AN EXERGOECONOMIC AND SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS OF

COGENERATION SYSTEMS USING THERMAL AND MEMBRANE

DESALINATION TECHNOLOGIES

Authors: Abdulrahman S. Almutairi1, 1, Hamad M. Alhajeri 2, Abdulrahman H. Alenezi3, Hamad H. Almutairi4

1 Assistant Professor, College of Technological Studies, Kuwait, asa.almutairi@paaet.edu.kw
2 Assistant Professor, College of Technological Studies, Kuwait, hm.alhajeri@paaet.edu.kw
3 Assistant Professor, College of Technological Studies, Kuwait, ah.alenezi@paaet.edu.kw
4 Assistant Professor, College of Technological Studies, Kuwait, hhh.almutairi@paaet.edu.kw

Presenter: Abdulrahman S. Almutairi , PhD, Assistant Professor- College of Technological Studies - Kuwait

ABSTRACT SUMMARY

This paper investigates the exergoeconomic and sustainability aspects of a cogeneration power and water
desalination plant using actual operational data. The primary mover of the cogeneration system is a combined cycle
power plant (CCPP) with advanced configurations including a triple pressure reheat heat recovery steam generator
(HRSG). In the desalination units, two technologies, the conventional multi-effect plant (MED) and two-pass
reverse osmosis (RO) unit are investigated. Comprehensive models have been developed for the proposed systems
using a specialized software and the outcomes were validated against manufacturer-supplied data as well as
published data in the literature. The thermo-physical properties of saline water was modelled based on a real mixture
principle approach. In the current study, the most common economic criteria was selected to evaluate the
profitability and acceptability of proposed systems. Furthermore, the impact of varying production settings of
cogeneration plants on the economic efficiency were explored. The results demonstrated that the combustion
chamber, GT, HRSG, de-aerating condenser and compressor respectively have the highest waste exergy in both
systems and the most important components from the exergoeconomic perspective. The water production cost based
on exergoeconomic approach were shown to be 0.51 and 1.54 $/m3 for (RO) membrane technology and (MED)
thermal desalination processes, respectively. Environmentally, CCPP-RO systems are more favorable in
comparison with CCPP-MED systems.

Keywords: Cogeneration, Desalination, Gas Turbine, Exergoeconomic , Sustainability.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
1. INTRODUCTION

