Energy 228 (2021) 120580

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Application of advanced exergy analysis for optimizing the design of

carbon dioxide pressurization system
Hafiz Ali Muhammad a, b, Beomjoon Lee a, Junhyun Cho a, Zabdur Rehman c,
Bongsu Choi a, Jongjae Cho a, Chulwoo Roh a, Gilbong Lee a, Muhammad Imran d,
Young-Jin Baik a, b, *
a
Thermal Energy Systems Laboratory, Korea Institute of Energy Research, Daejeon, 305-343, South Korea
b
University of Science and Technology, Daejeon, 305-350, South Korea
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Air University Islamabad, Aerospace and Aviation Campus, Kamra, Pakistan
d
Department of Mechanical, Biomedical and Design Engineering, College of Engineering and Physical Science, Aston University, Birmingham, B47ET, UK

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

Article history: The pressurization of carbon dioxide is an integral step of the carbon capture and storage process; a key
Received 26 October 2020 technology frontier for the decarbonization of power and heat industry. Effective measures to improve
Received in revised form the pressurization scheme directly translate into the reduction of process costs. This study aimed to
12 March 2021
reduce the energy expenditure of the carbon dioxide pressurization process by assisting the conventional
Accepted 3 April 2021
Available online 8 April 2021
carbon dioxide multi-stage compressors with an Ammonia (R717) or Propane (R290) based heat-pump
system. In these systems, carbon dioxide is liquefied in the heat-pump after being compressed to an
intermediate liquefaction pressure. The liquefied carbon dioxide is subsequently pumped to the target
Keywords:
Advanced exergy analysis
pressure. In this study, the advanced exergy analysis, in addition to the conventional energy analysis is
Carbon capture and storage applied to design and optimize the carbon dioxide liquefaction system using a heat pump. The initial
CO2 pressurization conventional exergy analysis reveals that 43.76% of total fuel exergy is destroyed and lost. Subsequently,
Heat pump the advanced exergy analysis is performed to pinpoint the source of total irreversibility (exergy
Supercritical CO2 power cycle destruction), calculate the avoidable exergy destruction in the system and figure out potential measures
to improve the system’s performance. The advanced exergy analysis reveals the avoidable exergy
destruction is 48.85% and 51.20% of the total exergy destruction for R290 and R717, respectively.
Furthermore, the avoidable exogenous exergy destruction is 16% and 19%, respectively. The results also
show that for R717, the extent of improvement is in the following order,
Condenser > Compressor > Evaporator > Expansion valve. With this information, a systematic approach
is devised and followed to optimize the operating parameters and design of the heat-pump system.
Furthermore, in the proposed system, 2328.6 kW of exergy is lost to the environment. To recover this
exergy loss, the heat pump-assisted pressurization scheme is integrated with a supercritical carbon
dioxide power cycle which generated 1191.00 kW of electric power. The results reveal that the electrical
power consumed by the proposed system optimized through advanced exergy analysis is 15.5% lower
than that consumed by a benchmark system. The study demonstrates the effectiveness of advanced
exergy analysis and the approach presented here can be extended to other energy conversion systems to
maximize the energy and exergy savings for sustainable development.
© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction mitigate the anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to the

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a widely used technique to
* Corresponding author. Thermal Energy Systems Laboratory, Korea Institute of
Energy Research, Daejeon, 305-343, South Korea.
E-mail address: twinjin@kier.re.kr (Y.-J. Baik).
environment and, consequently, global warming [1]. CCS enables
the continuous use of fossil fuels, such as coal, in the power sector
by sequestering the produced CO2 [2]. Moreover, CCS is considered
as one of the most important research frontiers for the develop-
ment of a sustainable future [3]. The CCS process is favored by the
energy stakeholder as well as the public [4] and is capable of being

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120580
0360-5442/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
H.A. Muhammad, B. Lee, J. Cho et al. Energy 228 (2021) 120580

Nomenclature C Cooling temperature

Comp Compressor
BC Conventional multistage compression established as Cond Condenser
the baseline case CW Cooling water
CCS Carbon capture and storage D Destruction
Ex Exergy (kW) En Endogenous exergy destruction
ex Specific exergy (kJ/kg) Eva Evaporator
h Enthalpy (kJ/kg) Ex Exergy
HP Heat pump EX Exogenous exergy destruction
HX Heat exchanger Exp Expansion valve
IC Intercooler F Fuel
m Mass flow rate (kg/s) is Isentropic
P Pressure (kPa) k k-th component
PP Pinch point in the heat transfer process L Loss
Q Rate of heat transfer (kW) Me Mechanical
SH Refrigerants’ degree of superheat at HP’s compressor o Ambient conditions
inlet (K) P Product
s Entropy (kJ/kg-K) PC Proposed case
T Temperature (K) PH Physical
TV Throttling valve R Ratio
W Power (kW) Refr Refrigerant or HP working fluid
X Quality Sat Saturated
State 1CO2e12CO2 CO2 states SC Subcooling
State 1Refre5Refr Refrigerant states sCO2 Supercritical CO2
Th Thermal
Subscripts and superscripts Turb Turbine
AV Avoidable exergy destruction UN Unavoidable exergy destruction
BC Conventional multistage compression established as X Quality
the baseline case h Isentropic efficiency

