COMBINED EXERGY AND PINCH ANALYSIS FOR OPTIMAL ENERGY

CONVERSION TECHNOLOGIES INTEGRATION

Francois Marechal

, Daniel Favrat
Laboratory for Industrial Energy Systems, Ecole Polytechnique F ed erale de Lausanne
CH-1015 Lausanne
ABSTRACT
Exergy concept combined with pinch based approach are used for studying the optimal integration
of energy conversion systems. The analysis rst considers the representation of the hot and cold
composite curves of the process and denes the energy and the exergy requirements. The basic as-
sumption of the Tmin required for the pinch analysis is represented as an exergy loss that increases
the exergy requirement of the process. The exergy composite curves put the focus on the opportuni-
ties for heat pumping in the process. The optimal integration of the utility system is then realised by
extracting the energy conversion system conguration from a superstructure using a Mixed Integer
Linear Programming formulation in which the heat cascade denition and the combined heat and
power production balances are introduced as constraints and where the exergy losses minimisation
is used as an objective function. The balanced exergy composite curves are used to visualise the
exergy losses in the heat exchanges and the analysis of the results is made using a denition of the
exergy efciency that accounts for the pinch point location, the process exergy and the exported
energy services.
Keywords: process integration, energy conversion integration, exergy analysis, second law analysis
NOMENCLATURE
CHP Combined heat and power
T
min
Minimum heat recovery approach temperature
e
f uel
specic exergy of the fuel (kJ/kg)
f
f uel
fuel owrate (kg/s)
E
cool
exergy available below the pinch point (kW)
E
f rg
exergy required for the refrigeration(kW)
E
heat
exergy required above the pinch point (kW)
E
res
exergy resource consumed by the process(kW)
GT Gas turbine
HP Heat pump system
LHV Lower Heating Value (kJ/kg)
MER Minimum Energy Requirement
MILP Mixed Integer Linear Programming
W Electrical power (kW)
INTRODUCTION
When considering the energy efciency of a pro-
cess, pinch based approaches [1] target the identi-
cation of the possible energy recovery by heat ex-
change and dene this way the minimum energy
requirement (MER) of a process. The integration

Corresponding author: Phone: +41 21693 3516 Fax: +41

21693 3502 E-mail: francois.marechal@ep.ch
of the energy conversion technologies concerns the
way the minimum energy requirement will be satis-
ed by converting energy resources into useful en-
ergy for the process, considering the combined heat
and power production, the integration of steam net-
works, heat pumps and refrigeration systems. It rep-
resents a major step in a process integration study
because it denes the cost of the energy require-
ment together with the complete list of streams to
be considered in the heat exchanger network design.
It is usually solved by applying optimisation tech-
niques based on mixed integer linear programming
techniques [2, 3] that aim at selecting the most ap-
propriate technology and to determine the optimal
owrates in the energy conversion technologies.
By allowing the comparison of different forms of
energy, exergy is a rigourous way of analysing en-
ergy conversion systems. In the context of pro-
cess integration analysis, the exergy concept is com-
bined with the pinch analysis for reducing the en-
ergy requirement of the process [4, 5], optimising
the energy conversion system integration and realis-
ing combined heat and power production. The ex-
ergy composite curve concept has been introduced
by Dhole [6] for this purpose. The exergy deliv-
ered (E) by a stream delivering heat (Q) from T
in
to T
out
is computed by : E = Q(1
T
a
T
lm
) where T
lm
is the logarithmic mean of temperatures computed
by T
lm
=
T
in
T
out
ln(
T
in
T
out
)
and T
a
is the ambient temperature,
all temperatures being expressed in K. When con-
sidering the hot composite curve, the heat delivered
is represented by the temperature-enthalpy diagram,
the exergy delivered is computed by replacing the
temperature axis by the Carnot efciency (1
T
a
T
).
It corresponds then to the area between the com-
posite curve and the enthalpy axis (gure 1, right).
The same procedure is followed for the cold streams
to dene the exergy required by the cold streams.
Favrat and Staine [4] have added to this represen-
tation, the exergy losses related to the compression
work (as a function of the pressure drop) and the
grey exergy. The grey exergy is the exergy required
to construct the heat exchangers. It includes the
raw materials exergy content as well as the exergy
consumed in the construction process. This con-
cept is then used to determine the optimal value of
the T
min
. The exergy analysis has been extended
to account for the chemical reactions or the physi-
cal separations of the process operations [7, 5]. The
graphical representation in [7] uses
HT
a
S
H
as Y-
axis that is an extension of the Carnot factor (1
T
a
T
).
Marechal et al. in [8] use the concept of exergy to
target the combined heat and power production by
integrating rectangles in the Grand composite curve.
The area of the rectangles is proportional to the me-
chanical power production, the height referring to
the Carnot efciency and the width being propor-
tional to the heat load.
The goal of this paper is to discuss the application of
exergy concepts for helping in the design of optimal
energy conversion systems for a given process.
MINIMUM ENERGY REQUIREMENT
Based on the denition of a minimum approach tem-
perature difference (T
min
), composite curves are
used to compute the maximum energy recovery be-
tween the hot and the cold streams of a process. The
temperature is a topological indicator in the sense
that it allows to pinpoint the process operations con-
cerned with the pinch points or the pseudo pinch
points. Four zones are of importance in the hot and
(OT
5TILITY
#OLD
5TILITY
2EFRIGERATION
(EATRECOVERY
%XERGYDELIVERED
%XERGYREQUIRED
(OT
5TILITY
#OLD
5TILITY
2EFRIGERATION
(EAT
RECOVERY
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
T
(
K
)