Non-renewable energy and water continuously deplete as the population, economy and lifestyle continuously
evolve. Energy resources have become more scarce accompanied by an increase in prices due to higher demands.
The depletion of non-renewable energy influences the increased in the cost of raw materials, manufacturing
processes and transportation, negatively impacting the end users. To combat against this challenging obstacle, two
alternatives can be taken: develop new technologies that are either non-co-dependent on non-renewable resources
or can delay the inevitable depletion [1]. Similar to its counterpart, the depletion of water resources are continue
rises. Another cause of water depletion is pollution with no type alternative solution. The most realistic approach
to battle against the environmental issue is to delay the inevitable as efficiently and effectively. The most abundant
resource on the planet, water, covers approximately 70% of the earth, where 97% is saltwater and the remainder is
fresh water. The freshwater resources are the most impacted because 80% of it resides within the frozen icecaps.
Due to the limited amount of freshwater, the remaining amount is not evenly distributed per population density and
is not readily available in most locations. Despite that fact that water was once the most abundant resource on the
planet since the beginning, as the population continue to increases, the availability of water continues to
significantly decrease. In the last century, the world’s population grew by seven-time, which causes water resources
to decrease by 40% and can continue to fall to 60 % over the next decade. This debilitating shortage in some
countries and are typically accompanied by the spread of life-threatening diseases results in higher prices sometimes
greater than oil.[2].
To delay the depletion of non-renewable and water resources, can occur under efficient sustainable development
such as the utilization of energy resources. By utilizing these resources, the needs of human can be met in an
effective and cleaner way. The most effective approach in sustainable development is energy conversion efficiency.
By enhancing the energy conversion efficiency or thermal power plants, will result a significant decrease in fuel
consumption and generation of pollution. The traditional electrical gas turbine plant emits about two-thirds of
energy waste into the atmosphere. This type of waste can be effectively utilized in another energy system, such as
absorption chillers, desalination plants, and steam turbines, can enhance the energy conversion efficiency that can
lower global warming and increase the price reduction of the final product. This type of practice is known as
cogeneration principle. It’s a popular option that combines the heat loss with another form of energy output for the
same amount of fuel. [3]–[5].
The deficiencies of an energy system can be characterized through exergy analysis. Exergy analysis evaluates the
energy system deficiencies by quantifying the entropy generation by all components with respect to the first and
second law of thermodynamics [6]. Additionally, the exergoeconomic approach provides an adequate tool that
utilizes the concept of both exergy and economics to evaluate the thermal system, in terms of cost-effectiveness.
The inefficiencies of a thermal system are measurable and quantifiable in terms of cost, which a useful quality for
designer and end-users. Initially, Tsatsaronis [7] coined the term exergoeconomic as a result of combining the
exergy with economic analysis. Other researchers incorporating this name within their own study for different
thermal applications such as [8]–[11] . Within the previous two decades, the primary research was focus on the
electricity-water cogeneration systems using gas turbines as a primary mover.
A comparative study of CCPP pair with different desalination technologies was reported by Darwish and Al Najem.
Results of their study showed that RO was more efficient than other thermal desalination technologies. [12].
Sommarva evaluated diverse methods that would utilize the CCPP waste heat in order to enhance the performance
of an MSF/MED thermal desalination plant. This is accomplished by modifying the water-power configuration
[13].This author also studied on the HRSG and has established several methods that addresses the desalination
requirements, while simultaneously capitalizing on the heat recovery of a system.
An thorough exergy analysis and genetic algorithm optimization on a CCPP system, paired with an MSF
desalination unit, was conducted by Sanaye and Asgari, based on a four-objective function [14]. The conclusion of
this study determined the following: (i) as the number stages decreases, the exergy destruction and MSF investment
cost decreases; (ii) it was determined that the gas turbine unit and the MSF unit were the major source of
irreversibility.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 2 --
An feasibility study was conducted by Chacartegui, et al., carried out in order to investigated the characteristic of a
low-temperature cogeneration plants in a combined cycle with MED desalination plants [15]. The pressure of the
condenser had a significant impact on the cogeneration plant performance. The study showed that a lower and
higher-pressure value are more beneficial to power generation and desalination, respectively.Another exergy
analysis was carried out by Alsairafi, et al., in order to investigated the cogeneration properties of electrical power
combined with a MED desalination plant, under several operational conditions [16]. The Al-Zour south power plant
in Kuwait was selected for the power element and incorporated with a hypothetical desalination model. The authors
of this study determined that the cogeneration plant efficiency is dependent on the desalination unit capacity.
Despite the decreased total power output, the efficiency of the cogeneration plant increases as the desalination unit
capacity increases.
Nafey, et al., successfully exergoeconomic characterized a multi-stage flash (MSF) thermal desalination plant
using a user-interface friendly Visual Design & Simulation (VDS) software package that calculates the rate of
exergy flow for all inlet and outlet streams [17]. The research team further used VDS package for exergoeconomic
analysis on a combination of thermal and membrane desalination systems. [18]. Mabrouk and Fath expanded the
VDS exergoeconomic analysis on a hybrid system consisting of an MSF unit and pre-treatment with a nanofiltration
membrane [19].
Sayyaadi and Saffari optimized an exergoeconomic analysis of a 2000 (t/day) multi-effect distillation (MED)
desalination system with thermo-vapour-compressor (ME-TVC) using a genetic algorithm [20]. Sayyaadi, et al.,
also executed an exergoeconomic analysis using a optimizing algorithm that includes an “simulated annealing”
feature on the same type of plant[21] . Literature showed that the multi-objective analysis solutions, in most cases,
are located within a range of thermodynamic and thermoeconomic single-objective results. Ansari, et al., studied
exergoeconomic optimization for cogeneration nuclear power plant coupled to a ME-TVC desalination system [22].
Hamed et al carried out a thermoeconomic analysis based on the exergy accounting method of a CCPP integrated
with a hybrid MSF/RO desalination plant [23]. The analysis results showed that for oil prices ranging from $37/m3
($6/bbl) to $453/m3 ($72/bbl), the corresponding production cost varied from $0.0226/kWh to $0.096/kWh for the
electricity, and from $0.8258/m3 to $2.259/m3 for water. An exergy analysis of a cogeneration power (CCPP) and
water desalination (ME-TVC-MED) plant using in real operational data was conducted by Almutairi et al., The
findings determined that the highest exergy destruction level occurs in the combustion chamber and lowest exergy
value occurs in the steam turbine. The main reason for the high level of irreversibility in the first effect is due to the
temperature difference between the steam and feed water with high fuel energy. [24]. Askari, et al., recently carried
out exergoeconomic analysis for different desalination technologies integrated with the solar Rankine cycles. The
results showed that the cogeneration system integrated with MED or MED/TVC units entails the lowering the
electrical efficiency as compared the dual-purpose plants with RO unit. Also, was another finding from this study
showed that the solar radiation level is highly effected on the fresh water cost rather than seawater temperature
[25].V. Gude achieved a detailed exergatic analysis for several desalination processes. The results showed that the
highest exergy destruction takes place in the condenser for thermal desalination systems while for membrane
systems, the membrane module itself is the major source of irreversibility. The author highly recommended using
cogeneration principle which is considered an attractive approach from an exergy point of view [26]. Despite the
importance of the cogeneration principle for electricity-water, limited studies are available that sufficiently address
the multi-effect distillation (MED) in cogeneration mode using real set of data determined by exergy analysis along
with chemical impact. Additionally, there are currently no comprehensive comparison study available in literature
on CCPP-MED and CCPP-RO system using exergoeconomic and sustainability analysis in cogeneration mode.

2. SYSTEMS DESCRIPTION

The proposed cogeneration plants for this study consists of two systems driven by CCPP as the primary mover
while the desalination units are composed of two configurations of a conventional multi-effect plant (MED) and
two-pass reverse osmosis (RO) unit. The CCPP of the cogeneration plants are consisted of two highly advance GE
gas turbines composed of two triple pressure reheat HRSG, as one steam turbine, as depicted in Figure 1- and 2-A.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 3 --
The MED desalination unit have 10 effects, totaling an overall capacity of five MIGD, as shown in Figure 1-B. The
RO desalination units are a two-pass system with a total capacity of 30 MIGD, influence by the Al Shuwaikh,
located in the state of Kuwait, as depicted in Figure 2-B. The performance data of the CCPP in Table 1 while the
data of the RO and MED desalination units are presented in Tables 2 and 3 respectively.

Figure 1-A. Schematic diagram of CCPP in the first proposed system.

Figure 1-B. Schematic diagram of a conventional MED unit.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 4 --
 Figure 2-A. Schematic diagram of CCPP in the first proposed system.

Figure 2-B. Schematic diagram for the Shuwaikh RO Desalination Plant.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 5 --
 Table 1. Performance Data of Proposed CCPP.