retrofitted to the existing plants as well [5]. However, despite the
broad consensus on CCS as a leading technology for the decar-
bonization of the power and industrial sectors, the significant en-
ergy penalty associated with the CCS process has significantly
limited the implementation of CCS in these sectors [6].
The CCS process involves the separation of carbon content of
either fuel (pre-combustion) or exhaust (post-combustion) and the
transportation and storage of CO2 to underground repositories [7].
The preferred mode of CO2 transportation from capture to storage
sites, which are normally separated by 1000 km, is pipelines [8].
The CO2 pressure required for pipeline transportation ranges from
150 to 200 bar, while, the CO2 captured using state-of-the-art
capturing techniques is at near atmospheric pressures
(1.2e3.5 bar) [9]. Therefore, in the first stage of transportation, the
pressure of the captured CO2 is boosted to that required for the
transportation through pipelines. The major portion of the CCS
process penalty comes from CO2 capture or separation process.
However, the pressurization of large volumes of CO2 over such
pressure ratios can amount for an efficiency penalty of as high as
12% of the total loss of the power plant efficiency [10].
Many studies have conducted performance assessment and
have proposed process intensification measures of the CCS process,
as indicated in Ref. [11]. Owing to the sizable contribution of CO2
pressurization for transportation to the overall process penalty,
some researchers have exclusively focused on improving the CO2
compression process and analyzing the CO2 transport and storage
mechanisms. In this perspective, Witkowski et al. [8] investigated
the CO2 transport and examined the potential leakage of CO2 from
the pipelines and the associated environmental problems. They
investigated the effects of the ambient temperature and thickness
of the thermal insulation layer on the flow of CO2 in the pipelines
and determined the locations of subsequent CO2 booster stations.
Zhang and Huisingh [12] reviewed the CO2 storage schemes and
conducted a techno-economic assessment of various CO2 storage
methods and repositories. They concluded that the high cost and
significant energy penalty of pressurization are still the main bar-
riers to the deployment of CO2 storage schemes.
The conventional mean of compressing CO2 from the capture to
the pipeline pressure is the multistage compression, where each
stage involves the use of a compressor and an intercooler [13].
Numerous CO2 compression models have been developed with the
capability of handling high flowrates and pressure ratios associated
with the CCS process. Moore et al. [14] designed and fabricated a
multi-stage centrifugal compressor with internal intercooling of
CO2. To achieve the internal cooling, they optimized the design of
the cooling jacket embedded within the centrifugal compressors.
The performance of a multi-stage compression can be improved by
increasing the number of stages to near the isothermal compres-
sion; however, this introduced additional costs. Moreover, during
the intercooling step of the multistage compression, a significant
amount of sensible heat is lost to the environment. The tempera-
ture at which this heat is lost to the environment depends on the
compressors’ pressure ratio and is around 400 K [15]. To recover the
intercooling heat optimally, different strategies have been proposed
and analyzed. Romeo et al. [16] integrated the intercooling heat to
the low-pressure steam in the cycle and optimized the design in
terms of the energy consumption and costs. In the last decade, the
organic Rankine cycle (ORC) has evolved into a mature technology
to harness low temperature heat resources [17]. Kurtulus et al. [18]
integrated the CO2 compression chain with an ORC to recover the
intercooling heat. They carried out the exergoeconomic analysis of
their design and reported the exergy cost of compressed CO2 comes
out to be 184.3 $/h.
Many studies have focused on replacing the CO2 compression

