Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

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

Energy, exergy, exergoeconomic, and exergoenvironmental (4E) analysis of

a new bio-waste driven multigeneration system for power, heating,
hydrogen, and freshwater production: Modeling and a case study in Izmir
Zahra Hajimohammadi Tabriz a, Mousa Mohammadpourfard a, b, *, Gülden Gökçen Akkurt b,
Saeed Zeinali Heris a
a
Faculty of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
b
Department of Energy Systems Engineering, Izmir Institute of Technology, Izmir, Türkiye

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Today, the world is facing numerous challenges such as the increasing demand for energy, fossil fuels reduction,
Multigeneration system the growth of atmospheric pollutants, and the water crisis. In the present research, a new multigeneration system
Exergy based on urban sewage bio-waste has been designed and evaluated for power, hydrogen, freshwater, and heating
Hydrogen
production. This system, which consists of biomass conversion subsystem, hydrogen production unit, Brayton
Atmospheric water harvesting
cycle, atmospheric water harvesting unit, steam Rankine cycle, and organic Rankine cycles, has been evaluated
Sewage sludge Biomass
4E analysis from a thermodynamic point of view, and the energy, exergy, exergoeconomic, and exergoenvironmental ana­
lyses have been carried out on it. In the current study, the atmospheric water harvesting unit, as an attractive and
environmentally friendly technology, is integrated with this Biomass-based multigeneration. A case study has
been conducted on this system using the information collected from Çiğli wastewater treatment plant located In
Izmir province, Turkey, and the results indicate that such a system, in addition to receiving sewage sludge from
the treatment plant unit as a polluting waste, can produce added value products. The modeling results show that
in the base conditions and with a feed rate of 7.52 kg/s, the total power generated by this system is 17750 kW,
the hydrogen production rate is 3180 kg/h, the freshwater production rate is more than 18 l/h, and the energy
and exergy efficiencies are 35.48% and 40.18%, respectively. According to the exergoeconomic and exer­
goenvironmental evaluations, the unit cost of total products and the unit emission of carbon dioxide are
calculated as 13.05 $/GJ and 0.2327 t/MWh, respectively. Also, the results of parametric studies show that
increasing the rate of Biomass improves the overall energy efficiency and production rates and also reduces the
unit emission of carbon dioxide, but on the other hand, it causes a decrease in exergy efficiency and an increase
in the unit cost of total products.

the current primary energy supply is more than 12 × 109 tons of oil
equivalent, which causes the emission of 39.5 Gt of CO2 [3]. Moreover,
1. Introduction the asymmetric distribution of water all over the world and the lack of
available freshwater have caused water stress in many parts of the
Nowadays, the world’s most important concerns are energy, envi­ world. Although 70% of our planet is covered with water, only 2.5% of
ronment, and water. The increase in energy demand, the reduction of this water is available as freshwater. About 4 × 109 people experience
fossil fuels, and the low efficiency of traditional power plants are the water shortage for at least one month a year, and about 5 × 108 people
challenges in the energy field. In the last ten years, the world’s energy face this issue all year long [4,5].
demand has increased by 1.7% annually [1]. However, traditional Designing and evaluating polygeneration systems is a promising
power plants have only 30% fuel-to-electricity efficiency [2]. Burning solution to reduce energy issues. Polygeneration systems simultaneously
fossil fuels and even some procedures for clean fuel production have produce two or more than two energy products in a single integrated
caused environmental effects, greenhouse gas emissions, and global process [6]. The design of polygeneration systems enhances efficiency
warming. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA) reports,

* Corresponding author at: Department of Energy Systems Engineering, Izmir Institute of Technology, İzmir / Türkiye.
E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (M. Mohammadpourfard).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2023.117130
Received 2 January 2023; Received in revised form 29 March 2023; Accepted 30 April 2023
Available online 11 May 2023
0196-8904/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Nomenclature SRC Steam Rankine cycle

STBM(-) Steam to Biomass ratio
ARC Absorption refrigeration cycle RH (-) Relative humidity
AWH Atmospheric water harvesting t(s) Time
BC Brayton cycle TPC(kJ/s) Total power consumption
BCS Biomass conversion system VS(-) Volatile solid
c($/GJ) Specified cost per unit of exergy Ẇ(kJ/s) Power
Ċ($/s) Cost rate WGR Water generation rate
cp ($/GJ) Unit cost of product WGSRU Water-gas shift reaction unit
Cei (− ) Exergoenvironmental impact coefficient WWTP Wastewater treatment plant
CEPCI Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index x(kg/kgsolution ) Ammonia mass fraction
CEHX Condenser–evaporator heat exchanger y Exergy destruction ratio
COP Coefficient of performance Zk ($) The cost of kth component
CRF( − ) Capital recovery factor ˙
Z($/s) Capital investment cost
Des Destruction
E(kJ) Energy Greek letters
EMICO2 (t/MWh) Unit emission of carbon dioxide ε Heat exchanger effectiveness
ex(kJ/kg) Special exergy η Energy efficiency
f ei (− ) Exergoenvironment factor θei Environmental damage effectiveness factor
f es (− ) Exergy stability factor θeii Exergoenvironmental impact improvement
f k (− ) Exergoeconomic factor λ Fuel-air ratio on the molar basis
g(kJ/kmol) Molar specific Gibbs free energy ϕ Maintenance factor
h(kJ/kg) Specific enthalpy ψ Exergy efficiency
h(kJ/kmol) Molar specific enthalpy ω Specific humidity
0 ω
̃ Vapor mole fraction ratio
hf (kJ/kg) Molar specific enthalpy of formation
i( − ) Interest rate Subscripts and superscripts
K(-) Equilibrium constant 0 Standard conditions
LHV(kJ/kmol) Molar lower heating value a Air
ṁ(kg/s) Mass flow rate ch Chemical
MC(-) Moisture content cv Control volume
MW(kg/kmol) Molar weight D Destruction
N(h) Annual duration of operation hours DA Dry air
n(Year) Lifetime of the project DS Dry solid
ORC Organic Rankine cycle e Exit
Q̇(kJ/s) Heat transfer rate ha Relative humidity
R(kJ/kg) Universal gas constant i Input
R(kJ/kmol.K) Universal molar gas constant mix Mixture
s(kJ/kg.K) Specific entropy OM Organic matter
s(kJ/kmol.K) Molar specific entropy ph Physical
SHX Solution heat exchanger w Water

and reduces pollution by utilizing waste energy or stream of the system increasing and it is predicted that its amount, which is currently around
in other subsystems [7]. 50 g of dry matter per person per day, will not decrease in the future. The
The energy used in these plants can be supplied through fossil fuels, implementation of municipal sewage sludge, as the feed of poly­
but due to their disadvantages in causing pollution, researchers tend to generation systems is a suitable solution to produce valuable products
replace them with cleaner fuels. Using cleaner and more affordable fuels from a polluting waste [15]. Power and heating are typical products of
such as shale gas [8] in multigeneration systems or co-firing Biomass Biomass-based plants. Also, the coupling of hydrogen production pro­
with fossil fuels [9] has been the subject of recent studies in this field. cesses with these systems has received a lot of attention. Hydrogen is
Renewable energy sources, as the most important and clean energy known as a clean fuel that does not cause harmful emissions when used
sources, when used in polygeneration systems, combine the benefits of to generate electricity. But one thing to note is that clean fuel is
using renewable energy sources with those of polygeneration. The important when its overall life cycle is environmentally benign.
integration of solar energy [10], geothermal energy [11], and Biomass Hydrogen production using renewable energy sources or through the
energy [12] with multigeneration systems has been the most popular Biomass conversion cycles is a promising solution [16].
topic in recent studies. Ishaq et al. [17] proposed a Biomass driven system for power,
Unlike other renewable energy sources, Biomass has no intermittent hydrogen, heating, and hot water production. This system uses low-
nature and has gained much popularity due to its easy storage, high grade waste heat for organic Rankine cycle and the thermoelectric
availability, and carbon neutrality [13]. In addition, the use of wasted generator. The overall energy efficiency is obtained to be 50.83%,
Biomass (Bio-waste) has an additional advantage because it does not whereas the exergy efficiency is found to be 32.78%. In another study,
chiefly compete with the food chain or other benefits [14]. Municipal Ishaq et al. [18] designed a Biomass driven plant to produce power,
sewage sludge is one of the most important types of Bio-waste. A large heating, and hydrogen. The hydrogen is produced in a PEM electrolyzer
amount of sewage sludge is produced from municipal wastewater and water gas shift reactor. They showed that energy and exergy effi­
treatment plants around the world. Sludge production is continuously ciencies are 53.7% and 45.5%, respectively. Sotoodeh et al. [19]

2
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

developed a waste-to-energy Biomass gasification-based multi­ • The implementation of municipal sewage sludge, as the feed of
generation system that produces power, heating, cooling, and hydrogen. polygeneration systems, has received less attention. However, the
They have improved power generation in the cycle by 12%. Energy and improper disposal of wastewater in some areas has caused serious
exergy analysis and a comprehensive parametric study on the cycle have damage to the ecosystem and also has neglected a potential energy
been done, and the energy and exergy efficiencies obtained 52.3% and source.
41.3%, respectively. • The use of sewage sludge to produce biogas through anaerobic
Water stress, as mentioned earlier, is a problem that threatens the digestion, and using the digested sludge to produce syngas through
coming decades of the planet. Therefore, integrating water desalination gasification, simultaneously in the same system, have not been
units with energy systems to simultaneously produce freshwater and investigated in previous studies. Also, the simultaneous conversion
other products is also considered. In the system proposed by Safari et al. of sewage sludge into energy through both anaerobic digestion and
[14], a sewage sludge bio-waste-based multigeneration system was gasification is limited.
developed to produce electricity, heating, freshwater, and hydrogen. • Powering atmospheric water harvesting units with renewable energy
The main subsystems of this plant are a Brayton cycle fueled with biogas has recently become more popular, but researchers have focused
from anaerobic digestion, a multi-effect desalination unit, and an more on using solar and wind energy. The integration of this unit as
organic Rankine cycle. This system’s energy and exergy efficiencies are one of the subsystems of a power plant or a multigeneration system is
63% and 40%, respectively. Yilmaz et al. [20] designed a system based a subject that has not been studied.
on demolition wood that produces electricity, heating, freshwater, and • Performed studies on renewable hydrogen production using syngas
hydrogen. This system uses a membrane distillation unit to produce in multigeneration systems are limited. Obtained syngas from the
freshwater. Furthermore, the produced hydrogen is obtained from the gasification of various bio-wastes is a rich source of hydrogen. Uti­
high-temperature steam electrolyzer subsystem. This system’s energy lizing this potential while controlling and recycling wastes and pre­
and exergy efficiencies are reported as 52.84% and 46.59%, respec­ venting their environmental hazards also uses this free resource.
tively. Onder et al. [21] proposed a system for producing electricity,
heating, cooling, hydrogen, hot water, and drying. Hydrogen production In this way, the need to design a system to fill some gaps was felt.
in this system is through a four-step Cu-Cl thermochemical process. The Accordingly, a new Biomass-based multigeneration system is designed
power plant’s energy and exergy efficiencies are calculated as 56.71% to produce power, hydrogen, freshwater, and heating by receiving
and 53.59%, respectively. sewage sludge as bio-waste. The Brayton cycle in this system is fed with
There are numerous techniques to supplement freshwater from sea or biogas obtained from the anaerobic digestion process of raw sludge.
ocean water. However, all these techniques require access to water re­ Also, digested sludge enters the gasifier to produce syngas. This system
sources, so their use is problematic, particularly in landlocked areas. In produces hydrogen in a gas–water shift reaction unit that feeds on
addition, these techniques need vast infrastructure for operation [4]. syngas, and freshwater is obtained through the atmospheric water har­
Atmospheric water harvesting (AWH) is a process that harvests air vesting unit. In the design of this system, the maximum heat capacity of
moisture. Moisture, as one of the sources of freshwater, exists all over the produced gases has been used, and efforts have been made to inte­
the world. The volume of water in the atmosphere, which is estimated at grate the subsystems so that the waste in the set is reduced as much as
12,900 km3, is six times the volume of all rivers in the world. This water possible. In this way, while reducing the environmental effects of
source can provide part of the water needs in the agricultural, drinking, wastewater, its energy is recovered, and valuable products, including
and even industrial sectors [22]. The United Nations, in its recent report, power, heating, freshwater, and hydrogen, are produced.
recognized AWH as a promising and low-cost alternative that can meet In this paper, in addition, to designing a system based on existing
human consumption standards [23]. Furthermore, this process does not gaps with a new configuration, 4E (energy, exergy, exergoeconomic, and
negatively affect the environment because the hydrological cycle natu­ exergoenvironmental) analysis is implemented on it, and the impact of
rally refills the harvested moisture [4]. the system’s key variables on the main performance criteria of the sys­
Patel et al. [24] conducted an experimental study on an atmospheric tem is studied. In addition, a case study is considered for the Çiğli
water extracting (AWE) device. Their study was performed for different wastewater treatment plant located in Izmir-Turkey to reveal the ben­
climates, and the results were reported. They showed that the AWE efits of this system. In this regard, the information about this treatment
device performs best in hot and humid regions. Also, the obtained results plant was prepared and the weather data, including the temperature and
showed that in the best condition, i.e., warm-humid condition, the relative humidity of the environment, were also extracted.
freshwater production by this device is 1.78 l/h, and its power con­
sumption is 0.75 kWh/l of water, while for mild and dry conditions, 2. System description
these values are respectively equal to 0.28 l/h and 4.71 kWh/l. Inte­
gration of atmospheric water harvesting units with renewable energy An overview of the whole system is shown in Fig. 1. The proposed
sources can increase the benefits of this process. Chaitanya et al. [23] system consists of a Biomass conversion subsystem (BCS), water–gas
have used Biomass gasification energy to power an off-grid refrigeration shift reaction unit (WGSRU), Brayton cycle (BC), atmospheric water
system that can harvest air humidity. The results of the thermodynamic harvesting unit (AWH), steam Rankine cycle (SRC) and organic Rankine
analysis showed that if 1000 kg of Biomass is used, this system will be cycles (ORC).
able to produce 800–1200 L of water. Also, they claimed that the pro­ A more detailed description of the system and the activation
duced water amount can meet 10–12% of drinking water needs in sequence of its different parts can be described in six steps as follows:
certain states of India. Energy and exergy analysis of a solar AWH has First, the sewage sludge from the wastewater treatment plant enters
been performed by Salek et al. [25]. They investigated the system per­ the system as an input feed. This sludge is first anaerobically digested.
formance in different climates; accordingly, they studied three cities in During this process, Biomass is converted into biogas and digestate.
Iran: Tehran, Bandar Abbas, and Ramsar. Their proposed system was Biogas contains about 60% (by volume) methane and 40% of carbon
able to produce approximately 400 L of water per month at its maximum dioxide. This biogas is used as the fuel of the Brayton cycle. The
production, while its specific energy consumption was equal to 3 kWh/l. incoming air from stream 7 passes through the preheater and enters the
According to the literature review conducted on the research field, combustion chamber to react with biogas. Combustion gases enter the
and also based on the results obtained from the authors’ recent review gas turbine to generate power. Then these gases are passed through the
paper [26] that reviewed the Biomass-based polygeneration systems, preheater to heat the incoming air. Next, these gases, which are still at a
some of the existing gaps were recognized as follows: high temperature (544.9 ◦ C), pass through the generator of the water-
ammonia absorption refrigeration cycle to provide the heat required

