Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 1411e1420

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

A study of the thermodynamic performance and CO2 emissions of a vapour

compression bio-trigeneration system
José A.R. Parise a, *, Luis C. Castillo Martínez a, Rui Pitanga Marques a,
Jesús Betancourt Mena a, José V.C. Vargas b
a
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, PUC-Rio, Department of Mechanical Engineering, 22453-900 Rio de Janeiro RJ, Brazil
b
Universidade Federal do Paraná, UFPR, Department of Mechanical Engineering, 81531-990 Curitiba, Brazil

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A trigeneration system (simultaneous production of heating, cooling and electricity) using a heat engine
Received 28 July 2010 and a vapour compression chiller, running on biofuel, is studied. A system configuration, capable of
Accepted 24 December 2010 meeting the three energy demands in a realistic situation, was devised. It consisted of a compression
Available online 12 January 2011
ignition internal combustion engine driving an electric generator, an electrically driven vapour
compression heat pump and a peak boiler. Part of the heating demand was met by recovering waste heat
Keywords:
from the engine and the heat pump condenser, thus reducing the overall fuel consumption. New criteria
Bio-trigeneration
parameters, based on the relative magnitudes of the three energy demands, were defined to evaluate
Trigeneration
Biofuel
thermal performance and CO2 emissions. A comparative analysis between the biofuel trigeneration and
CO2 emissions conventional fossil fuel with no waste heat recovery was carried out, showing that, depending on the
Waste heat recovery relative values of energy demands and on component characteristics, significant reduction on primary
energy consumption (up to 50%) and on CO2 emissions (up to 5% of the original emissions) can be
attained with the biofuel-trigeneration combination.
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Biofuels have long been regarded as viable substitutes for fossil
fuels in internal combustion engines and have been facing
continuous development, as reported in, for example, [1e3]. The
use of alcohol in automobiles, in Brazil, and biodiesel in trucks, in
Germany, are already a long-standing reality. Concomitantly,
cogeneration [4e7] and trigeneration [8e10] systems clearly
represent a more efficient way of meeting electricity, heating and
refrigerating load demands, either in industrial, commercial or
residential applications. Biofuel and cogeneration-trigeneration
technologies can thus be combined to provide energy systems with
improved energy efficiency and reduced environmental impact. A
number of studies on cogeneration systems running on biofuels can
be found in the literature, for example, [2,11e15], with reported
improvement on fuel usage and mitigation of greenhouse gas
emissions. As for trigeneration systems running on biofuels, the
available information is scarcer [16e21], yet the number of publi-
cations has been steadily increasing.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ55 21 35271380; fax: þ55 21 35271165.
E-mail addresses: parise@puc-rio.br (J.A.R. Parise), nvluis@hotmail.com (L.C.
Castillo Martínez), rupitanga@hotmail.com (R.P. Marques), betancourt@uclv.edu.
cu (J.B. Mena), jvargas@demec.ufpr.br (J.V.C. Vargas).
In one of the first related studies, Meunier [16] concluded that
the best solutions for the reduction of CO2 emissions correspond to
the use of non-fossil fuels and total energy systems, such as tri-
generation. Later [17], the solution was further detailed to the use of
distributed polygeneration units and renunciation to boilers and
electric resistances, in favour of heat-driven sorption heat pumps.
As it will be seen, later in the present paper, even with the use of
trigeneration systems, total renunciation to those devices may not
be possible. Sen et al. [18], in studying biofuel-trigeneration
systems for sustainable rural industrialization, identified four
different routes: the boiler, the bio-oil, the gasifier and the bio-
methanation routes. Three other preliminary studies followed, with
biofuel from local crops [19], wood chips and pellets [20] or raw
jathropha oil [21], for hotel [20] and residential [21] applications.
In the present work, a trigeneration system, for the simulta-
neous production of heating, cooling and electricity, using a heat
engine and a vapour compression chiller, running on biofuel, is
studied. Fig. 1 shows a schematic diagram of a trigeneration system,
where the energy flows are presented (outgoing heat rate and
electricity power, and incoming refrigeration power and fuel
power).
A system configuration, capable of meeting the three power
demands in a realistic situation, was devised for this preliminary
analysis. Fig. 2 shows a heat engine (gas turbine, internal

1359-4311/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2010.12.040
1412 J.A.R. Parise et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 1411e1420

Nomenclature RHC heating-to-cooling load ratio [e]

