Combustion Engine vs Gas Turbine: Ambient Temperature

The increasing need for flexible power across the world, often in harsh climates, makes power
plant performance under varying conditions an important consideration in technology
selection. As combustion engines are less sensible to temperature and humidity, Wrtsil
power plants outperform gas turbines in hot conditions.
Depending on the technology and site conditions, a power plants actual electrical output,
efficiency, and fuel consumption can be quite different than its performance at design conditions.
Ambient conditions can vary dramatically with geographic location and by season. For example,
summer temperatures in the Middle East and northern Africa frequently exceed 40C (104F),
while large seasonal temperature swings of over 38C (100F) occur in some locations. As surging
temperatures usually correspond to peak electrical demand, reduction in power output at high
ambient temperatures can be problematic. Gas turbines in particular can experience significant
performance derating in hot, humid conditions.

Image credit: Maps of the World

How do ambient conditions affect power plant output and efficiency?
Ambient temperature, altitude and humidity affect the density of air. Hot and humid air is less
dense than dry, cooler air. In gas turbines, power output is dependent on the mass flow through the
compressor. As the density of air decreases, more power is required to compress the same mass of
air. This reduces the output of the gas turbine and decreases efficiency. Studies have found that gas
turbine efficiency deteriorates by one percent for every 10 degree rise in temperature above ISO
conditions
1
. This translates into a power output reduction of 5 to 10 percent, depending on the type
of gas turbine. Gas turbine manufacturers use various techniques to cool inlet air and boost turbine
output, including evaporative coolers and mechanical chillers. However, inlet air cooling requires
additional power consumption, and the efficacy of cooling systems is highly dependent on the
ambient humidity. Combustion enginesare less sensitive to temperature and humidity, retaining
their rated efficiency and power output over a broader range of ambient conditions.
The performance of simple cycle gas turbines, combined cycle gas turbines (CCGT) and
Wrtsil combustion engines at varying ambient conditions was assessed using data from GT PRO.
Popular model heavy frame industrial gas turbines were compared with similarly sized Wrtsil
engines, with capacities of 200 275 MW in simple cycle, and approximately 300 MW in
combined cycle (see fact box at end of article for full load output of the specific models compared). For
combined cycle operation, a 1x1 CCGT configuration was assumed with air-cooled condensers and a
bypass stack to isolate the steam generating portion of the plant from the gas turbine. Figure 1 presents the
net power plant output at varying ambient temperatures ranging from 10C to 40C (50F to 104F) for gas
turbines and Wrtsil combustion engines operating in combined cycle. CCGT output decreases by 15 to 18
percent at 40C compared to ISO reference conditions, while the Wrtsil Flexicycle plant output
decreases by only 8 percent compared to reference conditions.


Figure 1: Impact of ambient temperature on Wrtsil Flexicycle
TM
and CCGT power output.
The impact on plant efficiency is shown in Figure 2 for both combined cycle and simple cycle operation. At
an ambient temperature of 40C, CCGT efficiency decreases by 3.5 percent compared to ISO conditions. In
a Flexicycle power plant using combustion engines, efficiency only drops by 1.1 percent at 40C. All
values represent net efficiency at the high-voltage grid side at sea level pressure. In simple cycle operation,
Wrtsil power plants demonstrate significant efficiency advantages over gas turbines. While simple cycle
efficiency of a gas turbine is approximately 35 percent at 40C, Wrtsil efficiency is over 45 percent. The
impact of ambient temperature on efficiency becomes even more pronounced when the plant is operating at
part load. As a result, Wrtsil power plants offer a wide range of operational flexibility and reliable
performance, even in harsh ambient conditions.

Figure 2: Efficiency of Wrtsil engines compared with gas turbines at varying ambient
temperatures.


1
The standard reference conditions (prescribed by the International Organization for Standardization, or
ISO) are the temperature and pressure conditions under which manufacturers evaluate generating capacity
and efficiency. These ISO reference conditions differ depending on the technology. Standard reference
conditions for gas turbines (ISO 3977) are 15C (59F) and 101.3 kPa (14.7 psia) while for
combustion engines (ISO 3046) reference conditions are 25C (77F) and 99 kPa (14.4 psia).

Combustion Engine vs. Gas Turbine: Part Load Efficiency and
Flexibility
The performance of power plants at partial load has become a significant operational
consideration for electric power grids worldwide. This technical comparison examines
the range of output and the part load efficiency of combustion engines and gas
turbines, and how Wrtsil power plants deliver enhanced flexibility.
Preferential access for renewables and feed-in tariffs often result in fossil-fueled generation curtailing output
to allow for wind and solar loads. This periodic adjustment of output is called cycling. A U.S. National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) study demonstrated that high penetrations of wind and solar caused
fossil-fueled plants to cycle more frequently (Figure 1).