3
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Fig. 1. An overview of the whole system.

for this cycle. The schematic of this step is shown in Fig. 2. steam Rankine cycle. The schematic of this step is illustrated in Fig. 5. In
Second, a single-stage ammonia-water cycle, including absorber, the steam Rankine cycle, steam travels through this cycle as a working
pump, generator, rectifier, condenser, evaporator, expansion valves, and fluid to generate power. Water is heated by hot gases in a heat exchanger
heat exchangers, has been used for harvesting atmospheric water. As and enters the steam turbine as superheated steam to generate power.
shown in Fig. 3, which presents the schematic of this step, A low- Then, passing through the condenser, it liquefies and returns to the heat
pressure but strong solution of ammonia is pumped from the absorber exchanger to repeat the cycle. Due to the high enthalpy difference in this
to the generator, which operates at high pressure. The water and equipment, it can be used to produce hot water. hot gases in stream 37,
ammonia solution are separated in the generator; this separation hap­ which was used to heat the Rankine cycle water, enter the following heat
pens through ammonia evaporation. Then the rectifier purifies the exchanger in stream 38 (at 348 ◦ C) to provide the heating power
ammonia vapor. This vapor is condensed in the condenser, and after required for the organic Rankine cycle.
passing through the condenser-evaporator heat exchanger and throttling Next, in the fifth step, Organic Rankine Cycles are used for power
valve, it enters the evaporator. Liquid ammonia in the evaporator, which generation. This cycle supplies the required heating from stream 38. The
is very strong and has low pressure, is used to refrigerate the evaporator schematic of this part of the system is presented in Fig. 6. Organic
space. Next, ammonia evaporates and enters the absorber to repeat the Rankine cycle 1 uses cyclohexane as the working fluid. This fluid is
cycle. In this way, the ammonia-water cycle is completed to produce chemically stable and works efficiently when high-temperature heat
cooling. In the following, the cooling produced by this cycle is used to sources are provided [27]. Cyclohexane passes through the mentioned
harvest atmospheric water. This environmentally benign technology of heat exchanger to turn into superheated steam. Then it passes through
freshwater production works based on the dew point temperature. The the steam turbine and produces power during this process. Because
cooling power produced in the evaporator reduces the temperature of cyclohexane is still a superheated vapor, its heat can evaporate isobu­
moist air to below its dew point, so liquid water is produced. tane in the second Rankine cycle evaporator. In the following, the
In the third step of integration, the digestate from the digestion remaining heat is removed through the condenser to become a saturated
process enters the gasifier to produce syngas in a steam gasification liquid and pumped into the heat exchanger again, and the cycle repeats
process. The produced syngas enters a Water-Gas Shift Reaction Unit in the same way. The same is true for the second Rankine cycle. How­
and produces hydrogen during the reaction with water vapor. In this ever, the working fluid in the second cycle is isobutane. Also, unlike the
process, carbon monoxide reacts with water vapor and produces carbon other condensers in the system, the condenser of this cycle is cooled by
dioxide and hydrogen. Hydrogen is removed as a valuable product of air due to the low temperature of its associated streams [28]. As a
this unit, and the gas from the reaction enters the mixer to be mixed with common fluid in organic Rankine cycles, isobutane requires a lower
the combustion gases that were previously used to provide the required temperature input for evaporation. Generally, this fluid performs well
heat for the absorption refrigeration cycle. This mixing increases the gas and is chemically stable and non-toxic [29].
enthalpy (by enhancing the flow rate to 84.55 kg/s, and the temperature The exhaust gas from the organic Rankine cycle heat exchanger still
to 572 ◦ C) for continuing the process and generating power. The sche­ has a high enthalpy. This potential can be used to produce hot water.
matic of this step is shown in Fig. 4. Finally, the flue gas leaves the system at 110 ◦ C in the base case con­
As mentioned, stream 37 is a gas flow that is a mixture of gases from dition. The complete schematic of the system, which was completed
the water–gas shift reaction unit and from biogas combustion. In the after six stages of integration, is shown in Fig. 7.
fourth step, this gas is used to supply the heating power required for a
3. Materials and methods

The analysis of this cycle has been done from the perspective of the
first and second law of thermodynamics, and also the economic and
environmental points of view. The mass and energy conservation
equations, exergy balance equation, cost balance equation, and envi­
ronmental impact equations are written and solved using engineering
equation solver (EES) software.
For system modeling, the following general assumptions are
considered [25,30–32]:

• The whole cycle is assumed to be in a steady state.

• The composition of air is 77.48% nitrogen, 20.59% oxygen, 1.90%
water vapor, and 0.03% carbon dioxide.
• The temperature, pressure, and relative humidity of air are consid­
ered as 25 ◦ C, 101.3 kPa, and 40%, respectively.
• All gases are considered ideal.
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of the first part of the system.

4
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of the second step of the system integration.

Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of the third step of the system integration.

• All turbines, compressors, and pumps operate in adiabatic mode. The

isentropic efficiency of turbines and compressors is assumed to be
85%, and the isentropic efficiency of pumps is 90%.
• Potential and kinetic energy and exergy changes are negligible.
• In the economic analysis, the cost of all cooling water and air flows is
assumed to be zero. Also, due to the different costs of steam in
different production methods, it was assumed that the steam of both
hydrogen production and gasification units are supplied from waste
heat, and as a result, it is also considered equal to zero.

Fig. 5. Schematic diagram of the fourth step of the system integration. 3.1. Energy and exergy analyses

• The pressure drops in pipes and heat exchangers are negligible. The The main equations of mass conservation, energy conservation, and
pressure drop in the combustion chamber is 3%; the air preheater on exergy balance by implementing the mentioned assumptions, are
the air side and gas side has 5% and 3% pressure drop, respectively. expressed as follows [30]:
• The heat loss in the equipment is ignored, while the heat loss in the ∑ ∑
ṁi = ṁe (1)
combustion chamber is assumed to be 2% of the fuel’s lower heating i e
value (LHV).
∑ ∑ ∑
Q̇j + ṁi hi = Ẇ + ṁe he (2)
j i e

5
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Fig. 6. Schematic diagram of the fifth step of the system integration.

Fig. 7. Schematic diagram of the proposed system.

∑ T0 ∑ ∑ investigations of the system. In the following, the analysis performed on

Q̇j (1 − )+ ṁi exi = Ẇ + ˙D
ṁe exe + Ex (3) the subsystems and the equations related to each one has been discussed
Tj
separately. The main equations necessary for the mathematical
j i e

The exergy of each stream is defined as the sum of its physical and modeling of processes are explained, and the exergy equations for spe­
chemical exergies. The following relations generally express these cial cases are presented. Finally, the mass, energy, and exergy balance
equations: equations for each component are presented in Table 1.

ex = exph + exch (4) • Anaerobic Digestion

exph = h − h0 − T0 (s − s0 ) (5) The general reaction of the anaerobic digestion process that leads to
∑ 1 ∑ ∑ the formation of methane and carbon dioxide is [33]:
(6)
◦
exch = ( yk ex k + RT0 yk Ln(yk )) ( ) ( ) ( )
y M a b n a b n a b
(7)
k k k k k Cn H a O b + n − − H2 O→ + − CH4 + − + CO2
4 2 2 8 4 2 8 4
The mentioned equations are the basis of energy and exergy

6
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Table 1 Table 1 (continued )

