feedwater preheater, is not can provide additional
power boost, for
considered andthetheTESpower plant isprocess,
discharging able to generate above component
as it is a crucial the registered capacity. gas
in dissolved LPFP and/or
removal
HPFP bypassing has been considered. The deaerator, which is also a feedwater
from the feedwater. Additionally, a deaerator tank is also acting as the water return point in the TES preheater, is not
considered for the (D).
charging process TESSimulations
discharginghave process, as it is a crucial
been performed component
to assess in dissolved
the potential gas removal
of TES integration in
from the feedwater.
all listed points forAdditionally,
the charging and a deaerator
dischargingtankprocesses.
is also acting as the water return point in the TES
charging process (D). Simulations have been performed to assess the potential of TES integration in all
4. Simulation
listed points for Test and Results
the charging and discharging processes.
This feasibility study is not focused on any particular TES technology and design, so the entire
4. Simulation Test and Results
TES system is designed as a black box with the operation conditions suitable for both charging and
discharging processes.
This feasibility studyInlet andfocused
is not outlet steam/water parameters
on any particular TESare taken intoand
technology consideration
design, sotothe
assess
entire
TES system is designed as a black box with the operation conditions suitable for both charging is
the maximum possible heat transfer in the TES charging and discharging processes. The main aim and
to extract the
discharging maximum
processes. heat
Inlet andtooutlet
and from the TES system
steam/water with the
parameters are minimum
taken intonegative influence
consideration on
to assess
thethe power plant
maximum process
possible heatcycle. Although
transfer in the the
TESProTRAX
charging software platformprocesses.
and discharging is capable The
of dynamic
main aim
process simulations, a steady state analysis has been performed for load levels within the entire plant
Energies 2017, 10, 205 9 of 19

is to extract the maximum heat to and from the TES system with the minimum negative influence
on the power plant process cycle. Although the ProTRAX software platform is capable of dynamic
process simulations, a steady state analysis has been performed for load levels within the entire
plant operational range of 100375 MW. The results are presented for TES charging and discharging
processes in two pressure control system modes: FP and SP mode. It is assumed that only one TES
configuration is tested at a time for the TES charging process. The TES discharging process has been
tested for bypasses low pressure, high pressure and both feedwater preheaters.

4.1. TES Charging Process

The TES charging process requires a TES control valve implementation for each considered
charging point separately. Superheated steam is taken from one point at a time (T0AT5). A simple PI
controller maintains constant steam mass flow to the TES HX within the range of 0100 kg/s (with
5 kg/s step). The TES charging power (PTES ) is proportional to the steam mass flow and the difference
in enthalpies between the inlet and outlet points of TES HX and can be calculated according to the
following equation:
PTES = WTES ( Hi Ho ) (3)

where WTES is the mass flow rate of extracted steam; Hi and Ho are the specific enthalpies of the inlet
and outlet streams of HX.
To get the maximum available charging power PTES , it is necessary to ensure the maximum
available steam mass flow and the maximum possible difference in enthalpies between TES HX inlet
and outlet nodes. Therefore, the steam condensation process should occur in TES HX in the TES
charging process. To assume the minimum negative influence on the plant cycle, the water parameters
at the outlet from TES HX are equal to the water parameters in the devices return point: deaerator tank
or condenser tank (depending on the TES charging point). Pressure drop across TES HX is considered
to be constant within the entire load level range (0.3 bar). The remaining pressure drop between the TES
steam extraction point and the water return point is reached on the TES control valve. It is also essential
to assess the power penalty on the plant process cycle (dP) caused by steam extraction in the TES
charging process. In this case, it is necessary to disable the power plant master control system, leaving
all local controllers active. The power penalty is the difference between requested load level and the
actual value of generated power. The real benchmark for the TES charging process is the difference
between TES charging power PTES and the power penalty dP, according to the following equation:

benchmark = PTES dP (4)

Simulation results shown in Figure 7 indicate four main restrictions in the maximum possible
steam mass flow (WTES ) in TES charging mode:

(1) MST restriction: MST should be kept constant (535 C 10%) within the entire load level
range. The power plant model is not able to reach the rated MST value for the lowest load
levels: <155 MW in FP mode and <110 MW in SP mode (Figure 5). Additional steam extraction
for the TES charging process allows one to increase MST for the lowest load levels for TES
extraction points located before the reheater (T0AT2). In this case, it is possible to extend the
plant operational range for low load levels. No influence has been noticed for TES points located
downstream of the reheater (T3T5). Figure 7a shows an example for point T1, where MST is too
low for the lower load levels (100150 MW) and WTES 030 kg/s (the crossed area).
(2) RHT restriction: RHT should be kept constant (537 C 10%) within the entire load level range.
RHT acts similar to MST for low load levels. Additionally, RHT rises suddenly with increasing
TES steam mass flow extraction for points T0AT2; therefore, the maximum TES steam mass flow
is restricted to 2030 kg/s. This is caused by insufficient reheater cooling, as the steam mass flow
through the reheater is much smaller than through the superheater. This is the main limiting
Energies 2017, 10, 205 10 of 19

factor for all TES extraction points located before the reheater. Furthermore, no influence has been
noticed for points located downstream of the reheater (T3T5). Figure 7b shows an example for
point T1, where the RHT is too high for WTES higher than 2030 kg/s (the crossed area). RHT also
Energies 2017, 10, 205 10 of 19
acts similar for low load levels as MST shown in the previous point (Figure 7a).
(3) Deaerator
crossedfunctionality is limited
area). RHT also for TES
acts similar for charging pointasT3.
low load levels MSTA negative
shown in steam mass point
the previous flow can be
observed(Figure 7a).steam tap supplying the deaerator (the crossed area in Figure 7c). This condition
in the
(3) Deaerator
occurs for TES steamfunctionality
massisflow
limited for TES
greater thancharging pointThis
35 kg/s. T3. Aisnegative
causedsteam
by the mass flow can
pressure be
increase in
observed in the steam tap supplying the deaerator (the crossed area in Figure 7c). This condition
the deaerator tank above the pressure level in the steam tap.
occurs for TES steam mass flow greater than 35 kg/s. This is caused by the pressure increase in
(4) Maximum pipe diameter
the deaerator tank aboverestriction:
the pressureThelevelmaximum
in the steamsteam
tap. mass flow is also restricted by the
maximum
(4) Maximum diameter of the pipe
pipe diameter delivering
restriction: steam tosteam
The maximum the TES masssystem. Therestricted
flow is also conditionbywhere
the the
maximum maximum steam mass flow
diameter of thetopipe
TESdelivering
(WTES ) issteam
reached
to theoccurs for TES
TES system. Thesteam extraction
condition where thepoint T5
(CVTESmaximum
= 100%, the steam
redmass flowintoFigure
colour TES (W TES) is
7d). Thereached occursof
left border forthe
TES steam
red areaextraction
indicatespoint T5
the maximum
(CV TES = 100%, the red colour in Figure 7d). The left border of the red area indicates the maximum
possible steam mass flow to TES system (3863 kg/s).
possible steam mass flow to TES system (3863 kg/s).