2
H.A. Muhammad, B. Lee, J. Cho et al.
with its liquefaction and pumping, because boosting the pressure of
a liquid consumes significantly less energy than the compression
process. However, the CO2 coming from the capture unit is close to
the atmospheric pressure, while the triple point pressure of CO2 is
5.17 bar. Therefore, the liquefaction process of CO2 in the CCS pro-
cess is always accompanied by multi-stage compression [17].
Consequentially, many CO2 pressurization strategies where multi-
stage compressors are assisted with a refrigeration cycle for CO2
liquefaction have been developed and investigated. In these stra-
tegies, the initial compressors raise the CO2 pressure to an inter-
mediate liquefaction pressure; then, CO2 is liquefied and pumped to
the pipeline pressures. Moore et al. [19] optimized the CO2
compression strategy for an integrated gasification combined cycle
and achieved a 35% reduction in power compared to a benchmark
process. The optimum thermodynamic path of CO2 compression
depends on the plant type and separation technique [20]. Due to
the availability of to the CO2 separation at multiple pressure levels
low temperature N2, integrated gasification combined cycle plants
differ significantly from natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) or coal
fired power plants. Botero et al. [21] focused on the NGCC and
conducted a thermodynamic and preliminary economic feasibility
analysis of CO2 compression strategies for an NGCC. They concluded
that a complementing CO2 multi-stage compressor with liquefac-
tion and pumping can reduce the electric power required for CO2
pressurization in NGCCs as well.
Alabdulkarem et al. [22] studied CO2 liquefaction through a
heat-pump (HP). They investigated various refrigerants for HP
based on thermodynamics’ first law analysis and achieved 5.1%
reduction in power using ammonia (R717) as the refrigerant.
Muhammad et al. [20] pointed out that the boundary conditions for
CO2 pressurization depend on the capture process and power plant
characteristics and have a direct effect on the performance of the
refrigeration cycle. Their study revealed that higher pressure ratios
in CO2 compressors and lower cooling temperatures result in better
performance of liquefaction-assisted compression compared to
that of conventional multistage compression. Recently, a new
concept of integrating the CO2 liquefaction and pumping with the
supercritical CO2 (sCO2) power cycle was also investigated and
showed a reduction of 13.88% in saving in power [23]. The literature
survey concludes that a hybrid pressurization scheme involving
CO2 compressors, liquefaction using HP, and pumping can suc-
cessfully reduce the power required for CO2 pressurization.
The extent of improvement using hybrid pressurization depends
on the design of the liquefaction cycle. Some studies reported the
optimization of the HP design to improve the overall performance.
Alabdulkarem et al. [22] performed a parametric study on the
pressure at which CO2 is liquefied in the evaporator of HP and
showed that the optimum value of CO2 liquefaction pressure results
in the best performance. Similarly, Muhammad et al. [23] employed
a genetic algorithm to optimize the performance of the HP system
with respect to the liquefaction pressure and the superheat degree
of the refrigerant at HP’s compressor inlet. While all these studies
have reported that hybrid pressurization of CO2 is superior, and the
optimization of the hybrid system can enhance the overall perfor-
mance, however, the measures adopted to improve the perfor-
mance aren’t well defined and discussed. The literature lacks the
systematic methodology for the optimization of the hybrid pres-
surization scheme.
The optimization of any energy system requires the ascertaining
of the following [24].
(a) How and where the energy is degraded?
(b) What are the potential measures to reduce the degradation
of energy?
3
Energy 228 (2021) 120580
A reliable and systematic methodology to answer above ques-
tions is the advanced exergy analysis which is vastly practiced for
the optimization of diverse energy conversion systems. The exergy
analysis is an effective tool to identify potential improvements
within a system and has been widely employed for the optimiza-
tion of energy systems [25] and for the identification of the origin
and source of irreversibility as well as for quantifying the amount of
irreversibility as exergy destruction (ExD). Mehdizadeh-Fard and
Pourfayaz [26] demonstrated the application of advanced exergy
analysis by optimizing the design of the heat exchanger network in
complex natural gas refinery and achieved an increase in exergy
efficiency of 34% relative to the old one. Sansaniwal et al. [27]
reviewed the design of solar energy applications and showed the
more realistic and insightful way of analysis is complementing
energy with exergy analysis. By the aid of the combined analysis,
they derived valuable recommendations for the efficient exploita-
tion of solar energy. Idrissa et al. [28] conducted the advanced
exergy analysis on a combined Brayton power cycle and provided
insights which weren’t apparent from the conventional energy
analysis. Similarly, Mohammadi et al. [29] used it to study the in-
teractions between components in a recompression supercritical
CO2 cycle and suggested that the measure for improvements should
focus on the high temperature recuperator followed by the turbine.
Wu et al. [30] extended this analysis to coal-to-synthetic natural
gas plant and correlated the exergy destruction with carbon
emissions. Their study concluded, reducing exergy destruction by
one percentage point brings about 0.76% reduction in carbon
emissions. The advanced exergy analysis has also been actively
used for the design and optimization of complex integrated sys-
tems [31]. Zhang et al. [32] examined an integrated energy storage
system based on transcritical CO2 energy storage and ORC and
concluded that advanced exergy analysis gave more reasonable
suggestions in terms of system optimization.
The superiority of advanced exergy analysis over conventional
analysis in the optimization of an energy conversion system is well
established, therefore, this extends that analysis to comprehen-
sively investigate and develop a systematic way to analyze and
optimize the HP system for CO2 liquefaction. Distinct from previous
studies, which limits to providing the guidelines only [25e31], this
study, applied the guidelines suggested by advanced exergy anal-
ysis and showed the consequent improvement in system perfor-
mance. For a precise understanding, ExD is further classified as
unavoidable (UN), avoidable (AV), endogenous (EN), or exogenous
(EX) exergy destructions based on advanced exergy analysis [33].
This classification of exergy helps to understand the in-
terdependencies between the system components and identify the
potential measures that can be taken to improve the performance
[34]. The isolation of avoidable part aids the decision making by
identifying measures that can result in improving the system per-
formance. The information on enhancing the system performance;
either by improving (a) the design of components themselves (b) or
the interaction between the components, is gained through the
categorization of exergy into endogenous and exogenous. Based on
the information obtained through the advanced exergy analysis,
the design of the HP system is modified, and the resulting
improvement in the performance of the system is shown.
Furthermore, the results of the exergy analysis are used to identify
the sCO2 power cycle as the most viable option to recover the CO2
compressors’ intercooling heat. This study develops a systematic
way to optimize the HP system by using an advanced exergy
analysis and describes a novel CO2 pressurization scheme. This
scheme incorporates multi-stage compressors, a HP system for CO2
liquefaction, and an integrated sCO2 cycle.
The paper is organized into five sections. The research back-
ground and literature review are described in Section 1. Section 2
H.A. Muhammad, B. Lee, J. Cho et al.
describes the proposed system, and Section 3 provides the
modelling details. The results of the study are reported in Section 4,
and the conclusions are outlined in Section 5.
2. System description
An NGCC taken from Botero et al. [21] was selected for the
analysis of the CO2 pressurization strategy. The boundary condi-
tions considered throughout the analysis are summarized in
Table 1. For the analysis, it was assumed that the system is in steady
state and pressure losses across the pipes and the heat exchangers
(HXs) are negligible [19,20].
2.1. Benchmark design
The conventional mean of multistage compression was estab-
lished as a benchmark case [18,20], and the performance
improvement with the new design compared to the benchmark
case was quantified and reported. For the benchmark case, four
stages of compression were considered, as shown in Fig. 1. The
pressure ratio (PR) across each stage is evenly distributed to achieve
the desired pressure increase from the captured pressure (PIn) to
the desired pressure (POut).
2.2. Proposed design
In the proposed design, the multi-stage compressors are assis-
ted with the HP system to liquefy CO2, as shown in Fig. 2. The
incoming CO2 from the capture unit is at a pressure of 1.9 bar, while
the triple point pressure of CO2 is 5.17 bar [22]. Therefore, the initial
two stages of compression are necessary to increase the CO2
pressure to a value higher than the triple point pressure. After the
two initial stages, the compressors are replaced by a HP system and
a pump in the proposed design.
3. Modelling and analysis
In the benchmark case, the net power consumed for CO2 pres-
surization (WBC) is the sum of that consumed by individual com-
pressors, as in Eq. (1a). For the proposed case (Fig. 2), the net power
consumed (WNet,PC) is the sum of the power consumed by the first
two multi-stage compressors (WCO2,Comp), the HP’s compressor
work (WRefr, Comp), and the power consumed by the CO2 pump
(WCO2,Pump), as in Eq. (1b).
X Furthermore, the exergy analysis requires the product (ExP) and
WBC ¼ WComp (1a)
WNet;PC ¼ WCO2;Comp þ WCO2;Pump þ WRefr;Comp (1b)
The first two compressors raise the CO2 pressure to the lique-
faction pressure (P5CO2) in State 5CO2. After the compression until
Table 1
Boundary conditions for CO2 pressurization [21].
Parameter Value
Plant type NGCC ~400 MW
Compressor, pump & turbine isentropic efficiency 0.80, 0.85 & 0.85
CO2 mass flow rate (mCO2) 37.5 kg/s
Pinch point (PP) temperature 4 ExF;Total ¼ ExP;Total þ
CO2 captured pressure (PIn) 1.9 bar
CO2 target pressure (POut) 160 bar
Cooling water temperature in (TCW,In) 293 K
Cooling water temperature out (TCW,Out) 298 K
Reference state temperature (To) and pressure (Po) 288 K & 101.325 kPa
4
Energy 228 (2021) 120580
P5CO2, the CO2 is cooled down using the ambient intercooler before
it is fed into the HP’s evaporator. In the evaporator of the HP, the
heat (QEva) is transferred from CO2 to the refrigerant. For the HP
evaporator design, CO2 is cooled down to saturated liquid state at
State 6CO2; therefore, the saturation temperature of CO2 in the
evaporator in State 6CO2 (T6CO2) and QEva are fixed. The saturation
temperature of the HP’s refrigerant in the evaporator is then
determined by the T6CO2 and the pinch point (PP) limit. After
identifying the saturation state of the refrigerant in the evaporator,
State 1Refr is determined by considering 0 of SH. The refrigerant is
designed to reject its heat to the ambient, so the saturation state of
the refrigerant in the condenser is determined by the cooling water
temperature. With the known saturation pressure in the condenser
and isentropic efficiency of the compressor (hComp), State 2Refr is
solved. State 3Refr and State 4Refr are determined by assuming the
saturated liquid state at 3Refr and isenthalpic expansion. With the
known state properties and QEva, the required mass flow rate of the
refrigerant (mRefr) is calculated. The methodology to solve the
proposed design is given in Table 2.
The discretization scheme is used for the modelling of the heat
exchangers, whose detail can be found in Ref. [35]; the thermo-
dynamic properties of CO2 and refrigerant were obtained from the
REFPROP 8.0 database [36].
3.1. Conventional exergy analysis
The physical exergy (exPH) associated with any material stream
is the function of its thermodynamic state and the reference
environment:
exPH ¼ h  ho  To ðs  so Þ: (2a)
In the case of a refrigeration cycle, the definition of product and
fuel exergy can only be applied, if the exPH is split into thermal
(exTh) and mechanical (exMe) parts [37]. Then,
exPH ¼ exTh þ exMe ; (2b)
where exTh and exMe are
exTh ¼ fh  hX  To ðs  sX ÞgP¼Constant ; (2c)
exMe ¼ fhX  ho  To ðsX  so ÞgTo ¼Constant ; (2d)
respectively, and hX and sX are defined at the given pressure and To.
fuel (ExF) exergies [37,38]. The product and fuel exergies are
defined depending on the purpose of the component [39]. The
exergetic balance for the kth component is [39],
ExF ¼ ExP þ ExD ; (3a)
where the irreversibility in a component is reflected by its
destruction of exergy (ExD). The exergetic efficiency (hEx) for the
kth component is
hEx ¼ ExP =ExF ; (3b)
while that for the overall system is
X
ExD þ ExL;Total : (3c)
Here, the exergy loss (ExL) is not used within the system and is
transferred to the environment. For the benchmark case, the per-
formance results of the first law and exergy analyses are summa-
rized in Table 3.
H.A. Muhammad, B. Lee, J. Cho et al. Energy 228 (2021) 120580

Fig. 1. Benchmark case for CO2 pressurization (To stands for reference state temperature).