Q(kW)
Hot and cold composite curves
hot composite
hot composite cor.
cold composite cor.
cold composite
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
(
1
-
T
0
/
T
)
Q(kW)
Carnot composite curves
hot composite
hot composite cor.
cold composite cor.
cold composite
Figure 1: Exergy composite curves dening the pro-
cess requirements
cold composite curves (gure 1, left). On the right,
we visualise the hot utility requirement. The heat re-
covery zone represents the possible heat recovery by
exchange between hot and cold streams of the pro-
cess. The remaining heat of the hot stream has to be
evacuated by cold utility. The left part of the graph
denes therefore the cold utility requirement, the
later being divided between cooling requirements
above the ambient temperature and the refrigeration
requirements below the ambient temperature. When
using the Carnot efciency ((1
T
a
T
)) as the Y-axis,
the area between the Xzero-axis and the cold com-
posite curve (gure 1,right) represents the exergy re-
quired to heat up the process cold streams while the
area below the hot composite and the zero axis rep-
resents the exergy delivered by the hot streams of
the process. The difference between the two areas
represent the net exergy balance available from the
process streams through heat exchange. From this
available exergy, a rst exergy loss will be associ-
ated to the passage in the corrected temperatures do-
main that is obtained by shifting vertically the hot
streams downwards and the cold streams upwards
from a value of T
min
/2. More rigourously, the ex-
ergy loss is computed considering the contribution
T
min
/2
j
of each stream j that is proportional to its
heat lm transfer coefcient.
The Grand composite curve (gure 2, left) describes
as a function of the temperature, the way energy has
to be supplied to or removed from the system. The
process Grand composite curve is divided into three
zones : above the process pinch point, the system is
+
+
-
-
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
(
1
-
T
0
/
T
)
Q(kW)
Carnot Grand composite curve
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
T
(
K
)






