Thermo-Economic Analysis and Optimization of The Very High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor-Based Nuclear Hydrogen Production System Using Copper-Chlorine Cycle

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 6 ( 2 0 2 1 ) 3 1 5 6 3 e3 1 5 8 5
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/he
Thermo-economic analysis and optimization of the

very high temperature gas-cooled reactor-based
nuclear hydrogen production system using
copper-chlorine cycle
Qi Wang a,*, Chunyu Liu a, Run Luo a,b, Xiaodong Li a, Dantong Li c,

n-Juan a
Rafael Macia
a
Chair of Nuclear Technology, Technical University of Munich (TUM), 85748, Garching, Germany
b
School of Resource & Environment and Safety Engineering, University of South China, 421001, Hengyang, China
c
School of Energy and Power Engineering, Xi'an Jiaotong University, 710049, Xi'an, China
highlights graphical abstract
An improved conceptual design of

a nuclear hydrogen production
system is proposed.
Energy, exergy and economic
analysis method is used to model
the system.
System optimization is performed
based on five different production
strategies.
Efficiencies of producing hydrogen
are lower than that of generating
electricity.
Cost of producing hydrogen is
higher than that of generating
electricity.
article info abstract
Article history: An improved very high temperature gas-cooled reactor (VHTR) and copper-chlorine (Cu
Received 16 May 2021 eCl) cycle-based nuclear hydrogen production system is proposed and investigated in this
Received in revised form paper, in order to reveal the unknown thermo-economic characteristics of the system
5 July 2021 under variable operating conditions. Energy, exergy and economic analysis method and
Accepted 11 July 2021 particle swarm optimization algorithm are used to model and optimize the system,
Available online 31 July 2021 respectively. Parametric analysis of the effects of several key operating parameters on the
system performance is conducted, and energy loss, exergy loss, and investment cost dis-
Keywords: tributions of the system are discussed under three typical production modes. Results show
Nuclear hydrogen production that increasing the reactor subsystem pressure ratio can enhance the system's thermo-
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: qi.wang@tum.de (Q. Wang).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.07.060
0360-3199/© 2021 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
31564 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 6 ( 2 0 2 1 ) 3 1 5 6 3 e3 1 5 8 5
Very high temperature gas-cooled economic performance, and the total efficiencies and cost of producing compressed
reactor hydrogen from nuclear energy are respectively lower and higher than that of generating
Copper-chlorine cycle electricity. When the system operates at the maximum hydrogen production rate of
Combined cycle 403.1 mol/s, the system's net electrical power output, thermal efficiency, exergy efficiency,
Thermo-economic analysis and specific energy cost are found to be 38.77 MW, 39.3%, 41.26%, and 0.0731 $/kW$h,
Particle swarm optimization respectively. And when the system's hydrogen production load equals to 0, these values are
respectively calculated to be 177.25 MW, 50.64%, 53.29%, and 0.0268 $/kW$h. In addition,
more than 90% of the system's total energy losses are caused by condenser and CueCl
cycle, and about 50e60% of the system's total exergy destructions occur in VHTR. About
60% and 30% of the system's specific energy cost are respectively caused by the equipment
investment and the system operation & maintenance, and the investment costs of VHTR
and CueCl plant are the system's main capital investment sources.
© 2021 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Nomenclature q quality ()