Fig. 2. Proposed design for CO2 pressurization (To stands for reference state temperature).

Table 2
Calculation methodology.

Step State Temperature Pressure Enthalpy Comment

1 1Refr T1Refr ¼ f (TSat,Eva, SH) P1Refr ¼ PSat,Eva f (P1Refr, T1Refr) SH is assumed.

TSat,Eva ¼ f (T6CO2, PP)
2 2Refr T2Refr ¼ f (TSat, Cond, hComp) P2Refr ¼ PSat, Cond f (P2Refr, T2Refr) Isentropic model.
TSat, Cond ¼ f (TCW,Out, PP)
3 3Refr T3Refr ¼ TSat, Cond ¼ P3Refr ¼ PSat, Cond f (P3Refr, X ¼ 0) Where quality (X) is zero.
TCW,Out þ PP
4 4Refr T4Refr ¼ TSat,Eva P4Refr ¼ PSat,Eva f (P4Refr, h ¼ h3Refr) Isenthalpic expansion.

Table 3
Energetic and exergetic balance of the benchmark case.

Parameter Value Comments

ExF,Total 11613.42 kW The sum of the power consumed by all the compressors in Fig. 1 is the ExF for the benchmark case. Thus, ExF,Total ¼ WBC [34].
ExP,Total 6530.94 kW The increase in exergy of the CO2 is the desired output of the compressors and, thus, ExP,Total ¼ ExCO2,In e ExCO2,Out.
ExD,Total 1721.20 kW The exergy is destroyed during the compression; thus, the total sum is ExD,Total.
ExL 3361.28 kW The exergy in the intercoolers is transferred to the surroundings and not used within the system.
hEx,BC 56.24% System exergetic efficiency.

For the new design given in Fig. 2, in addition to the same CO2 thermodynamic states of CO2 and refrigerant in the new design.
compressors and intercoolers as in the benchmark case, there is a For a component operating below the reference temperature, or
HP system for CO2 liquefaction. Table 4 summarizes the if the temperature is crossed, the exergetic balance considers the

Table 4
Thermodynamic state of CO2 and refrigerant in the new design.

State m [kg/s] P [kPa] T [K] h [kJ/kg] s [kJ/kg,K] ExTh [kW] ExMe [kW] ExPH [kW]

1CO2 37.5 190 298 504.88 2.61 5.434 1273 1278.63

2CO2 37.5 575.56 397.18 592.19 2.66 576.1 3490 4066.15
3CO2 37.5 575.56 297 500.32 2.39 5.626 3490 3495.04
4CO2 37.5 1743.56 396.54 585.49 2.44 600.3 5615.4 6215.70
5CO2 37.5 1743.56 297 489.17 2.16 4.98 5615.4 5620.13
6CO2 37.5 1743.56 249.26 146.14 0.80 1824.08 5615.4 7439.06
7CO2 37.5 16,000 257.05 161.94 0.81 135.84 7795.88 7931.72
1Refr 6.51 132.20 245.26 1569.60 6.50 95.20 435.40 530.61
2Refr 6.51 1127.80 432.96 1970.52 6.69 1454.07 3152.40 4606.48
3Refr 6.51 1127.80 302.00 479.35 1.94 181.53 3152.40 3170.56
4Refr 6.51 132.20 245.26 479.35 2.05 2345.31 435.40 2780.70

5
H.A. Muhammad, B. Lee, J. Cho et al. Energy 228 (2021) 120580

fact that, at these conditions, the exergy of the stream will be higher process [22,23]. The results of the advanced exergy analysis of the
if its temperature is lower. The definition of ExF and ExP according HP system with R290 and R717 are summarized in Tables 10 and 11,
to the SPECO approach [39] for the new design are given in Table 5. respectively.

3.2. Advanced exergy analysis 4.1. Selection of HP refrigerant

The advanced exergy analysis is an effective tool to identify the
potential improvements within a system. In this study, we applied
the advanced exergy analysis to the HP system shown in Fig. 2. In
the advanced exergy analysis, ExD in each component is split into
unavoidable (ExUN AV EN
D,k), avoidable (ExD,k), endogenous (ExD,k), and
exogenous (ExEXD,k) exergy destruction. Through an advanced exergy
analysis, the avoidable exergy destruction in a component is
separated from the unavoidable part and whether the exergy
destruction is due to the component irreversibility (ExEN D,k) or the
system irreversibility (ExEX
D,k) is determined. The equations required
for advanced exergy analysis are summarized in Table 6. From the
advanced exergy analysis results, design engineers and analysts can
identify whether the improvement in the system performance re-
quires the improvement in the design of the kth-component
(ExAV,EN AV,EX
D,k ) or the other components (ExD,k ). The detailed imple-
mentation procedure of the advanced exergy analysis and further
insights about the significance of each exergy destruction measures
can be found in Refs. [25,33,34].
Table 7 summarizes the real (actual operating conditions used
for conventional analysis), unavoidable (with extremely high effi-
ciency), and theoretical (theoretical maximum efficiency used to
simulate the theoretical cycle) operating conditions of all the
components in the HP system [37].
The calculation flowchart of the analysis is summarized in Fig. 3.
3.3. Validation
Alabdulkarem et al. [22] also conducted the first law analysis of
the similar schematics as shown in Fig. 2 for CO2 liquefaction with
R717 (Ammonia) and R290 (Propane) as refrigerants at different
CO2 liquefaction pressures. The boundary conditions taken in their
study [22] are summarized in Table 8 while the results comparison
between those reported by Ref. [22] and estimated through this
model are given in Table 9. The table shows the current model
predicts the performance with reasonable accuracy with a
maximum error of 3.6% and the root mean square error (ErrorRMS)
of 1.98%.
4. Results and discussions
Propane (R290) and R717 are initially studied as the HP refrig-
erant because both are considered environmentally friendly and
have been investigated for the liquefaction of CO2 in the CCS
Among R290 and R717, the latter was shortlisted as the HP
refrigerant owing to the following reasons:
 From Tables 10 and 11, we can see that R717 results in less net
exergy destruction than R290.
 The expansion valve is the largest contributor of ExD,k for R290.
The advanced exergy analysis reveals that the major portion of
exergy destruction in the expansion valve is unavoidable
(Table 10). Therefore, the refrigerant R290 does not exhibit
considerable improvement potential.
 This study aims to optimize the proposed design by adjusting
the system parameters, thereby minimizing ExAV,EX D,k . From
Tables 10 and 11, we can see that the sum of ExAV,EX
D,k for R717 is
greater than that for R290. Therefore, the HP with R717 has
more potential for improvement by adjusting the system pa-
rameters. Through a first law analysis of the HP system, the same
refrigerant R717, was reported to give the best performance in
Refs. [22,23].
4.2. Implications of the advanced exergy analysis
Fig. 4 shows the results of the advanced exergy analysis for the
HP with R717 as the refrigerant. In the figure only the avoidable
part of the exergy destruction is presented, i.e., ExAV,EN
D,k and ExAV,EX
D,k .
In the remainder of this section, the implications of the advanced
exergy analysis for each component will be discussed.
For the evaporator, as in all the refrigeration machines, the
exergy destruction is endogenous [34]. The results imply that any
performance measure for the evaporator requires the improvement
in the design of the evaporator and is irrespective of the design of
other components. Fig. 5 shows the heat transfer process in the
evaporator on the Ph diagram for two different degrees of SH. From
Fig. 5(a), the ExAV,EN
D,Eva decreases as the SH at the compressor inlet
increases. Furthermore, increases in the SH lead to increases in the
specific refrigeration capacity of the refrigerant in the evaporator
and consequently, decreases mRefr. As can be seen in Fig. 5,
increasing the SH also results in a better thermal match between
CO2 and R717 and, therefore, reduced irreversibility during the heat
transfer process. However, when the SH is increased, the
compressor outlet temperature increases, which lead to increases
in ExEX
D,Cond.
Fig. 6 shows the impact of SH on the complete system. The larger