Exergy (kW, T0 : 298.1K)
Exergy requirement as a function of the temperature
Pefrigeration
+l52 kw
Cold utility
7l45 kw
Cold utility
-l269 kw
Pefrigeration
l709 kw
Heat pumping
Lxergy balance : - 550 kw
Hot utility
+567 kw
Hot utility
6854 kw
Figure 2: Exergy Grand composite curves of the pro-
cess requirements
a heat sink to be supplied by a hot utility. Below the
process pinch point and above the ambient tempera-
ture, the process is a heat source. Below the ambient
temperature, the process requires refrigeration. The
feasibility rule of the utility integration is that the
Grand composite curve of the utility system should
envelop the process Grand composite curve.
When considering the exergy Grand composite
curve (gure 2,left), the process exergy requirement
is dened by a difference of areas. In this diagram, it
should be noted the special role of the self-sufcient
pockets (right part of the graph), the area of which
represents the possible mechanical power recovery
by combined heat and power production. The com-
posite curve on gure 2,right represents the cumu-
lated exergy required by the process as a function
of the temperature. The exergy balance shows an
overall exergy availability. However, from the def-
inition of the pinch point, it is necessary to divide
the system into three sub-systems, considering the
exergy balance for each of the systems. Compar-
ing the energy requirement and the exergy require-
ment allows to set efciency target for the energy
conversion system. This exergy may be recovered
partly by properly integrating combined heat and
power devices (Rankine cycles), while exergy trans-
fer between sub-systems will only be possible by
heat pumping.
INTEGRATION OF ENERGY CONVERSION
SYSTEMS
The integration of the energy conversion system
aims at dening the complete list of streams to be
considered including the hot and cold streams of
the utility sub-system, prior any heat exchanger net-
work design. The utility streams are dened so that
they will minimise the cost of the energy require-
ment and/or make the best use of the process ex-
ergy. The calculation of the best system will start
with the denition of a utility system superstruc-
ture that will include the possible conversion tech-
nologies that are envisaged. The analysis of the
grand composite curve, applying the rules for op-
timal placement of Townsend et al. [9] and other
rules for the optimal CHP integration, help in den-
ing the list of energy conversion technologies able to
supply the energy requirement of the process with
a maximum of efciency. In order to solve prob-
lems where several utilities are considered, MILP
formulations have been proposed [2, 10]. The math-
ematical formulation (eq. 1) of the targeting prob-
lem exploits the concept of Effect Modelling and
Optimisation (EMO) [3, 11]. It is used to select
the equipments in the superstructure and determine
their optimal operating owrates in the integrated
system. This approach assumes that the temperature
and pressure levels of the energy conversion tech-
nologies are known. Two variables are associated
with any utility technology w : the integer variables
y
w
represents the presence of the technology w in
the optimal conguration and f
w
its level of utili-
sation ( f min
w
f
w
f max
w
). The objective func-
tion is the total cost including the operating costs
and the annualised investment cost, both expressed
in e/year. Other objective functions like minimum
operating cost or minimum of emissions may also be
used. The annualising factor is computed knowing
the interest rate i and the expected life time of the
investment n
years
.
min
R
r
,y
w
, f
w
n
w

w=1
(C2
w
f
w
) +Cel
i
Wel
i
Cel
s
Wel
s
) t
+
n
w

w=1
(C1
w
y
w
)
+
i(1+i)
n
years
(1+i)
n
years
1
n
w

w=1
(ICF
w
y
w
+ICP
w
f
w
) (1)
subject to
Heat balance of the temperature intervals
n
w

