Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276207210
CITATIONS
READS
534
2 authors, including:
Ali Amiri
North Dakota State University
21 PUBLICATIONS 45 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
13
I. I NTRODUCTION
EMENT production is an energy intensive process, consuming about 4 GJ per ton of cement product. Theoretically, producing one ton of clinker requires a minimum 1.6-GJ
heat. However, in fact, the average specific energy consumption
is about 2.95 GJ per ton of cement produced for well-equipped
advanced kilns, whereas in some countries, the consumption
exceeds 5 GJ/ton [1][3].
Thermal energy cost accounts for almost 25% of the total
production cost, whereas thermal energy is considered to be
75% of primary energy usage. The major use of thermal energy
is in the pyroprocess line, and diversity in fuels such as coal,
pet coke, gas, and oil apart from alternative fuels such as used
tires, incinerable harmful wastes, and agro residues are used to
provide thermal energy [4].
Manuscript received February 10, 2013; accepted January 14, 2014. Date
of publication August 13, 2014; date of current version January 16, 2015.
Paper 2013-CIC-093, presented at the 2013 IEEE-IAS/PCA Cement Industry
Technical Conference, Orlando, FL, USA, April 1119, and approved for
publication in the IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON I NDUSTRY A PPLICATIONS by
the Cement Industry Committee of the IEEE Industry Applications Society.
A. Amiri is with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, North Dakota
State University, Fargo, ND 58108 USA (e-mail: ali.amiri@my.ndsu.edu).
M. R. Vaseghi is with the Department of Polymer Engineering, Islamic Azad
University of Shiraz, Shiraz, Iran.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIA.2014.2347196
0093-9994 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
14
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
ramic shapes that can absorb and store relatively large amounts
of thermal energy. During the operating cycle, fixed and rotary
regenerators are an alternative to recuperators. Use of fixed and
rotary regenerators is becoming increasingly common in the
United States. However, due to higher costs, rotary regenerators
have not been commercialized in the United States industries.
Use of recuperators and regenerators is the most common
method in glass industry (and blast furnaces), but they have not
been commercialized in cement industry in the United States
[11], [12]. A schematic of a regenerator for storing thermal
energy is shown in Fig. 4.
VII. WASTE H EAT B OILER
A waste heat boiler is one of the most common methods of
WHR in the United States cement industry. As shown in Fig. 5,
a waste heat boiler is a tube boiler that uses medium- to hightemperature exhaust gases to generate steam. It is similar to a
conventional boiler; however, instead of using a burner, it will
produce steam by taking energy from waste hot gas stream.
Their capacity can vary from 30 to 3000 M3 /min gas intake;
the produced steam can be used to process heating or power
generation. Use of a waste heat boiler to recover part of the
exhaust gas heat is an option for plants that need a source of
steam or hot water. Waste heat boilers can be a solution for
plants seeking additional steam capacity.
AMIRI AND VASEGHI: WASTE HEAT RECOVERY POWER GENERATION SYSTEMS FOR CEMENT PRODUCTION PROCESS
Fig. 5.
(1)
15
16
Fig. 7.
(5)
pel
Q uid
(2)
Q uid
Q HS
(3)
(4)
AMIRI AND VASEGHI: WASTE HEAT RECOVERY POWER GENERATION SYSTEMS FOR CEMENT PRODUCTION PROCESS
17
TABLE I
U NCOVERED WASTE H EAT AND W ORK P OTENTIAL F ROM E XHAUST G ASES IN C EMENT K ILNS
C. Kalina Cycle
The Kalina cycle was first developed by Aleksander Kalina
in the late 1970s and early 1980s [24]. The main difference
between the Kalina cycle and the ORC or the steam Rankine
cycle is that the Kalina cycle uses a mixture of ammonia and
water as working fluid. As a binary fluid cycle, the temperature profile during boiling and condensation is different. In
the steam Rankine cycle and the ORC, temperature remains
constant during evaporation. While the Kalina cycle because
of the boiling temperature difference of water and ammonia,
temperature will increase during evaporation. In the Kalina
cycle, due to nonisothermal boiling, the use of a mixture
results in good thermal matching with the waste heat source
and cooling medium in condenser. Results from a second law
analysis showed that by using a binary fluid, the Kalina cycle
irreversibility reduced in the boiler. As a result, the total efficiency of the cycle was significantly improved [25]. Moreover,
as mentioned in several studies, it is strongly believed that the
Kalina cycles performance is significantly better than that of
the steam Rankine cycle and the ORC [26][30]. The main
application of the Kalina cycle is in power generation from
geothermal and waste heat.
All three aforementioned cycles can be utilized by cement
plants to produce power. The selection of the heat recovery
method will depend on factors such as temperature of waste
heat, composition of exhaust gases, and cost. The United States
cement industry has great potential for using WHR systems and
turn waste heat into power. Although WHR has been getting
increasing attention over the past decade, about 90 MJ/yr of
waste heat is still uncovered in the United States cement industry. Table I shows uncovered waste heat and work potential
from exhaust gases in cement kilns.
D. Supercritical CO2 Power Generation Cycle
Supercritical carbon dioxide (ScCO2 ) power cycle is considered to be an advanced power cycle using ScCO2 as the
working fluid. ScCO2 is environmentally nontoxic, benign, and
with desirable heat and mass transfer properties [31], [32].
In general, ScCO2 power cycles offer a better overall plant
economics because of higher efficiency over a moderate range
of heat source temperatures. A huge advantage of the ScCO2
cycle includes having a compact size, fewer components, and
smaller turbo machinery. When temperature and pressure reach
their critical points (31 C and 73 atm), Carbon dioxide is at
its supercritical fluid state, where it has both gas and liquid
qualities (see Fig. 8). Theoretically, any heat source above this
temperature can sustain a ScCO2 power generation cycle.