Table 5
Product and fuel exergy balance of the HP system in the proposed design [34,37].

Component ExF ExP

Evaporatora ExTh  ExTh b 4(a) ExTh Th b 5(a)

4Refr 1Refr 6CO2  Ex5CO2
Compressora ExTh þ WRefr;Comp 4(b) ExTh þ ðExMe  ExMe Þ 5(b)
1Refr 2Refr 2Refr 1Refr
Condenserc Ex2Refr  Ex3refr 4(c) ExCW;out  ExCW;In 5(c)
Expansion valvea ExMe
3Refr
 ExMe
4Refr
þ ExT3Refr 4(d) ExT4Refr 5(d)
Overall system ExF;Total ¼ WRefr;Comp 4(e) ExP;Total ¼ ExEvaporator þ ExCondenser 5(e)
P P
a
The reference temperature is crossed during the operation of this component.
b
Because there is no pressure drop across the HX, ExMe does not change.
c
Operates entirely above the reference temperature. Although the condenser is the dissipative component, ExF and ExP of the condenser are defined for consistency and to
implement the advanced exergy analysis.

6
H.A. Muhammad, B. Lee, J. Cho et al. Energy 228 (2021) 120580

Table 6
Implementation of the advanced exergy analysis [33,34].

Equation Comment

ExUN ¼ 6(a) (ExD,k/ExP,k)UN is calculated by simulating the system in which only unavoidable exergy destruction occurs; the unavoidable operating
D;k
!UN conditions are used.
ExD;k
ExReal
P;k ExP;k
ExAV ¼ ExD;k  ExUN 6(b) ExD,k is the total exergy destruction in the k-th component.
D;k D;k

ExUN;EN ¼ 6(c) To calculate the endogenous exergy destruction, a ‘theoretical cycle’ is simulated in which all the components, except the k-th component,
D;k
!UN operate ideally. The theoretical operating conditions are summarized in Table 7. The number of theoretical cycles is equal to the number of
ExD;k components in the system.
ExEN
P;k ExP;k
ExUN;EX ¼ ExUN  6(d) In the similar way, the ExAV,EN
D,k and ExAV,EX
D,k are solved.
D;k D;k

ExUN;EN
D;k

Table 7
Values for the real, theoretical, and unavoidable operating conditions.

Component Real Theoretical Unavoidable

Compressor isentropic efficiency 0.80 1 0.98

Pitch point temperature difference during heat transfer 4 0 1
Expansion valve Isenthalpic Isentropic Isenthalpic

Table 8
Boundary conditions adopted from Ref. [22] for results validation.

Parameters Value

Compressor isentropic efficiency 0.80

Pump isentropic efficiency 0.75
Heat exchanger pressure drop 10.0 kPa
Pinch point temperature 3.00 K
Cooling temperature 308 K
CO2 mass flow rate 72.42 Ton/hr
CO2 inlet pressure 1.80 bar
CO2 required pressure 150 bar

analysis. In practice, the isentropic expansion is unavoidable and

thus, ExAV,EN AV,EN
D,Exp during throttling cannot be reduced; therefore, ExD,Exp
is not considered for the improvement measures, as in Ref. [34].
The avoidable exogenous exergy destruction in the condenser is
considerable. Therefore, the performance of this component can be
significantly improved by taking measures that can improve the
system’s design rather than improving the component itself. One
potential measure to improve the system is sub-cooling the
refrigerant. However, because the refrigerant is already at ambient
temperature at 4Refr, the ambient cooling is not viable for sub-
cooling. Nevertheless, as shown in Table 4, the temperature of
CO2 in State 7CO2 is only 261.61 K; therefore, CO2 in State 7CO2 can
be applied to sub-cool the refrigerant. Alternatively, the high
pressure and low temperature CO2 in State 7CO2 could be used to
cool the incoming CO2 in State 5CO2 before it enters the evaporator.
The latter measure would have a greater impact on the system
Fig. 3. Modelling flowchart. performance because it reduces ExAV,EN AV,EX
D,Eva as well as ExD . Through
the advanced exergy results and their implications, an improved
strategy for the HP system, as shown in Fig. 7 is devised.
increase in ExD,Cond compared to that in the ExD for other compo-
nents indicates that the SH is undesirable for the HP system with
R717. 4.3. Recovering the exergy loss
The larger portion of avoidable exergy in the compressor is
ExAV,EN
D,Comp, which implies that increasing the isentropic efficiency of Fig. 8 summarizes the exergy destruction and exergetic loss of
the compressor is the only useful performance improvement the components shown in Fig. 7, and Table 12 summarizes their
measure. In the condenser, ExAV,EN
D,Cond is insignificant compared to exergetic efficiency. IC1 and IC2 as well as the condenser of the HP
ExAV,EX
D,Cond. For the expansion valve, the throttling process is idealized system (IC3) are the dissipative components, and the exergy losses
by the isentropic expansion to implement the advanced exergy in these components are separated from the remaining exergy
7
H.A. Muhammad, B. Lee, J. Cho et al. Energy 228 (2021) 120580

Table 9
Results validation.