w=1
f
w
q
w,r
+
n

i=1
Q
i,r
+R
r+1
R
r
= 0
r = 1, ..., n
r
(2)
Electricity consumption:
n
w

w=1
f
w
w
w
+Wel
i
Wc 0 (3)
Electricity exportation
n
w

w=1
f
w
w
w
+Wel
i
Wel
s
Wc = 0 (4)
Existence of technology w
f min
w
y
w
f
w
f max
w
y
w
w=1,...,n
w
y
w
{0,1}
(5)
Thermodynamic feasibility of the heat recovery and util-
ity systems
Wel 0,Wel
s
0 (6)
R
1
= 0, R
n
r+1
= 0, R
r
0 r = 1, ..., n
r+1
(7)
R
r
[kW] (r=1,n
r
+1) is the heat cascaded from the
temperature interval r to the lower temperature in-
tervals, n is the number of process streams, Q
ir
[kW]
is the heat load of the process stream i in the tem-
perature interval r (Q
ir
> 0 for hot streams), Wel
s
and Wel
i
are respectively the net production and net
import of electricity [kW]; C1
w
and C2
w
are respec-
tively the xed and the proportional cost of using
the technology w; ICF
w
and ICP
w
are respectively
the xed and the proportional cost related to the in-
vestment of using technology w. Although the for-
mulation is linear, it allows this way to account for
size effect in the investment; n
w
is the number of
technologies proposed in the utility system super-
structure; q
wr
is the heat load of the technology w
in the temperature interval r for a given reference
owrate, (q
wr
> 0 for a hot stream) ;w
w
is the me-
chanical power produced by the reference owrate
of technology w; (w
w
> 0 for a mechanical power
producer); Cel
s
and Cel
i
are respectively the selling
price and the import price of electricity [e/kW]; t is
the total annual operation time [s/year] ; Wc [kW] is
the overall mechanical power needs of the process;
(Wc < 0 if the overall balance corresponds to a me-
chanical power production).
This method may be applied to any kind of energy
conversion technologies. It is based on the assump-
tion that the operating conditions have been dened
for each of the equipment concerned and that only
the owrates are unknown. This is a limiting as-
sumption but it allows to solve most of the problems
of energy conversion integration mainly because non
linearities may usually be solved by discretising the
search space. The method has been further adapted
to compute the optimal integration of steam net-
works [12], to incorporate restricted matches con-
straints [13], to integrate refrigeration cycles [14]
and Organic Rankine Cycles[15] as well as heat
pumps [16].
The grand composite curve resulting from the opti-
misation is the balanced composite curves. An ex-
ample of such curves is given on gure 3, left. This
representation is characterised by a number of pinch
points, one being the process pinch point, the oth-
ers corresponding to the maximum use of the cheap-
est utilities to satisfy the process requirement. In
the Carnot representation (gure 3, right) the area
between the curve and the Y-axis represents the ex-
ergy losses in the system heat transfer. Two curves
are presented, the external one represents the over-
all exergy losses, while the internal one that feature
pinch points represents the one computed with the
corrected temperatures. The area between the two
curves represents therefore the exergy losses relat-
ing to the assumptions of the T
min
/2
j
contributions
of the streams. Analysing the inner curve allows to
identify further improvement for the energy conver-
sion by modifying for example the operating condi-
tions (pressures or temperatures) in the energy con-
version technologies. Integrated composite curves
[17] may be used to analyse the integration of sub-
systems in the process. The gure 4 shows for exam-
ple the integration of the steam network in the sys-
tem under study. The energy balance of the hot and
cold streams of the steam network is the net mechan-
ical power production. When appropriately placed,
it corresponds to a supplement of energy to be sup-
plied to the system. The fact that it appears on the
left of the temperature axis proves that the steamnet-
work characteristics are appropriate for the optimal
production of mechanical power. In the Carnot fac-
tor ordinate, the area between the two curves gives
an indication of the quality of the exergy use in the
corresponding sub-system.
One heuristic rule resulting from the exergy analysis
is to try to reduce to a minimum the area between
the hot and cold composite curves of the integrated
systems including the energy conversion system.
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000
T
(
K
)






Q(kW)
Grand composite curve
Grand composite
Grand composite cor.
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000
(
1
-
T
0
/
T
)
Q(kW)
Carnot Grand composite
Grand composite
Grand composite cor.
Figure 3: Balanced Grand composite curves of the
integrated system
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
-1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
T
(
K
)





Q(kW)
Integrated composite curves of the steam network
Others
(STMNET)
Mech. power
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
-1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
1
-
T
0
/
T
Q(kW)
Carnot integrated composite curves of the steam network
Others
(STMNET)
Mech. power
Figure 4: Integrated composite curves of the steam
network
Using the exergy losses as an objective func-
tion
Due to the linear nature of the problem, the use of
the energy cost as an objective function may reveals
some difculties [16]. When the cost of fuel and
electricity is such that the electrical efciency of
a cogeneration unit is attractive without the use of
heat (i.e. when the electrical efciency of the unit

el
=
W
el
LHV
f uel
is greater than
C
LHV
(e/kJ)
C
el
(e/kJ
e
)) there is an
economical interest to produce electricity even with-
out cogeneration). In this case, the linear program-
ming procedure leads to a situation where the cogen-
eration unit is used at its maximum. This situation
usually does not occur when the investment cost are
properly considered or when the cost of the differ-
ent forms of energy are coherent with respect to the
electrical efciency. Nevertheless, the relative price
of the different forms of energy will inuence the
technology selection and their level of usage in the
integrated solution. When the target is the maximi-
sation of the system efciency, alternative formula-
tions that take into account the value of energy in
the objective functions have to be considered. The
minimisation of the exergy losses (eq. 8) is an alter-
native way of formulating the objective function.
Min
R
k
,y
w
, f
w
n
w