The mass, energy, and exergy balance equations for components. Cycle Components Balance equations
Cycle Components Balance equations
ṁ14 h14 + ṁ19 h19 = ṁ37 h37
BCS Digester ṁ1 + ṁ6 = ṁ2 + ṁ3 + ṁ5 Ex
˙ D,MIXER = ṁ14 ex14 + ṁ19 ex19 − ṁ37 ex37
ṁ1 h1 + ṁ6 h6 = ṁ2 h2 + ṁ3 h3 + ṁ5 h5 SRC Heat Exchanger ṁ37 + ṁ41 = ṁ38 + ṁ42
Ex
˙ D,DIGBCS = ṁ1 ex1 + ṁ37 h37 + ṁ41 h41 = ṁ38 h38 + ṁ42 h42
ṁ6 ex6 − ṁ2 ex2 − ṁ3 ex3 − ṁ5 ex5 ˙ D,HXSRC = ṁ37 ex37 + ṁ41 ex41 − ṁ38 ex38 − ṁ42 ex42
Ex
Heat Exchanger ṁ6 = ṁ5 Pump ṁ44 = ṁ41
ṁ5 h5 + ṁ13 h13 = ṁ6 h6 + ṁ14 h14 ṁ44 h44 + Ẇpmp,SRC = ṁ41 h41
Ex
˙ D,HXBCS = ṁ5 ex5 + ṁ13 ex13 − ṁ6 ex6 − ṁ14 ex14 ˙ D,PUSRC = ṁ44 ex44 + Ẇpmp,SRC − ṁ41 ex41
Ex
Gasifier ṁ2 + ṁ15 = ṁ16 Turbine ṁ42 = ṁ43
0 0 0 0
Q̇Gas = a1 hH2 + a2 hCO + a3 hCO2 + a4 hH2 O + ṁ42 h42 = ṁ43 h43 + ẆST,SRC
0 0 0 0
a5 hCH4 − hf,Biomass − whH2 O(l) − mhH2 O
˙ D,TUSRC = ṁ42 ex42 − ṁ43 ex43 − ẆST,SRC
Ex
Condenser ṁ43 + ṁ60 = ṁ44 + ṁ61
˙ D,GASBCS = ṁ2 ex2 + ṁ15 ex15 − ṁ16 ex16 +
Ex
( ) ṁ43 h43 + ṁ60 h60 = ṁ44 h44 + ṁ61 h61
Q̇Gas 1 − T0 /TGasf
Ex
˙ D,CDSRC = ṁ43 ex43 + ṁ60 ex60 − ṁ44 ex44 − ṁ61 ex61
WGSRU WGSRU ṁ16 + ṁ17 = ṁ18 + ṁ19
ORC Heat Exchanger ṁ38 + ṁ45 = ṁ39 + ṁ46
ṁ16 h16 + ṁ17 h17 = ṁ18 h18 + ṁ19 h19
1 ṁ38 h38 + ṁ45 h45 = ṁ39 h39 + ṁ46 h46
˙ D,WGSRU = ṁ16 ex16 +
Ex ˙ D,HXORC1 = ṁ38 ex38 +
Ex
ṁ17 ex17 − ṁ18 ex18 − ṁ19 ex19
ṁ45 ex45 − ṁ39 ex39 − ṁ46 ex46
BC Fuel ṁ3 = ṁ4
Pump 1 ṁ49 = ṁ45
Compressor ṁ3 h3 + ẆFC = ṁ4 h4
ṁ49 h49 + Ẇpmp,ORC1 = ṁ45 h45
˙ D,FCBC = ṁ3 ex3 + ẆFC − ṁ4 ex4
Ex
Ex
˙ D,PUORC1 = ṁ49 ex49 + Ẇpmp,ORC1 − ṁ45 ex45
Air Compressor ṁ7 = ṁ8
Pump 2 ṁ53 = ṁ50
ṁ7 h7 + ẆAC = ṁ8 h8
ṁ53 h53 + Ẇpmp,ORC2 = ṁ50 h50
Ex
˙ D,ACBC = ṁ7 ex7 + ẆAC − ṁ8 ex8
Ex
˙ D,PUORC2 = ṁ53 ex53 + Ẇpmp,ORC2 − ṁ50 ex50
Air Preheater ṁ8 + ṁ11 = ṁ9 + ṁ12
Turbine 1 ṁ46 = ṁ47
ṁ8 h8 + ṁ11 h11 = ṁ9 h9 + ṁ12 h12
ṁ46 h46 = ṁ47 h47 + ẆST,ORC1
Ex
˙ D,APBC = ṁ8 ex8 + ṁ11 ex11 − ṁ9 ex9 − ṁ12 ex12
Combustion ṁ4 + ṁ9 = ṁ10 Ex
˙ D,TUORC1 = ṁ46 ex46 − ṁ47 ex47 − ẆST,ORC1

Chamber Turbine 2 ṁ51 = ṁ52

0 = − 0.02λLHV + h9 + λh4 − (1 + λ)h10
ṁ51 h51 = ṁ52 h52 + ẆST,ORC2
˙ D,CCBC = ṁ4 ex4 + ṁ9 ex9 − ṁ10 ex10
Ex
Gas Turbine ṁ10 = ṁ11 Ex
˙ D,TUORC2 = ṁ51 ex51 − ṁ52 ex52 − ẆST,ORC2
Condenser 1 ṁ48 + ṁ62 = ṁ49 + ṁ63
ṁ10 h10 = ṁ11 h11 + ẆGT
ṁ48 h48 + ṁ62 h62 = ṁ49 h49 + ṁ63 h63
Ex
˙ D,GTBC = ṁ10 ex10 − ṁ11 ex11 − ẆGT
˙ D,CDORC1 = ṁ48 ex48 +
Ex
ARC & Absorber ṁ25 + ṁ33 + ṁ58 = ṁ20 + ṁ59
ṁ62 ex62 − ṁ49 ex49 − ṁ63 ex63
AWH ṁ25 h25 + ṁ33 h33 + ṁ58 h58 = ṁ20 h20 + ṁ59 h59
Condenser 2 ṁ52 + ṁ64 = ṁ53 + ṁ65
Ex
˙ D,ABARC = ṁ25 ex25 + ṁ33 ex33 +
ṁ52 h52 + ṁ64 h64 + ẆFan = ṁ53 h53 + ṁ65 h65
ṁ58 ex58 − ṁ20 ex20 − ṁ59 ex59
Pump ṁ20 = ṁ21 Ex
˙ D,ACCORC2 = ṁ52 ex52 + ṁ64 ex64 +

ṁ20 h20 + Ẇpmp,ARC = ṁ21 h21 ẆFan − ṁ53 ex53 − ṁ65 ex65
Heat Exchanger ṁ47 + ṁ50 = ṁ48 + ṁ51
˙ D,PMPARC = ṁ20 ex20 + Ẇpmp,ARC − ṁ21 ex21
Ex
2 ṁ47 h47 + ṁ50 h50 = ṁ48 h48 + ṁ51 h51
SHE ṁ21 + ṁ23 = ṁ22 + ṁ24
Ex
˙ D,HXORC1 = ṁ47 ex47 +
ṁ21 h21 + ṁ23 h23 = ṁ22 h22 + ṁ24 h24
ṁ50 ex50 − ṁ48 ex48 − ṁ51 ex51
Ex
˙ D,SHXARC = ṁ21 ex21 +
Heater Heater ṁ39 + ṁ66 = ṁ40 + ṁ67
ṁ23 ex23 − ṁ22 ex22 − ṁ24 ex24
ṁ39 h39 + ṁ66 h66 = ṁ40 h40 + ṁ67 h67
Abs. Valve ṁ24 = ṁ25
Ex
˙ D,HEATER = ṁ39 ex39 +
ṁ24 h24 = ṁ25 h25
ṁ66 ex66 − ṁ40 ex40 − ṁ67 ex67
Ex
˙ D,VLVSARC = ṁ24 ex24 − ṁ25 ex25
Generator ṁ22 + ṁ27 + ṁ12 = ṁ23 + ṁ26 + ṁ13
ṁ22 h22 + ṁ27 h27 + ṁ12 h12 = ṁ23 h23 + ṁ26 h26 +
ṁ13 h13 This process takes place in a digester whose temperature is kept
˙ D,GENARC = ṁ22 ex22 + ṁ27 ex27 +
Ex constant at 35 ◦ C. Considering that a well-designed digester destroys at
ṁ12 ex12 − ṁ23 ex23 − ṁ26 ex26 − ṁ13 ex13
least 70% of volatile solids, the biogas obtained from the reaction will
Rectifier ṁ26 + ṁ56 = ṁ27 + ṁ28 + ṁ57
ṁ26 h26 + ṁ56 h56 = ṁ27 h27 + ṁ28 h28 + ṁ57 h57
contain about 60% of methane (by volume) and 40% of carbon dioxide
Ex
˙ D,RECTARC = ṁ26 ex26 + [34,35].
ṁ56 ex56 − ṁ27 ex27 − ṁ28 ex28 − ṁ57 ex57 To calculate the required heat of the process, considering that a large
Condenser ṁ28 + ṁ54 = ṁ29 + ṁ55 part of the Biomass is moisture, the amount of heat needed to change the
ṁ28 h28 + ṁ54 h54 = ṁ29 h29 + ṁ55 h55
water temperature from the ambient temperature to the digestion
Ex
˙ D,CONDARC = ṁ28 ex28 +
temperature will be equivalent to the heat required for the digestion
ṁ54 ex54 − ṁ29 ex29 − ṁ55 ex55
CEHE ṁ29 + ṁ32 = ṁ30 + ṁ33 process [34]:
ṁ29 h29 + ṁ32 h32 = ṁ30 h30 + ṁ33 h33
˙ D,CHXARC = ṁ29 ex29 +
Ex
Q̇Dig = ṁMC Cp,water (TDig − T0 ) (8)
ṁ32 ex32 − ṁ30 ex30 − ṁ33 ex33
The physical and chemical exergy of the raw and digested Biomass
Evap. Valve ṁ30 = ṁ31
ṁ30 h30 = ṁ31 h31 can be calculated using the exergy relations of organic matter [36]:
Ex
˙ D,VLVCARC = ṁ30 ex30 − ṁ31 ex31 ( )
T
Evaporator ṁ31 + ṁ34 = ṁ32 + ṁ35 + ṁ36 exph
OM = Cp T − T0 − T0 ln( ) (9)
ṁ31 h31 + ṁ34 h34 = ṁ32 h32 + ṁ35 h35 + ṁ36 h36 T0
Ex
˙ D,EVAPARC = ṁ31 ex31 +
ṁ34 ex34 − ṁ32 ex32 − ṁ35 ex35 − ṁ36 ex36 exch
OM = 363.439C+1075.633H − 86.308O+4.14N +190.798S− 21.1A [kJ/kg]
Mixer Mixer ṁ14 + ṁ19 = ṁ37
(10)

7
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

The global reaction of the steam gasification process is as follows

• Brayton Cycle [39]:
CH a Ob + wH2 O + mH2 O→a1 H2 + a2 CO + a3 CO2 + a4 H2 O + a5 CH 4 (23)
The Brayton cycle consists of a fuel compressor, an air compressor,
an air preheater, a combustion chamber, and a gas turbine. The prop­ CHa Ob is the chemical formula of Biomass that is simplified. Given that
erties related to the output flows of the fuel and air compressors and gas in an extensive range of Biomass feedstocks, sulfur and nitrogen levels
turbine are calculated using the isentropic efficiency relations given as are insignificant, the equation below is valid [40]:
follows [37]:
a = 1.4125b + 0.5004 (24)
h4s − h3
ηs,FC = (11) Also, the required relations for a and b calculation are as [41]:
h4 − h3
MC × H
h8s − h7 a= (25)
ηs,AC = (12) MH × C
h8 − h7
MC × O
b= (26)
h11s − h10 MO × C
ηs,GT = (13)
h11 − h10 In the global reaction of steam gasification, m is the mole of steam
The combustion chamber of this cycle is fed by biogas. The amount of added per mole of dry ash-free Biomass, and w is the moisture per mole
air entering the cycle is determined by the fuel–air ratio. This ratio on a of dry ash-free Biomass. These parameters can be determined as follows
molar basis is defined as [38]: [42]:

ṅF MH2 O × m
λ= (14) STBM = (27)
ṅa MBiomass + MH2 O × w

The combustion reaction equation for the complete combustion of MBiomass × MC

biogas is written as follows: w= (28)
MH2 O × (1 − MC)
λ[xCH4 CH 4 + xCO2 CO2 ] + [0.7748N2 + 0.2059O2 + 0.0003CO2
(15) To calculate the coefficients of a1 to a5 , molar balance is used for the
+ 0.019H2 O]→[1 + λ][YN2 N2 + YO2 O2 + YCO2 CO2 + YH2 O H2 O] components, but more than these equations are needed, and the equi­
librium constants relationships should also be used.
With the balance of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen, the
mole fraction of the components of the combustion products are: Carbon balance : a1 + a3 + a5 = 1 (29)

Y N2 =
0.7748
(16) Hydrogen balance : a + 2w + 2m = 2a1 + 2a4 + 4a5 (30)
1+λ
Oxygen balance : b + w + m = a2 + 2a3 + a4 (31)
0.2059 − 2xCH4
Y O2 = (17)
1+λ The following equilibrium reactions are the main reactions that take
place in the reduction zone of the gasifier [39]:
0.0003 + λ
YCO2 = (18) Boudouard reaction : C + CO2 →2CO (32)
1+λ
Water − gas reaction : C + H2 O→CO + H2 (33)
0.019 + 2xCH4
YH2O = (19)
1+λ Water − gas shift reaction : CO + H2 O→CO2 + H2 (34)
As it was mentioned in the assumptions, the heat loss of the com­
bustion chamber is assumed to be 2% of the LHV of the fuel. So, the Methane reaction : C + 2H2 →CH4 (35)
energy balance for the combustion chamber is written as follows: Equilibrium constants for water–gas shift and methane reactions are
0 = − 0.02λLHV + h9 + λh4 − (1 + λ)h10 (20) given as [43]:

By inserting appropriate expressions for each term, the fuel–air ratio K1 =

PCO2 PH2
=
a3 a1
(36)
can be obtained through the following equation: PCO PH2 O a2 a4