R*HC limit heating-to-cooling load ratio (when heating load
a1, a2 coefficients in Eq. (40) [e] equals recovered heat) [e]
b1, b2 coefficients in Eq. (41) [e] RHE heating-to-electricity load ratio [e]
c1, c2 coefficients in Eq. (42) [e] W_ cp compressor power input [W]
COPh heating coefficient of performance of the heat pump W_ es heat engine shaft power output [W]
[e] W_ es;max maximum heat engine shaft power output [W]
COPr refrigerating coefficient of performance of the heat
pump [e] Greek letters
d1, d2 coefficients in Eq. (43) [e] aec fraction of energy rate equivalent of engine fuel
e1, e2 coefficients in Eq. (44) [e] consumption that goes to the engine coolant [e]
E_ lo electricity power load [W] aex fraction of energy rate equivalent of engine fuel
ECRcv energy conversion ratio of a conventional system consumption that goes to the engine exhaust [e]
without heat recovery [e] aes fraction of energy rate equivalent of engine fuel
ECRtg energy conversion ratio of a trigeneration system [e] consumption that goes to the engine shaft power [e]
H_ fb energy rate equivalent of peak boiler fuel consumption Ghe heat engine total heat recovery to fuel heat ratio [e]
[W] Gsg heat engine-electrical generator compound overall fuel
H_ fe energy rate equivalent of heat engine fuel to electricity conversion ratio [e]
consumption [W] 3ec heat recovery efficiency of heat engine coolant heat
H_ fu energy rate equivalent of total fuel consumption [W] exchanger [e]
Kbdeds B-100 biodiesel to petroleum diesel fuel life cycle fossil 3ex heat recovery efficiency of heat engine exhaust heat
CO2 emissions ratio [e] exchanger [e]
_ CO2 ;fu
m total life cycle fossil CO2 emission rate for fuel [kg CO2] hge electric generator efficiency [e]
_ CO2 ;bd
m total life cycle fossil CO2 emission rate for B-100 biofuel hpb peak boiler efficiency [e]
[kg CO2] lco refrigeration part-load operation ratio [e]
_ CO2 ;pd
m total life cycle fossil CO2 emission rates for petroleum les heat engine part-load operation ratio [e]
diesel [kg CO2] pCO2 ;bd total life cycle fossil CO2 emission factor of B100
Q_ cd condenser power output [W] biodiesel fuel [kg CO2/J]
Q_ co cooling power load [W] pCO2 ;pd total life cycle fossil CO2 emission factor of petroleum
Q_ co;max maximum cooling power load [W] diesel fuel [kg CO2/J]
Q_ ec heat recovery rate from engine coolant [W] pCO2 ;fu total life cycle fossil CO2 emission factor of fuel [kg CO2/J]
Q_ ex heat recovery rate from engine exhaust [W] FECR ECR ratio between trigeneration and conventional
Q_ ht heating power load [W] systems [e]
Q_ pb heat transfer rate from the peak boiler [W] FCO2 life cycle fossil CO2 emissions ratio between B-100
Q_ rc total heat recovery rate from heat engine and chiller biodiesel trigeneration and diesel conventional system
[W] [e]
REC electricity-to-cooling load ratio [e]

combustion engine or Stirling engine) driving an electric generator. P

Electricity from the generator is used to drive the vapour- ðenergy productsÞ Q_ þ Q_ ht þ E_ lo
ECRtg ¼ ¼ co (1)
compression chiller, which produces, of course, refrigeration effect energy consumption H_ fu
and rejects heat from the condenser. The electricity demand is met
by the surplus of electricity production from the generator. The Three additional non-dimensional ratios are defined:
heat demand is met by recovering heat from the heat engine
(exhaust and, when applicable, coolant system) and from the heat Q_ ht
RHC ¼ (2)
pump condenser. If the total heat recovered, from engine and Q_ co
chiller, does not meet the heat demand, a peak boiler, burning the
same type of fuel, is added to the system. Therefore, the system
E_ lo
operates in the power/refrigeration matched mode. REC ¼ (3)
Trigeneration systems are fairly new and, for their peculiar Q_ co
characteristic of supplying three different demands of energy flow and
from a single fuel stream, require a robust set of criteria to justify
and optimize their application. A new energy conversion perfor- Q_ ht
mance criterion, based on the energy conservation principle, is RHE ¼ (4)
E_lo
presented here. Analogous to the thermal efficiency of a heat
engine or the coefficient of performance of a refrigeration cycle, the They compare the magnitudes of the heating, cooling and elec-
thermal performance parameter of a trigeneration system is based tricity power load demands. A thermodynamic analysis, based on
on the ratio between energy products and energy consumption. An energy conservation equations, and involving the parameters
energy conversion ratio, ECRtg, is defined, similarly to an “energetic defined above, is presented in the following section.
performance of trigeneration” as suggested by Minciuc et al. [22] or The paper objectives are threefold: (i) to model a trigeneration
an “utilization factor”, proposed by Çengel et al. [23], as the total system running on biofuel; (ii) to present an energy-based perfor-
energy delivery (heat, electricity and refrigeration) divided by the mance parameter; (iii) to show the dependence of the system
fuel energy consumption (from the engine and the peak boiler): performance on the relative magnitudes of the energy demands
 J.A.R. Parise et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 1411e1420 1413

(iii) The temperature at which waste heat is recovered is suffi-

Fuel ciently high for the heat load demand, Q_ ht .

It should be noted that the cooling load, or demand, of the system

is equal to the cooling capacity of the vapour compression heat
pump, assumption (i), as this is the only possibility (as clearly seen in
the configuration of Fig. 2) to produce refrigeration effects (e.g.,
chilled water). The same rationale applies for assumption (ii). Any
waste heat recovery process takes place only if a temperature
Heat difference across the heat exchanger exists, of course. Assumption
Trigeneration (iii) arises from the observation that typical temperature ranges
System for all fluids involved (engine exhaust gas, 300e500  C; engine
coolant, 90e120  C; heat pump condensing temperature, 40e60  C;
trigeneration system water temperature, 20e30  C) make the entire
Electricity heat recovery process possible.
Replacing Eqs. (2) and (3) in (1), and taking into account that the
total fuel consumption is distributed between the peak boiler and
the engine,

H_ fu ¼ H_ fe þ H_ fb (5)

Refrigeration one has:

1 þ RHC þ REC
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a trigeneration system.
ECRtg ¼  . (6)
H_ fe þ H_ fb Q_ co
(heating, refrigeration and electricity). The modelling and analysis The peak boiler is characterized by its efficiency, hpb , so that,
efforts are based in the energy conservation principle (1st law
analysis). After validation against experimental results from exist- Q_ pb
ing systems of similar configuration, the model is applied to a part- H_ fb ¼ (7)
hpb
load analysis and to a practical case of variable energy demands.
The peak boiler is added to the system to supply additional heat
2. Thermodynamic model when heat recovered from the heat engine and from the chiller
condenser is not sufficient to meet the heat load. Therefore,
Three basic assumptions were made on the energy demands to
model the systems. They are as follows: Q_ pb ¼ Q_ ht  Q_ rc (8)