Figure 1: Dispatch curve shows curtailment of coal and cycling of combined cycle plants to accommodate
large load fluctuations from wind and solar sources during one challenging week in the U.S. Western
Interconnection. Image credit: NREL (2013) The Western Wind and Solar Integration Study Phase 2
Simple cycle gas turbines have traditionally served as peaking units because they can be started within
minutes and ramped up and down quickly to meet spikes in demand or sudden changes in electric system
loads. They also have lower efficiencies less than 40 percent so they operate during when electric
demand peaks and the price of electricity is high. With the expanding need for more flexible power, capacity
that was designed for continuous, baseload operation is often being used to provide load-following and even
peaking electric service. This is particularly true for combined cycle gas turbines (CCGTs) which can
respond to changes in load much faster than conventional steam power plants.
The cycling of CCGT plants presents other issues however, including increased thermal and mechanical
stress on plant components and load turndown limitations. The performance of cycling power plants at part
load is an important consideration for minimizing power system emissions, maintaining efficiency, and
maximizing operational flexibility. The part load technical limitations and efficiency performance of
combustion engines compared with gas turbines are explored below.
Minimum Environmental Load
A technical constraint for partial load operation of gas turbine power plants is the minimum environmental
load, also called the minimum emissions-compliant load. This is the lowest output at which the generating
unit can operate and still meet environmental limits for nitrous oxides (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO)
emissions. The minimum environmental load for most gas turbines is about 50 percent of full output
because operation at lower loads can result in reduced combustion temperature, less conversion of CO to
CO2 and potential emissions permit exceedances. In combined cycle plants, the gas turbine outlet
temperature must also be kept high to produce sufficient steam to power the steam turbine.
To facilitate a wider range of gas turbine output, manufacturers have introduced control systems designed to
extend emissions-compliant turndown while minimizing efficiency impacts at part load. While the exact
methods for turndown optimization vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, the control systems use
variable guide vanes to decrease compressor mass flow and sequential firing (reheat) to produce higher
combustion temperatures at low loads. Higher combustion temperatures not only enhance the conversion of
CO to CO2 but also boost steam production and thus output from the steam turbine, improving overall part-
load plant efficiency.
As a result, some gas turbine models can achieve emissions-compliant turndown to about 40 percent of
baseload power. Site-specific conditions including the environmental permit requirements, plant
configuration and post-combustion emissions control systems will ultimately dictate the exact emissions-
compliant turndown limit.
For all practical purposes, combustion engine power plants do not have minimum load limitations and can
maintain high efficiency at partial load due to modularity of design the operation of a subset of the engines
at full load.

Part Load Efficiency
Gas turbine manufacturers boast efficiencies of 55 percent or greater, but this is the efficiency at full, or
baseload power. In reality, CCGT power plants often cycle frequently. Operation at partial load and
turndown limitations can restrict the flexibility of CCGT plants. To compare the performance of CCGTs,
simple cycle gas turbines, and Wrtsil combustion engines at varying load, efficiency data was produced
using GT PRO. The gas turbines chosen for comparison were based on popular heavy frame industrial
models well-suited for combined cycle operation that could also be used in simple cycle operation as
peaking units.

Similar sized units are compared, with capacities of approximately 180 275 MW in simple cycle, and 235
310 MW when running in combined cycle mode (depending on ambient conditions). This assumes a 1x1
CCGT configuration (one gas turbine and heat recovery steam generator supplying one steam turbine), air-
cooled condensers and a bypass stack to isolate the steam generating portion of the plant from the gas
turbine.
Figure 2 shows efficiency curves for plants operating at summer ambient conditions of 25C (77F). The
efficiencies of CCGTs drop below 50 percent between 55 to 65 percent of full load. In simple cycle mode,
the degradation of gas turbine efficiency is more pronounced, with gas turbines dropping to less than 30
percent efficiency at half load. The minimum environmental load of 50 percent for typical GT turndown and
40 percent for extended turndown is noted in Figure 2. For a 300 MW combined cycle plant, this means that
the minimum emissions-compliant output is between 120 to 150 MW.


Figure 2: Part Load Efficiency of Wrtsil Engines Compared with Gas Turbines
Unlike gas turbines, Wrtsil engine power plants have near full range capability of emissions-compliant
turndown. As load is decreased, individual engines within the generating set are shut down to reduce output.
The engines that remain operating can generate at full load, retaining high efficiency of the generating set.
Flexicycle power plant efficiency is above 48 percent all the way down to 23 percent of full load (69 MW).
Beyond the minimum load for the Flexicycle steam turbine, the engines will operate in simple cycle mode.
Thus, the output of a 300 MW Flexicycle plant can be turned down to only 18 MW. As a result, Flexicycle
power plants provide a much wider range of output flexibility than gas turbines without the constraints of
turndown limitations or efficiency impacts.