Description Value Unit

GT power output 224.63 MW
ST power output 250.01 MW
LHV 47,435 kJ/kg
Net Plant Heat Rate 6,734 kJ/kWh
Net Plant Efficiency 53.46 %
Compressor pressure ratio 16.8 ----
Exhaust gases mass flow 593 Kg/s
o
GT Exhaust gases temperature 622.5 C
Steam mass flow 153 Kg/s
Power factor 0.85 ----
Frequancy 50 Hz

Table 2. Performance Data of Proposed RO Desalination Unit.

Description Value Unit

Number of SWRO stages 10 ----
Number of BWRO stages 4 ----
o
Seawater feed temperature 15 C
Design mass flow rate 4921.1 Kg/s
Permeate mass flow rate 1611.1 Kg/s
Rejected mass flow rate 3342.8 Kg/s
SWRO permeate mass flow rate 1750 Kg/s
SWRO bypass permeate mass flow rate 361.1 Kg/s
SWRO permeate mass flow rate 1250 Kg/s
BWRO rejected mass flow rate 138.8 Kg/s
Permeate salinity less than 200 ppm
Brine salinity 66279 ppm
SSP discharge pressure 2.5 bar
FFP discharge pressure 5.5 bar
UF Backwash discharge pressure 4.5 bar
ERD booster pump discharge pressure 66.7 bar
SWRO HPP discharge pressure 66.7 bar
BWRO HPP discharge pressure 13.7 bar
SWRO recovery ratio 42 %
BWRO recovery ratio 90 %

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 6 --
 Table 3. Performance Data of Proposed MED Desalination Unit.

Description Value Unit

No. Of effect 10 ----
ST power output 4.8 (255) MIGD(kg/s)
o
Steam temperature 70 C
Steam mass flow 30 Kg/s
o
Feed water temperature 37 C
Feed salinity 45,600 PPM
Feed flow rate 685 Kg/s
o
GT Exhaust gases temperature 622.5 C
Gained output Ratio (GOR) 8.5 Kg/s

3. METHODOLOGY

Energy analysis and working system evaluations has been previously conducted under the first law of
thermodynamics. The potential drawback of this original method is that this type of analysis was unable to generate
information revolving around high temperature thermal energy degrades during the power generating process or
provide adequate data on the relative quality of various energy forms. To overcome this limitation, the second law
of thermodynamic was incorporated to differentiate between quality and quantity while simultaneously
demonstrating that with any real process the overall quality of energy decreases.. This lead to characterizing the
availability of energy for useful work, in the terms of exergy, accompanied by the quantification is known as exergy
analysis.
The maximum amount of useful work before a system reaches equilibrium under a particular environmental
conditions is known as exergy. The conservation of exergy with a component or system is achieved when a
reversible process is implemented, while the opposite is observed under irreversible conditions. Under irreversible
conditions, the conservation of energy is diminished. To balance exergy, the following equation should be expressed
as:
𝑇𝑜
∑(1 − )𝑄̇ − 𝐸̇𝑤 = ∑𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑚̇𝑒 − ∑𝑖𝑛 𝑚̇𝑒 + 𝐸̇𝑑 (1)
𝑇𝑘 𝑘

where o and k represent reference state and the component within the system, respectively. The equation on the
left-hand side describes the exergy transfers process fueled by heat and work, while the opposite side describe the
exergy transfer behavior at the inlets and outlets along with exergy destruction within a given component, 𝐸̇𝑑
By neglecting the various form of tension effects, such as kinetic, potential , electrical, magnetic, nuclear and
surface, the total exergy can be characterizing a physical and chemical exergy components. [27]–[29]. The balance
of general exergy can be express as the following:

𝐸̇𝑥 = 𝐸̇𝑝ℎ + 𝐸̇𝑐ℎ (2)

Physical exergy (𝐸̇𝑝ℎ ) is defined as the maximum useful work transfers, derived from a unit mass of a substance,
from one specified state into the another state (typically known as a reference state) as expressed in Equation 3.

𝐸̇𝑝ℎ = 𝑚̇ [(ℎ𝑠 − ℎ𝑜 ) − 𝑇𝑜 (𝑠𝑠 − 𝑠𝑜 )] (3)

where as s and o represent the state and reference state, respectively.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 7 --
The other exergy counterpart, chemical exergy, is the maximum energy that can be produced under the following
condition: when the mass flows from a reference state to a dead state due to mismatching concentration levels.
Chemical exergy can be express in the following equations:

𝐸̇𝑐ℎ,𝐺 = 𝑛̇ [𝑦𝑘 𝑒̅𝑘𝑐ℎ + 𝑅̅ 𝑇𝑜 ∑ 𝑦𝑘 𝑙𝑛(𝑦𝑘 )] (4)

𝐸̇𝑐ℎ,𝐹 = 𝑛̇ 𝐿𝐻𝑉
̅̅̅̅̅̅ (5)

𝐸̇𝑐ℎ,𝑤 = 𝑚̇ ∑ 𝑤𝑘 (𝜇𝑘𝑠 − 𝜇𝑘𝑜 ) (6)

Equations 4, 5, 6, represent the chemical exergy for gas mixture, fuel, and saline water stream, respectively. The
performance of the energy systems are heavily dictated by the thermodynamic and chemical properties of working
fluids. Literature has identified four methods to analyze the thermodynamic properties of saline water. This
experiment utilises the most current thermophysical properties of saline water, including several empirical
correlation functions used to determine following properties of seawater: density, enthalpy and entropy. [30], [31].