Combining Eqs. (7) and (8) into (6), one obtains:

(i) The vapour compression chiller is sized to supply all the
cooling load, Q_ co .
(ii) The heat engine/electric generator compound is designed to 1 þ RHC þ REC
ECRtg ¼       (9)
provide sufficient power to meet the electricity demand, E_ lo , H_ fe =Q_ co þ Q_ ht h1 =Q_ co  Q_ rc h1 =Q_ co
pb pb
and to drive the heat pump compressor.
Heat is recovered from the heat pump condenser and from the
heat engine coolant and exhaust systems. Therefore, the total heat
recovery rate is:

Q_ rc ¼ Q_ cd þ Q_ ec þ Q_ ex (10)
Waste heat is recovered from the engine coolant and exhaust
gases at rates that depend on: (i) the energy balance of the heat
engine, characterized by aec, aex and aes; (ii) the heat recovery
efficiencies of both engine exhaust and coolant heat exchangers, 3ec
and 3ex. Thus:

_
W
aes ¼ _ es (11)
Hfe

Q_
aec 3ec ¼ _ ec (12)
Hfe

Q_
aex 3ex ¼ _ ex (13)
Hfe

Fig. 2. Energy flow diagram of a trigeneration system running on a single fuel and with Electric power is supplied to the compressor of the chiller, and
a vapour compression chiller. both cooling and heating power are obtained from the evaporator
1414 J.A.R. Parise et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 1411e1420

and condenser, respectively. The refrigerating and heating coeffi- and the peak boiler will not operate. Its fuel consumption will be, of
cients of performance are defined by: course, zero. Now, by inserting Eqs. (3), (6) and (20) in (24),

Q_ co ð1 þ RHC þ REC ÞGsg

COPr ¼ (14) RHC  R*HC : ECRtg ¼ (25)
W_ cp ð1=COPr Þ þ REC
The locus of full waste heat utilization points, RHC ¼ R*HC , is
Q_ given by:
COPh ¼ cd (15)
W_ cp
ð1  COPr  COPr  RHC Þ
ECR*tg ¼ Ghe þ Gsg (26)
Taking into account the fraction of fuel consumed to generate COPh  COPr  RHC
shaft power by the heat engine, Eq. (11), and the efficiency of the
electric generator, the compressor power consumption can be 2.2. Part-load operation
calculated by an energy balance applied to the control volume of
the heat engine-electric generator compound: The nominal capacities of the heat engine and the vapour
compression heat pump are specified to meet maximum electric
E_ lo þ W
_ cp ¼ aes h H_
ge fe (16) power production and refrigeration load, respectively. Any load,
electric or cooling, below those values will force these components
From Eqs. (14), (15) and (16), the cooling capacity and condenser to operate at part-load. Under such circumstances, the system
power output of the chiller are, respectively: characteristic parameters may vary with the electrical or refriger-
  ation loads.
Q_ co ¼ COPr aes hge H_ fe  E_ lo (17) Part-load operation can be characterized by two parameters, lco
and les, defined as follows:
 
Q_ cd ¼ COPh aes hge H_ fe  E_ lo (18) Q_
lco ¼ _ co (27)
Q co;max
Replacing Eqs. (12), (13) and (18) in (10), one obtains:
 
Q_ rc ¼ H_ fe COPh asf hge þ aec 3ec þ aex 3ex  COPh E_ lo (19) _
W
les ¼ _ es (28)
W es;max
From Eq. (17), H_ fe can be written as
The heat engine/electric generator combination provides elec-
  
Q_ co =COPr þ E_ lo tric energy to meet the electrical load and to drive the compressor:
H_ fe ¼ (20)
aes hge
_
_ es h ¼ E_ þ Q co
W (29)
Taking Eqs. (19) and (20) into (9), and defining algebraic auxil- ge lo
COPr
iary parameters:
which, written in terms of lco, les and REC, yields:
Ghe ¼ aec 3ec þ aex 3ex (21)  
_ es;max h ¼ lco Q_ 1
les W ge co;max REC þ (30)
COPr
Gsg ¼ aes hge (22)
or
a final expression for the energy conversion ratio can be written in
terms of characteristic parameters of the system components _   
Q co;max 1 1
(efficiencies, energy fractions and coefficients of performance), and les ¼ lco _ es;max hge
REC þ (31)
W COPr
in terms of the heating to cooling and electricity to cooling load
ratios, RHC and REC, as follows: Eq. (31) sets the values of the load fraction, les, at which the heat
 
ð1þRHC þREC Þ Gsg hpb engine will operate. It depends on the refrigeration load fraction,
ECRtg ¼ n h  i  o lco, which is a function of the operational conditions of the refrig-
1 h  COP G þ G þR G þR h  G
COPr pb h sg he HC sg EC pb he eration cycle (such as condensing and evaporating temperatures). It
also depends on the ratio between maximum capacities of the
(23)
chiller and engine, Q_ co;max =W
_ es;max . Part-load factors are limited, of
course, by 0 < les < 1 and 0 < lco < 1.
2.1. Heat load less than the heat recovered
2.3. Conventional system with no heat recovery
A constraint imposed on RHC results from the fact that, in order
to operate the chiller, and to provide Q_ co , in accordance with The energy conversion ratio of a conventional system, ECRcv, can
assumption (i), waste heat from the heat engine and from the be estimated from Eq. (23) considering COPh ¼ 0, 3ec ¼ 0 and
chiller condenser, Q_ rc , is available. If the heat load is less than the 3ex ¼ 0. Thus,
total heat recoverable, only the required amount of heat is recov-  
ered, the rest being rejected. The limit situation is attained when ð1 þ RHC þ REC Þ Gsg hpb
Q_ ht equals Q_ rc . In this case, the heating to cooling load ratio is
ECRcv ¼    (32)
hpb =COPr þ RHC Gsg þ REC hpb
obtained by combining Eqs. (2) and (19), that is:
  A non-dimensional parameter, FECR , is also defined to compare
ðð1=COPr Þ þ REC Þ COPh Gsg þ Ghe
R*HC ¼  ðCOPh REC Þ (24) the energy conversion ratio of the trigeneration system under study
aes hge with a conventional plant for the production of heat (boiler),
 J.A.R. Parise et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 1411e1420 1415

refrigeration (electrically driven chiller) and electricity (motor- 1.6

generator), without any heat recovery.