Reciprocating Engine vs Gas Turbine: Advantages of Modularity
Forget the conventional wisdom that bigger is better modularity in power plant design enhances
flexibility and reliability. Reciprocating engine power plants comprised of multiple generating units
complement renewable energy without sacrificing efficiency. And unlike large combined cycle gas
turbines, reciprocating engine power plants have a wide range in load turndown making them ideally
suited to distributed energy applications.
Over the course of a century, the trend in the electric power industry had been toward ever increasing
generating unit sizes and plant capacities. Centralized power plants were built using custom engineered
technology of massive size. Conventional wisdom was that bigger is better as the capital costs per unit of
capacity and production costs declined with increasing unit size, delivering economies of scale driven in part
by improved steam turbine efficiencies. Steam turbine units averaging 400 megawatts (MW) or more
capacity were common by the 1980s. The push for higher outputs and efficiencies directly led to the
development of combined cycle, necessitating larger gas turbines with higher firing temperatures that
enabled exhaust gas heat recovery to drive a steam turbine. While in the 1950s the firing temperature of gas
turbines was around 800C and average turbine size was around 10 MW, by the 1990s advanced gas
turbines had firing temperatures exceeding 1300C and averaged over 100 MW.

However, large power plants required considerable on-site construction and assembly, and could not easily
adjust load to meet fluctuating demand. As the use of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar
increased, the need for more flexible power that could quickly start, ramp to full load, and operate at part
load became more apparent. Smaller-scale generating units that can be operated in parallel and deployed
as needed to match the changing power requirements began to serve an important function for the stability
of electric transmission grids. Using modern manufacturing and engineering, small electric generating units
are modularized to suit current and future needs of any power project. This shift toward economies of
numbers provides reliability, siting, and efficiency benefits.
What is Modularity?
Many manufacturers of power generating equipment promote the concept of modularity in product
portfolios and plant architecture. Modularity refers to electric generating equipment that is prefabricated in a
factory environment and packaged so as to shorten the timeframe needed to plan, engineer and construct a
power plant. Because gas turbines were expensive relative to other technologies, the concept of pre-
packaging the gas turbine within a power plant and shortening delivery times became essential to capture
market share.
Prefabricated power generation modules are self-contained components of the system that are designed to
interface with other power plant components. Engine modules, fuel delivery systems, emissions control
equipment, heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) modules, generators, pipe racks and other auxiliary
systems are some of the components that can be prefabricated and delivered in modules to the power plant
site. Standardizing the design of these components offers significant manufacturing cost savings, shorter
lead times for equipment delivery, and speeds on-site assembly and commissioning of the plant. Modularity
also offers simplified maintenance features and quality benefits, as components are manufactured in a
controlled environment and factory tested.
Modular design has been deployed for a range of generating sources, from small nuclear reactors to solar
farms to gas engines. Even gas turbine power plants, which have traditionally required significant on-site
assembly, have begun to be designed in a modular fashion to shorten construction time. Aeroderivative gas
turbines in particular, have been designed with modular architecture and range in size from about 15 to 120
MW. Because they have lower exhaust gas temperatures than industrial gas turbines, aeroderivatives are
not typically operated in combined cycle mode. Modularity can encompass more than just design and
prefabrication it can extend to plant sizing and the efficient use of a subset of the plant capacity to provide
a range of load response.

Plant Configuration and Operational Modularity
Interconnecting different modules offers flexibility of design to meet a variety of project needs. Because
generating units are incrementally sized, a wide range of plant capacities and fuel options including multi-
fuel use can be designed. The control systems and interfaces between modules are designed to
accommodate fuel selection, expected operations and emissions permit limits. Reciprocating engines are
ideally suited to modular use, as sets of 4 30 MW engine units can provide a range of incremental part
load power without sacrificing efficiency. For example, a Wrtsil power plant that has 28 modular 34SG
reciprocating engine units, each sized at approximately 10 MW, can deliver a range of output from just a few
MW to over 270 MW. By operating only a subset of the engines at full load to produce the desired output,
high efficiency is maintained. Further, because the startup time for reciprocating engines is within minutes,
the power plant can quickly adjust load by bringing additional engine sets online to meet changes in electric
demand.