Q_ heat flow rate (kW)
Abbreviations s specific entropy (kJ$kg1$K1)
CEPCI Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index T temperature (K)
CRF capital recovery factor U overall heat transfer coefficient (kW$m2$K1)
CueCl copper-chlorine Ẇ mechanical power (kW)
G Generator x mass flow rate ratio ()
GT gas turbine
Greek symbols
GTHTR gas turbine high temperature reactor
h efficiency (%)
HC helium compressor
D difference ()
HTR high temperature gas-cooled reactor
g pressure ratio ()
IC intercooler
m maintenance factor ()
IHX intermediate heat exchanger
t annual operational hours (h)
LCOE levelized cost of energy
4 fractional fission (%)
LHV lower heating value
LMTD logarithmic mean temperature difference Subscripts
NGTCC nuclear gas turbine combined cycle 0 reference state
PRc compressor pressure ratio cf cold fluid
PSO particle swarm optimization con consumed
SG steam generator CON condenser
SeI sulfur-iodine cv control volume
SRC steam Rankine cycle exg exergy
ST steam turbine fis fission
VHTR very high temperature gas-cooled reactor gen generated
he heat exchanger
Symbols
hf hot fluid
A area (m2)
ht heat transfer
b fission exergy (MeV$nucleon1)
in inlet
c_ cost rate ($/h)
is isentropic
C cost ($)
max maximum
e fission energy (MeV$nucleon1)
min minimum
E_ electrical power (kW)
net net
ex specific exergy (kJ$kg1)
_Ex os overall system
exergy flow rate (kW)
out outlet
h specific enthalpy (kJ$kg1)
O&M operation and maintenance
ir interest rate (%)
ref reference
I_ exergy destruction rate (kW)
th thermal
m _ mass flow rate (kg$s1)
tot total
n lifetime (year)
p pressure (kPa)
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 6 ( 2 0 2 1 ) 3 1 5 6 3 e3 1 5 8 5 31565
emission, but also increase the cost competitiveness and