Figure Figure 7. Simulation

7. Simulation results:
results: (a)(a) Mainsteam
Main steam temperature
temperature for
forTES charging
TES pointpoint
charging T1; (b)
T1;Reheater
(b) Reheater
temperature
temperature for TESfor charging
TES charging point
point T1;T1;
(c)(c)Steam
Steammass
mass flow
flowtotodeaerator
deaerator DEAE) for TES charging
(W(W ) for TES charging
DEAE
point T3; and (d) TES valve opening degree (CVTES) for TES charging point T5. The crossed area
point T3; and (d) TES valve opening degree (CVTES ) for TES charging point T5. The crossed area
represents the limit of the parameters range.
represents the limit of the parameters range.
A superposition of all specified restrictions for each investigated scenario allows one to draw an
A available
superposition
power of all operational
plant specified restrictions
range for all for each investigated
investigated TES charging scenario allows
points. The one to draw
maximum
available TES steam mass flow (W ) is depicted in Figure 8. The maximum
an available power plant operational range for all investigated TES charging points. The maximum
TES value is reached for
location T4. The linear outcome for point T5 comes from the maximum allowable steam mass flow
available TES steam mass flow (WTES ) is depicted in Figure 8. The maximum value is reached for
reached for the assumed diameter of the pipe delivering steam to TES HX. TES steam mass flow is
location T4. The linear outcome for point T5 comes from the maximum allowable steam mass flow
significantly restricted for all TES extraction points located before the reheater (points T0AT2),
reachedalthough
for theinassumed
FP mode, diameter
it is possibleoftothe
reachpipe delivering
slightly steam
higher values toinTES
than HX. TES
SP mode. steam
The main mass flow
benefit
is significantly restricted for all TES extraction points located before the reheater
in SP mode is slightly extended operational range for the lowest load levels below 150 MW. It is really(points T0AT2),
although in FP mode,
important it is possible
that power plants areto reach
able slightly
to operate for higher values
the lowest than
possible in SP
load mode.
levels Thefor
allowing main
TESbenefit
charging
in SP mode at the same
is slightly time. operational range for the lowest load levels below 150 MW. It is really
extended
important that power plants are able to operate for the lowest possible load levels allowing for TES
charging at the same time.
Energies 2017, 10, 205 11 of 19
Energies 2017,
Energies 2017, 10,
10, 205
205 11 of
11 of 19
19

(a)
(a) Fixed Pressure
Fixed Pressure (b)
(b) Sliding Pressure
Pressure
100 100
Sliding
100 100

80 80
80 80
T0A
T0A T0A
T0A
T0B
(kg/s)

T0B

(kg/s)
T0B
TES(kg/s)

T0B

TES(kg/s)
60 60
60 T1
T1 60 T1
T1
T2
T2 T2
T2
WWTES

WWTES
40 T3
T3 40 T3
40 40 T3
T4
T4 T4
T4
T5
T5 T5
20 20
T5
20 20

0 0
0 0
100 150 200 250 300 350 100 150 200 250 300 350
100 150 200 250 300 350 100 150 200 250 300 350
Load Level
Level (MW)
(MW) Load Level
Load Level (MW)
(MW)
Load
Figure 8.
Figure 8. Maximum
Maximum steam
steam mass
mass flow
flow (WTES
TES) to TES in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
Figure 8. Maximum steam mass (W
flow )(Wto TES
TES) to
in TES
FP (a)
inand SP (b)
FP (a) andoperating mode. mode.
SP (b) operating

SP operation
SP operation mode
mode also
also allows
allows one
one toto get
get aa higher
higher difference
difference in
in TES
TES inlet
inlet and
and outlet
outlet enthalpies
enthalpies
(dHSP
TESoperation
) for all mode also
extraction allows
points onebefore
located to get the
a higher difference
reheater (Figure in TES
9). The inlet and outlet
difference is more enthalpies
visible
(dHTES) for all extraction points located before the reheater (Figure 9). The difference is more visible
(dHat )
lower
atTES for all
load extraction
levels. Thepoints located
condensation before
process, the reheater
which occurs(Figure
in TES 9).
HX,The difference
helps to obtain
lower load levels. The condensation process, which occurs in TES HX, helps to obtain the highest is more
the visible
highest
at lower
possible
possible load levels. The
difference
difference in condensation
in enthalpies, as
enthalpies, asprocess,
the which occurs
the enthalpy
enthalpy of in TES HX,
of saturated
saturated helps
water
water to obtain
is much
is much the highest
lower
lower than
than
saturated
possible steam.
difference
saturated steam. in enthalpies, as the enthalpy of saturated water is much lower than saturated steam.

(a)
(a) Fixed Pressure
Fixed Pressure (b)
(b) Sliding Pressure
Sliding Pressure
3000 3000
3000 3000

2800 T0A
T0A 2800 T0A
(kJ/kg)

(kJ/kg)

2800 2800 T0A

TES(kJ/kg)

TES(kJ/kg)

T0B
T0B T0B
T1 T0B
T1 T1
T1
2600 T2
T2 2600 T2
dHTES

dHTES

2600 T3 2600 T2
T3 T3
T3
dH

dH

T4
T4 T4
T5 T4
2400 T5 2400 T5
T5
2400 2400

2200 2200
2200 2200
100 150 200 250 300 350 100 150 200 250 300 350
100 150 200 250 300 350 100 150 200 250 300 350
Load Level
Load Level (MW)
(MW) Load Level
Level (MW)
(MW)
Load
Figure 9.
Figure 9. Difference
Difference in
in enthalpy
enthalpy (dH
(dHTES
TES) at the inlet and outlet point of TES HX in FP (a) and SP (b)
) at the inlet and outlet point of TES HX in FP (a) and SP (b)
Figure 9. Difference
operating mode. in enthalpy (dHTES ) at the inlet and outlet point of TES HX in FP (a) and SP (b)
operating mode.
operating mode.
TES charging
TES charging powerpower (P (PTES
TES), as the result of multiplication of the above values, reaches the highest
), as the result of multiplication of the above values, reaches the highest
values
values for
TES for TES
charging locations
power (P
TES locations T4,
T4,
TES
T5
T5 andthe
), as
and T3,result
T3, respectively (Figure 10).
of multiplication
respectively (Figure 10). The
ofThe advantage
the above
advantage for points
values,
for points T4
reachesT4 and
the
and T5
highest
T5
comes
values
comes from
forfrom the
TES the lower
locations
lower T4,water
water parameters
T5 parameters in
and T3, respectivelythe condenser tank
(Figure tank
in the condenser than
10). The in the
thanadvantage deaerator (TES
for points
in the deaerator return
(TEST4return
and T5
point).
point).
comes TESthe
TES
from charging
charging powerparameters
power
lower water is restricted
is restrictedinfor
for
theallcondenser
all locations upstream
locations upstream
tank thanof ofinthe
the boiler
theboiler reheater
reheater
deaerator (TESupreturn
up to 50
to 50 MW
MW
point).
in
in FP
FP mode
mode and
and about
about 20
20 MW
MW in
in SP
SP mode.
mode. The
The main
main benefit
benefit in
in SP
SP control
control
TES charging power is restricted for all locations upstream of the boiler reheater up to 50 MW in FP system
system mode
mode is
is the
the extended
extended
TES operational
TES operational range, which which allows
allows oneone toto decrease
decrease the the power plant plant load
load level
level to the
the minimum
minimum
mode and about 20range, MW in SP mode. The main benefit in SPpower control system mode istothe extended TES
during the TES
during therange, charging
TES charging process.
process.one to decrease the power plant load level to the minimum during
operational which allows
The power
The power penalty
penalty (dP)
(dP) onon thethe plant
plant cycle
cycle during
during thethe TES
TES charging
charging process
process is is proportional
proportional to to the
the
the TES charging process.
charging
charging power
power P TES (Figure 11). The smallest values are reached for the charging point located at the
PTES (Figure 11). The smallest
The power penalty (dP) on the plant cyclevalues
duringare thereached for the charging
TES charging process is point located at to
proportional thethe
outlet from
outlet from thethe superheater
superheater (T0A).
(T0A).
charging power
The benchmark
PTES (Figure
benchmark
11). The smallest
value (benchmark)
(benchmark) calculated
values
calculated according
are reached
according to
for the(4)
to Equation
Equation (4)
charging pointin
is presented
presented in
located at12the
Figure 12
The value is Figure
outlet from
and takes the
takes into superheater
into consideration
consideration the(T0A).
the power
power penalty
penalty (dP)
(dP) during
during the the TES
TES charging
charging process.
process. According
According to to
and
theThe benchmark
obtained results, value
the (benchmark)
best candidate calculated
points areaccording
all to Equation
locations downstream (4) isofpresented
the boiler inreheater:
Figure 12
the obtained results, the best candidate points are all locations downstream of the boiler reheater:
and takesT4,
points intoT3consideration
and T5, the power
T5, respectively.
respectively. penalty
Slightly (dP) values
lower duringcan the be TESreached
charging in process.
mode,According
SP mode, but the
the mainto the
main
points T4, T3 and Slightly lower values can be reached in SP but
obtained results,
advantage is is thethe best
the extended candidate
extended plant points
plant operational are
operational range all locations
range forfor low downstream
low load
load levels.
levels. of the boiler reheater: points
advantage
T4, T3 and T5, respectively. Slightly lower values can be reached in SP mode, but the main advantage
is the extended plant operational range for low load levels.
Energies 2017, 10, 205 12 of 19
Energies 2017, 10, 205 12 of 19
Energies 2017, 10, 205 12 of 19
Energies 2017, 10, 205 12 of 19
(a) Fixed Pressure (b) Sliding Pressure
(a)300 Fixed Pressure (b)300 Sliding Pressure
(a)300 Fixed Pressure (b)300 Sliding Pressure
300 300
250 250
250 250
250 250
200 T0A 200 T0A
TES (MW)