Refr. Liquefaction Pressure [bar] Pump (WCO2,Pump) Refrigerant CO2 Compressor Net power (WNet,PC) Errorb
[MW] Compressor (WRefr, (WCO2,Comp) [MW] [MW]
Comp) [MW]

Refr.a Current Refr.a Current Refr.a Current Refr.a Current

R717 30 0.34 0.33 1.37 1.58 4.36 4.37 6.06 6.28 3.6%
R717 50 0.33 0.31 0.59 0.60 5.01 5.05 5.93 5.96 0.5%
R717 70 0.38 0.31 0.15 0.15 5.44 5.45 5.97 5.91 1.0%
R290 70 0.38 0.31 0.16 0.16 5.44 5.45 5.99 5.92 1.1%
a
Ref.: The results published by Ref. [22].
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
PN 2
b 1 Error
Error ¼ [ẆNet,PC (Ref.)eẆNet,PC (Current)]/ẆNet,PC (Ref.); ErrorRMS ¼ .
N

Table 10
Advanced exergy analysis of the HP system with propane (R290).

Component ExD,k [kW] ExUN

D,k [kW] ExAV
D,k [kW] ExEN
D,k [kW] ExEX
D,k [kW] ExAV,EN
D,k [kW] ExAV,EX
D,k [kW]

Evaporator 420.01 237.38 182.11 419.49 0.00 182.1067 0

(15.77%)
Compressor 895.40 76.81 818.60 705.83 189.58 646.8236 171.7718
(33.65%)
Condenser 432.67 217.68 214.99 337.78 94.89 147.0763 67.91626
(16.26%)
Expansion valve 913.16 767.97 145.19 635.65 277.51 40.2862 185.4785
(34.32%)
Sum 2660.73 1299.85 1360.89 2098.75 561.99 935.72 425.17 (16%)

Table 11
Advanced exergy analysis of the HP system with ammonia (R717).

Component ExD,k [kW] ExUN

D,k [kW] ExAV
D,k [kW] ExEN
D,k [kW] ExEX
D,k [kW] ExAV,EN
D,k [kW] ExAV,EX
D,k [kW]

Evaporator 420.01 237.38 182.11 419.49 0.00 182.11 0.00

(17.07%)
Compressor 652.63 61.51 591.11 553.05 99.57 504.31 86.80
(26.56%)
Condenser 996.43 537.39 459.04 637.20 359.23 151.40 307.63
(40.55%)
Expansion valve 388.72 331.90 56.82 278.66 110.06 16.33 73.15
(15.82%)
Sum 2457.26 1168.18 1289.07 1888.40 568.86 821.49 467.58 (19%)

design improvement of the compressor would involve the

Fig. 4. Advanced exergy analysis for R717 in all components.
destruction. From the figure, the major constituents of the exergy
destruction in the improved design presented in Fig. 6 are the
compressors CM1, CM2, and CM3. This is apparent because, as
shown in Tables 11 and 77.27% of the avoidable exergy destruction
in CM3 is endogenous. As already discussed in section 4.2, the
improvement in the isentropic efficiency of the compressor, and it
is not considered in this study. As shown in Fig. 8, a substantial
portion of exergy is lost to the environment from the dissipative
components.
The advanced exergy analysis does not give indications on the
measures useful to reduce the exergy losses. However, because ExL
represents a substantial portion of the exergy, we aimed at recov-
ering this exergy by devising a new strategy. Fig. 9 shows the
pathway of CO2 and the refrigerant R717 on the Ph diagram. It
shows that the temperature of CO2 after the compressors in State
2CO2 and State 4CO2 is approximately 400 K, and the temperature
of R717 after the compressor in State 2Refr is 432.97 K. These
temperatures are low temperature heat sources and can be recov-
ered using methods such as ORC [17] or sCO2 power cycles [23].
The sCO2 power generation cycle uses CO2 as the working fluid
and is operated with target turbine inlet pressures in the range of
150e300 bar [40]. In the proposed design (Fig. 7), the CO2 is
pumped to the target pressure of 160 bar after being liquefied in the
HP. From Table 12, we can see that the exergetic efficiency of the
pumping process is extremely high, indicating that the CO2 can be
efficiently pumped to even higher pressures, which is suitable for a
sCO2 cycler. Furthermore, integrating the sCO2 cycle would not
require additional working fluids because the captured CO2 can be

8
H.A. Muhammad, B. Lee, J. Cho et al. Energy 228 (2021) 120580

Fig. 5. Heat transfer process in the evaporator with (a) SH ¼ 0 and (b) SH ¼ 10 K (T and s for CO2 are not to the scale).

pressure CO2 is split into two streams in State 9CO2 with equal
flow rate that are fed into different intercoolers, as indicated by the
brown lines in Fig. 10. After the two streams have exchanged heat in
the intercooler, they are mixed in State 11CO2. The high-
temperature CO2 is further heated from State 11CO2 to State
12CO2 using the HP’s refrigerant before it enters the turbine. The
condenser of the HP transfers the high-temperature sensible heat
to the CO2 and then reject the latent heat to the environment and,
ultimately, to the sub cooler where the heat is transferred from
R717 to the CO2. The high-pressure and high-temperature CO2 ex-
pands in the turbine to produce power. The turbine outlet pressure
is fixed to the saturation pressure corresponding to the cooling
temperature. After expansion, the CO2 is cooled down before it is
compressed to 160 bars for storage.
In the integrated design, the net power consumed (WGrand,Net)
for pressurization is modified as follows:

WGrand;Net ¼ WNet;PC  WCycle ; (4)

In Eq. (4), WNet,PC is given in Eq. (1), and WCycle is the net power
Fig. 6. Effect of SH on the HP system. produced by the sCO2 cycle:

Fig. 7. Improved HP design for CO2 liquefaction (To stands for reference state temperature).

used to operate the open sCO2 power cycle. Therefore, to recover

the exergy loss, the HP assisted CO2 pressurization system is inte-
grated with a sCO2 cycle, as shown in Fig. 10. In the integrated WCycle ¼ WTurb  WCM4 ; (5)
scheme, the CO2 is initially pumped to higher pressures. The high-
pressure CO2 is then heated up first using the intercooling heat (IC1 where WCM4 is the power consumed by the end chain compressor
and IC2) and then using the refrigerant’s heat before it enters the in Fig. 10 to raise the CO2 pressure from State 14CO2 to State 15CO2
turbine. To optimally recover the intercooling heat, the high- before it is delivered to the pipelines. Then, the savings in power
9
H.A. Muhammad, B. Lee, J. Cho et al. Energy 228 (2021) 120580

Fig. 8. Exergy destruction (ExD) and loss (ExL) in the improved design.