energy conversion ratio, ECRtg

1.4
ECRtg
FECR ¼ (33) REC=0.5
ECRcv 1.2
1
Similarly to Eq. (26),
1 1.5
2
COPr RHC Ghe
F*ECR ¼ 1 (34) 0.8 3
ðCOPh  COPr RHC Þhpb 4

0.6

3. CO2 emissions
0.4

CO2 emissions can be related to the fuel energy flow by:

0.2
0 2 4 6 8 10
_ CO2
m ¼ pCO2 aes H_ fu (35) heating-to-cooling load ratio, RHC
where pCO2 accounts for the fossil CO2 mass flow rate associated
Fig. 4. Variation of the energy conversion ratio with heating and power to cooling load
with the combustion reactions of a given fuel in the heat engine for ratios for a trigeneration system (aec ¼ 0.3; aex ¼ 0.3; aes ¼ 0.3; hge ¼ 0.9; hpb ¼ 0.9;
the delivery of shaft work [24]. 3ec ¼ 0.75; 3ex ¼ 0.75; COPr ¼ 3 and COPh ¼ 4).
By combining Eqs. (1) and (35), one has the rate of CO2 emis-
sions as a function of the cooling, refrigerating and electrical loads,
fuel characteristics and the energy conversion ratio.
1  
_ FCO2 ¼ Kbdepd (38)
_ _  FECR
_ CO2 ;fu ¼ pCO2 ;fu aes
Q co þ Q ht þ E lo
m (36)
ECR where
As can be seen from Eq. (36), CO2 emissions are a function of the !
pCO2 ;bd
system overall energy efficiency, ECR. Note that the reduction in Kbdepd ¼ (39)
CO2 emissions is proportional to the increase in the energy pCO2 ;pd
conversion ratio, which is, after all, a measure of how efficiently the
Eqs. (38) and (39) synthesize the separate effects that the two
fuel is being consumed to meet the three different energy demands.
factors have on the mitigation of total life cycle fossil CO2 emissions
For the purpose of comparison between a B100 biodiesel tri-
(FCO2 ): the energy conversion process (1=FECR ) and fuel charac-
generation system and a conventional one (with no heat recovery)
teristics (Kbdepd ).
running on petroleum diesel fuel, a useful non-dimensional
parameter, FCO2 , is defined as follows:
4. Results
_ CO2 ;bd
m
FCO2 ¼ (37) 4.1. Comparison with data from the literature
_ CO2 ;pd
m

Assuming that both systems operate at the same power, cooling A small-scale trigeneration system was investigated by Míguez
and heating demands (E_ lo , Q_ co and Q_ ht ), and that the heat engine et al. [25], who built a prototype of what they called a “thermo-
energy balance, aes, remains unaltered with either of the fuels used, electric autonomous group”. The aim was to construct an integrated
Eqs. (33), (36) and (37) yield: energy system to satisfy domestic energy demands all year round.
Their system consisted of a water-cooled reciprocating 395 cm3
gas-fired spark ignition internal combustion engine driving
0.9
energy conversion ratio, ECRcv

0.8 2
REC=0.5
REC=0.5
0.7 1.8
E C R r a t i o , Φ ECR

1 1

1.5 1.5
2 1.6 2
0.6
3 3
4 1.4 4
0.5

1.2
0.4
1
0.3
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
heating-to-cooling load ratio, RHC heating-to-cooling load ratio, RHC

Fig. 3. Variation of the energy conversion ratio with heating and power to cooling load Fig. 5. B-100 biodiesel trigeneration and diesel conventional system ECR ratio as
ratios for a conventional system with no heat recovery (aes ¼ 0.3; hge ¼ 0.9; hpb ¼ 0.9 a function of heating and power to cooling load ratios (aec ¼ 0.3; aex ¼ 0.3; aes ¼ 0.3;
and COPr ¼ 3). hge ¼ 0.9; hpb ¼ 0.9; 3ec ¼ 0.75; 3ex ¼ 0.75; COPr ¼ 3 and COPr ¼ 4).
1416 J.A.R. Parise et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 1411e1420