𝜌𝑤 = 9.999𝑥102 + 2.034𝑥10−2 𝑇 − 6.162𝑥10−3 𝑇 2 + 2.261𝑥10−5 𝑇 3 − 4.657𝑥10−8 𝑇 4 (7)

𝜌𝑠𝑤 = 𝜌𝑤 +𝑤𝑠 (𝑎1 + 𝑎2 𝑇 + 𝑎3 𝑇 2 + 𝑎4 𝑇 3 + 𝑎5 𝑤𝑠 𝑇 2 ) (8)

ℎ𝑤 = 141.355 + 4202.070 𝑇 − 0.535 𝑇 2 + 0.004𝑇 3 (9)

ℎ𝑠𝑤 = ℎ𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠 (𝑏1 + 𝑏2 𝑤𝑠 + 𝑏3 𝑤𝑠2 + 𝑏4 𝑤𝑠3 + 𝑏5 𝑇 + 𝑏6 𝑇 2 + 𝑏7 𝑇 3 + 𝑏8 𝑤𝑠 𝑇 + 𝑏9 𝑤𝑠2 𝑇 + 𝑏10 𝑤𝑠 𝑇 2 ) (10)

𝑠𝑤 = 0.1543 + 15.383 𝑇 − 2.996𝑥10−2 𝑇 2 + 8.193𝑥10−5 𝑇 3 − 1.37𝑥10−7 𝑇 4 (11)

𝑠𝑠𝑤 = 𝑠𝑤 − 𝑤𝑠 (𝑐1 + 𝑐2 𝑤𝑠 + 𝑐3 𝑤𝑠2 + 𝑐4 𝑤𝑠3 + 𝑐5 𝑇 + 𝑐6 𝑇 2 + 𝑐7 𝑇 3 + 𝑐8 𝑤𝑠 𝑇 + 𝑐9 𝑤𝑠2 𝑇 + 𝑐10 𝑤𝑠 𝑇 2 ) (12)

where 𝑤 and 𝑠𝑤 represent the pure water and seawater, respectively. 𝑤𝑠 represent the Salt concentration y in
kgs/kgsw. Nevertheless, these correlations contain constants are defined in Table -4.

Table 4. Empirical correlations constant.

a1 = 8.02x102 b1 = -2.348x104 b6 = -4.417x101 c1 = -4.231x102 c6 = -1.443x10-1

a2 = -2.001x101 b2 = 3.152x105 b7 = 2.139x10-1 c2 =1.463x104 c7 = 5.879x10-4

a3 =1.677x10-2 b3 = 2.803x106 b8 = -1.991x104 c3 = -9.88x104 c8 = -6.111x101

a4 = -3.06x10-5 b4 = -1.446x107 b9 = 2.778x104 c4 =3.095x105 c9 = 8.041x101

a5 = -1.613x10-5 b5 = 7.826x103 b10 = 9.728x101 c5 = 2.562x101 c10 = 3.035x10-1

The exergetic efficiency of the desalination units is defined as a ratio of the minimum separation work required to
the total fuel exergy supplied to the system, as expressed below:

𝑊̇𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝜂𝑒𝑥 = 𝐸̇𝑓
(13)

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 8 --
In the current study the most common economic criteria were selected for the assessment process: payback period
(PBP), the net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR) and profitability index (PI). Three main
assumptions were made when conducting the economic evaluation; (i) no taxation on plant expenditures and
revenues, (ii) no degradation of gas turbine power output and heat rate [28], and (iii) the salvage value is assumed
10% of capital cost.

In order to accurately evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a thermal process, both exergy and economics must be
characterized to properly conduct this “exergoeconomic analysis”, which can provide unique comprehensive data
that cannot be obtained from other traditional methods.. Identified in literature as one of the most popular method
to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cogeneration plants, is the specific exergy cost method [SPECO].. This method
requires three sequential steps: (1) exergy analysis identify all exergy streams in the proposed system, (2) defined
fuels and products for each component and (3) evaluate the cost from economic analysis including fuel, operation
and maintenance (O&M) and capital cost. Additional equations are required to achieve a balance between the
number of variables and equations, in order to solved SPECO method, numerically. Additional details of the SPECO
method was further discussed in [28], [32]. The cost balance equation for the kth component can be described by
the following equation:

̇ + 𝐶𝑤,𝑘
∑𝑒 𝐶𝑒,𝑘 ̇ ̇ + ∑𝑖 𝐶𝑖,𝑘
= 𝐶𝑞,𝑘 ̇ + 𝑍̇𝑘𝑇 (14)

where 𝑍̇𝑘𝑇 is equal to the sum of the cost rates of capital cost plus the O&M cost. 𝐶̇ is the cost rate.

Dincer and Rosen [33] stated that there is a significant corelation between an exergy analysis and sustainability.
As the energy system’s exergetic efficiency increases, the environmental impact reduces, while sustainability
simultaneously increases. In the literature, few exergetic environmental indicators were developed to analyze the
environmental impact and sustainability produced by various cogeneration energy system [34]. The range and
preferable values a of environmental and sustainability indicators are shown in Table-5

Table 5: Environmental and sustainability indicators.

Range Preferable
No. Indicator Equation
From Up to value
1
1 Environmental Destruction Coefficient 𝐶𝑒𝑑 = 1 ∞ Low
𝜂𝑒𝑥
𝐸̇𝐿 + 𝐸̇𝑑
2 Environmental destruction index 𝛩𝑒𝑑𝑖= [ ] 𝐶𝑒𝑑 0 ∞ Low
𝐸𝑓̇
1
3 Environmental benign index 𝛩𝑒𝑏𝑖 = 0 ∞ High
𝛩𝑒𝑑𝑖
𝐸̇ 𝑥𝑑
4 Depletion factor 𝐷𝑃 = 0 1 Low
𝐸̇ 𝑥𝑖𝑛

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Cogeneration systems are considered as promising technologies for power application, fresh water production
and cooling or heating purposes. In power plants, a small portion of energy input is transformed into electricity