In [32], Dostal et al. examined a basic supercritical recompression carbon dioxide Brayton cycle with ScCO2 with
a second high-temperature recuperator, a dual ScCO2 cycle,
combined ScCO2 and ORC with four different types of running
fluids. The summary of efficiencies they reached for each cycle
is presented in Table II.
As seen, they observed efficiency of 43.31%, which is close
to the thermal efficiency found for a supercritical Rankine cycle
in [33]. Table III shows a cost comparison between different
mechanical methods to generate power [23], [34][36].
XII. C ONCLUSION
About 90 MJ/yr of waste heat is uncovered in the United
States cement industry. These wastes can be avoided by increasing the process efficiency and use in cogenerating processes.
WHR is feasible for a cement industry, and it can offer about
6 MW of electric power for a typical cement plant. Moreover,
by reusing the waste heat and lowering the temperature of exhaust gases, the amount of CO2 emissions will be significantly
lowered. It is estimated that 280 000 MW could be generated
from recyclable waste heat savings of $70 billion to $150 billion
per year.
The preheater and clinker cooler exhaust gases are the two
main sources of heat recovery systems, whereas capturing heat
from clinker cooler will provide more options to increase the
efficiency. There are several methods to utilize the waste heat
and generate power. There are several factors affecting the
feasibility of heat recovery such as heat quantity, heat quality,
composition of the stream, and minimum allowable temperature. These factors have a significant effect of design criteria
and efficiency of WHR systems.
Four methods for transferring mechanical work into electrical power were discussed in this paper, namely, steam,
18
TABLE II
R ESULTS C OMPARISON F ROM [32]
TABLE III
C OMPARISON OF C OSTS FOR S TEAM C YCLE , ORC, AND K ALINA C YCLE
R EFERENCES
[1] T. Engin and V. Ari, Energy auditing and recovery for dry type cement
rotary kiln systemsA case study, Energy Convers. Manage., vol. 46,
no. 4, pp. 551562, Mar. 2005.
[2] F. Liu, M. Ross, and S. Wang, Energy efficiency of Chinas cement
industry, Energy, vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 669681, Jul. 1995.
[3] S. Khurana, R. Banerjee, and U. Gaitonde, Energy balance and cogeneration for a cement plant, Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 485494,
Apr. 2002.
[4] M. Vaseghi, A. Amiri, and A. Pesaran, A review of energy efficiency and
CO2 emissions in the US cement industry, in Proc. 23rd IEEE-IAS/PCA
Cement Ind. Tech. Conf., 2012, pp. 19.
[5] A. Pahuja, Energy auditing and monitoring in the cement industry,
Cement Ind., vol. 81, pp. 670694, 1996.
[6] K. Kamal, Energy efficiency improvement in the cement industry, presented at the Seminar Energy Efficiency, Geneva, Switzerland, 1997,
organized by ASSOCHAM-India and RMA-USA.
[7] T. Engin, Thermal analysis of rotary kilns used in cement plants, in
Proc. 1st MAMKON Mech. Eng. Congr., Istanbul, Turkey, 1997, pp. 46.
[8] Unlock energy savings with waste heat recovery, Washington, DC,
USA, DOE/EE-0577, 2012, Anonymous.
[9] Waste heat recovery: Technology and opportunities in U.S. industry,
Ind. Technol. Program Energy Efficiency Renew. Energy, Washington,
DC, USA, 2008.
[10] Waste heat reduction and recovery for improving furnace efficiency, productivity and emissions performance, Ind. Technol. Program Energy Efficiency Renew. Energy, Washington, DC, USA, DOE/GO-102004, 2004.
[11] C. K. Hyde, Technological Change and the British Iron Industry
17001870. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton Univ. Press, 1977.
[12] W. C. Turner, Energy Management Handbook. New York, NY, USA:
Marcel Dekker, 2004.
[13] R. J. Goldstick and A. Thumann, Principles Of Waste Heat Recovery.
Atlanta, GA, USA: Fairmont, 1985.
[14] R. E. Sonntag, C. Borgnakke, G. J. Van Wylen, and S. Van Wyk, Fundamentals of Thermodynamics. New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 1998.
[15] M. S. Peters, K. D. Timmerhaus, R. E. West, K. Timmerhaus, and R. West,
Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers. New York, NY,
USA: McGraw-Hill, 1968.
[16] Use Feedwater Economizers for Waste Heat Recovery, U.S. Dept. Energy,
Washington, DC, USA, Tech. Fact Sheet, 2006.
AMIRI AND VASEGHI: WASTE HEAT RECOVERY POWER GENERATION SYSTEMS FOR CEMENT PRODUCTION PROCESS
Ali Amiri received the Bachelors degree in mechanical engineering from Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran,
and the M.Sc. degree in mechanical engineering,
with a thesis on carbon-fiber-reinforced composites
and their fatigue behavior, from the University of
North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND, USA, in 2012. He is
currently working toward the Ph.D. degree at North
Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, USA, conducting research on the characterization and development
of bio-based reinforced composites.
He is currently a Research Assistant with North
Dakota State University. He has served a total of seven years in the cement
industry. Throughout his career, he has been part of different design teams such
as five international cement projects, five turn-key projects, and ten upgrade
projects. He has also executed more than 45 Kiln Laser Alignment Projects
along with roller and gear adjustments as the team leader. Some other fields
of experience include working as a Technical Office Manager, a Machinery
Installation Supervisor, a Manufacturing Supervisor, and a Project Lead Engineer. During his career and graduate studies, he has published multiple papers
and presented several technical papers at different conferences.
19