Wrtsil modular power plant comprised of multiple reciprocating engine generating units provides output
versatility.
Modularity in architecture provides limited operational modularity for gas turbines, however. This is
particularly true of gas turbine power plants due to the size of units, limited number of units, and efficiency
tradeoffs for simple cycle versus combined cycle. Industrial gas turbines for power generation may be 100
350 MW apiece and have limits on the lower range of output at which they can operate. This minimal load,
or turndown percentage, is bounded by emissions limits. When the turbine operates at low load, the
compressor airflow may not be enough to support conversion of carbon monoxide (CO) into carbon dioxide
(CO2) in the combustion chamber. Although manufacturers offer enhanced design features such as inlet
guide vane control, gas turbines are generally constrained to a turndown of 30 to 40 percent of full load to
meet emissions regulations. A simple cycle power plant with two gas turbines can adjust plant output down
to about 15 to 20 percent of full load by operating only one turbine.

Large gas turbine power plants (1x1 configuration shown) are limited in their turndown capability.
Combined cycle operation introduces more complexity into the operating parameters of the plant. Modular
architecture for combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) power plants consists of one to four gas turbines,
HRSGs for each gas turbine, and a common proportionally-sized steam turbine. Modularization is intended
to provide turnkey power plant solutions with reduced on-site assembly and higher part load efficiencies
because of the steam turbine output. The steam turbine accounts for about one third of the total plant output
and is inflexible capacity because of the time required to achieve necessary steam conditions and for the
steam turbine to warm up. The lower load limit is affected by the turbine exhaust temperature, which must
be high enough to generate sufficient steam pressure in the HRSG to power the steam turbine. The typical
configuration of a 2x1 CCGT plant which has two gas turbine/HRSG units supplying one steam turbine may
have the ability to operate one of the gas turbines independently of the other, depending on emissions
criteria. Emissions compliant turndown for CCGT plants is usually 40 to 50 percent of full load. For example,
a combined cycle power plant design based on 200 MW gas turbines (in the typical 2x1 configuration) has a
rated output of over 600 MW, limiting turndown ability to about 300 MW.
A Flexicycle power plant based on modular reciprocating engine units does not have similar restrictions on
load turndown because sufficient steam pressure can be developed by operating only 25 percent of the
generating units. Modularity using reciprocating engine units has other operational benefits over gas turbine
power plants. The economies of numbers provides reciprocating engine power plants built-in redundancy
in case of unit outages or maintenance without significantly affecting overall full plant output.
Modular engine technology also allows siting to complement distributed renewable energy sources in areas
that lack transmission infrastructure to support large power stations, providing better matching to changing
grid needs. Expanding power needs in the future can be met with the addition of more engine units and
ancillary modules, rather than the construction of a new power plant. Reciprocating engine technology
provides the needed versatility and flexibility of load to compensate for variable smaller, distributed scale of
renewable sources which may only be a few MW. And importantly, using small modular reciprocating
engines to provide flexible load allows larger combined cycle plants to operate at full output, taking
advantage of their high efficiencies at full load and reducing electric system costs.
Combustion Engine vs Gas Turbine: Startup Time
Power plants that can be dispatched within minutes are important assets for balancing electric
system loads and maintaining grid reliability. The generating technology affects the time required
for a power plant to startup and reach full load. While combined cycle gas turbines can take over 30
minutes to start, combustion engine power plants can start and reach full load in less than 10
minutes providing flexible, quick-start capability.