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 9 --
while remainder emitted to the surrounding as a waste heat energy. Therefore, cogeneration mode helps to
minimize the losses in the power systems through utilization energy resources in a more efficient way.
In current study, two comprehensive models for cogeneration power and water desalination plant have been
developed based on energetic and exergetic analyses. The power section in all models is inspired by the Al
Subiya CCPP whereas water desalination plants take different forms and technologies. Due to lack of
information in the literature regarding MED technology, an advanced hypothetical model was used; for the
reverse osmosis types of desalination technology real operational data were used. In the current study, energy
and exergy analyses are conducted for cogeneration systems in different operating condition. The
environmental state for the topping cycle was selected at an ambient pressure of 1.01 bar and a temperature of
288 K which includes air and exhaust gases; the environmental and dead state desalination units were T= 288
K, P = 1.01 bar, and ws = 45,600 PPM, which represents the intake conditions for the seawater.

The effect of seawater cooling temperature on both cogeneration plant and desalination unit is shown in Figure
3. It can be seen that increasing cooling temperature leads to an improvement in MED exergetic efficiency.
The exergetic efficiency of a cogeneration plant improved slightly due to the low level of useful work required
for the separation process compared to fuel input to the plant. The performance of the MED desalination unit
improves as the cooling temperature increases because of a reducing production ratio (that is plant production
per unit amount of feed water). Consequently, the minimum work of separation is increased and, hence, plant
efficiency. On the other hand, increasing cooling temperature causes large amounts feed water to be cooled in
the condenser. An adverse economic effect may be observed in the plant, because more feed pumps may be
required with greater investment and maintenance costs. This conflict can be resolved by applying an
optimization process based on plant configuration and intake conditions during the entire year. That means
cogeneration plant, where the exergetic efficiency is only slightly affected, should always operate at low
cooling temperatures, whereas in stand-alone desalination plants the reverse is recommended.

The relation between exergetic efficiency of both systems and feed water temperature is linearly proportional
as illustrated in Figure 4. Increasing feed temperature leads to reducing the thermal load per effect due to
reducing the difference in temperatures between feed water and boiling temperature of brine water. The
exergetic efficiency of a cogeneration plant slightly increased for the same reason as mentioned above, while
the efficiency of the MED unit increased on average by 0.6% per degree over the range investigated. The
production ratio increased at high feed temperatures, which is considered advantageous and compatible with
high exergetic efficiency. Thus, it is highly recommended to design and operate the MED desalination unit at
high feed temperatures to achieve high performance with cost effective investment and operation.

Figure 5 shows the effect of steam temperature on plant exergetic efficiency and production ratio. The variation
in steam temperature is highly affected on net power output due to extracted steam. The highest exergetic
efficiency for both cogeneration plant and the MED desalination unit occur at low steam temperatures. The
production ratio is almost constant with steam temperature because the first effect is more affected on any
other. It is strongly recommended to operate the plant at a low steam temperature as that reduces both the
amount of extracted steam and heat input to the desalination unit.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 10 --
 CCPP-MED MED Production Ratio
60

50
Exergetic Efficiency [%]

40

30

20

10

0
298 303 308
Cooling Tempertures [K]

Figure 3: Exergetic efficiency of cogeneration plant (CCPP-MED) and desalination unit (MED) as a
percentage production ratio versus seawater-cooling temperature.

CCPP-MED MED Production Ratio

60

50
Exergetic Efficiency [%]

40

30

20

10

0
308.15 310.15 312.15
Feed Tempertures [K]

Figure 4: Exergetic efficiency of cogeneration plant (CCPP-MED) and desalination unit (MED) as a
percentage with production ratio versus feed water temperature.

The influence of the number of effects on cogeneration plant efficiency and MED capacity is shown in Figure
6. Increasing the number of effects improves overall plant efficiency and MED capacity as well, due to greater
utilization of energy input in the desalination unit. The exergetic efficiency improved, on average, by 0.021%
and 1.9% per effect for cogeneration plant and MED unit, respectively. The MED capacity is increased, on
average, by 34 kg/s per effect and that is considered a good reason to support MED technology in addition to
the low heat input temperature. However, there are two constraints which control the number of effects, the
size of plant and practical limits on energy input.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 11 --
 CCPP-MED MED Production Ratio

60

50
Exergetic Efficiency [%]

40

30

20

10

0
341.15 343.15 345.15
Steam Temperture [K]

Figure 5: Exergetic efficiency of cogeneration plant (CCPP-MED) and desalination unit (MED) as a
percentage with production ratio versus steam water temperature.

CCPP-MED MED MED Capacity

60 300

50 250
Exergetic Efficiency [%]

MED Capacity [kg/s]

40 200

30 150

20 100

10 50

0 0
8 9 10
Number of Effects

Figure 6: Exergetic efficiency of cogeneration plant (CCPP-MED) and desalination unit as a percentage with
MED capacity versus number of effects.

The seawater feed temperature has a significant effect on cogeneration plant and RO unit performance as
shown in Figure 7. It is know the temperature of the sea water in the Arabian Gulf varies from 10 oC to 32oC
over a year and that shows the importance of investigating feed temperature as early as practicable in the design
stage. The exergetic efficiency of both cogeneration plant and RO systems increase as feed temperature
increases due to reduction in fuel exergy input and increasing minimum work of separation. A 10 o (298 K to
308 K) increase in feed temperature improves RO unit exergetic efficiency by 2.26%. The exegetic efficiency

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 12 --
of the RO system was the highest compared to the other common thermal desalination technologies. There are
a number of reasons for that, including quality of input energy and using energy recovery devices. The effect
of feed temperature augmented the hybridisation of RO plant and thermal desalination plant or steam power
plant in order to provide feed water at high temperature. The exergetic efficiency of the cogeneration plant
improved slightly while the production ratio drop very slightly and the recovery ratio value is unchanged
because the energy saving in the RO unit was very close to the increase in minimum work of separation.