w=1
( f
w
(Ex
w

n
k

k=1
ex
wk
+w
w
)) (8)
In this relation, Ex
w
is the exergy consumed to
produce the hot and cold streams and the electricity
of the conversion unit w, ex
wk
is the heat-exergy
supplied by the ns
w
hot and cold streams of the con-
version unit w in the temperature interval k. ex
wk
is
given by (9).
ex
wk
=
ns
w

s=1
q
sk
(1
T
a
ln(
T
k+1
+T
min
/2
s
T
k
+T
min
/2
s
)
T
k+1
T
k
) (9)
Using this formulation, it is possible to dene the
set of energy conversion technologies that minimises
the exergy losses of the system. It is even possible
to introduce the aspects related to the investment by
adding the grey exergy into the Ex
w
term.
EXAMPLE
Let us consider the system requirements dened on
table 1. These result from the hot and cold compos-
ite curves of gure 1 and the Grand composite curve
of gure 2. For the calculations, we assumed that all
the possible process improvements were already im-
plemented before analysing the energy conversion
technologies integration.
Table 1: Minimum energy and exergy requirements
of the process
Energy Exergy
Heating (kW) +6854 +567
Cooling (kW) -6948 - 1269
Refrigeration (kW) +1709 + 157
Several optional energy conversion system cong-
urations are studied, the results are summarized in
table 5 where the energy consumption of the energy
conversion sub-systems are presented. The simplest
solution (option 1) is to integrate a boiler using nat-
ural gas (with a LHV of 44495 kJ/kg) and to cool
the process with cooling water. The refrigeration
needs will be supplied with a refrigeration cycle us-
ing ammonia (R717). The operating conditions of
the refrigeration cycle (table 2) have been obtained
by simulation considering the temperature levels in
the composite curve and the T
min
to be reached
in the heat exchangers. The integrated composite
curves presenting the results of the optimisation are
presented on gure 5 (left). The refrigeration cy-
cle consumption is of 314 kW corresponding to an
exergy efciency of 50 %. It should be noted that
the energy consumption is higher than the MER due
to the losses at the boiler stack (398 K). The solu-
tion accounts for the possibility of air preheating to
valorise the energy excess available in the process.
The heat load of air preheating is of 131 kW. In or-
der to valorise the exergy potential, a steam network
has been integrated (Option 2). The steam network
headers are given on table 3, the isentropic efciency
of the turbines are assumed to be of 70 %.
Table 2: Refrigeration cycle characteristics
Refrigerant R717 Ammonia
Reference owrate 0.1 kmol/s
Mechanical power 394 kW
P T
in
T
out
Q Tmin/2
(bar) (K) (K) kW (K)
Hot str. 12 340 304 2274 2
Cold str. 3 264 264 1880 2
Applying the rules of the appropriate placement of
heat pumping devices, 3 heat pumping cycles have
been proposed and simulated (table 4).
The high values of the COP are explained by the
very small temperature raise to be obtained from the
heat pump when considering small T
min
/2 values
for the heat exchangers. Using the optimisation tool,
the optimal owrates in the three cycles have been
computed together with the new value of the fuel in
the boiler house (Option 4). In the example consid-
ered, this leads to a situation where the whole heat
requirement may be provided by the heat pumps.
When the steam network is considered together with
the heat pumps (Option 5), the results are slightly
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
-2000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
1
-
T
0
/
T





Q(kW)
Option 1 : Carnot composite curves
Process composite curve
Utility composite curve
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
-2000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
1
-
T
0
/
T