0.22
15 °C

coefficient of performance, COPr

7

0.2
CO2 emissions ratio, ΦCO2

6 10 °C
0.18
Tev= 5 °C
5
0.16 4
3 4
2
0.14 1.5
1 3
0.12 REC=0.5

0.1
0 2 4 6
heating-to-cooling load ratio, RHC
Fig. 6. Life cycle fossil CO2 emissions ratio between B-100 biodiesel trigeneration and diesel
conventional system as a function of RHC and REC (aec ¼ 0.3; aex ¼ 0.3; aes ¼ 0.3; hge ¼ 0.9;
hpb ¼ 0.9; 3ec ¼ 0.75; 3ex ¼ 0.75; COPr ¼ 3; COPh ¼ 4, pCO2 ;bd ¼ 50:827  109 kg CO2 =J
and pCO2 ;pd ¼ 235:9  109 kg CO2 =J).
simultaneously a 4.8 kVA electric generator and a 5-axial-piston
reciprocating compressor. The R-134a water-to-water heat pump
was of the reversible type. Waste heat was recovered from the
engine exhaust gases and coolant. A thermal accumulator and
batteries were employed to allow for better control under variable
thermal and electrical demands. Depending on energy demands
and accumulator status, the system operated in five different
modes: stand-by, electric generator, co-generation, heat pump
summer or heat pump winter modes.
After inserting the system characteristics, (aec ¼ 0.325;
aex ¼ 0.27; aes ¼ 0.325; hge ¼ 0.75; COPr ¼ 2.46; COPh ¼ 2.95;
3ec ¼ 0.95 and 3ex ¼ 0.65, estimated from figures provided by
Míguez et al. [25]), into Eqs. (23) or (25), one obtains the value of
ECR ¼ 1.7, which compares well with an experimental value of 1.67.
This value was calculated by adding the three energy demands,
E_ lo ¼ 1:5 kW, Q_ ht ¼ 19:6 kW and Q_ co ¼ 9:1 kW and dividing
them by the engine thermal input from fuel consumption,
H_ fe ¼ 18:1 kW. These are operational values for “heat pump
summer” mode, with engine and condenser heat recovery [25]. A
small adjustment was introduced in the present model to account
for the fact that, in [25], the compressor was driven by the engine
2
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
8 10
refrigeration part-load ratio, λ co
Fig. 8. Refrigerating coefficient of performance as a function of refrigeration part-load
operation ratio [26].
directly. The calculated ratio ðRHC =R*HC Þ approached unity, i.e., the
heat load equalled the amount of heat recovered, as the authors did
not employ any supplemental heater in their apparatus [25].
4.2. Parametric analysis
Energy conversion ratios for trigeneration and conventional
systems (considering the same load ratios) were estimated from
Eqs. (23), (25) and (32), with the following input data: aec ¼ 0:3;
aex ¼ 0:3; aes ¼ 0:3; hge ¼ 0:9; hpb ¼ 0:9; 3ec ¼ 0:75;
3ex ¼ 0:75; COPr ¼ 3 and COPh ¼ 4. The heating-to-cooling load
ratio, RHC, was made to vary from zero (no heating demand) to 10.
The power-to-cooling load ratio, REC, varied from 0.5 to 4.0.
Fig. 3 shows the calculated values of ECR for the conventional
mode (without heat recovery). In this case, and for the input values
provided to the model, ECR increases with both heating and power
to cooling load ratios.
Fig. 4 shows calculated values of ECR for the trigeneration
system as a function of the electricity and heating to cooling load
ratios. Full utilization of waste heat is attained when the waste heat
is equal to the heating demand. Beyond this point, the conventional
peak boiler is brought into operation to supplement the heat
production, thus affecting the overall energy conversion ratio. By

8
100 15 °C
coefficient of performance, COPh

losses
90 7
Fuel Energy Distribution [%]

80
10 °C
70
exhaust 6

60 Tev= 5 °C
5
50

40 coolant
4
30

20 3
shaft
10
2
0 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
refrigeration part-load ratio, λ co
engine shaft part-load ratio, λ es
Fig. 9. Heating coefficient of performance as a function of refrigeration part-load
Fig. 7. Energy balance in a Diesel engine as a function of load fraction [26]. operation ratio [26].
 J.A.R. Parise et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 1411e1420 1417

1.9 3000

1.8
2500
1.7 REC=0.5

load demands [kW]

2000
1.6 REC=0.5
Electricity
Φ ECR

1.5 REC=2 1500

Cooling
1.4 REC=2
1000 Heating
1.3

1.2 λ co 500
0.5
1.1 1 0
Feb Apr Jun Aug Oct Dec
1
month
0 2 4 6 8 10
Fig. 11. Expected monthly maximum demands for a Hong Kong commercial complex
RHC (the electricity demand excludes the amount of electricity needed for thermal energy
production) [28].
Fig. 10. Trigeneration and conventional system ECR ratio as a function of heating and
power to cooling load ratios, at part-load operation (aec, aex, aes: according to Fig. 7;
hge ¼ 0.9; hpb ¼ 0.9; 3ec ¼ 0.8; 3ex ¼ 0.6; COPr, COPh: according to Figs. 8 and 9;
were assumed to be the same for both systems, with input
Q_ co;max =W
_ es;max ¼ 0:5). values assumed as above (Figs. 3e5). Values for the fossil CO2 emis-
sions factors were taken from [24], as follows: pCO2 ;bd ¼
136:45 g CO2 =bhp h ¼ 50.827  109 kg CO2/J (note: biodiesel from
the same token, when the heating load is less than the available
soybean [24]; this value will differ for different biomass sources) and
waste heat, RHC  R*HC , the waste heat is only partially utilized,
thereby diminishing the system overall efficiency.
pCO2 ;pd ¼ 633:28 g CO2 =bhp h ¼ 235.9  109 kg CO2/J. Note that
Kbdeds ¼ 0:215, i.e., fossil CO2 emissions drop to nearly a fifth by
Fig. 5 shows a comparison of the obtained the non-dimensional
substituting, in the same system, diesel fuel for B-100 biodiesel. Fig. 6
gain in the energy conversion ratio, FECR , between the trigenera-
demonstrates significant reductions on CO2 emissions over the entire
tion and conventional systems (the latter running with separate
range of electricity and heating to cooling load ratios, should a B-100
components e boiler, motor-generator and chiller, with no heat
biodiesel fuelled trigeneration system be used, instead of a conven-
recovered). System characteristics parameters, aec, aex, aes, hge, hpb,
tional petroleum diesel system with no heat recovery.
3ec, 3ex, COPr and COPh, were assumed to remain constant with loads
and to have the same values for both systems (where applicable). It
can be seen that the trigeneration system provides a significant 4.3. Comparative analysis with variable system parameters
gain in the energy conversion ratio, particularly with heating loads
close to the amount of waste heat recovered from the engine and System characteristics parameters may vary with engine and
heat pump. Note that, as RHC approaches zero, i.e., no heating load, refrigeration loads, as illustrated in Fig. 7, which depicts the energy
both systems tend to have the same value of ECR, FECR ¼ 1, which balance of a Diesel engine [26]. An approximate function for the
shows that the energetic advantage of this type of trigeneration fuel energy distribution factor can be established as follows:
system, Fig. 2, lies on the recovery of waste heat to contribute to the
heating load. Should a heat driven absorption heat pump be used, aes ¼ a1 þ a2 les (40)
the waste heat recovery benefit could also be redirected to the
production of the refrigerating capacity. aec ¼ b1 þ b2 les (41)
Fig. 6 depicts the fossil fuel CO2 emissions ratio, comparing the
B-100 biodiesel-fuelled trigeneration system with the conventional
aex ¼ c1 þ c2 les (42)
plant running on diesel fuel. Component performance parameters