CCPP-RO RO Production Ratio

60
Exergetic Efficiency [%]

50

40

30

20

10

0
298 303 308
Cooling/Feed Tempertures [K]

Figure 7: Exergetic efficiency of cogeneration plant (CCPP-RO) and desalination unit (RO) as a percentage
production ratio versus seawater feed temperature.

Figure 8 shows the exergetic flow as a percentage of input fuel exergy for the proposed cogeneration plants.
The general trend for both cogeneration plants is identical with slight differences in specific values due to
different configuration, e.g., the number of effects and capacity. This figure shows the exergetic efficiency of
cogeneration plant is controlled mainly by the power section, where the major source of irreversibilities take
place. The total exergy destruction is relatively high, which allows for further improvements. The exergy loss
is higher than the fuel exergy input to the desalination unit, which may offer opportunities to use low-grade
heat recovery technologies to enhance the overall exergetic efficiency for the entire system. The cogeneration
plant reduces exergy loss against to CCPP and steam turbine useful work reduce as well . The energy input to
RO desalination unit is in the form of electrical energy, and from an exergy perspective that has a higher quality
compared to heat input. The fuel exergy has a value of 1.7% which is consider high with respect to MED
thermal desalting system.

The waste exergy has the highest value in CCPP-MED system due to low fuel exergy, that can be reduced by
either improving components efficiency or adding a low-grade heat recovery system. The GT engines produce
the highest useful work of all systems at around 33.8% of the total fuel exergy input. The power output from
steam cycle is affected strongly by desalination plant capacity, as more extracted steam means reduced power
output. However, the addition of a thermal desalination unit to the power system is useful from two viewpoints;
first, it saves a significant amount of fuel with respect to stand-alone desalination units since the fuel is
recovered from GT waste exergy. Secondly it improves economic efficiency of the cogeneration plant slightly
via reduce the capital cost in separated mode. That emphasizes the performance of an electrical and water
cogeneration system and shows how it is useful for sustainable development.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 13 --
Figure 8: Exergy flow as a percentage of input fuel exergy for the proposed systems.

Figure 9 shows the waste destruction rates for all components in the cogeneration plants. The GT engine (primary
mover) dominates the exergy destruction in a cogeneration plant which means more developmental work must done
on this part to achieve a substantial overall improvement in the whole plant. Factors to be considered include
increasing pressure ratio of compressor, improving mixing within the combustor, and using preheating system in
order to reduce fuel consumption. Despite the low exergy destruction of desalination units compared to other
component, it is considered high relative to fuel exergy input. The exergy destruction in the desalination units is
governed by fuel exergy, unit capacity and number of components. The RO has higher exergy destruction relative
to MED due to high fuel exergy. The exergy destruction in the condenser for CCPP-MED is the highest because of
high fuel exergy that results from the flow of extracted steam from the steam turbine. The waste exergy in the
condenser can be reduced by lowering steam pressure and that would improve whole steam cycle. Steam turbine
exergy destruction is relatively low compared to its fuel exergy input because of reheat between the high-pressure
and intermediate steam turbines and using three steam turbines which enhances expansion and increases power
output. The exergy loss can be reduced by integrating the current system with other thermal processes, thus
improving the overall efficiency and decreasing the amount energy emitted to environment.

It well known, at single generation power plants power setting is obvious and full load is recommended to achieve
optimum economical and operational performance. For cogeneration systems produce more than one useful product
and the economic efficiency might vary with production setting, thus the effect of production setting. The electrical
generation of both systems were adjusted to full load and variable power settings. In the latter condition the system
operated at full load for 5000 hour and half load for 3000 hour. The desalination unit’s production was set at full,

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 14 --
half and zero for each load. Table 3 shows the economic profitability for the proposed systems at different operating
condition using the MS Excel model with the same input data such as plant book life and discount rate. In both
systems the full CCPP load with zero energy extraction condition shows high economic performance because the
CCPP has a high energy conversion efficiency compared to the desalination unit. The internal rate of return of
CCPP-MED and CCPP-RO at full-zero conditions are 44.60 and 40.83 respectively, while the PBPs of the capital
investment are 2.10 and 2.46 years, respectively. The profitability of both systems is high with NPVs of 2,11 and
2,26 M$ over 20 years of project life, which is below the typical lifetime of such energy systems. The cogeneration
plant with the MED system performs better than the RO system due to low heat input and unit capacity. The
advantage of the cogeneration plant was illustrated by the amount of fuel saved when the desalination unit was
connected directly to an industrial boiler.

Exergy Destruction [%]

70

60 MED RO

50

40

30

20

10

0
Compressor Combustion Gas Turbine HRSG Steam Turbine Condenser Desalination Losses
Chamber Unit

Figure 9: Waste exergy as a percentage of total value for all components for in the cogeneration plants .