0.7748ΔhN2 + 0.2059ΔhO2 + 0.0003ΔhCO2 + 0.019ΔhH2 O PCH4 a5 (a1 + a2 + a3 + a4 + a5 )

λ= (21) K2 = = (37)
h4 − 0.02LHV − (− 2xCH4 hO2 + hCO2 + 2xCH4 hH2O )(T10 ) P H2 2 a1 2

The lower heating value of the biogas at 25 ◦ C and 101.3 kPa can be The equilibrium constant is a function of temperature and is
calculated as [37]: expressed in terms of Gibbs free energy:
∑ ∑ − Δg
(22)
0 0
LHV = H prod − H react = Np hf ,p − Nr hf ,r LnK = (38)
RTg

• Steam Gasification where R is the universal gas constant 8.314 kJ/kmol. K and Δg can be
determined as follows:

8
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Δg = Δh − Tg Δs (39)
• Atmospheric Water Harvesting
Therefore, for water–gas shift and methane reactions, respectively:
The AWH cycle analysis has been performed by applying the first law
(40)
0 0 0 0
Δg1 = (hCO2 + hH2 − hCO − hH2O ) − Tg (s0CO2 + s0H2 − s0CO − s0H2O )
of thermodynamics. Dry air mass flow rate is defined as [46]:
0 0 0
Δg2 = (hCH4 − 2hH2 − hC ) − Tg (s0CH4 − 2s0H2 − s0C ) (41) ṁ34 = ṁ34DA (1 + ω34 ) (49)

Steam to Biomass ratio is considered a known parameter in ṁ35 = ṁ35DA (1 + ω35 ) (50)
modeling. Gasification of Biomass using other agents is autothermal, but
gasification using CO2 and steam agents is allothermal because the ṁDA = ṁ34DA = ṁ35DA (51)
steam gasification is a highly endothermic reaction, so the heat of this
Hence, produced water mass flow rate is determined as:
process (Q̇Gas ) is provided by an external heat source [41] and calculated
as follows [43]: ṁwater = ṁDA ω34 − ṁDA ω35 (52)

(42) where ω is the humidity ratio of air which can be obtained by psy­
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Q̇Gas = a1 hH2 + a2 hCO + a3 hCO2 + a4 hH2 O + a5 hCH4 − hf ,Biomass − whH2O(l)
chrometric charts. This paper uses the EES software library, which has
The following equation is used to calculate the LHV of syngas [17]: thermodynamic properties of humid air. The value of the humidity ratio
∑ is obtained by having three variables: temperature, pressure, and rela­
LHV syngas = ni × LHV i (43)
i tive humidity.
Also, for the evaporator, the following relationship is established:
where ni and LHV i represent the mole flow rate and molar LHV of the gas
Q̇evaporator = ṁDA (h34 − h35 ) − ṁ36 h36 (53)
components.
Total power consumption per kg of water generation in one hour
• Water-Gas Shift Reaction expressed as:

A water–gas shift reaction unit was applied to convert the syngas to WP =

Ẇ pmp,SRC + Q̇gen
(54)
hydrogen. This unit is considered adiabatic. The general reaction of the ṁ36 × 3600
water gas shift process is as follows [18]: The chemical exergy of the refrigerant cycle working fluid and the
CO + H2 O→CO2 + H2 (44) physical exergy of humid air are calculated from special relationships.
Specific chemical exergy for the mixture “refrigerant-absorbent” can be
As it is known from the reaction equation, carbon monoxide in the determined as [47]:
syngas reacts with water vapor and produces carbon dioxide and
hydrogen. Hydrogen is a valuable fuel that, if produced from syngas, exch = x • exch ch
refrigerant + (1 − x) • exabsorbent (55)
goes through an environmentally benign life cycle [16].
where exch ch ch ch
refrigerant = exNH3 = 337900kJ/kmol, and exabsorbent = exH2 O =
• Rankine Cycles 900kJ/kmol were used.
The physical exergy of humid air is defined as below [48]:
The Rankine cycles in this system work through the energy recovery ( ( )) ( )
( ) T T P
of the flue gas, which is a mixture of combustion product gases and exha = cp,a + ωcp,w • T0 − 1 − ln + (1 + ω
̃ )Ra T0 ln
exhaust gas from the WGSRU. The temperature of the mixed flow can be T0 T0 P0
⎡ ( ⎤
calculated using its enthalpy. The enthalpy of mixed gas (state 37) is
) (56)
⎣ 1+ω̃0 ω̃ (1 + ω̃0) ⎦
determined using the following equation [44]: + Ra T0 ln +ω̃ ln( )
1+ω ̃ ω̃ 0 (1 + ω
̃)
ṁ14 ṁ19
h37 = h14 + h19 (45)
ṁ14 + ṁ19 ṁ14 + ṁ19 where ω̃ is the vapor mole fraction ratio which ω
̃ = 1.608ω, Ra is the gas
constant of air that is equal to 0.287 kJ/kg.K, and subscript 0 refers to
The properties related to the outlet streams of all turbines and pumps
the reference state.
in the steam/organic Rankine cycles are determined using the isentropic
efficiencies that define as below:
• Performance criteria
he,s − hi
ηs,ST = (46)
he − hi The evaluation of this system is based on energy and exergy analysis.
The total exergy destruction rate of the whole system and exergy
hi − he,s destruction ratio can be calculated from the following relations,
ηs,P = (47)
hi − he respectively:
∑
The condenser of the second organic Rankine cycle is cooled by air ˙ D,Tot =
Ex Ex˙ D,k (57)
due to the low temperature of the associated streams. It is assumed that k

the power consumed by the air-cooled condenser fans is 0.15 kW per kg/
˙ D,k
s of air flow [45]: YD,k =
Ex
(58)
˙ D,Tot
Ex
Ẇ Fan = 0.15ṁ64 (48)

9
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

The exergetic performance coefficient is defined as the ratio of the Table 2

total power generation rate to the total exergy destruction rate. This The energy and exergy efficiencies of subsystems.
factor includes both energy and exergy factors and can be beneficial for cycle Energy Efficiency Exergy Efficiency
engineering decisions [49]:
ARC Q̇evap ˙ Q
Ex
COPen = COPex =
evap
Ẇ net Q̇gen + Ẇpmp,ARC ẆP + Ex
˙ Q
EPC = (59) gen
˙ D,Tot
Ex BC ẆGT − ẆAC − ẆFC Ẇ − ẆAC − ẆFC
η = ψ = GT
ṁ4 LHV4 ṁ4 ex4
where: WGSRU ṁ18 LHVH2 ṁ18 ex18
η = ψ =
ṁ16 h16 − ṁ19 h19 + ṁ17 h17 ṁ16 ex16 − ṁ19 ex19 + ṁ17 ex17
Ẇ net = Ẇ GT + Ẇ ST,SRC + Ẇ ST,ORC1 + Ẇ ST,ORC2 − (Ẇ AC + Ẇ FC + Ẇ pmp,SRC SRC ẆST,SRC − Ẇpmp,SRC ẆST,SRC − Ẇpmp,SRC
η = ψ =
ṁ37 h37 − ṁ38 h38 ṁ37 ex37 − ṁ38 ex38
+ Ẇ pmp,ORC1 + Ẇ pmp,ORC2 + Ẇ pmp,ARC + Ẇ Fan ) ORC ẆST,ORC1 + ẆST,ORC2 − (Ẇpmp,ORC1 + Ẇpmp,ORC2 + ẆFan )
η = ψ =
(60) ṁ38 h38 − ṁ39 h39
ẆST,ORC1 + ẆST,ORC2 − (Ẇpmp,ORC1 + Ẇpmp,ORC2 + ẆFan )
The main performance criteria for the thermodynamic evaluation of ṁ38 ex38 − ṁ39 ex39
the system are energy and exergy efficiencies. Efficiency is usually
defined as the ratio of useful output to the total input. In Table 2, each
subsystem’s energy and exergy efficiencies are provided separately. CEPCIp
To evaluate the overall system performance, the overall energy and Zp = Z0 ( ) (68)
CEPCI0
exergy efficiencies have been considered:
Here p and 0 subscripts refer to the present and the original year. The
ηen =
Ẇ net + Q̇Heating + ṁH2 LHV H2 + ṁwater hwater
(61) latest available CEPCI was 808.9 (December 2022), used as the present
ṁBiomass LHV Biomass + Q̇Gas + ṁ15 h15 + ṁ17 h17 year index [53].
Total cost rate of this system is considered as the sum of the fuel cost
Ẇ net + (ṁ61 (ex61 − ex60 ) + ṁ67 (ex67 − ex66 )) + ṁH2 exH2 + ṁwater exwater rate, the rate of the penalty cost of greenhouse gas emission, the heat
ψ ex = ( )
ṁBiomass exBiomass + Q̇Gas 1 − T0 /TGasf + ṁ15 ex15 + ṁ17 ex17 cost rate for the gasifier, the cost rate of exergy destruction, and the total
(62) capital investment cost of the components [54,55]:
∑
where: ĊTOTAL = Ċf + Ċenv + ĊQ + ĊD,TOTAL + Ż k (69)
k

Q̇Heating = Q̇Heater + Q̇Cond,SRC = ṁ61 (h61 − h60 ) + ṁ67 (h67 − h66 ) (63) Each of the above parameters is defined as follows:

3.2. Exergoeconomic analysis

˙f
Ċf = cf • Ex (70)

Exergoeconomic analysis combines exergy investigations with eco­ Ċenv = cCO2 • ṁCO2 ,40 (71)
nomic principles to study the system from exergy and economics per­
spectives. This analysis covers the inadequacy of energy and exergy ĊQ = cq • Q̇Gas (72)
analyses by providing economic results for decision-makers. The cost ∑
balance equation as the base of this evaluation is expressed as [30]: ĊD,TOTAL = ĊD,k ˙ D,k
; ĊD,k = cF,k • Ex (73)
k
∑ ∑
Ċin,k + Ċq,k + Ż k = Ċout,k + Ċw,k (64)
in out where cf is cost of Biomass per unit of exergy (2 $/GJ) [56], cCO2 is the
unit damage cost of CO2 (0.024 $/kg) [57], cq is the specific cost of
where Ċ refers to the cost rate and Żk is the capital investment cost of heating energy (0.04 $/kWh) [58], and cF,k is the unit cost of fuel of the
components. The cost rate is obtained as [30]: kth component.
The unit cost of each product of the system and the unit cost of total
˙
Ċ = c × Ex (65)
products of the multigeneration system are expressed respectively as
[59]:
where c is the specified cost per unit of exergy.
Capital investment cost of components that consists of operation and Ċproduct
maintenance costs is defined as [50]: cproduct = (74)
˙ product
Ex
Zk • CRF • ϕ
Ż k = (66) ĊW,NET + Ċ61 + Ċ67 + Ċ18 + Ċ36
N × 3600 cp,TOTAL = (75)
˙ 61 + Ex
Ẇ net + Ex ˙ p67 + Ex
˙ 18 + Ex
˙ 36
Here N and ϕ are the annual duration of operation hours and
maintenance factor, respectively. Additionally, CRF is the capital re­ In addition, since the cost sources of a component are classified into
covery factor that is given by [50]: two categories of non-exergy-related costs and the costs related to
exergy destruction, the exergoeconomic factor is defined to evaluate the
i(1 + i)n
CRF = (67) performance of each component [59]:
(1 + i)n − 1

where i and n represent the interest rate and lifetime of the project,
respectively. The values of the mentioned parameters are presented in Table 3
Table 3. Cost indices.
The cost of kth component (Zk ) are listed in Table 4. The cost of the Parameters Values Units
water–gas shift reactor is estimated through the six-tenth rule [51]. The Annual duration of operation hours (N) 8000 Hours
values obtained from the cost equations should be updated to the current Maintenance factor (ϕ) 1.06 –
year, utilizing Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index (CEPCI) [52]: Interest rate (i) 0.10 –
Lifetime of the project (n) 20 Years