Increasing penetration of renewable energy sources presents challenges for transmission grid operators to
maintain electric reliability despite the intermittency of wind and solar power. This variability is managed with
redundant generating capacity that can quickly respond to fluctuations in demand, and has predominately
been served by coal and gas-fired units that are synchronized to the grid but operating at part load. Flexible
power generation that can be rapidly brought online reduces the inefficiency of relying on part load
operation. System operators, such as PJM, California ISO and ERCOT define such quick-start or non-
spinning reserve as generation capacity that can be synchronized to the grid and ramped to capacity within
10 minutes.
Whereas conventional steam cycle generators (based on the Rankine cycle) can take more than 12 hours to
reach full load, internal combustion engines can be dispatched in minutes. The two primary internal
combustion engine technologies utilized for power generation are reciprocating combustion engines and gas
turbines. The differences between the two technologies affect startup time and their suitability to provide
flexible power.
Startup time is a significant metric for flexibility, but comparison of different technologies and designs is
complicated by the way startup time is measured by different manufacturers. The startup time quoted can be
from push of the start command or from ignition. In the case of gas turbines, this difference in start
definition can be as much as 20 minutes. Further, it is important to differentiate between time to achieve full
load versus partial load.
Gas Turbine Power Plant Startup
During startup, the gas turbine (GT) undergoes a sequence of increasing compressor spin to reach firing
speed, ignition, turbine acceleration to self-sustaining speed, synchronization, and loading. There are
numerous thermo-mechanical constraints during startup of the GT, including limits on airflow velocity
through the compressor blades to prevent stall, vibrational limits, and combustion temperature limits to
prevent turbine blade fatigue, with the significant parameter being the turbine inlet temperature.
In combined cycle operation, the heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) imposes additional thermal
limitations on the gas turbine power plant, as the high temperature environment subjects HRSG components
to thermal stress. The HRSG is directly coupled to the gas turbine, so changes in turbine exhaust gases
induce flow, temperature, and pressure gradients within the HRSG. These gradients must be carefully
controlled to prevent adverse impacts such as material fatigue, creep (damage caused by high
temperatures) and corrosion. In order to avoid impacts, it takes longer to start the HRSG from cold
conditions than from hot conditions. The definition of hot conditions varies by manufacturer, but is
generally defined as within eight (8) to 16 hours of HRSG shutdown. As a result, the amount of time elapsed
since last shutdown greatly influences startup time. Once-through HRSGs are used by some manufacturers
to overcome the startup thermal and pressure limitations that exist with steam drums.
CCGTs are also subject to purge requirements to prevent auto-ignition from possible accumulation of
combustible gases in the gas turbine, HRSG and exhaust systems. The purge is required before the unit is
restarted. Purge times depend on the boiler volume and air flow through the HRSG, and are typically set to
about 15 minutes. This purge time adds to the overall start time. In addition, the steam turbine can restrict
the GT loading rate if the steam temperature leaving the HRSG exceeds steam turbine limits. To avoid this,
temperature matching using GT holds as the load is increased may be necessary.
In order to enable faster startup, CCGT manufacturers have attempted to decouple the gas turbine startup
from the HRSG and steam turbine warm-up. Process- and equipment-enhanced start options have been
developed that can be used under hot start conditions. A purge credit allows the system purge to be
completed at shutdown, eliminating the requirement for a redundant purge at next startup. The purge credit
can only be used in some HRSGs that have no duct burners and where the GT is fired on natural gas only.
Bypass dampers can be used to restrict the exhaust gas flow to the HRSG. However, pollution control
equipment for nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO) are typically integrated within the HRSG
and environmental regulations for these emissions may prohibit the startup of the GT without the HRSG.
Another method for decoupling the HRSG and steam turbine from the GT exhaust gas usesspray water
attemperators or air attemperators to control the steam temperature so that gas turbine loading is not limited
for temperature matching. This enables parallel loading of the gas turbine and steam turbine.
Although hot start conditions for CCGTs vary somewhat by manufacturer, maintaining energized electrical
systems, purge credit, and steam temperature control enable CCGT startup times of about 30 to 35 minutes
from initiation of the start sequence. This is about half the time for conventional hot start that would require
purge and gas turbine holds. In simple cycle, published start times for gas turbines are about 10 to 15
minutes.
Combustion Engine Power Plant Startup
A combustion engine power plant can start and ramp to full load very quickly due to rapid ignition of fuel
within the cylinders and the coordinated starting of multiple generating sets. Wrtsil combustion engine
power plants employ high efficiency lean-burn technology that can reach full load in as little as two (2)
minutes under hot start conditions. To meet hot start conditions, cooling water is preheated and
maintained above 70C, engine bearings are continuously prelubricated, a jack up pump supplies
prelubrication to the generator bearings, and the engine is slow turning (cycling). The Wrtsil 34SG power
plant requires only 30 seconds to complete startup preparations, speed acceleration, and synchronization to
the grid. Loading to full power occurs rapidly in just 90 seconds. Startup time is not affected by the amount
of time the unit had been previously shut down. The 50SG power plant takes seven (7) minutes to reach full
load. Under cold startup conditions, the 34SG power plant can reach full load in 10 minutes and the 50SG in
12 minutes. Combustion engine power plants also have combined cycle advantages as sufficient steam
pressure can be generated with only a subset of the engines operating.

Rapid Startup for Flexible Power Generation
Figure 1 shows a startup time comparison of the Wrtsil 34SG and 50SG power plants with simple cycle
and combined cycle gas turbine plants from manufacturers GE, Alstom, and Siemens. All startup times are
measured from operator initiation of the start sequence. As can be seen from the graph, Wrtsil power
plants provide quick start ability under 10 minutes, which meets system operator requirements. Unlike
CCGTs, hot start conditions in a Wrtsil power plant can be maintained regardless of how long the engines
had previously been inactive.