%I Elsevier Ltd
%A F. Basrawi
%A T.K. Ibrahim
%A K. Habib
%A T. Yamada
%A D.M.N. Daing Idris
%V 124
%T Techno-economic performance of biogas-fueled micro gas turbine cogeneration systems in sewage treatment plants: Effect of prime mover generation capacity
%P 238-248
%K Biogas; Cogeneration plants; Gas plants; Gas turbines; Investments; Life cycle; River pollution, Cogeneration systems; Economic performance; Life cycle cost analysis; Micro gas turbine co-generation systems; Micro gas turbines; Optimum configurations; Power generation capacities; Sizing, Sewage treatment plants, biofuel; biogas; cogeneration; economic analysis; energy efficiency; life cycle analysis; performance assessment; power generation; sewage treatment; size; technological change; turbine; wastewater treatment plant
%X The optimum size of Micro Gas Turbine Cogeneration Systems (MGT-CGSs) in a Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) in terms of its economic performance was investigated. A STP operating in a cold region was adopted as a model and was scaled down to obtain different size ratios. It was also assumed to operate in different regions to obtain different heat demand patterns. MGT-CGSs with power output capacity of 30, 65 and 200 kW were simulated to utilize biogas produced by the STP. Instead of multiple units of the same size of MGT-CGSs, combination of different sizes of MGT-CGSs was also investigated. Life Cycle Cost Analysis was carried out to compare the economic performance of MGT-CGSs. It was found that optimum combination of three types of MGTs (MGT-Combined) stated above had the highest power generated and efficiency. However, MGT-Combined also had larger power generation capacity and low usage ratio, thus resulting in higher capital investment. Although all configurations of MGT-CGSs can generate Net Present Value, optimum configuration was obtained when the rated fuel input of MGT-CGS is approximately equal to the biogas production of the STP. However, when heat demand fluctuates throughout the year smaller size of MGT is preferred. © 2017 Elsevier Ltd
%R 10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.066
%D 2017
%J Energy
%L scholars9362
%O cited By 36