Q(kW)
Option 5 : Carnot composite curves
Process composite curve
Utility composite curve
Figure 5: Carnot integrated composite curves of the
energy conversion system for options 1 (left) and 5
(right)
different since in this case, an additional amount of
energy is required by the system to balance the me-
chanical power produced by expansion in the steam
network. The solution of heat pumping is then com-
pared with a combined heat power production using
a gas turbine (Option 3). In this situation, the two
options are conicting.
Energy and Exergy efciency
The summary of the energy conversion system inte-
gration is given on table 6. It is shown that a MER
of 6854 kW for the heating requirement and of 1709
kW for the refrigeration requirement is nally sup-
plied with an equivalent 893 kW of fuel when con-
sidering the possibility of heat pumping and when
converting the exergy content of the process streams.
Compared to the boiler house solution, the new situ-
Table 3: Steam cycle characteristics
Header P T Comment
(bar) (K)
HP2 92 793 superheated
HP1 39 707 superheated
HPU 32 510 condensation
MPU 7.66 442 condensation
LPU 4.28 419 condensation
LPU2 2.59 402 condensation
LPU3 1.29 380 condensation
DEA 1.15 377 deaeration
Table 4: Characteristics of the heat pump system,
based on R123 as working uid
P
low
T
low
P
high
T
high
COP kWe
(bar) (K) (bar) (K) -
Cycle 3 5 354 7.5 371 15 130
Cycle 2 6 361 10 384 12 323
Cycle 0 6 361 7.5 371 28 34
Table 5: Results of the energy conversion system
integration for different options
Opt Fuel GT CHP Cooling HP
kW
LHV
kWe kWe kW kWe
1 7071 - - 8979 -
2 10086 2957 9006 -
3 16961 5427 2262 9160 -
4 - - - 2800 485
5 666 - 738 2713 496
ation corresponds to a reduction by a factor 8 of the
fuel consumption. These data have been computed
by considering a fuel equivalence of 55% for the
electricity production (column Total 1). The order of
the solutions will be different if we consider the Eu-
ropean mix (38.7%) for the fuel equivalence (Table
6, column Total 2). In order not to rely on the de-
nition of a fuel equivalence, an exergy efciency
ec
of the energy conversion system will be computed
considering the exergy of the process. In this deni-
tion, we consider that the energy services delivered,
i.e. the process exergy requirement (E
heat
+E
f rg
)
and the export of electricity (Wel
s
), will be satised
with an efciency of
ec
leading to an exergy con-
sumption of
E
heat
+E
f rg
+Wel
s

ec
, while the exergy excess
(E
cool
) will be converted with an efciency of
ec
.
The balance (eq. 10) is equal to the energy resources
(E
res
= f
f uel
e
f uel
+Wel
i
) converted in the energy
conversion system. Solving (10) gives the denition
of the exergy efciency of the system (eq. 11). In
Table 6, it can be seen that the options that do not
convert the exergy excess (E
cool
) have smaller ex-
ergy efciencies. The best solutions are the one that
realise heat pumping that pump the excess of ex-
ergy from below to above the pinch point.
E
res
=
E
heat
+E
f rg
+Wel
s

ec
E
cool

ec
(10)