Table 6 : Economic appraisals of CCPP-MED and CCPP-RO systems at different operating modes.
Operating Modes Profit Factors
System Electricity Water load PBP (years) NPV (M$) IRR (%) PI (%)
Full 2.287 1,964 42.52 6.06
Full load Half 2.185 2,040 43.69 6.23
CCPP-MED

Zero 2.097 2,107 44.60 6.38

Full load Full 2.626 1,791 39.33 5.64
(5000 hr) Half 2.527 1,846 40.24 5.78
Half load
(3000 hr) Zero 2.464 1,883 40.84 5.87
Full 3.122 1,785 35.19 4.91
Full load Half 3.039 1,867 35.87 5.08
CCPP-RO

Zero 2.464 2,255 40.83 5.86

Full load Full 5.289 1,048 24.25 3.42
(5000 hr) Half 5.076 1,130 25.06 3.58
Half load
Zero 4.882 1,211 25.85 3.75
(3000 hr)

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 15 --
Figure 10 shows the total cost and exergoeconomic variables for the condensing CCPP-RO. The combustion
chamber, GT, HRSG, the first RO unit ,de-aerating condenser , compressor and the second RO unit respectively are
the most important components from the exergoeconomic perspective. In all these components the source of costs
are associated with exergy destruction except for the HRSG where the cost is related to non-exergy sources because
the value of the exergoeconomic factor is above 50%. Thus, enhancing the cost effectiveness of entire system can
be achieved by improving the performance of these components whereas for the HRSG value of the equipment
purchase cost (EPC) must be reduced. In the RO plant the effect of non-exergy cost is relatively high therefore
reduction of capital and O&M costs is required to reduce the fresh water cost and improve the cost effectiveness of
the whole system.

Exergoeconomic and economic analyses have many differences beginning with estimating initial cost, determining
the relevant and useful economic parameters and ending with the applied methodology. The product cost for the
proposed desalination processes using economic and exergoeconomic analysis is shown in Table 7. The main
conclusions from this Table 6 can be summarized in two points: First, that there is a difference between the outcomes
of both analyses. Secondly, membrane technology (RO) gives a lower product cost than MED thermal desalination
process.
Table 7: Product cost for two desalination processes using economic and exergoeconomic analysis.
Product Cost $/m3
No. Desalination Processes
Economic analysis Exergoeconomic analysis
1 MED 1.67 1.54
2 RO 1.43 0.51

Figure 10: Exergy destruction costs and total cost (𝐶̇𝑑+𝑍̇𝐾𝑇), relative cost difference (𝑟𝑘) and exergoeconomic
factor (𝑓𝑘) for the main components of CCPP-RO cogeneration plant.

The environmental impact was investigated using different indicators for the proposed systems, see Table 5. All
environmental indicators show that CCPP-RO is more environmentally favourable than the CCPP-MED.
Consequently, it is more efficient environmentally, producing less environmental damage.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 16 --
Table 5: Environmental Indicators for different systems at ISO condition.

No. Indicators CCPP-MED CCPP-RO

1 Environmental Destruction Coefficient [Ced] 1.87 1.94

2 Environmental destruction index [ 𝛩𝑒𝑑𝑖 ] 0.80 0.86

3 Environmental benign index [𝛩𝑒𝑏𝑖] 1.25 1.16

5 Depletion factor [𝐷𝑃] 0.43 0.44

5. Conclusion

Cogeneration plants for power and water purposes was thermodynamically studied under different operating
conditions based on exergoeconomıc and sustaınabılıty analysıs analysis. The exergatic data for the proposed
system were extracted from the developed model by specialized software and validated with the manufacturer’s
data and showed good agreements. The main conclusions drawn from this study is outlined below:

1. The exergetic efficiency of cogeneration plant for power and water purposes is controlled mainly by the
power section and any slight improvement will substantially reduce products cost as well as environmental
impact.

2. The membrane separation technology performs well compared with the thermal separation process due to:
high-quality energy input, a single phase of separation, use of an energy recovery device, and a sophisticated
pre-treatment process.

3. The variation in temperatures of feed water, cooling and steam temperature, have a significant effect on the
cogeneration plant exergetic efficiency.

4. The GT engine (primary mover) dominates the exergy destruction in a cogeneration plant which means
more developmental work must done on this part to achieve a substantial overall improvement in the whole
plant.

5. The economic and exergoeconomic assessments showed the membrane desalination technology to have the
lowest production cost compared with the MED thermal desalination processes.

6. All environmental indicators show that CCPP-RO is more environmentally favourable in comparison with
the CCPP-MED plant.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 17 --
REFERENCES

[1] “International Energy Agency.” [Online]. Available: https://www.iea.org/. [Accessed: 02-Jul-2014].