TES (MW)
200 T0A
T0B 200 T0A
T0B
(MW)

(MW)
200 T0A
T0B 200 T0A
T0B
T1 T1
P(MW)

(MW)
150 150
150 T0B
T1
T2 150 T0B
T1
T2

PTES
PTES

P
150 T1
T2
T3 150 T1
T2
T3

PTES
PTES

100 100
100
T2
T3
T4 100
T2
T3
T4
100 T3
T4
T5 100 T3
T4
T5
50 50
T4
T5 T4
T5
50 50
T5 T5
50 50
0 0
0100 150 200 250 300 350 0100 150 200 250 300 350
0100 150 200 Level
Load 250 (MW)300 350 0100
200 Level
Load 150
250 (MW)300 350
100 150 200 250
Load Level (MW)300 350 200
Load 100
250
Level 150
(MW)300 350
Load Level
Figure (MW)
10. TES (PTES) in FP (a) and SP (b)Load
charging power Level (MW)
operating mode.
Figure TES
10.10.
Figure charging
TES chargingpower
power(P TES))in
(PTES inFP
FP(a)
(a)and
andSPSP
(b)(b) operating
operating mode.
mode.
Figure 10. TES charging power (PTES) in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
(a) Fixed Pressure (b) Sliding Pressure
(a)70 Fixed Pressure (b) 70 Sliding Pressure
(a)70 Fixed Pressure (b)70 Sliding Pressure
60
70 60
70
60 60
50
60 50
60
50 T0A 50 T0A
(MW)

T0A T0A
(MW)

40
50 T0B 40
50 T0B
T0A
(MW)

T0A
(MW)

40 T0B
T1 40 T0B
T1
(MW)

(MW)

30
40 T0B
T1
T2 30
40 T0B
T1
T2
dP

dP

30 T1
T2
T3 30 T1
T2
T3
dPdP

dPdP

20
30 T2
T3
T4 20
30 T2
T3
T4
20 T3
T4
T5 20 T3
T4
T5
10
20 T4
T5 10
20 T4
T5
10 T5 10 T5
0
10 0
10
0 0
100 150 200 250 300 350 100 150 200 250 300 350
0 0
100 150 200 Level
Load 250 (MW)300 350 100 150 200 Level
Load 250 (MW)300 350
100 150 200 250
Load Level (MW)300 350 100 150 200
Load 250
Level (MW)300 350

Figure Load Level (MW)

11. Power penalty
on the plant cycle (dP) in FP (a) andLoad
mode. Level
SP (b) (MW)
operating
Figure 11. Power penalty on the plant cycle (dP) in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
Figure Power
11.11.
Figure penalty
Power penaltyon
onthe
theplant
plant cycle (dP) in
cycle (dP) inFP
FP(a)
(a)and
andSPSP(b)
(b) operating
operating mode.
mode.
(a) Fixed Pressure (b) Sliding Pressure
(a)250 Fixed Pressure (b)250 Sliding Pressure
(a)250 Fixed Pressure (b)250 Sliding Pressure
250 250
200 200
(MW)

200 200
(MW)

200 T0A 200 T0A

(MW)

(MW)

150 T0A
T0B 150 T0A
T0B
(MW)

(MW)
benchmark

benchmark

150 T0A
T0B
T1 150 T0A
T0B
T1
benchmark

benchmark

150 T0B
T1
T2 150 T0B
T1
T2
benchmark

benchmark

100 T1
T2
T3 100 T1
T2
T3
100 T2
T3 100 T2
T3
T4 T4
100 T3 100 T3
T4
T5 T4
T5
50 50
T4
T5 T4
T5
50 50
50 T5 50 T5
0 0
0100 150 200 250 300 350 0100 150 200 250 300 350
0100 150 200 Level
Load 250 (MW)300 350 150 Load 0100
200 Level
250 (MW)300 350
150 200 100
250
100 150 200
Load 250
Level (MW)300 350 Load Level (MW)300 350
Load Level
Figure 12.(MW) Load Level (MW)
The benchmark value in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
Figure 12. The benchmark value in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
Figure 12. The benchmark value in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
Figure 12.
Another important The in
factor benchmark
determining value a in FP (a) and
potential TESSP (b) operating
integration is themode.
superheated stream
Another
temperature important factor in determining a potential TES integration is the superheated stream
Another(T TESin) entering TES HX in the charging process (Figure 13). High Temperature Thermal
important factor in determining a potential TES integration is the superheated stream
temperature
Storage (TTESin
(HTTS) ) entering
systems TEStemperature
require HX in the charging
levels process
above 400 (Figure 13). High
Cintegration
[17,18,34], whichTemperature Thermal
Another
temperature important
(TTESin factor
) entering in determining
TES HX in the charging a potential
process TES(Figure 13). High the could
is Temperature be achieved
superheated Thermalstream
Storage
only for(HTTS) systems
extraction require
points closesttemperature
to the main levels
steamabove
line400
and C [17,18,34],
the reheater which
line: could
T3, T0Abe achieved
and T0B,
temperature (T
Storage (HTTS)TESin ) entering TES HX in the charging process (Figure 13).
systems require temperature levels above 400 C [17,18,34], which could be achieved High Temperature Thermal
only for extraction
respectively. The points
steam closest to is
temperature the main steam
relatively line across
uniform andthe reheater line: T3,inT0A and T0B,
Storage
only (HTTS) systems
for extraction require
points temperature
closest to the mainlevels
steamabove
line 400
and theCthe plant load
[17,18,34],
reheater level
which
line: FP operation
T3,could
T0A be achieved
and T0B,
respectively.
mode. The
SP mode steam temperature is relatively uniform across the plant load level in FP operation
onlyrespectively.
for The offers
extraction steam
points elevated
temperature
closest steam
to the temperature
is relatively
main steam for
uniformline all
andpoints
across the located
the plant
reheaterloadupstream in of
level T3,
line: FP the
T0A boilerT0B,
operation
and
mode.
reheater SPdue
mode offerspressure
tosteam
lower elevatedthrottling
steam temperature
at the TES for all points
control valvethe located
(up upstream
to 70load C for theof the boiler
mode.
respectively.SP The
mode offers elevated steam
temperature temperature
is relatively for all
uniform points
across located
plant upstream
level oflowest
in load
theoperation
FP boiler
reheater
level). due
TES HX to lower
inlet pressure
temperature throttling
for all at
pointsthe TES
located control valve
downstream (up
of to
the 70 C
boiler for the
reheater lowest
remains loadat
reheater
mode. SP TES due offers
mode to lower pressure
elevated throttling
steam at the TES
temperature control
for all points valve (up upstream
located to 70 C for of the
the lowest
boiler load
reheater
level).
the same HX
level, inlet temperature
as thetemperature for
pressure difference all points
betweenlocated downstream
the FP and SP control of the boiler
system reheater
modes remains
is marginal. at
level).
duethe
to lowerTES HX inlet
pressure throttling for TES
all points located downstream C of
forthe boiler reheater remains at HX
same level, as the pressureat the
difference control
betweenvalvethe FP (up
andtoSP70 control the lowest
system loadislevel).
modes TES
marginal.
the same level, as the pressure difference between the FP and SP control
inlet temperature for all points located downstream of the boiler reheater remains at the same level, system modes is marginal.
as the pressure difference between the FP and SP control system modes is marginal.
Energies 2017, 10, 205 13 of 19