Table 12 increase in WCycle favours it. Also from Fig. 12, the increase in WCycle
Exergetic efficiency of the components in the until P12CO2 ¼ 18,000 kPa is sharper, and beyond that the rise in
improved design. WCO2,Pump becomes more profound. Thus, the optimum value of
Component Exh (%) P12CO2 (¼P7CO2) leads to the maximum power savings.
The improved design consumes (WNet,PC) 10999.24 kW of elec-
CM1 0.85
IC1 0.14 tric power to raise the CO2 pressure to the optimum P12CO2 of
CM2 0.85 18,000 kPa. On the other hand, the conventional multistage
IC2 0.15 compression consumed 11613.42 kW to raise the CO2 pressure to
HX1 0.48
the target pressure of 160 bar. By recovering the intercooling and
HX2 0.89
Pump 1 0.96
refrigerant heats, the sCO2 cycle generates 1191.00 kW. Therefore,
HX3 0.95 the sCO2 power cycle generates 10.82% of electric power required
CM3 0.86 for CO2 compression. Consequently, in the improved design,
IC3 0.30 WGrand,Net becomes 9808.25 kW, which is 15.5% lower than that in
TV 0.94
the conventional compression (11613.41 kW). The proposed pres-

Fig. 9. Ph diagrams of the pathway of (a) CO2 and (b) R717.

(SavingPower) are
 
SavingPower ¼ WBC  WGrand;Net WBC :
Fig. 11 shows the effects of the variation in the turbine inlet
pressure (P12CO2) on the power savings. From the figure, we can see
that the optimum value of P12CO2 gives the best net effect.
Fig. 10 shows that P12CO2 is equal to the pump outlet pressure at
State 7CO2. Thus, when P12CO2 increases the power consumption
WCO2,Pump also increases. However, at the same time, increasing the
P12CO2 increases the WCycle as shown in Fig. 12. The increase in
WCO2,Pump with P12CO2 is detrimental for the net savings while the
surization system replaces the two compression stages in the
conventional multistage compression with a HP system and sCO2
(6) cycle. In the future, the details quantification of the economic
savings of the proposed design should be performed.
5. Conclusions
The optimization of CO2 pressurization systems using heat
pump and supercritical CO2 power cycle for carbon sequestration
processes via advanced exergy analysis was presented. With the aid
of the advanced exergy analysis, the exergy destruction was
10
H.A. Muhammad, B. Lee, J. Cho et al. Energy 228 (2021) 120580

Fig. 10. Improved HP design integration with sCO2 power cycle.

categorized into unavoidable/avoidable and endogenous/exoge-

nous parts, and sub-categorized into combinations of these. The
categorization of exergy destruction provided useful insights and
indicated the potential measures needed to improve the system
performance. The implications of the advanced exergy analysis on
the CO2 pressurization system are as follows:

 The total exergy destruction of the heat pump system operating

with R290 and R717 is 2660.73 kW and 2457.26 kW, respec-
tively. This result indicates that the heat-pump system with
R717 gives better performance.
 The advanced exergy analysis shows that for R717 the avoidable
exergy destruction is 52.46% while for R290 it is 51.14%. There-
fore, the refrigerant R717 exhibits more improvement potential
which is therefore selected as the heat pump refrigerant.
 The magnitude of the exergy destruction and consequentially
the improvement potential of the components in the heat pump
with R717 refrigerant are in the following order:
condenser > compressor > evaporator > expansion valve.
 Most of the avoidable exergy destruction in the compressor was
endogenous. Therefore, the increase in the isentropic efficiency
Fig. 11. Effects of the variation in the turbine inlet pressure (P12CO2) on the power of the compressor was identified as the most effective measure
savings. to improve its performance. Most of the avoidable exergy
destruction in the condenser and throttling valve is exogenous.
 The exergy losses from the pressurization system to the envi-
ronment were recovered by integrating the system with the
super-critical CO2 cycle. The optimized heat pump design inte-
grated with the super-critical CO2 cycle consumed 15.5% less
electrical power compared to the benchmark case.

This study demonstrated the effectiveness of the advanced

exergy analysis by applying it to devise a systematic approach to
optimize the design of CO2 pressurization systems for carbon
storage processes. The methodology described in this study can be
extended for the optimization of other similar energy conversion
systems. Moreover, this study addressed the minimization of
electrical power by optimizing the system design. However, the
suitability of any design change depends on economic factors as
well. Information about economically justified modifications can be
obtained through an exergoeconomic analyses, which can be
combined with the presented framework for optimal configuration.