Table 1
Maximum monthly utility demands for a commercial complex [28] and all-year long dimensionless trigeneration system criteria parameters for the system configuration of
the case-study.

Month Energy demands Dimensionless parameters

E_ lo (kW) Q_ ht (kW) Q_ co (kW) RHC Eq.(2) REC Eq. (3) R*HC Eq. (24) ECRtg FECR Eq. (33) TPES Eq. (45)
Jan 2441.74 1135.66 832.17 1.3647 2.9342 6.7792 0.4379 1.1253 0.1113
Feb 2258.34 1162.90 757.70 1.5348 2.9805 6.8564 0.4494 1.1389 0.1220
Mar 2098.12 1052.35 1059.99 0.9928 1.9794 5.1879 0.4637 1.1288 0.1141
Apr 2345.19 908.79 1452.53 0.6257 1.6146 4.5798 0.4491 1.0964 0.0879
May 1961.39 630.68 2213.00 0.2850 0.8863 3.3661 0.4807 1.0701 0.0655
Jun 1937.63 475.48 2637.36 0.1803 0.7347 3.1134 0.4841 1.0506 0.0482
Jul 2384.24 446.44 2716.77 0.1643 0.8776 3.3516 0.4553 1.0407 0.0391
Aug 2418.70 439.19 2736.58 0.1605 0.8838 3.3620 0.4535 1.0396 0.0381
Sep 2395.87 473.97 2641.48 0.1794 0.9070 3.4006 0.4542 1.0434 0.0416
Oct 1953.99 646.46 2169.84 0.2979 0.9005 3.3898 0.4811 1.0724 0.0675
Nov 1926.51 922.91 1413.92 0.6527 1.3625 4.1598 0.4801 1.1155 0.1035
Dec 2461.96 965.34 1297.91 0.7438 1.8969 5.0503 0.4408 1.1000 0.0909
1418 J.A.R. Parise et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 1411e1420

7 coefficients of performance measured by Parise and Cartwright

[26], theoretically differing by unity, were considerably closer, as
6 shown in Figs. 8 and 9. This was probably due to the lack of insu-
lation of a shell-and-coil condenser, with condensing refrigerant
flowing in the shell side and exchanging heat with ambient [27], as
5 R*HC
load demand ratios

well.
Fig. 10 depicts FECR as a function of electricity and heating to
4 refrigeration load ratios, for two values of lco, 0.5 and 1. The same
behaviour of Fig. 5 was observed. Calculated values of les, Eq. (31),
3 REC
remained, as expected, within 0 and 1, as a result of an appropriate
choice for the ðQ_ co;max =W
_ es;max Þ value. Since part-load operation
2 (lco < 1 and les < 1) is less efficient for both the engine and heat
pump, FECR was smaller for lco ¼ 0:5. Nevertheless, it should be
1 observed that a positive gain in ECR, i.e., FECR  1, was attained for
RHC the entire range of REC, RHC and lco values.
0
F eb Apr J un Aug Oct Dec
month 4.4. Case study e the trigeneration scheme applied to a commercial
building complex
Fig. 12. Relative magnitudes of maximum monthly energy demands for the conditions
for a commercial complex, in Hong Kong [28].
Data available in [28], for a commercial building complex
located in Hong Kong, may be used to assess the thermal perfor-
The coefficients of performance also vary with the refrigeration mance of the trigeneration system layout represented in Fig. 2,
load. For a given evaporating temperature, the refrigerating and through the evaluation of dimensionless criteria parameters pre-
heating coefficients of performance, as shown in Figs. 8 and 9, sented in this paper. For this purpose, the conditions of maximum
respectively, can be approximated [26] by: monthly utility demands of [28] are reproduced in Fig. 11. In so
doing, the input data of system components for the parametric
COPh ¼ d1 þ d2 lco (43) analysis will be the same as those used in Section 4.2 of the present
paper.
Results provided in Table 1, and Figs. 12e15, show a situation in
COPr ¼ e1 þ e2 lco (44)
which the heat load is less than the recoverable heat and, therefore,
where d1, d2, e1 and e2 are functions of the evaporating a considerable amount of the waste heat from the engine is rejected
temperature. without any practical use. The prevailing condition, RHC < R*HC ,
A comparative analysis was carried out with system parameters indicates that the trigeneration system, although meeting the
taken from [26] for the engine (a1 ¼ 0.254; a1 ¼ 0.0594; b1 ¼ 0.437; electricity, heating and cooling demands for the application at
b2 ¼ 0.202; c1 ¼ 0.135; c2 ¼ 0.153) and for heat pump (d1 ¼ 4.13; hand, without making use of the peak boiler, will only achieve
d2 ¼ 13.2; e1 ¼ 2.95; e2 ¼ 11.1, operating at an evaporating moderate ECR values. Figs. 13e15 show that the operating points at
temperature of 5  C and condensing temperature ranging from maximum monthly utility demands would remain, irrespective of
30  C to 50  C). The following parameters were estimated: 3ec ¼ 0.8; the month, quite far from the condition of maximum thermal
3ex ¼ 0.6; hge ¼ 0.9 and hpb ¼ 0.9. Note that heating and refrigerating performance of the trigeneration system.