Energies 2017, 10, 205 13 of 19

The results
Energies for205temperature gradients across TES HX in charging mode are depicted in
2017, 10, Figure
13 of 19 14.
To ensure The results for TES
the minimal temperature
influencegradients
of the across TES HX inprocess
TES charging chargingon mode
the are depicted
plant cycle,inthe
Figure 14.
temperature
Tothe The
ensure
level atEnergies results
outletthefrom for temperature
minimal gradients
TES influence of theacross TES HX in
TES charging charging
process mode
on the arecycle,
plant depicted in Figure
the temperature 14.
2017, 10, 205 TES HX equals the temperature level in the devices discharging point 13(deaerator
of 19
To ensure
level at thetheoutlet
minimal fromTES influence
TES of thethe
HX equals TEStemperature
charging process
level onin the plant cycle,
devices the temperature
discharging point
or condenser tank). There is a considerable difference between temperature levels in the deaerator
level at theoroutlet
(deaerator from
condenser TES HX
tank).
C). equals
There the temperature
is a considerable level between
difference in the devices discharging
temperature levels inpoint
the
and condenser The results
(about for150
temperature gradients
SP mode across
offersTES
alsoconsiderableHX in elevated
slightly charging mode are depicted
temperatures forin
allFigure
TES 14.
charging
(deaeratorand
deaerator or condenser
condenser tank).
(aboutThere
150 is a SP
C). mode alsodifference
offers between
slightly temperature
elevated levels for
temperatures in the
all
To
pointsTES ensure
located the minimal
upstream TES
of the influence
boiler of the TES charging process on the plant cycle, the temperature
deaerator
chargingandpoints
condenser (about
located 150reheater.
upstream C). SP boiler
of the mode reheater.
also offers slightly elevated temperatures for all
level at the outlet from TES HX equals the temperature level in the devices discharging point
TES charging points located upstream of the boiler reheater.
(deaerator or condenser tank). There is a considerable difference between temperature levels in the
(a) Fixed Pressure
deaerator and condenser (about 150 C). SP mode(b)
Sliding Pressure
also offers slightly elevated temperatures for all
(a) Fixed Pressure (b) Sliding Pressure
TES charging
500 points located upstream of the boiler reheater.
500
500 500
(a) Fixed Pressure T0A (b) Sliding Pressure T0A

(oC)(oC)
(oC)(oC)

400 T0B
T0A 400 T0B
T0A
500
400 T1
T0B 500 T1

TTESin
400 T0B
TTESin

T2
T1 T2
T1

TTESin (oC)TTESin
TTESin (oC)TTESin

T3
T2 T3
300 300 T2
T0A
T4 T0A
T4
T3 T3
400
300 T0B
T5 400
300 T0B
T5
T4 T4
T1 T1
T5 T5
200 T2 200 T2
T3 T3
300
200100 150 200 250 300 350 300
200100
T4 150 200 250 300 350 T4
100 150 Load
200 Level
250(MW)300 350 T5 100 150 Load
200 Level
250(MW)300 350 T5
Load Level (MW) Load Level (MW)
200 Figure 13. TES inlet temperature in FP200
(a) and SP (b) operating mode.
Figure 13. TES inlet temperature in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
Figure 13. TES inlet temperature in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
100 150 200 250 300 350 100 150 200 250 300 350
(a) FixedLevel
Load Pressure
(MW) (b) Sliding Pressure
Load Level (MW)
(a)400 Fixed Pressure (b)400 Sliding Pressure
Figure 13. TES inlet temperature in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
400 400
350 350

(a)300
350
Fixed Pressure (b)300
350 Sliding Pressure
TES (oC)

T0A T0A
TES (oC)

300
400 T0B 400
300 T0B
dT(oC)

T0A 250 T0A

dT(oC)

250
T1 T1
T0B
250
350 T0B 350
250
T2 T2
dTTES (oC)dTTES

200 200
dTTES (oC)dTTES

T1 T1
T3 T3
T2
200
300 T2 300
200
150 T4
T0A 150 T0A
T4
T3 T3
T5
T0B T0B
T5
150
250
100 T4 250
150
100 T4
T1 T1
T5 T5
100
200 T2 200
100 T2
50 50
100 150 200 250 300 350 T3 100 150 200 250 300 350 T3
50
150 T4 150
50 T4
100 150 Load
200 Level
250(MW)300 350 100 150 Load
200 Level
250(MW)300 350
T5 T5
100 Load Level (MW) 100 Load Level (MW)
Figure 14. Temperature gradient across the TES tank in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
50 50
Figure
100 14.150
Temperature
200 gradient
250 300 across
350 the TES tank in 100
FP (a) and
150
SP200
(b) operating
250
mode.350
300
Figure 14. Temperature
Unit generation efficiency gradient across the TES tank in FP (a) andisSPdepicted (b) operating mode.
Load Level (MW)(UNIT) during the TES charging process Load Level (MW) in Figure 15. The
Unit generation
dash-dotted black line efficiency (UNIT
represents ) during
the the TES charging
unit efficiency process
without the TES ischarging
depictedprocess
in Figure
(no15.TES).
The
Figure 14. Temperature gradient across the TES tank in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
dash-dotted
Superheated
Unit black
generation line represents
steamefficiency
extraction ( the
causes
UNIT ) unit
the efficiency
unit
during efficiency
the TESwithout
to drop the
in
charging TES
each charging
examined
process is process
TES (no
charging
depicted in TES).
case,
Figure 15.
Superheated
which is
The dash-dotted steam
proportional extraction
black line to the causes
power
represents the unit
delivered efficiency
to the TES to drop
system in
(P each). examined TES charging case,
Unit generation efficiency (UNITthe unitthe
) during efficiency without
TES charging the is
TES
process TES charging
depicted process
in Figure (no TES).
15. The
which is proportional to the power delivered to the TES system (PTES).
(a) steam
dash-dotted
Superheated black linePressure
extraction
Fixed represents
causesthetheunit
unitefficiency
efficiency
(b) without
to dropthein TES
each charging
examined
Sliding Pressure process
TES (no TES).
charging case,
(a)
Superheated steam extraction causes the unit efficiency
(b)
which is proportional to the power delivered to the TES system (PSliding
40 Fixed Pressure 40 to drop in each examined
TES ).Pressure
TES charging case,
which40 is proportional to the power delivered to the TES
38 40 system (PTES).
38
38
36 T0A 38 T0A
(a) Fixed Pressure T0B
T0A
(b)36 Sliding Pressure T0B
T0A
(%) (%)

(%) (%)

36
34 36
34
40 T1
T0B 40 T1
T0B
UNIT

T2
UNIT

34
32 T1 34
32 T2
T1
38 T3 38 T3
UNIT (%) UNIT

T2
UNIT (%) UNIT

32
30 32
30 T2
36 T0A
T4 36 T0A
T4
T3 T3
30
28 T0B
T5 30
28 T0B
T5
34 T4 34 T4
T1
noTES T1
noTES
28
26 T5 28
26 T5
32 T2 32 T2
noTES noTES
26
24 T3 26
24 T3
30 T4 30 T4
24100 150 200 250 300 350 24100 150 200 250 300 350
28 T5 28 T5
100 150 Load
200 Level
250(MW)300 350 noTES 100 150 Load
200 Level
250(MW)300 350 noTES
26 26
Load Level (MW) Load Level (MW)
24 Figure 15. Unit efficiency (UNIT) in FP 24
(a) and SP (b) operating mode.
100 150 Figure
200 25015. Unit
300 efficiency
350 (UNIT) in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
100 150 200 250 300 350
Load Level (MW) Load Level (MW)

Figure 15. Unit efficiency (UNIT) in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
Figure 15. Unit efficiency (UNIT ) in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode.
Energies 2017, 10, 205 14 of 19