[2] H. El-Dessouky and H. Ettouney, Fundamentals of salt water desalination. Elsevier, 2002.
[3] F. a. Al-Sulaiman, I. Dincer, and F. Hamdullahpur, “Exergy analysis of an integrated solid oxide fuel cell and organic
Rankine cycle for cooling, heating and power production,” J. Power Sources, vol. 195, no. 8, pp. 2346–2354, 2010.
[4] Almutairi, A., P. Pilidis, N. Al-Mutawa, and M. Al-Weshahi, “Exergetic and Sustainability Analysis of an
Intercooled Gas Turbine Cogeneration Plant with Reverse Osmosis Desalination System,” J. Energy Eng., vol. 143,
no. 5, 2017.
[5] M. Kanoglu and I. Dincer, “Performance assessment of cogeneration plants,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 50, no.
1, pp. 76–81, 2009.
[6] H. Kwak, D.Kim, and J. Jeon, “Exergetic and thermoeconomic analyses of power plants,” Energy, vol. 28, no. 4, pp.
343–360, 2003.
[7] G. Tsatsaronis, “Combination of Exergetic and Economic Analysis in Energy-Conversion Processes,” 1985, pp. 151–
157.
[8] L. Meyer, R. Castillo, J. Buchgeister, and G. Tsatsaronis, “Application of exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental
analysis to an SOFC system with an allothermal biomass gasifier,” Int. J. Thermodyn., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 177–186,
2009.
[9] G. Tsatsaronis and M. Winhold, “Exergoeconomic analysis and evaluation of energy-conversion plants—I. A new
general methodology,” Energy, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 69–80, Jan. 1985.
[10] L. G. Alves and S. A. Nebra, “Exergoeconomic study of hydrogen production from steam reforming of natural gas,”
in ECOS 2005 - Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Efficiency, Cost, Optimization, Simulation, and
Environmental Impact of Energy Systems, 2005, pp. 1123–1130.
[11] S. E. Yalçin and T. Derbentl, “Exergoeconomic analysis of boilers,” in ECOS 2006 - Proceedings of the 19th
International Conference on Efficiency, Cost, Optimization, Simulation and Environmental Impact of Energy
Systems, 2006, pp. 459–463.
[12] M. a. Darwish and N. Al Najem, “Co-generation power desalting plants: New outlook with gas turbines,”
Desalination, vol. 161, pp. 1–12, 2004.
[13] C. Sommarva, “Utilisation of power plant waste heat steams to enhance efficiency in thermal desalination,”
Desalination, vol. 222, no. 1–3, pp. 592–595, 2008.
[14] S. Sanaye and S. Asgari, “Four E analysis and multi-objective optimization of combined cycle power plants
integrated with Multi-stage Flash (MSF) desalination unit,” Desalination, vol. 320, pp. 105–117, 2013.
[15] R. Chacartegui, D. Sánchez, N. di Gregorio, F. J. Jiménez-Espadafor, A. Muñoz, and T. Sánchez, “Feasibility
analysis of a MED desalination plant in a combined cycle based cogeneration facility,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 29,
no. 2–3, pp. 412–417, 2009.
[16] A. A. Alsairafi and M. Darwish, “Efficiency improvement and exergy destruction reduction by combining a power
and a multi-effect boiling desalination plant,” vol. 1, no. June, pp. 289–315, 2013.
[17] a. S. Nafey, H. E. S. Fath, and A. a. Mabrouk, “Exergy and thermoeconomic evaluation of MSF process using a new
visual package,” Desalination, vol. 201, no. 1–3, pp. 224–240, 2006.
[18] A. A. Mabrouk, A. S. Nafey, and H. E. S. Fath, “Thermoeconomic analysis of some existing desalination processes,”
Desalination, vol. 205, no. 1–3, pp. 354–373, 2007.
[19] A. N. A. Mabrouk and H. E. S. Fath, “Techno-economic analysis of hybrid high performance MSF desalination plant
with NF membrane,” Desalin. Water Treat., vol. 51, no. 4–6, pp. 844–856, Jan. 2013.
[20] H. Sayyaadi and A. Saffari, “Thermoeconomic optimization of multi effect distillation desalination systems,” Appl.
Energy, vol. 87, no. 4, pp. 1122–1133, 2010.
[21] H. Sayyaadi, A. Saffari, and A. Mahmoodian, “Various approaches in optimization of multi effects distillation
desalination systems using a hybrid meta-heuristic optimization tool,” Desalination, vol. 254, no. 1–3, pp. 138–148,
2010.
[22] K. Ansari, H. Sayyaadi, and M. Amidpour, “Thermoeconomic optimization of a hybrid pressurized water reactor
(PWR) power plant coupled to a multi effect distillation desalination system with thermo-vapor compressor (MED-
TVC),” Energy, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 1981–1996, 2010.
[23] O. A. Hamed, “Thermoeconomic analysis of combined power cycle integrated with MSF/SWRO desalination plant,”
Desalin. Water Treat., vol. 3994, no. August, pp. 1–10, 2016.
[24] A. Almutairi, P. Pilidis, N. Al-Mutawa, and M. Al-Weshahi, “Energetic and exergetic analysis of cogeneration power
combined cycle and ME-TVC-MED water desalination plant: Part-1 operation and performance,” Appl. Therm. Eng.,

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 18 --
 vol. 103, pp. 77–91, 2016.
[25] I. B. Askari, M. Ameri, and F. Calise, “Energy, exergy and exergo-economic analysis of different water desalination
technologies powered by Linear Fresnel solar field,” Desalination, vol. 425, no. October 2017, pp. 37–67, 2018.
[26] V. G. Gude, “Exergy Evaluation of Desalination Processes,” 2018.
[27] T. J. Kotas, The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. London, 2012.
[28] A. Bejan, G. Tsatsaronis, and M. Michael, Thermal design and optimization. John Wiley & Sons, 1996.
[29] A. Almutairi, P. Pilidis, and N. Al-Mutawa, “Energetic and exergetic analysis of combined cycle power plant: Part-1
operation and performance,” Energies, vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 14118–14135, 2015.
[30] M. H. Sharqawy, J. H. Lienhard V, and S. M. Zubair, “On exergy calculations of seawater with applications in
desalination systems,” Int. J. Therm. Sci., vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 187–196, 2011.
[31] M. H. Sharqawy, J. H. Lienhard V, and S. M. Zubair, “Thermophysical properties of seawater: A review of existing
correlations and data,” Desalin. Water Treat., vol. 29, no. 1–3, pp. 355–355, 2011.
[32] A. Almutairi, P. Pilidis, and N. Al-mutawa, “Exergoeconomic and Sustainability Analysis of Reheat Gas Turbine
Engine,” Am. J. Energy Res., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2016.
[33] I. Dincer and M. A. Rosen, Exergy. Elsevier Ltd, 2013.
[34] A. Midilli and I. Dincer, “Development of some exergetic parameters for PEM fuel cells for measuring
environmental impact and sustainability,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, vol. 34, no. 9, pp. 3858–3872, 2009.

The International Desalination Association Conference 2019 Action4Good, Santa Margherita, Italy
REF: IDA19A4G-XXXXXX_Almutairi
-- 19 --