Fig. 13. Energy conversion ratio for the trigeneration system operating under variable RHC and REC, imposed by the case study [28] variable energy demands.
 J.A.R. Parise et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 1411e1420 1419

Fig. 14. ECR ratio between trigeneration and conventional systems, FECR , for the trigeneration system operating under variable RHC and REC, imposed by the case study [28] variable
energy demands.

A comparative analysis of the performance of the trigeneration
system with that of the conventional system with no heat recovery
may be conducted based on the definition of the ECR ratio between
trigeneration and conventional systems, FECR , Eq. (33). As a first
appraisal, results given in Table 1 and represented graphically in
Fig. 14 seem to point out to the advantage of trigeneration over
a conventional separate energy production scheme. However,
a question like “What’s the relative improvement in energy utilization
with trigeneration?” may arise. The comparative parameter FECR is
consistent with the definition of the Trigeneration Primary Energy
Saving (TPES), used by Chicco and Mancarella [29] and Piacentino
and Cardona [30], through the relation
for which minimum threshold values of 0.1e0.15 are to be fixed
for the system to be regarded as “high efficiency” [30]. Results of
the case study then indicate that the proposed trigeneration
system hardly surpasses the TPES minimum threshold values, and
only for a limited number of months.
The trigeneration system waste heat surplus at the expected
monthly maximum demands suggests that, instead of the system
layout of Fig. 2, a switch to a trigeneration system with waste heat-
driven absorption chillers would be advisable. The scheme here
studied would be more suitable for systems with a relatively large
heating demand.

TPES ¼ 1  ð1=FECR Þ (45)