The best candidate point selection for the TES charging process is a multi-dimensional task, and
all presented parameters
Energies 2017, 10, 205 have to be taken into consideration. Taking into account both the 14 benchmark
of 19
value and the
Energies stream
2017, 10, 205 temperature (TTESin ), the best candidate point for steam extraction14 inofthe
19 TES
The bestis
charging process candidate point
the boiler selection
reheater for the
outlet TESwith
(T3) charging process
the peak is a multi-dimensional
value task,power
of the TES charging and for
all presented
The bestparameters have to
candidate point be taken
selection forinto
theconsideration.
TES charging Taking
processinto
is a account both the benchmark
multi-dimensional task, and
moderate load levels around 275 MW.
value and theparameters
all presented stream temperature
have to be (T TESin),
taken theconsideration.
into best candidateTaking point into
for steam
account extraction in the TES
both the benchmark
charging
value andprocessthe stream is thetemperature
boiler reheater outlet
(TTESin (T3)
), the with
best the peakpoint
candidate valuefor of steam
the TESextraction
charging in power
the TESfor
4.2. TES Discharging Process
moderate load levels
charging process around
is the boiler275 MW. outlet (T3) with the peak value of the TES charging power for
reheater
The heat from
moderate the TES
load levels system
around should be used by bringing it back into the power plant process
275 MW.
4.2. TES Discharging Process
loop. During normal power plant operation, a part of the superheated steam from the steam turbine is
4.2. TES Discharging Process
extracted to Thefeedwater
heat from preheaters
the TES system (HPFP,
should deaerator
be used by and LPFP)itfor
bringing backtheinto
feedwater
the powerpreheating
plant process process,
loop.The
increasing During
the heat normal
from the
efficiency power
of TES plant operation,
system
the cycle atshould
the same bea used
part of
bythe
time. superheated
bringing
The heatitfrombacksteam
into the
TES from
could the
powerbe steam
plant turbine
used process
for the same
purposeis extracted
loop. During
instead oftonormal
feedwater
using power
the preheaters
superheated (HPFP,
plant operation, deaerator
steama part
from ofthe and
thesteam LPFP)
superheated
turbine. for
steamthe from
Steam feedwater
the steam
extractionpreheating
turbine
to feedwater
process,
is extractedincreasing
to feedwaterthe efficiency of the(HPFP,
preheaters cycle atdeaerator
the same time. The heat
and LPFP) forfrom
the TES could be
feedwater used for
preheating
preheaters is stopped during the TES discharging process, and more steam flows through the steam
the sameincreasing
process, purpose instead of usingofthe
the efficiency thesuperheated
cycle at the samesteamtime.
fromThe the heat
steam turbine.
from Steambe
TES could extraction
used for
turbineto
stages allowing for increased electricity generation. In the powerand plant cycle, there are two
thefeedwater
same purpose preheaters
insteadisofstopped
using the during the TESsteam
superheated discharging
from theprocess,
steam turbine. more
Steam steam flows
extraction
possible locations
through
to feedwaterthe steam for the
preheaters TES
turbine discharging
is stages
stopped allowing
during process.
for TESAdischarging
theincreased bypass could
electricity be built
generation.
process, and In around
the power
more LPFP
steam plant
flows and/or
HPFP.cycle,
Although
through there the
the are
steam deaerator
twoturbine
possible is one of
locations
stages the
allowing feedwater
for the preheaters,
TES discharging
for increased electricity no
process. bypassing
A bypass
generation. is
In the considered
could
power builtin this
be plant
case. This
cycle,component
around LPFPare
there and/or
twois HPFP.
crucial
possible for
Althoughthe oxygen
locations thefor theand
deaerator other
TESis one ofdissolved
the feedwater
discharging gas preheaters,
process. removal
A bypass processes
no bypassing
could from the
be built
is
feedwater considered
around before in
LPFPentering this case.
and/or intoThis
HPFP. component
Although
the is crucial
the deaerator
main feedwater for theof
is one
pumps. oxygen
Any and other
the negligence
feedwater dissolved
preheaters,
in gasbypassing
no
this process removal
could cause
seriousprocesses
is feedwater
consideredfromin the
pumpthisfeedwater
case. Thisbefore
damage and entering
component
overall into theequipment
is boiler
crucial main
for thefeedwater
oxygen andpumps. Any
other Ideal
corrosion. negligence
dissolved in preheater
gas removal
feedwater this
process
processes could cause
from theidenticalserious feedwater
feedwaterfeedwater pump
before entering damage and
into the main overall
feedwater boiler equipment
pumps. corrosion. Ideal
substitution requires parameters when the heat fromAny thenegligence
TES system in thisis used
feedwater
process could preheater
cause substitution
serious feedwaterrequires identical
pump damagefeedwater parameters
and overall boiler when
equipmentthe heat from theIdeal
corrosion. TES
instead. LPFP and HPFP feedwater parameters in FP and SP operation modes within the entire power
system
feedwater is used instead.
preheater LPFP andrequires
substitution HPFP feedwater
identical parameters in FP and SP
feedwater parameters when operation
the heatmodes
from the within
TES
plant load
the
system level
entire range
is power
used are depicted
plant
instead. load
LPFP andin
level Figures
range
HPFP are 16 andparameters
depicted
feedwater 17.
in Figures 16 andand
in FP 17. SP operation modes within
the entire power plant load level range are depicted in Figures 16 and 17.
(a) Fixed Pressure
(b) Sliding Pressure
(a) 275
Fixed Pressure
26 550 (b) 275 Sliding Pressure
26 550

120 250
275 26 500 120 250
275 26 500
550 550
225
250 450
500 225
250 450
500
120 120
100 24 100 24
200
225 Win 400
450 200
225 W 400
450
Tin 24 Tin 24
100 175 Win 350 100 175 W 350
80
200 Tout 400 200 Tout 400
80
Tin
Pin Tin
Pin
150
175 300
350 150
175 300
350
80
Tout
Pout 22 Tout
Pout 22
80
60 Pin
Hin 250
300 60 125 Pin
Hin 250
300
125
150 22 150
Pout
Hout Pout
Hout 22
60 Hin 200
250 60 100 Hin 200
250
100
125 125
40 Hout 40 Hout
20 150
200 20 150
200
75
100 75
100
40 100 40 100
20 150 20 150
20 50
75 20 50
75
100 150 200 250 300 350 100 100 150 200 250 300 350 100
20 50 20 50
100 150
Load
200
Level
250
(MW) 300 350 Load Level (MW)
100 150 200 250 300 350
Load Level (MW)
Figure 16. LPFP feedwater parameters in FP (a) and SP (b) operating Load Level (MW)
mode; where, W: mass flow
Figure 16. LPFP feedwater parameters in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode; where, W: mass flow
(kg/s);
FigureT:16.
temperature (C); P:parameters
LPFP feedwater pressure (bar);
in FPH:(a)
enthalpy
and SP(kJ/kg); in: inlet;
(b) operating out: outlet.
mode; where, W: mass flow
(kg/s); T: temperature ( C); P: pressure (bar); H: enthalpy (kJ/kg); in: inlet; out: outlet.
(kg/s); T: temperature (C); P: pressure (bar); H: enthalpy (kJ/kg); in: inlet; out: outlet.
(a) (b)
Fixed Pressure Sliding Pressure
(a)
300 350 1300 (b)
300 350 1300
Fixed Pressure Sliding Pressure
300 350 180 1300 300 350 180 1300
280 1200 280 1200
300 300
180
160 180
160
280
260 1200 280
260 1200
300 1100 300 W 1100
250 W 250
Tin 160
140 Tin 160
140
260
240 260
240
W
Tout 1100 W
Tout 1100
250 1000 250 1000
Tin Tin
Pin
240 200
220
Pin 140
120 240 200
220
140
120
Tout
Pout 1000 Tout
Pout 1000
900 900
200 Pin
Hin 120 200 Pin
Hin 120
220 150
200 100 220 150
200 100
Pout
Hout Pout
Hout
900 900
Hin 800 Hin 800
200
180 150 100
80 200
180 150 100
80
100 Hout 100 Hout
800 800
80 700 80 700
180
160 60 180
160 60
100 100
50 700 50 700
160 100 150 200 250 300 350 60 160 100 150 200 250 300 350 60
50 Load Level (MW) 50 Load Level (MW)
100 150 200 250 300 350 100 150 200 250 300 350
Load Level (MW) Load Level (MW)
Figure 17. HPFP feedwater parameters in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode; where, W: mass flow
(kg/s);
FigureT:17.
temperature (C); P:parameters
HPFP feedwater pressure (bar);
in FPH:(a)
enthalpy
and SP(kJ/kg); in: inlet;mode;
(b) operating out: outlet.
where, W: mass flow
Figure 17. HPFP feedwater parameters in FP (a) and SP (b) operating mode; where, W: mass flow
(kg/s); T: temperature (C); P: pressure (bar); H: enthalpy (kJ/kg); in: inlet; out: outlet.
(kg/s); T: temperature ( C); P: pressure (bar); H: enthalpy (kJ/kg); in: inlet; out: outlet.
Energies 2017, 10, 205 15 of 19

