Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Evaluation of small-scale liquefied natural gas (SSLNG) processes: advanced exergoeconomic analysis

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Chemical Papers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the principal challenges facing today’s society is the necessity to discover more environmentally friendly, futureproof energy sources. In this scope, natural gas, ensued by liquefied natural gas, is an ever more important cornerstone on the path towards a low-carbon economy. The present study evaluates the processes employed for small-scale liquefied natural gas (SSLNG) plants. Three processes, namely, dual expansion, pre-cooled PRICO, and nitrogen expansion, and thereof, conventional and advanced exergoeconomic analyses are applied to appraise the performance of the processes. In the energy analysis, three parameters were assessed, namely, specific power consumption, the figure of merit, and the coefficient of performance. The precooled PRICO and the nitrogen expansion processes were the performant in the first two, and the third, respectively. The exergy efficiency in the three processes was 74%, 76%, and 75%, respectively. In all processes, the exogenous exergy destruction share was higher than endogenous, meaning that the internal irreversibility in other equipment substantially affects the exergy destruction in the equipment under analysis. The pre-cooled PRICO process had the highest exergoeconomic factor followed by the dual expansion process, both near 0.3. The highest avoidable endogenous exergy destruction costs in all processes were pertinent to the air coolers, gauged at 862.33, 308.23, and 71.67 $/h, respectively. Also, the highest avoidable endogenous investment cost rates were associated with C1, C2, and T1 equipment measured at 68.958, 49.42, and 3.38 $/h, respectively. The modified exergy efficiency was higher than the conventional exergy efficiency in all components of the three processes.

Graphical abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CL:

Cooler

C:

Compressor

E:

Heat exchanger

V:

Expansion valve

T:

Turboexpander

D:

Drum

P:

Pump

NG:

Natural gas

LNG:

Liquefied natural gas

SMR:

Single mixed refrigerant

DMR:

Dual mixed refrigerant

PFHE:

Plate-fin heat exchanger

SWHE:

Spiral wound heat exchanger

FoM:

Figure of merit

CoP:

Coefficient of performance

SPC:

Specific power consumption

mtpa:

Mega ton per annum

PRICO:

Poly refrigerant integral cycle operation

SPECO:

Specific exergy costing

PR:

Peng–Robinson

PRSV:

Peng–Robinson–Stryjek–Vera

\(I\) :

Irreversibility (kW)

\(e\) :

Specific stream exergy

\(E\) :

Exergy (kW)

\(\dot{E}\) :

Stream exergy (kW)

\(S\) :

Entropy (kJ/kgC)

\(\dot{m}\) :

Flow rate (kg/s)

\(Q\) :

Heat (kW)

\(W\) :

Work (kW)

\(m\) :

Number of cold streams

\(n\) :

Number of warm streams

\(\mathrm{BL}\) :

Book life (factory)

\(c\) :

Unit exergy cost rate ($/kJ)

\(C\) :

Exergy cost rate

\(f\) :

Exergoeconomic factor

\(\mathrm{FC}\) :

Fuel cost ($/s)

\(j\) :

The jth year of operation

\(\mathrm{OMC}\) :

Operation & maintenance cost ($)

\(\mathrm{PEC}\) :

Purchase equipment cost ($)

\(\mathrm{CRF}\) :

Capital recovery factor

\(r\) :

Relative cost difference

\(\mathrm{ROI}\) :

Return of investment

\({\dot{Z}}_{k}\) :

Capital cost flow rate

\(y\) :

Exergy destruction ratio

\(T\) :

Temperature

\(P\) :

Pressure

\({f}_{k}\) :

Exergoeconomic factor

\(i\) :

Input

\(i\) :

Component

\(o\) :

Output

\(sh\) :

Shaft

\(a\) :

Air

\(L\) :

Loss

\(\mathrm{tot}\) :

Total

\(c\) :

Cold

\(h\) :

Hot

\(k\) :

kth equipment

\(D\) :

Destruction

\(P\) :

Product

\(F\) :

Fuel

\(\mathrm{others}\) :

Other equipment

\(\Delta P\) :

Pressure component

\(\Delta T\) :

Thermal component

\(\mathrm{AV}\) :

Avoidable

\(\mathrm{UN}\) :

Unavoidable

\(\mathrm{EN}\) :

Endogenous

\(\mathrm{EX}\) :

Exogenous

ε :

Exergy efficiency

\({\varepsilon }_{\mathrm{modified}}\) :

Modified exergy efficiency

\(\Delta\) :

Gradient

Τ:

Annual hour operation

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

MD was involved in the formal analysis and investigation, methodology, data curation, software, validation, resources, and writing—original draft; HS contributed to the conceptualization, supervision, review and editing; SMH helped in the conceptualization, supervision, review and editing; MM was involved in the conceptualization, supervision, review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehdi Mehrpooya.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Delpisheh, M., Saffari, H., Hosseinalipour, S.M. et al. Evaluation of small-scale liquefied natural gas (SSLNG) processes: advanced exergoeconomic analysis. Chem. Pap. 76, 7373–7394 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11696-022-02408-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11696-022-02408-5

Keywords

Navigation