10
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

fk =
Ż k
(76) where Cei is the exergoenvironmental impact coefficient [60,66]:
Ż k + ĊD,k
1
Cei = (79)
ψ ex
3.3. Exergoenvironmental analysis The exergoenvironmental impact improvement, which shows the
positive effects of the system on the environment, is calculated as
Exergoenvironmental analysis combines exergy and environmental [60,66]:
analysis to simultaneously study the system from exergy and environ­
mental points of view. The exergoenvironment factor, which is defined θeii =
1
(80)
as follows, shows the harmful effects of irreversibility on the environ­ θei
ment [60,66]: The exergy stability factor is obtained by [60,66]:
˙ D,Tot
Ex ˙ D,Tot
fei = (77) fes =
Ex
(81)
Ex˙ in ˙ ˙ out + 1
ExD,Tot + Ex
If this factor is significant, the ratio of exergy destruction rate to The unit emission of carbon dioxide which is the ratio of emitted CO2
input exergy rate and consequently the negative effects on the envi­ to the production rate of the system considered as an environmental
ronment is high. factor, and is defined as follows [7,49]:
The next important factor in exergoenvironmental analysis is the
environmental damage effectiveness factor, which is calculated as fol­ EMI CO2 =
ṁCO2 ,emitted
× 3600 (82)
lows [60,66]: Ẇ net + Q̇Heating + ṁH2 LHV H2 + ṁwater hwater

θei = fei • Cei (78)

4. Validation

Table 4 The model has been validated for different subsystems of the plant to
Cost functions of system components. confirm the correctness of the obtained results. Considering that the
whole system is a collection of several subsystems, each has been vali­
Components Zk [$] Ref.
( ) ( )
dated separately using the modeling code developed in the EES software.
Compressor c′1 ṁ Pout Pout ′ The conditions and assumptions are adjusted to compare with those
Z = ′ ln c = 44.71$/(kg/s), [60]
c2 − ηSC Pin Pin 1
reported in the references.
c′2 = 0.95
Gas turbine c′ ṁ
(
Pin
)( ) The experimental work of Loha et al. [39] has been used to validate
Z = ′ 3 1 + ec5 (Tin − 1570) c′3 = [60] the steam gasification process. For this purpose, the syngas composition
′
ln
c4 − ηST Pout
301.45$/(kg/s), c′4 = 0.94, c′5 = 0.025K− 1 has been compared and presented in Table 5. The results obtained from
Combustion chamber
Z =
c′6 ṁ
(1 + ec8 (Tout − 1540) )c′6 = 28.98$/(kg/s),
′
[60]
this process modeling show a good agreement with their experimental
Pout
c7 −
′ results. The biogas-fueled Brayton cycle has been verified by repro­
Pin
c′7 = 0.995, c′8 = 0.015K− 1 ducing the results of Zhang et al. [38]. The comparison of the obtained
Heat exchangers Z = c′9 (AHE /0.093)0.78 c′9 = 130$/(m2 )0.78 results with those available in that work, which is given in Table 6,
[31]
shows the accuracy of the modeling. Table 7 shows the validation per­
Digester VT 0.75
Z = 350000(
21000
) [56] formed for the ammonia-water absorption unit. Comparing important
Gasifier Z = c′10 (ṁBiomass )0.67 c′10 = 1600$/(kg/h)0.67 obtained results with Adewusi’s [67] model results indicates that the
[56]
developed code is reliable. Validation of steam and organic Rankine
Mixer Z =0
[61] cycles has been done by reproducing the results of Refs. [27,31], and the
SRC Condenser Z = c′11 ṁc′11 = 1773$/(kg/s)
[62]
results are compared in Tables 8-9. The results presented in these tables
SRC Turbine 0.7 ′ also indicate the accuracy of the modeling.
Z = c′12 ẆST c12 = 6000$/(kW0.7 ) [62] Therefore, the validity of the overall system modeling is corrobo­
SRC Pump Z = c′13 ẆP
0.71 ′
c13 = 3540$/(kW0.71 ) rated due to the correctness of the results obtained from the modeling of
[62]
Generator Z = c′14 (AG /100)0.6 c′14 = 17500$/(m2 )0.6
the subsystems.
[63]
Absorber Z = c′15 (AA /100)0.6 c′15 = 16000$/(m2 )0.6
[63] 5. Case study – Çiğli WWTP – Izmir
Rectifier Z = c′16 (AR /100)0.6 c′16 = 17000$/(m2 )0.6
[64]
The proposed multigeneration system is fed from the sewage sludge
ARC Condenser Z = c′17 (AC /100)0.6 c′17 = 8000$/(m2 )0.6
[63] of Çiğli wastewater treatment plant. Çiğli with the GPS coordinates of
ARC Evaporator Z = c′18 (AE /100)0.6 c′18 = 16000$/(m2 )0.6
[63]
38◦ 29′ N and 27◦ 3′ E, is a metropolitan district of Izmir Province in
ARC HX.s
Turkey. The diagrams of the Çiğli hourly variations of average ambient
Z = c′19 (AH /100)0.6 c′19 = 16000$/(m2 )0.6
[63] temperature and relative humidity are presented in Fig. 8 [68]. This
ARC Valves Z =0 region’s average temperature and relative humidity are 18.11 ◦ C and
[63]
ARC Pump 0.8 ′ 60.05%, respectively. Moreover, the highest and lowest ambient tem­
Z = c′20 ẆP c20 = 1120$/(kW0.8 ) [31]
peratures are associated with July (41 ◦ C) and January (-6◦ C). Mean­
ORC Condenser Z = c′21 (AC )0.6 c′21 = 516.62$/(m2 )0.6
[65] while, the relative humidity is maximum (100%) in the beginning and
ORC Turbine Z = c′22 ẆT
0.75 ′
c22 = 4750$/(kW0.75 ) the end months of the year and is minimum (11%) in June. Also, as
[65]
expected, the diagrams indicate that temperature and relative humidity
ORC Pump Z = c′23 ẆST
0.65 ′
c23 = 200$/(kW0.65 ) [65] are inversely related. The air is more humid at low temperatures, and at
ORC2 Condenser (air- Condenser Z = c′24 (AC /200)0.89 c′24 =
[28]
high temperatures, the air is drier.
cooled) 156000$/(m2 )0.89 Çiğli WWTP was built to save the Gulf of Izmir from sewage pollu­
Fan Z = c′25 (ẆF /50)0.76 c′25 = 12300$/
tion. This WWTP is located south of Kaklıç airport in the former Gediz
(kW0.76 )
delta. It is built on a land area of 300,000 m2, and the average capacity of

11
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

this plant is about 600,000 m3 per day. In 2019, 190 million m3 of Table 6
wastewater was treated in this treatment plant [69]. Validation of the biogas-fueled Brayton cycle modeling.
State T (K) P (bar) ṁ(kg/s)
6. Results and discussion
Result Ref. [38] Result Ref. [38] Result Ref. [38]

The mentioned multigeneration system, which is provided for the 15 298.2 298.15 1.013 1.013 4.77 4.77
16 612.2 612.65 10.23 10.23 4.77 4.77
production of power, freshwater, hydrogen, and heating, is modeled by 17 650 650 9.72 9.72 4.77 4.77
EES software. The schematic of this system was presented in Fig. 2 18 1250 1250 9.33 9.23 4.935 4.96
previously. This system feeds with the wet sewage sludge from the 19 824.8 822.65 1.16 1.12 4.935 4.96
wastewater treatment plant. The characteristics of wet sewage sludge 20 788.7 789.15 1.10 1.07 4.935 4.96
before and after anaerobic digestion are presented in Table 10. Input Input values: CPR = 0.1, T17 = 377 ◦ C, T18 = 977 ◦ C, ṁ air = 4.77 kg/s.
data for the plant modeling is provided in Table 11.
The main modeling results for this system in the mentioned base case
condition are presented in Table 12. As can be seen, the system’s overall
energy and exergy efficiencies are 35.48% and 40.18%, respectively. In Table 7
addition, this system can produce 18.42 L of freshwater and 3180 kg of Validation of the ammonia–water absorption system.
hydrogen per hour. According to the information obtained from Çiğli Parameter Present work Adewusi model data [67]
WWTP, the annual energy consumption of this WWTP is equal to
COP 0.624 0.598
44847.08 MWh, and from the results reported in Table 12, this system Qgen (kW) 265.1 267.9
can generate 142,000 MWh energy annually, about 3.1 times the needs Qabs (kW) 233.3 231
of Çiğli WWTP. Qrec (kW) 44.7 50.7
Thermodynamic properties including mass flow rate(ṁ), tempera­ Qcond (kW) 157.4 151
Qeva (kW) 167.3 162
ture (T), pressure (P), the ammonia concentration in the refrigeration
cycle (x), and the total exergy rate (Ex)
˙ for the base case conditions, are Input values: Tevap = -10 ◦ C, ṁ = 1 kg/s, Tcondenser = 40 ◦ C, Tabsorber = 40 ◦ C, Δx
reported in Table 13. = 0.10, ammonia-water strong solution = 99.96%, ηpump = 50%, εSHX = 100%,
εCEHX = 95%.
Section 2 (System description) it was explained that the system
integration is completed in six steps by adding different subsystems. The
following will show how moving towards multigeneration improves
system performance from energy, exergy, and environmental
Table 8
perspectives.
Validation of the steam Rankine cycle.
Energy efficiency, exergy efficiency, and exergetic performance co­
Parameter Present work Ref. [31]
efficient variation during system integration in six steps are shown in
Fig. 9. As can be seen, the energy and exergy efficiencies increase Wnet (kW) 2789 2789
steadily, so that reaching from 15.32% and 17.24% in the first step to ηen (%) 15.64 15.2

35.48% and 40.18% in the last step of system formation, respectively. Input values: TIT = 420 ◦ C, ṁ = 6.44 kg/s, TIP = 8000 kPa, Pcond = 100 kPa,
However, the exergetic performance coefficient has a drop in the third ηpump = 90%, ηturbine = 85%, ηmec,turbine = 90%.
step of system completion and then increases again. The reason is that
the equipment with the highest exergy destruction contribution is added
to the system at this step.
The variation of the exergoenvironment factor, environmental Table 9
damage effectiveness factor, exergy stability factor, and the unit emis­ Validation of the organic Rankine cycle.
sion of carbon dioxide during system integration in six steps are shown Parameter Present work Ref. [27]
in Fig. 10. These changes are slightly fluctuating. Still, in a general view, Wnet (kW) 2450 2458
it can be concluded that this integration favors the system. The envi­ ηen (%) 24.94 25.0
ronmental factors in the last step of completing the system improve more
Input values: ηpump = 90%, ηturbine = 85%. ORC1(Cyclohexane): ṁ = 13 kg/s,
than the first steps. TIT = 300 ◦ C, TIP = 3000 kPa, Pcond = 100 kPa. ORC2(Isobutane): ṁ = 5 kg/s,
Fig. 11 shows the contribution of subsystems in the total exergy TIP = 3000 kPa, Pcond = 100 kPa.
destruction rate of the whole system and the contribution of components
in the exergy destruction rate of the subsystem with the highest share.
The Biomass conversion subsystem has the largest contribution among
shows the impact of these three factors on the mole fraction of compo­
other subsystems, and the contribution of the atmospheric water har­
nents and LHV of the syngas. As shown in this figure, in the given range
vesting unit is very small. Also, the gasifier with a share of 57.75%, has
of variables, by increasing the moisture content and steam to Biomass
the highest exergy destruction rate among other components.
ratio, the H2O mole fraction grows. In contrast, the lower heating value
The moisture content of Biomass, steam to Biomass ratio, and gasi­
and molar fraction of other constituents decrease. Meanwhile,
fication temperature are three important factors affecting the lower
increasing the gasification temperature in the given range decreases the
heating value and molar fraction of wet syngas components. Fig. 12
H2O mole fraction, and the lower heating value grows.
As mentioned earlier, the gasifier has the largest share in the exergy
Table 5 destruction rate of the system. Therefore, a parametric study was con­
The steam gasification produced gas composition vs. the experimental results. ducted on three essential factors on the exergy destruction rate of the
Dry Syngas Present work Loha experimental data [39] RMS gasifier. As shown in Fig. 13, increasing the steam to Biomass ratio de­
creases the exergy destruction rate because of the increase of ṁ15 and
H2(%) 49.19 49.50 1.2478
CO(%) 23.71 23.70
ṁ16 and the much higher exergy value of stream 16 compared to stream
CO2(%) 23.09 21.20 15. On the other hand, increasing the gasifier temperature and Biomass
CH4(%) 4.00 5.60 moisture content increases the exergy destruction rate of the gasifier.
Input values: Tg = 750 ◦ C, MCB = 0.0995, CH0.92O0.71, steam/Biomass = 1.
This increase can be easily justified with the help of the gasifier’s exergy

12
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Fig. 8. The hourly variations of average ambient temperature and relative humidity of Çiğli.