Energies 2017, 10, 205 15 of 19

LPFP is a 102 MW HX preheating feedwater at 21 bar from 33 to 133 C (T = 100 C) in the
designed condition. HPFP is a 148 MW HX preheating feedwater form 189 to 286 C (T = 97 C) at
LPFP is a pressure
102 MW of HX190preheating feedwater at 21difference
bar from 33 to 133 C (T = 100 C) in the
a much higher bar. As there is no major in the feedwater pressure in LPFP
designed
between FP condition.
and SP HPFP is a 148
operation MW there
modes, HX preheating
is also nofeedwater
differenceform C (T = 97in C)
189 to 286parameters
in feedwater at
both
amodes
much(Figure
higher 16).
pressure of 190mass
Feedwater bar. As
flowthere
rateisandno pressure
major difference
are reducedin the feedwater
in SP mode for pressure
low load inlevels,
LPFP
between
which FP and SPslightly
causes operation higher
modes, there is also notemperature
feedwater difference in feedwater
and enthalpy parameters in both modes
(about 5 C
(Figure 16). Feedwater
and 50 kJ/kg, mass flow rate and pressure are reduced in SP mode for low load levels, which
respectively).
causes Toslightly
get the higher
maximum feedwater temperature
profit from and enthalpy
TES integration, (about
it should 5 C andto
be possible 50reuse
kJ/kg,therespectively).
heat from the
To get the
TES system maximum
during profit from
peak demand, when TES theintegration, it should
electricity price is at be
thepossible
highest to reuse
level. The theTES
heat from
system
the TESbe
should system
able toduring
preheat peak demand, when
the feedwater to thethe electricity
designed price is
condition foratfull
theload
highest
levellevel. The TES
operation. The
power plant
system shouldcapacity
be able to increase
preheatabove the ratedtovalue
the feedwater (P) during
the designed the TES
condition discharging
for full load level process
operation. is
depicted
The power in plant
Figurecapacity
18. LPFP bypassing
increase above allows one to
the rated increase
value (P)the power
during theplant
TES output up toprocess
discharging 5% (18
MW)
is (solid in
depicted line), and 18.
Figure the LPFP
relation between allows
bypassing the powerone increase
to increase P the
andpower
load level
plantis output
linear within
up to the
5%
entire
(18 MW) load levelline),
(solid range.
andAthebetter result
relation can be the
between achieved
powerfor HPFPP
increase bypassing,
and load as more
level steamwithin
is linear flows
through
the entirea load
higher number
level range.ofAsteam
betterturbine
result canstages. The peakfor
be achieved value
HPFP of 11% (40 MW)
bypassing, as could be achieved
more steam flows
for an 80%
through load level
a higher (dashed
number line).turbine
of steam It is notstages.
possible
The topeak
substitute
value the HP feedwater
of 11% (40 MW) could preheater for the
be achieved
highest
for an 80%load levels
load level(more thanline).
(dashed 350 MW),
It is not aspossible
the model does not work
to substitute the HP stably. The best
feedwater result for
preheater canthebe
obtainedload
highest withlevels
both (more
LPFP andthanHPFP substitution.
350 MW), The peak
as the model doesP notvalue
work is stably.
reachedThe for best
a plant load
result level
can be
around 80%
obtained withand boththeLPFP
maximum
and HPFP possible power output
substitution. The peak P value
increase up to is 14.5%
reached (53for
MW) (dotted
a plant load line).
level
The results
around 80% confirm that the feedwater
and the maximum possible powerpreheaters
output bypassing
increase up is feasible
to 14.5%for (53 retrofitting,
MW) (dottedasline). the
maximum
The results power
confirmgenerated from thepreheaters
that the feedwater steam turbine should
bypassing is not exceed
feasible 115% of registered
for retrofitting, capacity
as the maximum
[35,36].generated from the steam turbine should not exceed 115% of registered capacity [35,36].
power

(a) (b)
50 LP 14
HP LP
12 HP
40 LP+HP
LP+HP
10
P (%)
P (MW)

30
8

20 6

4
10

2
0
100 150 200 250 300 350 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Load Level (MW) Load Level (%)

Figure 18. Power plant capacity increase (P) for the TES discharging process: (a) in MW; (b) in % of
Figure 18. Power plant capacity increase (P) for the TES discharging process: (a) in MW; (b) in % of
registered capacity; where, LP: low pressure feedwater preheater bypass; HP: high pressure
registered capacity; where, LP: low pressure feedwater preheater bypass; HP: high pressure feedwater
feedwater preheater bypass; HP + LP: both LP and HP feedwater preheaters bypass.
preheater bypass; HP + LP: both LP and HP feedwater preheaters bypass.

As the power output increases during the TES discharging process, the unit efficiency ( )
As the power output increases during the TES discharging process, the unit efficiency (UN IT )
calculated based on Equation (2) also increases. The simulation results are presented in Figure 19.
calculated based on Equation (2) also increases. The simulation results are presented in Figure 19.
LPFP bypassing allows for a 2% efficiency increase in the entire load level range, whereas HPFP
LPFP bypassing allows for a 2% efficiency increase in the entire load level range, whereas HPFP
substitution allows for a further efficiency increase to the maximum value of 45% for load levels
substitution allows for a further efficiency increase to the maximum value of 45% for load levels above
above 75%. The highest available efficiency can be achieved for both HPFP and LPFP bypassing and
75%. The highest available efficiency can be achieved for both HPFP and LPFP bypassing and can
can reach 47% for load levels above 80%.
reach 47% for load levels above 80%.
The TES discharging process allows one to effectively increase the operational flexibility of the
The TES discharging process allows one to effectively increase the operational flexibility of the
power plant, as it is possible to operate at a lower load factor and to generate electricity with the same
power plant, as it is possible to operate at a lower load factor and to generate electricity with the same
efficiency as for the plant designed condition. In the case of LPFP bypassing, the load level could be
efficiency as for the plant designed condition. In the case of LPFP bypassing, the load level could be
reduced to 65%, and the unit efficiency is still maintained at the level of 41%. HPFP bypassing allows
reduced to 65%, and the unit efficiency is still maintained at the level of 41%. HPFP bypassing allows
for further load level reduction down to 47%. HPFP and LPFP bypassing allows for further plant load
for further load level reduction down to 47%. HPFP and LPFP bypassing allows for further plant load
reduction to 39%.
reduction to 39%.
There are potential limitations in LPFP bypassing, as some of the steam taps can be integrated
There are potential limitations in LPFP bypassing, as some of the steam taps can be integrated
into the condenser in a way that it is difficult to install any stop valves to cut the steam mass extraction
into the condenser in a way that it is difficult to install any stop valves to cut the steam mass extraction
 Energies 2017, 10, 205 16 of 19
Energies 2017, 10, 205 16 of 19

(it (it
is site-specific). Another
is site-specific). potential
Another potentiallimitation
limitation in in
thetheHPFP
HPFPbypassing
bypassingcase emerges
case emerges from very
from high
very high
feedwater
feedwater pressure.
pressure.The HPHP
The preheater
preheateris located
is located directly
directlydownstream
downstream of of
thethe
main
main feedwater
feedwaterpump,
pump,
and and thethe
feedwater
feedwater pressure is the
pressure highest
is the highestin in
thethe
entire
entiresteam-water
steam-waterloop
loop(192 bar).
(192 bar).It makes thethe
It makes TES
TES
HXHX design
designdifficult and
difficult potentially
and potentiallyexpensive,
expensive, as as
it requires thick
it requires walls
thick and
walls more
and material
more to be
material used.
to be used.