ec
=
E
res

(E
res
)
2
+4E
cool
(E
f rg
+E
heat
+Wel
s
)
2E
cool
(11)
CONCLUSIONS
The application of the exergy concept combined
with pinch based methods for analysing the optimal
integration of energy conversion system of industrial
processes has been studied. The exergy compos-
ite curves is used to compute the minimum exergy
requirement of the process, considering the pinch
point location. The exergy requirement is obtained
by rst considering an exergy loss resulting from
the denition of the T
min
. The remaining exergy
requirement is divided into three contributions: the
exergy required above the pinch point, the exergy
produced as energy excess between the pinch point
and the ambient temperature and the exergy required
for refrigeration. Starting with an energy conversion
system superstructure, a linear programming formu-
lation is used to extract the optimal energy conver-
sion system conguration that supplies the process
energy requirement and that integrates the combined
heat and power production and the heat cascade. In
this formulation, it is possible to use either the en-
ergy cost or the exergy losses as an objective func-
tion. The exergy balanced composite curves and the
exergy integrated curves are used to visualise the ex-
ergy losses in the system. The exergy efciency of
the conversion system is dened by comparing the
exergy resource consumption with the exergy export
and the process exergy, making the distinction be-
tween the exergy available and the exergy required.
This efciency denition sets the focus on the ex-
Table 6: Energy and exergy efciency of the differ-
ent options
Opt Fuel Net El. Total 1 Total 2
ec
kW
LHV
kWe kW
LHV
kW
LHV
%
1 7071.0 371.0 7745.5 8030 9.6
2 10086.0 -2481.0 5575.1 3675 30.6
3 16961.0 -7195.0 3879.2 -1630 45.16
4 0.0 832.0 1512.7 2149 49.6
5 666.0 125.0 893.3 989 50.5
ergy available in the process, promoting solutions
that integrate heat pumps, thereby converting the ex-
ergy excess into useful energy.
REFERENCES
[1] Boland P., Hewitt G.F., Thomas B.E.A.,
Guy A.R., Marsland R.H., Linnhoff B.,
Townsend D.W. A user guide on process in-
tegration for the efcient use of energy. The
Institution of Chemical Engineers, 1982.
[2] Grossmann I.E., Papoulias S.A. A struc-
tural optimization approach in process synthe-
sis - i. utility systems. Comp. Chem. Engng.,
7(6):695706, 1983.
[3] B. Kalitventzeff, Marechal F. Heat and power
integration : a milp approach for optimal
integration of utility systems. proceedings
COPE91 (Barcelona), 1991.
[4] Favrat D., Staine F. Energy integration of
industrial processes based on the pinch anal-
ysis method extended to include exergy fac-
tors. Applied Thermal Engineering, 16:497
507, 1996.
[5] Lavric V., Baetens D., Plesu V., De Ruyck, J.
Broadening the capabilities of pinch analysis
through virtual heat exchanger networks. En-
ergy Conversion and Management, 44:2321-
2329,2003.
[6] Linnhoff B., Dhole V.R. Total site targets
for fuel, co-generation emissions, and cooling.
Comp. Chem Engng,17:s101-s109, 1992.
[7] Ohba T., Ishida M. A new approach to energy-
utilization diagrams for evaluation of energy of
chemical systems. In ECOS 04 Proceedings,
845852., 2004.
[8] Kalitventzeff B., Marechal F. Identication
of the optimal pressure levels in steam net-
works using integrated combined heat and
power method. Chemical Engineering Science,
52(17):29772989, 1997.
[9] Linnhoff B., Townsend D.W. Heat and power
networks in process design. part 1: Criteria for
placement of heat engines and heat pumps in
process networks. AIChE Journal, 29(5):742
748, 1983.
[10] Mason D., Linnhoff B., Cerda J., Wester-
berg A.W. Minimum utility usage in heat
exchanger network synthesis. a transporta-
tion problem. Chemical Engineering Science,
38(3):378387, 1983.
[11] Kalitventzeff B., Marechal F. Process integra-
tion : Selection of the optimal utility system.
Comp. Chem. Engng., 22:S149S156, 1998.
[12] Kalitventzeff B., Marechal F. Targeting the op-
timal integration of steam networks,. Comp.
Chem. Engng., 23:s133s136, 1999.
[13] Kalitventzeff B., Marechal F. Restricted
matches and minimum cost of energy require-
ments: tools and methodology for produc-
ing practical solutions. PRES99 proceedings,
433438, 1999.
[14] Kalitventzeff B., Marechal F. A tool for op-
timal synthesis of industrial refrigeration sys-
tems. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering
series, Ed. Elsevier, 90:457463, May 2001.
[15] Kalitventzeff B., Marechal F., Favrat D. A
methodology for the optimal insertion of or-
ganic Rankine cycles in industrial processes.
2nd International Symposium on Process Inte-
gration, Halifax, 2001.
[16] Kalitventzeff B., Marechal F. Targeting the
integration of multi-period utility systems for
site scale process integration. Applied Thermal
Engineering, 23:17631784, 2003.
[17] Kalitventzeff B., Marechal F. Targeting the
minimum cost of energy requirements : a new
graphical technique for evaluating the integra-
tion of utility systems. Comp. Chem. Engng.,
20(Suppl.):S225S230, 1996.