Authors contributions section

Fig. 12. Effects of the variation in the turbine inlet pressure (P12CO2) on the power
consumptions of CO2 pump and WCycle. Hafiz Ali Muhammad: Conceptualization, Formal analysis,
11
H.A. Muhammad, B. Lee, J. Cho et al.
Methodology, Software, Writing e original draft. Beomjoon Lee:
Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Writing e review & editing,
and Supervision. Junhyn Cho: Investigation, Methodology, Soft-
ware, Writing e original draft. Zabdur Rehman: Methodology,
Writing e original draft, Writing e review & editing. Bongsu Choi:
Conceptualization, Investigation, Data curation. Jongjae Cho:
Writing e review & editing, Supervision, Resources, Visualization.
Chulwoo Roh: Visualization, Formal analysis, Resources, Method-
ology. Gilbong Lee: Project administration, Resources, and Investi-
gation. Muhammad Imran: Visualization, Investigation, Writing e
review & editing. Young-Jin Baik: Conceptualization, Writing e
review & editing, Supervision, Project administration, and Funding
acquisition.
Declaration of competing interest
Authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Development Program of the
Korea Institute of Energy Research (KIER) through grant (C1-2423)
and by the National Research Council of Science & Technology
(NST) grant by the Ministry of Science and ICT, Republic of Korea
(No. CRC-15-07-KIER).
References
[1] International Energy Agency. World energy outlook. Paris, France; 2016.
[2] Carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS). Appl Energy 2019;235:
1289e99.
[3] Kılkış Ş, Kraja
ci
c G, Dui
c N, Montorsi L, Wang Q, Rosen MA. Research frontiers
in sustainable development of energy, water and environment systems in a
time of climate crisis. Energy Convers Manag 2019;199:111938. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.111938.
[4] Sun Y, Li Y, Cai BF, Li Q. Comparing the explicit and implicit attitudes of energy
stakeholders and the public towards carbon capture and storage. J Clean Prod
2020 May 1;254:120051.
[5] Elias RS, Wahab MI, Fang L. Retrofitting carbon capture and storage to natural
gas-fired power plants: a real-options approach. J Clean Prod 2018 Aug
10;192:722e34.
[6] Bui M, Adjiman CS, Bardow A, et al. Carbon capture and storage (CCS): the way
forward. Energy Environ Sci 2018;11:1062e176.
[7] Leung DYC, Caramanna G, Maroto-Valer MM. An overview of current status of
carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2014;39:426e43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.093.
[8] Witkowski A, Rusin A, Majkut M, Rulik S, Stolecka K. Comprehensive analysis
of pipeline transportation systems for CO2 sequestration. Thermodynamics
and safety problems. Energy Convers Manag 2013;76:665e73. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2013.07.087.
[9] Aminu MD, Nabavi SA, Rochelle CA, Manovic V. A review of developments in
carbon dioxide storage. Appl Energy 2017;208:1389e419.
[10] Pei P, Barse K, Gil AJ, Nasah J. Waste heat recovery in CO2 compression. Int J
Greenhouse Gas Contr 2014;30:86e96.
[11] Oh SY, Binns M, Cho H, Kim JK. Energy minimization of MEA-based CO2
capture process. Appl Energy 2016;169:353e62. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2016.02.046.
[12] Zhang Z, Huisingh D. Carbon dioxide storage schemes: technology, assess-
ment and deployment. J Clean Prod 2017;142:1055e64.
[13] Moore JJ, Nored MG. Novel concepts for the compression of large volumes of
carbon dioxide. In: Proceedings of ASME turbo expo 2008: power for land, sea
and air; 2008 Jun 9-13. p. 645e53. Berlin Germany. GT2008-50924.
[14] Moore JJ, Allison T, Lerche A, Pacheo J, Delgado H. Development of advanced
centrifugal compressors and pumps for carbon capture and sequestration
applications. In: Proceedings of the fortieth turbomachinery symposium;
2011 Sep. p. 12e5 [Texas, USA].
[15] Amrollahi Z, Ertesvåg IS, Bolland O. Thermodynamic analysis on post-
combustion CO2 capture of natural-gas-fired power plant. Int J Greenhouse
Gas Contr 2011 May 1;5(3):422e6.
12
Energy 228 (2021) 120580
[16] Romeo LM, Bolea I, Lara Y, Escosa JM. Optimization of intercooling compres-
sion in CO2 capture systems. Appl Therm Eng 2009;29:1744e51. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2008.08.010.
[17] Imran M, Haglind F, Asim M, Alvi JZ. Recent research trends in organic
Rankine cycle technology: a bibliometric approach. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2018;81:552e62.
[18] Kurtulus K, Coskun A, Ameen S, Yilmaz C, Bolatturk A. Thermoeconomic
analysis of a CO2 compression system using waste heat into the regenerative
organic Rankine Cycle. Energy Convers Manag 2018;168:588e98. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.05.037.
[19] Moore JJ, Nored MG. Novel Concepts for the compression of large volumes of
carbon dioxide. In: Proceedings of ASME turbo expo 2008: power for land, sea
and air; 2008 Jun. p. 9e13. Berlin, Germany. GT2008-50924.
[20] Muhammad HA, Roh C, Cho J, Rehman Z, Sultan H, Baik YJ, Lee BJ.
A comprehensive thermodynamic performance assessment of CO2 liquefac-
tion and pressurization system using a heat pump for Carbon Capture and
Storage (CCS) process. Energy Convers Manag 2020;206:112489. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.112489.
[21] Botero C, Finkenrath M, Belloni C, Bertolo S, D’Ercole M, Gori E, Tacconelli R.
Thermoeconomic evaluation of CO2 compression strategies for post-
combustion CO2 capture applications. In: Proceedings of ASME turbo expo:
power for land, sea and air; 2009 Jun. p. 517e26. https://doi.org/10.1115/
GT2009-60217. 8-12; Florida, USA. GT2009-60217.
[22] Alabdulkarem A, Hwang Y, Radermacher R. Development of CO2 liquefaction
cycles for CO2 sequestration. Appl Therm Eng 2012;33(34):144e56. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2011.09.027.
[23] Muhammad HA, Lee BJ, Lee G, Cho J, Baik YJ. Design and optimization of CO2
pressurization system integrated with a supercritical CO2 power cycle for the
CO2 capture and storage system. Energy Convers Manag 2019;195:609e19.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.05.029.
[24] Bandyopadhyay R, Alkilde OF, Upadhyayula S. Applying pinch and exergy
analysis for energy efficient design of diesel hydrotreating unit. J Clean Prod
2019;232:337e49.
[25] Ahamed JU, Saidur R, Masjuki HH. A review on exergy analysis of vapor
compression refrigeration system. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15(3):
1593e600.
[26] Mehdizadeh-Fard M, Pourfayaz F. Advanced exergy analysis of heat exchanger
network in a complex natural gas refinery. J Clean Prod 2019;206:670e87.
[27] Sansaniwal SK, Sharma V, Mathur J. Energy and exergy analyses of various
typical solar energy applications: a comprehensive review. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2018;82:1576e601.
[28] Idrissa AM, Boulama KG. Advanced exergy analysis of a combined Brayton/
Brayton power cycle. Energy 2019;166:724e37.
[29] Mohammadi Z, Fallah M, Mahmoudi SS. Advanced exergy analysis of
recompression supercritical CO2 cycle. Energy 2019;178:631e43. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.04.134.
[30] Wu J, Wang N. Exploring avoidable carbon emissions by reducing exergy
destruction based on advanced exergy analysis: a case study. Energy
2020;206:118246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118246.
[31] Wang Y, Chen Z, Shen Y, Ma Z, Li H, Liu X, Zhu Z, Qi J, Cui P, Wang L, Ma Y,
Xu D. Advanced exergy and exergoeconomic analysis of an integrated system
combining CO2 capture-storage and waste heat utilization processes. Energy
2021;219:119600.
[32] Zhang Y, Liang T, Yang C, Zhang X, Yang K. Advanced exergy analysis of an
integrated energy storage system based on transcritical CO2 energy storage
and Organic Rankine Cycle. Energy Convers Manag 2020;216:112938.
[33] Morosuk T, Tsatsaronis G, Schult M. Conventional and advanced exergetic
analyses: theory and application. Arabian J Sci Eng 2013;38:395e404.
[34] Morosuk T, Tsatsaronis G. Advanced exergetic evaluation of refrigeration
machines using different working fluids. Energy 2009;34:2248e58.
[35] Muhammad HA, Lee B, Lee G, Cho J, Baik YJ. Investigation of leakage rein-
jection system for supercritical CO2 power cycle using heat pump. Renew
Energy 2019;144:97e106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.10.059.
[36] REFPROP version 8.0. NIST Stand Ref Database 2007;23.
[37] Morosuk T, Tsatsaronis G, Zhang C. Conventional thermodynamic and
advanced exergetic analysis of a refrigeration machine using a Voorhees’
compression process. Energy Convers Manag 2012;60:143e51.
[38] Morosuk T, Tsatsaronis G. A new approach to the exergy analysis of absorp-
tion refrigeration machines. Energy 2008;33(6):890e907. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2007.09.012.
[39] Lazzaretto A, Tsatsaronis G. SPECO: A systematic and general methodology for
calculating efficiencies and costs in thermal systems. Energy 2006;31(8e9):
1257e89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2005.03.011.
[40] Sarkar J. Review and future trends of supercritical CO2 Rankine cycle for low-
grade heat conversion. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;48:434e51. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.039.