Table 10
Proximate and ultimate analysis of sewage sludge [70].
Biomass Proximate analysis (wt% /wt.) Ultimate analysis (db, wt% /wt.)

Moisture content Volatile matter Ash C H O N S

Raw sludge 75 65 30 37 4.5 19.5 3.3 0.65

Digestate 75 50 40 33.5 2.5 12.5 1.1 0.40

and energy equations mentioned in Table 2. The growth of the exergy ratio of the gas turbine improves the performance of the Brayton cycle,
destruction rate at the end of moisture content increasing is faster than while increasing the pressure ratio of the air compressor reduces the
its beginning, but the increase of the destruction rate with the rise in efficiency of the cycle. In the absorption refrigeration cycle, the effect of
gasification temperature goes through an approximately linear trend. the temperature of the absorber and condenser as key factors have been
Regarding the steam to Biomass ratio, it is the case that the reduction of evaluated on the cycle coefficient of performance. It can be seen that the
the exergy destruction rate of the gasifier at the end of STBM increasing increase of both factors caused a decrease in the performance criteria of
is slower than its beginning. this cycle. In the steam Rankine cycle, turbine inlet pressure and inlet
The effect of key variables of the Brayton cycle, absorption refrig­ temperature factors are directly proportional to cycle efficiencies. In the
eration cycle, steam Rankine cycle, and organic Rankine cycle on their organic Rankine cycle, the effect of the first and second cycles’ turbine
efficiency are shown in Fig. 14. As can be seen, increasing the pressure inlet pressure on the cycle performance was evaluated. The efficiency

13
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Table 11 Table 12
Input data for system modeling. Some of the main results.
Parameter Value Units Energy Exergy Exergoeconomic Exergoenvironment

Anaerobic Digestion [14,30,35] ηBC = 21.71% ψ BC = 31.24% Żtotal = 1.949M$/ fei = 0.594
Sewage sludge flow rate 1.88 kg/s Year
LHV of sludge 18,000 kJ/kg ηSRC = 26.07% ψ SRC = Ċf = 6.978M$/Year θei = 1.478
LHV of digestate 14,500 kJ/kg 41.66%
Digestion temperature (mesophilic) 35 ◦
C ηORC = ψ ORC = Ċenv = 7.647M$/ Cei = 2.489
Digestion pressure 101.3 kPa 24.80% 46.46% Year
Amount of destruction in the digester 70 % ηWGSRU = ψ WGSRU = ĊQ = 55.36M$/ θeii = 0.6764
Work needed for the digestion 0 W 20.95% 87.31% Year
Biomass simplified chemical formula C13.08H18.95O5.17 – COPen,ARC = COPex,ARC = fes = 0.5383
ĊD,TOTAL =
Brayton Cycle [30] 62.67% 12.73% 30.31M$/Year
Pressure ratio of the compressors 10 –
ηOverall = ψ Overall = ĊTOTAL = 102.2M$/ EMICO2 = 0.2327t/
Isentropic efficiency of the fuel compressor 85 %
35.48% 40.18% Year MWh
Isentropic efficiency of the air compressor 85 %
Combustion Chamber inlet temperature 576.85 ◦
C Q̇Gas = Ex
˙ D,Tot = cp,TOTAL =
Turbine inlet temperature 1246.85 ◦
C 173MW 146170kW 13.05$/GJ
Pressure ratio of the gas turbine 8.3 – Ẇnet =
Isentropic efficiency of the gas turbine 85 % 17750kW
Steam Gasification [19,71] Q̇Heating =
Temperature of the inlet Biomass 35 ◦
C 47440kW
Temperature of the inlet steam 400 ◦
C WGR =
Temperature of the outlet syngas 800 ◦
C 18.42l/h
Gasification pressure 101.3 kPa ṁH2 =
Steam to Biomass ratio 1 – 3180kg/h
Biomass simplified chemical formula CH0.89O0.28 –
Water-Gas Shift Reaction Unit
Temperature of the inlet steam 200 ◦
C increases with growing air temperature, so the water production rate is
Temperature of the produced hydrogen 25 ◦
C
higher in higher temperatures. As the relative humidity increases, water
Steam Rankine Cycle [31]
Steam flow rate in the cycle 12 kg/s vapor density in humid air increases. Consequently, as the density of
Turbine inlet temperature 420 ◦
C water vapor in humid air increases, the dew point of moist air increases,
Turbine inlet pressure 8000 kPa which means less cooling power is required to condense the water vapor
Turbine outlet pressure 100 kPa in moist air. The water production rate from this cycle can be deter­
Isentropic efficiency of the pump 90 %
Isentropic efficiency of the steam turbine 85 %
mined by having the relative humidity and the air temperature. There­
Organic Rankine Cycle1 [27] fore, these curves are named device performance curves.
Working fluid Cyclohexane The products of this multigeneration system are electrical power,
Fluid flow rate in the cycle 13 kg/s heating, hydrogen, and freshwater. The production rate of these prod­
Turbine inlet temperature 300 C
ucts in the base case condition was presented in Table 12. Fig. 16 shows
◦

Turbine inlet pressure 3000 kPa

Turbine outlet pressure 100 kPa the variation of electrical power, heating, and hydrogen production
Isentropic efficiency of the pump 90 % rates as a function of the input feed rate. As can be seen, increasing the
Isentropic efficiency of the steam turbine 85 % Biomass feed rate from 6 to 11 kg/s increases the production rate of
Organic Rankine Cycle2 [27] these products from 16,404 to 20833 kW, from 34,048 to 78062 kW, and
Working fluid Isobutane
Fluid flow rate in the cycle 5 kg/s
from 0.70 to 1.29 kg/s, respectively.
Turbine inlet pressure 3000 kPa The amount of water production rate in the different months of the
Turbine outlet pressure 100 kPa year is shown in Fig. 17. The maximum generation rate is for October
Isentropic efficiency of the pump 90 % with 38.67 l/h, and the minimum is for June with 24.6 l/h freshwater
Isentropic efficiency of the steam turbine 85 %
production. As shown in this figure, the generation rate in the autumn
Absorption Refrigeration Cycle [67]
Isentropic efficiency of the pump 90 % season is better than the others.
Effectiveness of solution heat exchanger 100 % The effect of Biomass flow rate and gasification temperature on the
Effectiveness of condensate precooler 95 % system’s overall efficiency and the unit emission of carbon dioxide is
Evaporator temperature − 10 ◦
C presented in Fig. 18. Evaluations show that the feed rate increasing from
Condenser temperature 40 ◦
C
Absorber temperature 40 ◦
C
6 to 11 kg/s improves the energy efficiency by 0.91%, and reduces the
Mass flow rate of water 1 kg/s unit emission of carbon dioxide by approximately 6 kg/MWh. Never­
Ammonia-water strong solution 99.96 % theless, it causes exergy efficiency reduction (because of enhancing the
Atmospheric Water Harvesting [46] total exergy destruction rate of the system). On the other hand,
Relative humidity of inlet air 40 %
increasing the temperature of the gasifier is beneficial to the system in
Relative humidity of exit air 100 %
Temperature of inlet air 25 ◦
C terms of these three criteria. Increasing the gasification temperature
from 520 to 820 ◦ C improves the energy and exergy efficiencies by
16.58% and 17.3%, respectively, and reduces the unit emission of car­
increasing with the inlet pressure of the first turbine experiences a bon dioxide by about 135 kg/MWh. This is mainly due to the increased
maximum point in its path, that is, up to a pressure of 3800 kPa, energy hydrogen production rate by the rising gasification temperature.
and exergy efficiencies of this cycle increase and then decrease. While The contribution of the capital investment cost of subsystems is
increasing the inlet pressure of the second turbine is entirely beneficial shown in Fig. 19. As can be seen, Rankine cycles have the highest capital
to cycle efficiencies. investment cost among the other subsystems. In both cycles, turbines
Two key factors affecting atmospheric water harvesting are tem­ have the highest share. After that, in the steam Rankine cycle, the largest
perature and relative humidity. The effect of these two variables on the share is for the pump, and in the organic Rankine cycle, the largest share
water generation rate and the amount of power consumption is pre­ is for the air-cooled condenser. In addition, as concluded in previous
sented in Fig. 15. The amount of water generation in all relative hu­ studies [72], this figure also shows that the capital investment cost of the
midity increases with the air temperature. The dew point of water vapor

14
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Table 13 Table 13 (continued )

Properties of the system state points. Stream Fluid ṁ(kg/s) T℃ P(kPa) x Eẋ(MW)
Stream Fluid ṁ(kg/s) T℃ P(kPa) x Eẋ(MW)
60 Water 97.75 25 101.3 0.281
1 Raw sewage 7.52 25 101.3 – 0 61 Water 97.75 85 101.3 4.882
sludge 62 Water 110.7 25 101.3 7.063
2 Digestated 6.335 35 101.3 – 121.125 63 Water 110.7 35 101.3 5.531
sewage sludge 64 Air 91.62 − 20 101.3 5.607
3 Biogas 1.185 35 101.3 – 82.496 65 Air 91.62 10 101.3 0.347
4 Biogas 1.185 247.9 1013 – 20.973 66 Water 91.19 25 101.3 0.035
5 Water 0.939 25 101.3 – 21.321 67 Water 91.19 85 101.3 4.555
6 Water 0.939 85 101.3 – 0.046
7 Air 20.92 25 101.3 – 0.067
8 Air 20.92 341.3 1013 – 0 air-cooled condenser is significantly higher than that of water-cooled
9 Air 20.92 576.9 962.4 – 6.379 condensers.
10 Combustion 22.1 1247 914.2 9.489
Fig. 20 demonstrates the contribution of the subsystem’s cost rates of
–
Products
11 Combustion 22.1 750 110.1 – 24.565 exergy destruction. Considering that this factor is obtained from the
Products product of the cost of the fuel stream for a component and its exergy
12 Combustion 22.1 544.9 106.8 – 9.867 destruction rate, the distribution shown in this figure can be justified
Products with the help of Fig. 11. Biomass conversion subsystem has the largest
13 Combustion 22.1 534.6 106.8 – 6.142
Products
share of exergy destruction rate and cost rates of exergy destruction.
14 Combustion 22.1 525.5 106.8 – 5.973 The column chart for comparing the exergoeconomic factor of all
Products equipment is shown in Fig. 21. According to this diagram, the highest
15 Steam 25.32 400 101.3 – 5.825 value of the exergoeconomic factor is for the air-cooled condenser of
16 Syngas 31.66 800 101.3 32.028
–
ORC2 and the solution heat exchanger of ARC. That is, this equipment’s
17 Steam 31.66 200 101.3 – 155.013
18 Hydrogen 0.883 25 101.3 – 33.959 capital investment cost is higher than the cost of exergy destruction.
19 WGSRU 62.44 581.5 101.3 – 103.411 Therefore, it is better to replace these components with lower equipment
products cost to improve the system’s economic performance.
20 Ammonia/ 1 40 286.8 0.3964 70.560 The effect of gasification temperature on the total cost rate of the
water
21 Ammonia/ 1 40.13 1556 0.3964 7.900
system, the unit cost of total products, and the unit cost of electricity and
water hydrogen products are investigated. As shown in Fig. 22, Increasing the
22 Ammonia/ 1 104.5 1556 0.3964 7.902 gasification temperature within the specified range causes an increase in
water the total cost rate of the system. As discussed earlier, increasing the
23 Ammonia/ 0.857 124.2 1556 0.2964 7.948
temperature of the gasifier raises its exergy destruction rate and its heat
water
24 Ammonia/ 0.857 40.13 1556 0.2964 5.128 requirement. According to Eq. (69), these factors increase the total cost
water rate of the system. On the other hand, although increasing the gasifi­
25 Ammonia/ 0.857 40.39 286.8 0.2964 5.078 cation temperature increases the production rate of hydrogen, it in­
water creases the cost of its production, which is mainly due to the high cost
26 Ammonia/ 0.152 101.9 1556 0.9583 5.077
water
spent on supplying heat to the gasifier. Utilizing waste heat sources
27 Water 0.010 101.9 1556 0.3964 2.963 seems more suitable for providing the heating power required by the
28 Ammonia 0.142 44.07 1556 0.9996 0.083 gasifier.
29 Ammonia 0.142 40 1556 0.9996 2.873
30 Ammonia 0.142 10.29 1556 0.9996 2.865
7. Conclusions
31 Ammonia 0.142 − 10.33 286.8 0.9996 2.865
32 Ammonia 0.142 − 10 286.8 0.9996 2.864
33 Ammonia 0.142 36.71 286.8 0.9996 2.842 A new urban sewage sludge-based multigeneration system for power,
34 Air 9.839 25 101.3 – 2.841 heating, hydrogen, and freshwater production was developed and
35 Air 9.834 9.476 101.3 – 0 evaluated from the energy, exergy, exergoeconomic, and exergoenvir­
36 Water 0.005 9.476 101.3 0.004
onment points of view. A case study for Çiğli wastewater treatment plant
–
37 Flue gas 84.55 572 102.4 – 0.00026
38 Flue gas 84.55 348 102.4 – 76.086 has been conducted on this system, and parametric studies have been
39 Flue gas 84.55 278.4 102.4 – 55.312 performed to investigate the effect of the main parameters on the sys­
40 Flue gas 84.55 110 102.4 – 50.069 tem’s performance criteria. Some of the main outcomes of this study are
41 Water 12 100.4 8000 40.733
–
listed below:
42 Water 12 420 8000 – 0.504
43 Water 12 99.63 100 – 15.317
44 Water 12 99.63 100 – 5.317 • This system’s energy and exergy efficiencies obtained 35.48% and
45 Cyclohexane 13 81.44 3000 – 0.403 40.18%, respectively.
46 Cyclohexane 13 300 3000 – 0.174 • The gasifier has the largest share (57.75%) of the exergy destruction
47 Cyclohexane 13 219.9 100 3.841
rate among the other components.
–
48 Cyclohexane 13 80.31 100 – 1.875
49 Cyclohexane 13 80.31 100 – 0.846 • Multigeneration has improved the system’s performance so that the
50 Isobutane 5 − 10.69 3000 – 0.121 energy and exergy efficiencies have been improved by 20.16% and
51 Isobutane 5 183.5 3000 – 0.300 22.94%, respectively, compared to the single-generation main sys­
52 Isobutane 5 91.64 100 0.931
–
tem. Also, it has reduced the unit emission of carbon dioxide by
53 Isobutane 5 − 12.01 100 – 0.058
54 Water 3.762 25 101.3 0.276 about 4 times.
55 Water 3.762 35 101.3 0.187 • The exergoenvironment, environmental damage effectiveness, and
56 Water 1.068 25 101.3 0.190 exergy stability factors of the proposed system obtained 0.4684,
57 Water 1.068 35 101.3 0.053 1.166, and 0.5383, respectively.
58 Water 5.551 25 101.3 0.054
• The hydrogen production rate in the base case conditions is 3180 kg/
59 Water 5.551 35 101.3 0.277
h, and its unit cost of production is 12.58 $/GJ.