48

46

44

UNIT (%) 42

40

38
noTES
36 LP
HP
34 LP+HP
32
100 150 200 250 300 350
Load Level (MW)

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Load Level (%)

Figure 19. Unit efficiency ( ) in the TES discharging process where, no TES: no preheater
Figure 19. Unit efficiency (UN IT ) in the TES discharging process where, no TES: no preheater
substitution; LP: low pressure feedwater preheater bypass; HP: high pressure feedwater preheater
substitution; LP: low pressure feedwater preheater bypass; HP: high pressure feedwater preheater
bypass; HPHP
bypass; + LP: both
+ LP: LPLP
both andand
HPHP
feedwater preheaters
feedwater bypass.
preheaters bypass.

4.3. Boundary Conditions for TES Integration in the Plant Process Cycle
4.3. Boundary Conditions for TES Integration in the Plant Process Cycle
Superheated steam extraction for the TES charging process causes the steam and water
Superheated steam extraction for the TES charging process causes the steam and water parameters
parameters to change in the plant process loop. The boundary conditions for maximum heat
to change in the plant process loop. The boundary conditions for maximum heat extraction come from
extraction come from several factors. The first one comes from superheated steam temperature
several factors. The first one comes from superheated steam temperature deviations at the main steam
deviations at the main steam and the reheater line. This significantly reduces the maximum steam
and the reheater line. This significantly reduces the maximum steam mass flow for all TES charging
mass flow for all TES charging points located upstream of the reheater outlet. Another restriction
points located upstream of the reheater outlet. Another restriction comes from physical boundaries,
comes from physical boundaries, like the maximum pipe diameter delivering steam to the TES
like the maximum pipe diameter delivering steam to the TES system. Furthermore, parameters in the
system. Furthermore, parameters in the deaerator can change significantly, leading to feedwater
deaerator can change significantly, leading to feedwater deaeration process obstruction. All of these
deaeration process obstruction. All of these restrictions allow for drawing an allowable plant
restrictions allow for drawing an allowable plant operational range as a function of the load level for
operational range as a function of the load level for each considered TES point separately.
each considered TES point separately. Additionally, to get the highest possible enthalpy difference, the
Additionally, to get the highest possible enthalpy difference, the steam condensation process should
steam condensation process should occur in TES HX. Another important factor that has to be taken
occur in TES HX. Another important factor that has to be taken into consideration is the steam
into consideration is the steam temperature at the inlet and outlet of TES HX. These parameters will
temperature at the inlet and outlet of TES HX. These parameters will allow one to choose the most
allow one to choose the most suitable type of TES system (sensible, latent or chemical) and make
suitable type of TES system (sensible, latent or chemical) and make an initial design assessment. All
an initial design assessment. All of these factors should be taken into account in the TES charging
of these factors should be taken into account in the TES charging point selection. Steam and water
point selection. Steam and water parameters in the plant process loop can change significantly for
parameters in the plant process loop can change significantly for different assumptions and different
different assumptions and different steam/water conditions at the TES HX inlet and outlet points in
steam/water conditions at the TES HX inlet and outlet points in the charging process.
the charging process.
This feasibility study also defines the requirements for the TES discharging process, as all
This feasibility study also defines the requirements for the TES discharging process, as all
feedwater parameters are known as a function of the plant load level. It should help to design TES
feedwater parameters are known as a function of the plant load level. It should help to design
HXs accurately and assess the potential for feedwater preheater bypassing.
TES HXs accurately and assess the potential for feedwater preheater bypassing.

5. Conclusions
5. Conclusions
TheThefeasibility study
feasibility of of
study TES integration
TES into
integration a conventional
into a conventionalpower
power plant
plantcycle performed
cycle performed in in
this
this
article
articleconfirms
confirmsthat the power
that the powerplant
plantmodel
model is able
is able to accommodate
to accommodate the TES thesystem
TES system
for each for each
considered
considered location
location with withimpacts
different different
on impacts on the process
the steam-water steam-water
loop. process
Superheated loop.steam
Superheated
extractionsteam
for the
extraction
TES charging process causes steam/water parameters to change in the process cycle allowingcycle
for the TES charging process causes steam/water parameters to change in the process one to
allowing
draw a oneTESto draw a operational
charging TES charging operational
map. map. Theforbest
The best location thelocation
TES systemfor the TES ensure
should systemtheshould
lowest
ensure
powerthe lowest
penalty dPpower
and thepenalty
highestdPTESand the highest
charging power TES
PTES charging
at the samepower
time. PAnother
TES at the same time.
important factor
Another important factor is the steam temperature entering TES HX with the highest values reached
for charging points located closest to the boiler outlets. Plant pressure control system mode also has
Energies 2017, 10, 205 17 of 19

is the steam temperature entering TES HX with the highest values reached for charging points located
closest to the boiler outlets. Plant pressure control system mode also has a significant influence on the
results, as the SP mode offers a wider TES operational range and higher steam temperatures, especially
for lower load levels. This is very beneficial as the charging process should occur for the possible lowest
load levels. The best candidate point selection for the TES charging process is a multi-dimensional
task, and all previously-presented parameters have to be carefully taken into consideration.
Furthermore, the TES discharging process can be successfully applied to the steam-water loop.
Both feedwater preheaters could be bypassed, and additional steam mass flow through steam turbine
stages allows for increased power generation. The TES discharging process supports power plant
generation during the peak load demand, increases unit efficiency and improves overall power plant
flexibility. The TES concept also helps to maintain optimum thermodynamic efficiency, allowing
the power plant to work closer to its design condition, and increases the power plant component
lifetime. Retrofitting, as one of the major assumptions in this paper, is feasible as the steam turbine can
accommodate a 15% increase in power generation above the design level. Further work is required
to identify a suitable TES system to match the HTF parameters investigated in this work. The TES
technology choice will have significant influence on the feasibility of the system integration, as different
TES technologies have different constructive, structural and economic implications.