Fig. 15. Trigeneration primary energy saving (TPES) for the trigeneration system operating under variable RHC and REC imposed by the case study [28] variable energy demands.
Also, TPES* ¼ 1  ðF*ECR Þ1 .
1420 J.A.R. Parise et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 1411e1420
5. Conclusions
A trigeneration system running on a single biofuel has been
studied. Results have shown that the option for a bio-trigeneration
system can lead to considerable reduction on energy consumption
(up to 50%, depending on relative energy demand magnitudes and
system characteristics) and in CO2 emissions (95%), an issue of
increasing public concern.
A key factor for the high energy conversion ratios of a trigener-
ation system is the internal waste heat recovery from system
components. In the present study, a vapour compression heat
pump was employed to meet the refrigeration demand, so that the
recovery of waste heat, from both heat engine and heat pump, was
directed to the heating load demand. Alternative internal heat
recovery schemes are possible, either by directing waste heat to
a heat-driven heat pump (thus prioritising the refrigeration
demand) or to a bottoming power cycle (as in organic Rankine
cycles), emphasizing the electrical power production.
The performance of trigeneration systems can be adequately
predicted by energy analysis. Some ingenious methods are avail-
able in the literature. A novel approach can only be justified as long
as it is able to unfold the complexity of a system that supplies three
different demands of energy flow. The definition of dimensionless
parameters that quantify the relative weights of energy demands
(heating, cooling, electricity) and a first-law energy conversion
ratio, previously used in [31,32], resulted in a useful thermody-
namic tool that covers a wide variety of trigeneration schemes. The
present study has thus shown that system energy demands as well
as capacity, for either electricity, heating or refrigeration powers,
have to be equally taken into account in a proper analysis.
Comparatively larger energy demands (either power, heating or
refrigeration) do require the system to rely on supplemental
equipment of traditional nature, thus reducing the impact of waste
heat recovery and, consequently, the overall energy conversion
performance. Such a circumstance is not always envisaged by the
existing analyses of trigeneration systems.
As a general remark, it may be pointed out that, although the ECR
expressions given by Eqs. (23) and (25) and, consequently,
the nondimensional parameter FECR, Eq. (33), strictly apply for the
specific case here studied, equivalent expressions, relating the relative
magnitudes of the system energy demands to energy performance
parameters, may be derived in the same fashion as carried out in this
paper for other trigeneration system configurations.
Only energy and CO2 emissions analysis were carried out in the
present study. However, the approach here presented, of relating an
energy performance index to nondimensional energy demand
parameters, can be easily extended to exergetic and thermoeco-
nomic analyses.
Acknowledgements
Thanks are due to CNPq, CAPES and FAPERJ, Brazilian research
funding agencies, for financial support. The authors are also greatly
indebted to Professor C.W. Hui, Hong Kong University of Science
and Technology, who kindly provided energy demand data for the
case study.
References
[1] L.R. Lindeman, C. Rocchiccioli, Ethanol in Brazil: brief summary of the state of
industry in 1977, Biotechnology and Bioengineering 21 (1979) 1107e1119.
[2] A.P.C. Faaij, Bio-energy in Europe: changing technology choices, Energy Policy
34 (2006) 322e342.
[3] M.A. Teixeira, Heat and power demands in babassu palm oil extraction
industry in Brazil, Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005)
2068e2074.
[4] M.P. Boyce, Handbook for Cogeneration and Combined Power Plants. ASME,
New York, 2001.
[5] H.I. Onovwiona, V.I. Ugursal, Residential cogeneration systems: review of the
current technology, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 10 (2006)
389e431.
[6] P.J. Mago, L.M. Chamra, A. Hueffed, A review on energy, economical, and
environmental benefits of the use of CHP systems for small commercial
buildings for the North American climate, International Journal of Energy
Research 33 (2009) 1252e1265.
[7] A. Abusoglu, M. Kanoglu, Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of
combined heat and power production: a review, Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 13 (2009) 2295e2308.
[8] J. Hernández-Santoyo, A. Sánchez-Cifuentes, Trigeneration: an alternative for
energy savings, Applied Energy 76 (2003) 219e227.
[9] D.W. Wu, R.Z. Wang, Combined cooling, heating and power: a review, Prog-
ress in Energy and Combustion Science 32 (2006) 459e495.
[10] G. Chicco, P. Mancarella, Distributed multi-generation: a comprehensive view,
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 13 (2009) 535e551.
[11] X. Dubuisson, I. Sintzoff, Energy and CO2 balances in different power gener-
ation routes using wood fuel from short rotation coppice, Biomass and Bio-
energy 15 (1998) 370e390.
[12] L. Gustavsson, R. Madlener, CO2 mitigation costs of large-scale bioenergy
technologies in competitive electricity markets, Energy 28 (2003)
1405e1425.
[13] Â. Marbe, S. Harvey, T. Berntsson, Technical, environmental and economic
analysis of co-firing of gasified biofuel in a natural gas combined cycle (NGCC)
combined heat and power (CHP) plant, Energy 31 (2006) 1614e1631.
[14] T. Savola, C. Fogelholm, Increased power to heat ratio of small scale CHP
plants using biomass fuels and natural gas, Energy Conversion and Manage-
ment 47 (2006) 3105e3118.
[15] S.N. Uddin, L. Barreto, Biomass-fired cogeneration systems with CO2 capture
and storage, Renewable Energy 32 (2007) 1006e1019.
[16] F. Meunier, Co- and tri-generation contribution to climate change control,
Applied Thermal Engineering 22 (2002) 703e718.
[17] F. Meunier, Sorption contribution to climate change control, Clean Technology
and Environment Policy 6 (2004) 187e195.
[18] P.V. Sen, P.K. Sen, P. Davies, Trigeneration for sustainable rural industrialisa-
tion, Paper ICME07-TH-25, 5 Pages, Proceedings of the International Confer-
ence on Mechanical Engineering 2007, (ICME2007) 29e31 December 2007,
Dhaka, Bangladesh.
[19] G. Nardin, G. Catanzaro, A self-sufficient system (“energy island”) fed only
with bio-oil from local crops, Helia 30 (46) (2007) 143e156.
[20] J. Galvão, S. Leitão, S. Malheiro, T. Gaio, Biofuel for the energy efficiency on
a building with small CCHP, in: International Conference on Clean Electrical
Power. ICCEP/IEEE, Capri/Italy, 2009.
[21] Y. Wang, Y. Huang, A.P. Roskilly, Y. Ding, N. Hewitt, Trigeneration running
with raw jatropha oil, Fuel Processing Technology 91 (2010) 348e353.
[22] E. Minciuc, O. Le Corre, V. Athanasovici, M. Tazerout, I. Bitir, Thermodynamic
analysis of tri-generation with absorption chilling machine, Applied Thermal
Engineering 23 (2003) 1391e1405.
[23] Y.A. Çengel, M.A. Boles, in: Thermodynamics, An Engineering Approach, fifth
ed. McGraw Hill Science and Engineering, 2006.
[24] J. Sheehan, V. Camobreco, J. Duffield, M. Graboski, H. Shapouri, An Overview of
Biodiesel and Petroleum Diesel Life Cycles, NREL/TP-580-24772. National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Colorado, US Department of Energy, USA, May
1998.
[25] J.L. Míguez, S. Murillo, J. Porteiro, L.M. López, Feasibility of a new domestic
CHP tri-generation with heat pump: I. Design and development, Applied
Thermal Engineering 24 (2004) 1409e1419.
[26] J.A.R. Parise, W.G. Cartwright, Experimental analysis of a diesel engine driven
water-to-water heat pump, Heat Recovery Systems & CHP 8 (2) (1988)
75e85.
[27] T.B. Herbas, E.C. Berlinck, C.A.T. Uriu, R.P. Marques, J.A.R. Parise, Steady-state
simulation of vapour-compression heat-pumps, International Journal of
Energy Research 17 (9) (1993) 801e816.
[28] S.M. Lai, C.W. Hui, Integration of trigeneration system and thermal storage
under demand uncertainties, Applied Energy 87 (9) (2010) 2868e2880.
[29] G. Chicco, P. Mancarella, Assessment of the greenhouse gas emissions from
cogeneration and trigeneration systems. Part I: models and indicators, Energy
33 (3) (2008) 410e417.
[30] A. Piacentino, F. Cardona, An original multi-objective criterion for the design
of small-scale polygeneration systems based on realistic operating conditions,
Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (17, 18) (2008) 2391e2404.
[31] T.B. Herbas, E.A. Dalvi, J.A.R. Parise, Heat recovery from refrigeration plants
meeting load and temperature requirements, International Journal of Refrig-
eration 13 (July (4)) (1990) 264e269.
[32] R.P. Marques, D. Hacon, A. Tessarollo, J.A.R. Parise, Thermodynamic analysis of
tri-generation systems taking into account refrigeration, heating and electricity
load demands, Energy Buildings 42 (12) (2010) 2323e2330.