15
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Fig. 9. Energy efficiency (η), exergy efficiency (ψ ), and exergetic performance coefficient (EPC) variation during system integration in six steps.

Fig. 10. Exergoenvironment factor (f ei ), the environmental damage effectiveness factor (θei ), exergy stability factor (f es ), and unit emission of carbon dioxide
(EMICO2 ) variation during system integration in six steps.

Fig. 11. The Contribution of exergy destruction rate of subsystems (Ex

˙ D,sub.sys ).

• The net power generation of the system is 17750 kW. This amount of studied area be used, it will be able to produce at least 24 l/h of
electricity generation, in addition to supplying the electricity de­ freshwater.
mand of Çiğli WWTP, can produce twice of surplus electricity that • The total cost rate of the system and the unit cost of total products are
can be used during peak hours or sold. calculated as 102.2 M$/Year and 13.05 $/GJ, respectively.
• This system can produce more than 18 L of freshwater per hour in • Rankine cycles have the highest capital investment cost among the
defined base case conditions. However, if the actual data of the other subsystems.

16
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Fig. 12. The effect of a) moisture content of Biomass, b) steam to Biomass ratio, and c) gasification temperature on the constituents’ mole fractions and lower heating
value of the syngas.

Fig. 13. The effect of a) gasification temperature, and b) steam to Biomass ratio on the exergy destruction rate of the gasifier.

Fig. 14. The effect of key variables of BC, ARC, SRC, and ORC subsystems on their efficiency.

17
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Fig. 15. The effect of ambient temperature and relative humidity on the a) water generation rate, and b) power consumption of AWH unit.

• The results of parametric studies show that increasing the rate of

Biomass improves the overall energy efficiency and production rates
and also reduces the unit emission of carbon dioxide, but on the other
hand, it causes a decrease in exergy efficiency and an increase in the
unit cost of total products.
• The relative humidity of the air directly affects water production, so
according to the parametric studies, increasing the relative humidity
from 30% to 90% in a constant temperature (25 ◦ C) increases the
hourly water production rate from about 3 l/h to about 120 l/h.

Fig. 16. The effect of the Biomass flow rate on the power, heating, and
hydrogen generation rate.

Fig. 17. Water generation rate along the year.

Fig. 18. The effect of a) Biomass flow rate and b) gasification temperature on the system overall efficiency and the unit emission of carbon dioxide.

18
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Fig. 19. Contribution of capital investment cost of subsystems (Żsub.sys ).

Fig. 20. Contribution of subsystem’s cost rates of exergy destruction (ĊD,sub.sys ).

Fig. 21. Exergoeconomic factor for all components.

19
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

Fig. 22. The effect of gasification temperature on the a) total cost rate of the system and unit cost of total products, and b) unit cost of electricity and
hydrogen products.

CRediT authorship contribution statement Energy Technol Assess 2022/10/01/ 2022,;53:102461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
seta.2022.102461.
[11] Seiiedhoseiny M, Khani L, Mohammadpourfard M, Akkurt GG. Exergoeconomic
Zahra Hajimohammadi Tabriz: Investigation, Conceptualization, analysis and optimization of a high-efficient multi-generation system powered by
Writing – original draft. Mousa Mohammadpourfard: Supervision, Sabalan (Savalan) geothermal power plant including branched GAX cycle and
Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing. Gulden G. Akkurt: electrolyzer unit. Energ Conver Manage 2022/09/15/ 2022,;268:115996. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.115996.
Writing – review & editing. Saeed Zeinali Heris: Writing – review & [12] Lak Kamari M, Maleki A, Daneshpour R, Rosen MA, Pourfayaz F, Alhuyi Nazari M.
editing. Exergy, energy and environmental evaluation of a biomass-assisted integrated
plant for multigeneration fed by various biomass sources. Energy 2023/01/15/
2023,;263:125649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.125649.
Declaration of Competing Interest [13] Safarian S, Unnthorsson R, Richter C. Hydrogen production via biomass
gasification: simulation and performance analysis under different gasifying agents.
Biofuels 2022/07/03 2022,;13(6):717–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial 17597269.2021.1894781.
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence [14] Safari F, Dincer I. Development and analysis of a novel biomass-based integrated
system for multigeneration with hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy
the work reported in this paper. 2019/02/05/ 2019,;44(7):3511–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2018.12.101.
Data availability [15] Rulkens W. Sewage Sludge as a Biomass Resource for the Production of Energy:
Overview and Assessment of the Various Options. Energy Fuel 2008/01/01 2008,;
22(1):9–15. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef700267m.
No data was used for the research described in the article. [16] Siddiqui O, Dincer I. Design and assessment of a new solar-based biomass
gasification system for hydrogen, cooling, power and fresh water production
utilizing rice husk biomass. Energ Conver Manage 2021/05/15/ 2021,;236:
Acknowledgment 114001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114001.
[17] Ishaq H, Islam S, Dincer I, Yilbas BS. Development and performance investigation
This work was supported by the Scientific & Technological Research of a biomass gasification based integrated system with thermoelectric generators.
J Clean Prod 2020/05/20/ 2020,;256:120625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Council of Turkey under program of TUBITAK 2221 Fellowship. jclepro.2020.120625.
[18] Ishaq H, Dincer I. A new energy system based on biomass gasification for hydrogen
and power production. Energy Rep 2020/11/01/ 2020,;6:771–81. https://doi.org/
References
10.1016/j.egyr.2020.02.019.
[19] Sotoodeh AF, Ahmadi F, Ghaffarpour Z, Ebadollahi M, Nasrollahi H, Amidpour M.
[1] Ağbulut Ü, Sarıdemir S. A general view to converting fossil fuels to cleaner energy Performance analyses of a waste-to-energy multigeneration system incorporated
source by adding nanoparticles. Int J Ambient Energy 2021/10/03 2021,;42(13): with thermoelectric generators. Sustainable Energy Technol Assess 2022/02/01/
1569–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/01430750.2018.1563822. 2022,;49:101649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101649.
[2] Dincer I, Acar C. Chapter 1.1 - Potential Energy Solutions for Better Sustainability. [20] Yilmaz F, Ozturk M, Selbas R. Design and thermodynamic assessment of a biomass
In: Dincer I, Colpan CO, Kizilkan O, editors. Exergetic, Energetic and gasification plant integrated with Brayton cycle and solid oxide steam electrolyzer
Environmental Dimensions. Academic Press; 2018. p. 3–37. for compressed hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2020/12/09/ 2020,;
[3] Abas N, Kalair A, Khan N. Review of fossil fuels and future energy technologies. 45(60):34620–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.02.174.
Futures 2015/05/01/ 2015,;69:31–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [21] G. Onder, F. Yilmaz, and M. Ozturk, “Thermodynamic performance analysis of a
futures.2015.03.003. copper–chlorine thermochemical cycle and biomass based combined plant for
[4] Raveesh G, Goyal R, Tyagi SK. Advances in atmospheric water generation multigeneration,” International Journal of Energy Research, https://doi.org/
technologies. Energ Conver Manage 2021/07/01/ 2021,;239:114226. https://doi. 10.1002/er.5482 vol. 44, no. 9, pp. 7548-7567, 2020/07/01 2020, doi: https://
org/10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114226. doi.org/10.1002/er.5482.
[5] Tu Y, Wang R, Zhang Y, Wang J. Progress and Expectation of Atmospheric Water [22] Ejeian M, Wang RZ. Adsorption-based atmospheric water harvesting. Joule 2021/
Harvesting. Joule 2018/08/15/ 2018,;2(8):1452–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 07/21/ 2021,;5(7):1678–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2021.04.005.
joule.2018.07.015. [23] Chaitanya B, Bahadur V, Thakur AD, Raj R. Biomass-gasification-based
[6] Rong A, Lahdelma R. Role of polygeneration in sustainable energy system atmospheric water harvesting in India. Energy 2018/12/15/ 2018,;165:610–21.
development challenges and opportunities from optimization viewpoints. Renew https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.09.183.
Sustain Energy Rev 2016/01/01/ 2016,;53:363–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [24] Patel J, Patel K, Mudgal A, Panchal H, Sadasivuni KK. Experimental investigations
rser.2015.08.060. of atmospheric water extraction device under different climatic conditions.
[7] L. Khani, M. Mohammadpour, M. Mohammadpourfard, S. Z. Heris, and G. G. Sustainable Energy Technol Assess 2020/04/01/ 2020,;38:100677. https://doi.
Akkurt, “Thermodynamic design, evaluation, and optimization of a novel org/10.1016/j.seta.2020.100677.
quadruple generation system combined of a fuel cell, an absorption refrigeration [25] Salek F, Eshghi H, Zamen M, Ahmadi MH. Energy and exergy analysis of an
cycle, and an electrolyzer,” International Journal of Energy Research, https://doi. atmospheric water generator integrated with the compound parabolic collector
org/10.1002/er.7634 vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 7261-7276, 2022/05/01 2022, doi: with storage tank in various climates. Energy Rep 2022/11/01/ 2022,;8:2401–12.
https://doi.org/10.1002/er.7634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.01.178.
[8] Khani L, Tabriz ZH, Mohammadpourfard M, Gökçen Akkurt G. Energy and exergy [26] Tabriz ZH, Khani L, Mohammadpourfard M, Akkurt GG. Biomass driven
analysis of combined power, methanol, and light olefin generation system fed with polygeneration systems: a review of recent progress and future prospects. Process
shale gas. Sustain Cities Soc 2022/12/01/ 2022,;87:104214. https://doi.org/ Saf Environ Prot 2022/11/15/ 2022,. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
10.1016/j.scs.2022.104214. psep.2022.11.029.
[9] Ghiami S, Khallaghi N, Borhani TN. Techno-economic and environmental [27] Almahdi M, Dincer I, Rosen MA. A new solar based multigeneration system with
assessment of staged oxy-co-firing of biomass-derived syngas and natural gas. hot and cold thermal storages and hydrogen production. Renew Energy 2016/06/
Energ Conver Manage 2021/09/01/ 2021,;243:114410. https://doi.org/10.1016/ 01/ 2016,;91:302–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.01.069.
j.enconman.2021.114410.
[10] Yilmaz F, Ozturk M, Selbas R. Investigation of the thermodynamic analysis of solar
Energy-Based multigeneration plant for sustainable multigeneration. Sustainable

