0
SPECIAL SECTION PAPERS

Power Cycle Assessment of Nuclear Systems, Providing Energy Storage for Low Carbon Grids

[+] Author and Article Information
Nima Fathi

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of New Mexico,
Albuquerque, NM 87131
e-mail: nfathi@unm.edu

Patrick McDaniel

Department of Nuclear Engineering,
University of New Mexico,
Albuquerque, NM 87131
e-mail: McDanielPK@aol.com

Charles Forsberg

Nuclear Science and Engineering Department,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, MA 02139
e-mail: cforsber@mit.edu

Cassiano de Oliveira

Department of Nuclear Engineering,
University of New Mexico,
Albuquerque, NM 87131
e-mail: cassiano@unm.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received October 16, 2016; final manuscript received August 24, 2017; published online March 5, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Guoqiang Wang.

ASME J of Nuclear Rad Sci 4(2), 020911 (Mar 05, 2018) (8 pages) Paper No: NERS-16-1139; doi: 10.1115/1.4037806 History: Received October 16, 2016; Revised August 24, 2017

The intermittency of renewable power generation systems on the low carbon electric grid can be alleviated by using nuclear systems as quasi-storage systems. Nuclear air-Brayton systems can produce and store hydrogen when electric generation is abundant and then burn the hydrogen by co-firing when generation is limited. The rated output of a nuclear plant can be significantly augmented by co-firing. The incremental efficiency of hydrogen to electricity can far exceed that of hydrogen in a standalone gas turbine. Herein, we simulate and evaluate this idea on a 50 MW small modular liquid metal/molten salt reactor. Considerable power increases are predicted for nuclear air-Brayton systems by co-firing with hydrogen before the power turbine.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

MacPherson, R. E. , Amos, J. C. , and Savage, H. W. , 1960, “ Development Testing of Liquid Metal and Molten Salt Heat Exchangers,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 8(1), pp. 14–20. [CrossRef]
Chang, W. , Kwon, Y. , Jeong, H. , Suk, S. , and Lee, Y. , 2011, “ Inherent Safety Analysis of the Kalimer Under a Lofa With a Reduced Primary Pump Halving Time,” Nucl. Eng. Technol., 43(1), pp. 63–74. [CrossRef]
Dostal, V. , Hejzlar, P. , and Driscoll, M. J. , 2006, “ High-Performance Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Cycle for Next-Generation Nuclear Reactors,” Nucl. Technol., 154(3), pp. 265–282. [CrossRef]
Waltar, A. E. , and Reynolds, A. B. , 1981, Fast Breeder Reactors, Alan E. Waltar , ed., Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.
Forsberg, C. , Curtis, D. , Stempien, J. , MacDonald, R. , and Peterson, P. , 2014, “ Fluoride-Salt-Cooled High-Temperature Reactor (FHR) Commercial Basis and Commercialization Strategy,” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, Report No. MIT-ANP-TR-153. http://web.mit.edu/nse/pdf/researchstaff/forsberg/FHR%20Commercialization%20ANP-153%20MIT-UCB.pdf
Vitart, X. , Le Duigou, A. , and Carles, P. , 2006, “ Hydrogen Production Using the Sulfur–Iodine Cycle Coupled to a VHTR: An Overview,” Energy Convers. Manage., 47(17), pp. 2740–2747. [CrossRef]
Stack, D. , 2016, “ Conceptual Design and Market Assessment of Firebrick Resistance Heated Energy Storage (Fires)-Avoiding Wind and Solar Electricity Price Collapse to Improve Nuclear, Wind, and Solar Economics,” International Congress Advanced Nuclear Power Plants (ICAPP), San Francisco, CA, Apr. 17–20.
Wilson, D. G. , and Korakianitis, T. , 2014, The Design of High-Efficiency Turbomachinery and Gas Turbines, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. [PubMed] [PubMed]
Kays, W. M. , and London, A. L. , 1984, Compact Heat Exchangers, McGraw-Hill, New York.
El-Wakil, M. M. , 1984, Powerplant Technology, Tata McGraw-Hill Education, Columbus, OH.
Walsh, P. P. , and Fletcher, P. , 2004, Gas Turbine Performance, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. [CrossRef]
Zohuri, B. , McDaniel, P. J. , and De Oliveira, C. R. , 2015, “ Advanced Nuclear Open Air-Brayton Cycles for Highly Efficient Power Conversion,” Nucl. Technol., 192(1), pp. 48–60. [CrossRef]
Zohuri, B. , and Fathi, N. , 2015, Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Nuclear Reactors, Springer, Berlin. [CrossRef]
Boyce, M. P. , 2011, Gas Turbine Engineering Handbook, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Forsberg, C. , and Curtis, D. , 2013, “ Nuclear Air-Brayton Combined Cycle (NACC) With Natural Gas Peak Power,” ASME Paper No. POWER2013-98119.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

System description

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic presentation of complete NACC with RIC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Cycle efficiencies for NACC, SCO2, NACC&RIC, and NARC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Compressor pressure ratios

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Power increase due to co-firing at normal steam flow rates

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Increase in steam flow to maintain pinch point for the NACC system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Power increase for NACC if the pinch point temperature difference is held constant

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Hydrogen burn efficiencies when the pinch point temperature difference is constant

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

The maximum co-firing temperature allowed to reach the system normal TIT

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Power increase allowed by co-firing at the maximum allowed temperature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

The required fraction of rated power for the reactor when co-firing at maximum temperature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Hydrogen burn efficiency at the maximum co-firing temperature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Increase in steam flow for the recuperator outlet temperature limit

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Percent power increase when the steam flow is increased to reach the maximum recuperator outlet temperature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Required fraction of reactor rated power when co-firing with increased steam flow

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Hydrogen burn efficiency when steam flow is increased to meet the maximum recuperator outlet temperature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Comparison of required environmental heat removal by water for NACC&RIC and NARCw systems

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Recommended peak burn temperatures for NARC systems

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Hydrogen burn efficiency for NARC systems

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Percent power augmentation for NARC systems using co-firing

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Overall system efficiencies for the co-fired systems

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Estimated system volumes for NACC and NARC systems

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In