Acknowledgments: This work was funded by Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)
Research Grants (EP/K021095/1, EP/K002228/1). The authors wish to thank Paul Lambart from R-MC Power
Recovery Ltd. and Stuart Simpson from UNIPER Technologies Limited for their valuable technical comments
and advice.
Author Contributions: Jacek D. Wojcik conducted the literature search, performed the modelling and simulation
work, the results analysis and contributed to the writing of the paper. Jihong Wang as the project leader initiated
the idea of TES integration into the power plant cycle and contributed to the writing of the paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Martinez, S.R.; Hughes, W. Bringing Variable Renewable Energy Up to ScaleOptions for Grid Integration Using
Natural Gas and Energy Storage; Technical Report 006/15; ESMAP: Washington, DC, USA, 2015.
2. Akhmatov, V. Analysis of Dynamic Behavior of Electric Power Systems with Large Amount of Wind Power.
Ph.D. Thesis, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, 2003.
3. Glensk, B.; Rosen, C.; Schiavo, R.B.; Rabiee, S.; Madlener, R.; De Doncker, R. Economic and Technical Evaluation
of Enhancing the Flexibility of Conventional Power Plants; E.ON Energy Research Center Series; Volume 7,
Issue 3, Aachen University: Aachen, Germany, 2016.
4. Fraunhofer-Institute for Wind Energy and Energy System Technology (IWES). The European Power System
in 2030: Flexibility Challenges and Integration Benefits; An Analysis with a Focus on the Pentalateral Energy
Forum Region; Agora Energiewende: Berlin, Germany, 2015.
5. Richter, M.; Mllenbruck, F.; Obermller, F. Flexibilization of steam power plants as partners for renewable
energy systems. In Proceedings of the 2016 Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC), Genoa, Italy,
2024 June 2016.
6. Guo, S.; Wang, J.; Wei, J.L.; Zachrades, P. A new model-based approach for power plant Tube-ball mill
condition monitoring and fault detection. Energy Convers. Manag. 2014, 80, 1019. [CrossRef]
7. EPSRC Project. Flexible and Efficient Power Plant: Flex-E-Plant. Available online: http://www.gow.epsrc.ac.
uk/NGBOViewGrant.aspx?GrantRef=EP/K021095/1 (accessed on 5 December 2016).
8. Draganescu, M.; Guo, S.; Wojcik, J.; Wang, J.; Liu, X.J.; Hou, G.L.; Xue, Y.L.; Gao, Q.R. Generalized predictive
control for superheated steam temperature regulation in a supercritical coal-fired power plant. CSEE J. Power
Energy Syst. 2015, 1, 6977. [CrossRef]
9. Garvey, S.D.; Eames, P.C.; Wang, J.H.; Pimm, A.J.; Waterson, M.; MacKay, R.S.; Giulietti, M.; Flatley, L.C.;
Thomson, M.; Barton, J.; et al. On Generation-Integrated Energy Storage. Energy Policy 2015, 86, 544551.
[CrossRef]
Energies 2017, 10, 205 18 of 19

10. Li, G.; Zheng, X. Thermal energy storage system integration forms for a sustainable future. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 2016, 62, 736757. [CrossRef]
11. Aneke, W.; Wang, M. Energy storage technologies and real life applicationsA state of the art review.
Appl. Energy 2016, 179, 350377. [CrossRef]
12. Luo, X.; Wang, J.; Dooner, M.; Clarke, J. Overview of current development in electrical energy storage
technologies and the application potential in power system operation. Appl. Energy 2015, 137, 511536.
[CrossRef]
13. Edwards, J.; Bindra, H.; Sabharwall, P. Exergy analysis of thermal energy storage options with nuclear
power plants. Ann. Nuclear Energy 2016, 96, 104111. [CrossRef]
14. Richter, M.; Mllenbruck, F.; Starinski, A.; Oeljeklaus, G.; Grner, K. Flexibilization of coal-fired power plants
by dynamic simulation. In Proceedings of the 11th International Modelica Conference, Versailles, France,
2123 September 2015.
15. Mir, L.; Gasia, J.; Cabeza, L.F. Thermal energy storage (TES) for industrial waste heat (IWH) recovery:
A review. Appl. Energy 2016, 179, 284301. [CrossRef]
16. Zhu, Y.; Zhai, R.; Peng, H.; Yang, Y. Exergy destruction analysis of solar tower aided coal-fired power
generation system using exergy and advanced exergetic methods. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2016, 108, 339346.
[CrossRef]
17. Gil, A.; Medrano, M.; Martorell, I.; Lzaro, A.; Dolado, P.; Zalba, B.; Cabeza, L.F. State of the art on high
temperature thermal energy storage for power generation. Part 1Concepts, materials and modellization.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2010, 14, 3155. [CrossRef]
18. Medrano, M.; Gil, A.; Martorell, I.; Potau, X.; Cabeza, L.F. State of the art on high temperature thermal energy
storage for power generation. Part 2Case studies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2010, 14, 5672. [CrossRef]
19. Torras, S.; Prez-Segarra, C.; Rodrguez, I.; Rigola, J.; Oliva, A. Parametric study of two-tank TES systems for
CSP plants. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Concentrating Solar Power and Chemical
Energy Systems, SolarPACES 2014, Beijing, China, 1619 September 2014.
20. Sharma, A.; Tyagi, V.V.; Chen, C.R.; Buddhi, D. Review on thermal energy storage with phase change
materials and applications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2009, 13, 318345. [CrossRef]
21. Drost, M.K.; Antoniak, Z.I.; Brown, D.R.; Somasundaram, S. Thermal Energy Storage for Power Generation;
Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC06-76RLO1830; Pacific Northwest
Laboratory: Washington, DC, USA, 1989.
22. Drost, M.K.; Somasundaram, S.; Brown, D.R.; Antoniak, Z.I. Thermal energy storage for coal-fired power
generation. In Proceedings of the Conference: Fossil Fuel Plant Cycling Meeting, Washington, DC, USA,
46 December 1990.
23. Wang, Y.; Wang, J.; Luo, X.; Guo, S.; Lv, J.; Gao, Q. Dynamic modelling and simulation of IGCC process with
Texaco gasifier using different coal. Syst. Sci. Control Eng. 2015, 3, 198210. [CrossRef]
24. Yang, Z.W.; Wang, Z.; Wu, Y.X.; Wang, J.; Lu, J.F.; Li, Z.; Ni, W. Dynamic model for an oxygen-staged slagging
entrained flow gasifier. Energy Fuel 2011, 25, 36463656. [CrossRef]
25. Vandersickel, A.; Von Gamm, M.; Angerer, M.; Spliethoff, H. Highly Load-flexible Coal-Fired Power Plants
through the Integration of Molten Salt Storage. In Proceedings of the International Renewable Energy
Storage Conference (IRES2015), Dsseldorf, Germany, 911 March 2015.
26. Alstom. Peak PowerCost-Effective Thermal Energy Storage. Available online: http://www.alstomenergy.
gepower.com/Global/Power/Resources/Documents/Brochures/peak-power-water-based-energy-storage-
solution-for-steam-plants-epslanguage=en-GB.pdf (accessed on 5 December 2016).
27. Schuele, V.; Bierewirtz, F.; Renjewski, D.; Clement, O. Hybrid or FlexibleIntegrated Approach
for Renewables Integration. Power Plant Symposium 2012, Republic of Serbia. Available online:
http://www.e2012.drustvo-termicara.com/presentations/download/31 (accessed on 5 December 2016).
28. Mohamed, O.; Wang, J.; Guo, S.; Wei, J.L.; Al-Duri, B.; Lv, J.; Gao, Q. Mathematical Modelling for Coal
Fired Supercritical Power Plants and Model Parameter Identification Using Genetic Algorithms. In Electrical
Engineering and Applied Computing; Springer: Heidelberg, Germany, 2011.
29. Mohamed, O.I.; Wang, J.; Al-Duri, B.; Lu, J.F.; Gao, Q.R.; Xue, Y.L. Study of a multivariable coordinate control
for a supercritical power plant process. Int. J. Energy Eng. 2012, 2, 210217. [CrossRef]
30. Liu, X.J.; Kong, X.B.; Hou, G.L.; Wang, J. Modelling of a 1000 MW power plant ultra super-critical boiler
system using Fuzzy-Neural network methods. Energy Convers. Manag. 2013, 65, 518527. [CrossRef]
Energies 2017, 10, 205 19 of 19

31. Oko, E.; Wang, M. Dynamic modelling, validation and analysis of coal-fired subcritical power plant. Fuel
2014, 135, 292300. [CrossRef]
32. TRAX LLC. ProTRAX Simulation System. Analysists Instruction Manual; TRAX LLC: Lynchburg, VA, USA, 2016.
33. Cabeza, L.F. Advances in Thermal Energy Storage Systems. Methods and Applications; Elsevier Science & Technology:
Cambridge, UK, 2014.
34. IEA-ETSAP and IRENA. Thermal Energy StorageTechnology Brief. January 2013. Available online:
https://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/IRENA-ETSAP%20Tech%20Brief%20E17%
20Thermal%20Energy%20Storage.pdf (accessed on 5 December 2016).
35. UNIPER Technologies Limited. (Ratcliffe Power Station, Nottingham, UK). Personal communication,
February 2016.
36. Rayaprolu, K. Boilers for Power and Process; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2009.

2017 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).