20
Z. Hajimohammadi Tabriz et al. Energy Conversion and Management 288 (2023) 117130

[28] Cavalcanti EJC, Motta HP. Exergoeconomic analysis of a solar-powered/fuel [51] Darabadi Zare AA, Yari M, Nami H, Mohammadkhani F. Thermodynamic and
assisted Rankine cycle for power generation. Energy 2015/08/01/ 2015,;88: thermoeconomic assessment of hydrogen production employing an efficient
555–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.05.081. multigeneration system based on rich fuel combustion. Int J Hydrogen Energy
[29] Wang J, Yan Z, Wang M, Ma S, Dai Y. Thermodynamic analysis and optimization of 2023/03/26/ 2023,;48(26):9861–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
an (organic Rankine cycle) ORC using low grade heat source. Energy 2013/01/01/ ijhydene.2022.11.296.
2013,;49:356–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.11.009. [52] Freund D, Güngör A, Atakan B. “Hydrogen production and separation in fuel-rich
[30] Auracher H. “Thermal design and optimization: Adrian Bejan, George Tsatsaronis operated HCCI engine polygeneration systems: Exergoeconomic analysis and
and Michael Moran,” ed: John Wiley & Sons Inc. NJ: Hoboken; 1996. comparison between pressure swing adsorption and palladium membrane
[31] Taheri MH, Mosaffa AH, Farshi LG. Energy, exergy and economic assessments of a separation,” Applications in Energy and Combustion. Science 2023/03/01/ 2023,;13:
novel integrated biomass based multigeneration energy system with hydrogen 100108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaecs.2022.100108.
production and LNG regasification cycle. Energy 2017/04/15/ 2017,;125:162–77. [53] “CEPCI.” https://www.chemengonline.com/2023-cepci-updates-january-prelim-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.124. and-december-2022-final/ (accessed.
[32] Husebye J, Brunsvold AL, Roussanaly S, Zhang X. Techno Economic Evaluation of [54] Zare AAD, Yari M, Mohammadkhani F, Nami H, Desideri U. Thermodynamic and
Amine based CO2 Capture: Impact of CO2 Concentration and Steam Supply. exergoeconomic analysis of a multi-generation gas-to-X system based on fuel-rich
Energy Procedia 2012/01/01/ 2012,;23:381–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. combustion to produce power, hydrogen, steam and heat. Sustain Cities Soc 2022/
egypro.2012.06.053. 11/01/ 2022,;86:104139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.104139.
[33] A. Buswell and W. Hatfield, “Anaerobic fermentations, state of Illinois,” Urbana, [55] M. H. Taheri, L. Khani, M. Mohammadpourfard, H. Aminfar, and G. G. Akkurt,
Illinois: Department of Registration and Education, Division of the State Wate r Survey, “Multi-objective optimization of a novel supercritical CO2 cycle-based combined
1936. cycle for solar power tower plants integrated with SOFC and LNG cold energy and
[34] Wellinger A, Murphy JP, Baxter D. The biogas handbook: science, production and regasification,” International Journal of Energy Research, https://doi.org/10.1002/
applications. Elsevier; 2013. er.7972 vol. 46, no. 9, pp. 12082-12107, 2022/07/01 2022, doi: https://doi.org/
[35] Yari M, Mehr AS, Mahmoudi SMS, Santarelli M. A comparative study of two SOFC 10.1002/er.7972.
based cogeneration systems fed by municipal solid waste by means of either the [56] Balafkandeh S, Zare V, Gholamian E. Multi-objective optimization of a tri-
gasifier or digester. Energy 2016/11/01/ 2016,;114:586–602. https://doi.org/ generation system based on biomass gasification/digestion combined with S-CO2
10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.035. cycle and absorption chiller. Energ Conver Manage 2019/11/15/ 2019,;200:
[36] Barati MR, et al. Comprehensive exergy analysis of a gas engine-equipped 112057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.112057.
anaerobic digestion plant producing electricity and biofertilizer from organic [57] Ahmadi P, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Thermoeconomic multi-objective optimization of a
fraction of municipal solid waste. Energ Conver Manage 2017/11/01/ 2017,;151: novel biomass-based integrated energy system. Energy 2014/04/15/ 2014,;68:
753–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.09.017. 958–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.01.085.
[37] Hosseini SE, Barzegaravval H, Wahid MA, Ganjehkaviri A, Sies MM. [58] Liu Z, Ehyaei MA. Thermoeconomic and exergoenvironmental assessments of a
Thermodynamic assessment of integrated biogas-based micro-power generation combined micro-gas turbine and superheated Kalina cycles for cogeneration of heat
system. Energ Conver Manage 2016/11/15/ 2016,;128:104–19. https://doi.org/ and electrical power using biomass. Int J Environ Sci Technol 2022/11/01 2022,;
10.1016/j.enconman.2016.09.064. 19(11):11233–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-022-04329-y.
[38] Zhang M, Chen H, Zoghi M, Habibi H. Comparison between biogas and pure [59] Akrami E, Chitsaz A, Nami H, Mahmoudi SMS. Energetic and exergoeconomic
methane as the fuel of a polygeneration system including a regenerative gas assessment of a multi-generation energy system based on indirect use of
turbine cycle and partial cooling supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle: 4E analysis and geothermal energy. Energy 2017/04/01/ 2017,;124:625–39. https://doi.org/
tri-objective optimization. Energy 2022/10/15/ 2022,;257:124695. https://doi. 10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.006.
org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.124695. [60] Talebizadehsardari P, et al. Energy, exergy, economic, exergoeconomic, and
[39] Loha C, Chatterjee PK, Chattopadhyay H. Performance of fluidized bed steam exergoenvironmental (5E) analyses of a triple cycle with carbon capture. J CO2
gasification of biomass – Modeling and experiment. Energ Conver Manage 2011/ Util 2020/10/01/ 2020,;41:101258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2020.101258.
03/01/ 2011,;52(3):1583–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2010.11.003. [61] Ji-chao Y, Sobhani B. Integration of biomass gasification with a supercritical CO2
[40] Basu P. Biomass gasification, pyrolysis and torrefaction: practical design and and Kalina cycles in a combined heating and power system: A thermodynamic and
theory. Academic press; 2018. exergoeconomic analysis. Energy 2021/05/01/ 2021,;222:119980. https://doi.
[41] Habibollahzade A, Ahmadi P, Rosen MA. Biomass gasification using various org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.119980.
gasification agents: Optimum feedstock selection, detailed numerical analyses and [62] A. Baghernejad and M. Yaghoubi, “Multi-objective exergoeconomic optimization of
tri-objective grey wolf optimization. J Clean Prod 2021/02/15/ 2021,;284: an Integrated Solar Combined Cycle System using evolutionary algorithms,”
124718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124718. International Journal of Energy Research, https://doi.org/10.1002/er.1715 vol. 35,
[42] Shayan E, Zare V, Mirzaee I. Hydrogen production from biomass gasification; a no. 7, pp. 601-615, 2011/06/10 2011, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/er.1715.
theoretical comparison of using different gasification agents. Energ Conver Manage [63] Ahmadi P, Dincer I. 1.8 Exergoeconomics. Comprehensive energy systems 2018;1:
2018/03/01/ 2018,;159:30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 340–76.
enconman.2017.12.096. [64] Khani L, Mahmoudi SMS, Chitsaz A, Rosen MA. Energy and exergoeconomic
[43] Asgari N, Khoshbakhti Saray R, Mirmasoumi S. Energy and exergy analyses of a evaluation of a new power/cooling cogeneration system based on a solid oxide fuel
novel seasonal CCHP system driven by a gas turbine integrated with a biomass cell. Energy 2016/01/01/ 2016,;94:64–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gasification unit and a LiBr-water absorption chiller. Energ Conver Manage 2020/ energy.2015.11.001.
09/15/ 2020,;220:113096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113096. [65] Behzadi A, Gholamian E, Houshfar E, Habibollahzade A. Multi-objective
[44] Moran MJ, Shapiro HN, Boettner DD, Bailey MB. Fundamentals of engineering optimization and exergoeconomic analysis of waste heat recovery from Tehran’s
thermodynamics. John Wiley & Sons; 2010. waste-to-energy plant integrated with an ORC unit. Energy 2018/10/01/ 2018,;
[45] Budisulistyo D, Krumdieck S. Thermodynamic and economic analysis for the pre- 160:1055–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.07.074.
feasibility study of a binary geothermal power plant. Energ Conver Manage 2015/ [66] Ehyaei MA, Baloochzadeh S, Ahmadi A, Abanades S. Energy, exergy, economic,
10/01/ 2015,;103:639–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2015.06.069. exergoenvironmental, and environmental analyses of a multigeneration system to
[46] Salek F, Moghaddam AN, Naserian MM. Thermodynamic analysis and produce electricity, cooling, potable water, hydrogen and sodium-hypochlorite.
improvement of a novel solar driven atmospheric water generator. Energ Conver Desalination 2021/04/01/ 2021,;501:114902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Manage 2018/04/01/ 2018,;161:104–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. desal.2020.114902.
enconman.2018.01.066. [67] Adewusi SA, Zubair SM. Second law based thermodynamic analysis of
[47] Morosuk T, Tsatsaronis G. A new approach to the exergy analysis of absorption ammonia–water absorption systems. Energ Conver Manage 2004/09/01/ 2004,;45
refrigeration machines. Energy 2008/06/01/ 2008,;33(6):890–907. https://doi. (15):2355–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2003.11.020.
org/10.1016/j.energy.2007.09.012. [68] “Çiğli Climate.” https://climate.onebuilding.
[48] Kim H, Rao SR, LaPotin A, Lee S, Wang EN. Thermodynamic analysis and org/WMO_Region_6_Europe/TUR_Turkey/index.html#IDIZ_Izmir (accessed.
optimization of adsorption-based atmospheric water harvesting. Int J Heat Mass [69] “Cigli.” https://www.izsu.gov.tr/tr/TesisDetay/1/80/1?AspxAutoDetectCoo
Transf 2020/11/01/ 2020,;161:120253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. kieSupport=1 (accessed.
ijheatmasstransfer.2020.120253. [70] Cartmell E, et al. BiosolidsA Fuel or a Waste? An Integrated Appraisal of Five Co-
[49] Mohammadpourfard M, Hajimohammadi Tabriz Z, Khani L. Design and combustion Scenarios with Policy Analysis. Environ Sci Tech 2006/02/01 2006,;40
Assessment of A New Dual Solid Oxide Fuel Cell – Gas Turbine Hybrid System. (in (3):649–58. https://doi.org/10.1021/es052181g.
en), J Energy Managem Technol 2022. https://doi.org/10.22109/ [71] Shayan E, Zare V, Mirzaee I. Exergoeconomic Analysis of an Integrated Steam
jemt.2022.329698.1372. Biomass Gasification System with a Solid Oxide Fuel Cell for Power and Freshwater
[50] Musharavati F, Khoshnevisan A, Alirahmi SM, Ahmadi P, Khanmohammadi S. Generations [Online]. Available: mdrsjrns 2020;20(3):553–64. http://mme.moda
Multi-objective optimization of a biomass gasification to generate electricity and res.ac.ir/article-15-27327-en.html.
desalinated water using Grey Wolf Optimizer and artificial neural network. [72] Walraven D, Laenen B, W. D’haeseleer,. Minimizing the levelized cost of electricity
Chemosphere 2022/01/01/ 2022,;287:131980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. production from low-temperature geothermal heat sources with ORCs: Water or air
chemosphere.2021.131980. cooled? Appl Energy 2015/03/15/ 2015,;142:144–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2014.12.078.

21