Introduction flexibility of the nuclear power plants.
Various types of thermochemical cycles and hybrid ther-
Nowadays, the development and utilization of clean energy mochemical cycles have been proposed and investigated for
sources such as nuclear energy and renewable energy have hydrogen production, such as the copper-chlorine (CueCl)
received more and more attention from scholars around the cycle [9e11], the sulfur-iodine (SeI) cycle [12e15], the
world due to the increasing energy demands, the decreasing magnesium-chlorine (MgeCl) cycle [17,18], the iron-chlorine
fossil fuel reserves, the serious environmental problems, and (FeeCl) cycle [19], etc. For different pure or hybrid thermo-
the noticeable climate change. Since most of renewable en- chemical cycles, the employed chemical compounds, the
ergy sources including solar energy and wind energy are number of reaction steps, and the temperature requirements
intermittent and dependent upon the weather conditions and may be different, which furtherly affects the overall effi-
geographical location [1], nuclear energy has been considered ciencies and cost of hydrogen production. Safari et al. [3]
as the promising carbon-free energy source to replace fossil presented a review and comparative evaluation of the
energy on a large scale in the future [2]. mentioned-above thermochemical cycles for hydrogen pro-
As a high energy density and environmentally friendly duction. It was reported that both the SeI cycle and the CueCl
working fluid, hydrogen can be used as the clean energy carrier cycle could achieve a relatively high efficiency and less cost of
for transportation, chemical industry, agriculture and energy hydrogen production. The SeI cycle developed by General
storage [3]. In addition, hydrogen can also act as a key element Atomics is a typical high temperature thermochemical cycle,
of energy policies for decreasing carbon emission as it can be which requires the high temperature thermal energy of
produced from nuclear energy and renewable energy [4]. A approximately 900 C. Since this high temperature require-
comprehensive assessment was performed by the Hydrogen ment can well match the VHTR outlet temperature, the SeI
Council to show hydrogen's long-term potential for energy cycle has been considered as the most suitable thermo-
supply and deployment in different pathways. Investigation chemical cycle to be coupled with a VHTR for hydrogen pro-
results showed that 18% of the global energy demand would be duction [14]. Both experimental and theoretical studies on the
supplied by hydrogen in 2050 [5]. Accordingly, hydrogen is SeI cycle have been conducted by many research institutions
today enjoying the unprecedented momentum as a clean of the world, notably Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA)
versatile energy source and it is time for the nuclear hydrogen [20e23] and Institute of Nuclear and New Energy Technology
production technology to demonstrate its importance in (INET) of Tsinghua University [24e26]. JAEA has been study-
securing an affordable and sustainable energy future [6]. ing the SeI cycle since the middle of the 1980s [20], and during
Nuclear hydrogen production is to couple the nuclear 1999e2005, research on the construction and operation of a
reactor with a hydrogen production plant using the advanced bench-scale experimental facility with the hydrogen pro-
hydrogen production processes in order to achieve a large- duction rate of 50 NL/h (normal liter per hour) had been
scale production of CO2-free hydrogen. Generally, there are conducted. In recent years, JAEA has carried out some studies
three well-known hydrogen production methods that can be on hydrogen and electricity cogeneration, based on the
used to produce hydrogen from nuclear energy: electrolysis, GTHTR300 (a VHTR using Brayton gas turbine cycle for elec-
thermochemical water decomposition, and hybrid thermo- tricity generation and SeI cycle for hydrogen production) [21].
chemical and electrical water decomposition [7]. Compared In addition, some experimental studies on hydrogen and
with the conventional electrolysis method, both thermo- electricity cogeneration have been conducted by JAEA to
chemical water decomposition and hybrid thermochemical validate the design and control strategy [22], and at the same
and electrical water decomposition can achieve a lower time, the relevant safety analysis has also been performed
hydrogen production cost. However, the requirements of [23]. During 2005e2007, INET of Tsinghua University had
high temperature thermal energy have ever limited the conducted many basic studies on the three main chemical
development of these two technologies as the high safety reactions of the SeI cycle (namely the Bunsen reaction, the
standard in nuclear industry does not allow the traditional hydroiodic acid decomposition reaction, and the sulfuric acid
water-cooled nuclear reactors such as the pressurized water decomposition reaction) [24,25]. An integrated laboratory-
reactor (PWR) and the boiling water reactor (BWR) to operate scale facility with the hydrogen production capacity of 100
at such high temperatures [8]. Encouragingly, with the NL/h was constructed in 2014, and the 60 h of continuous
development of the Generation IV nuclear reactor technol- operation with a hydrogen production rate of 60 NL/h was
ogy, several types of nuclear reactors including the super- successfully achieved in this facility [26]. Recently, some
critical water reactor (SWR) [7,9], the lead-cooled fast reactor thermodynamic analysis of the hydrogen and electricity
(LFR) [10], the gas-cooled fast reactor (GFR) [11], and the very cogeneration systems have been carried out, based on the SeI
high temperature gas-cooled reactor (VHTR) [12e15] are able cycle and the VHTR. For example, Qu et al. [14] proposed and
to supply the high temperature thermal energy for hydrogen investigated two different VHTR-based nuclear hydrogen
production [16]. In particular, the VHTR that can produce up production systems using the SeI cycle and the steam
to 600 MW at the reactor outlet temperature of 950 C or Rankine cycle (SRC). Obtained results showed that the overall
higher, is considered to be the most suitable reactor type for energy efficiencies of these two systems under the hydrogen
hydrogen production [14]. Currently, nuclear hydrogen pro- production rate of 100 mol/s were found to be 43.6% and
duction technology based on the VHTR and advanced ther- 39.2%, respectively.
mochemical cycles is attracting growing interest as it can not The CueCl cycle that has been extensively investigated by
only achieve large-scale hydrogen production with no carbon Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) and University of
Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT) [3], is another potential conditions, an improved VHTR and CueCl cycle-based nu-
thermochemical cycle that can be coupled with a nuclear clear hydrogen production system is proposed and investi-
power plant for hydrogen production. According to the num- gated in this paper. The system is modelled based on the
ber and type of reaction steps in the cycle, the CueCl cycle can energy, exergy and economic analysis method, and the sys-
be divided into many types, such as three-step CueCl cycle, tem optimization is performed using the particle swarm
four-step CueCl cycle, and five-step CueCl cycle. Orhan et al. optimization (PSO) algorithm. The system performance
[27] performed the efficiency comparison of several design changes under different operating conditions are analyzed,
schemes for the CueCl cycle-based hydrogen production and the optimal operating conditions of the system under
process by using Aspen Plus software. Simulation results five typical production strategies are solved. Finally, ac-
showed that using the hydrogen's lower heating value (LHV), cording to the optimization results, energy loss, exergy loss,
the thermal efficiency of the five-step CueCl cycle was found and investment cost distributions of the system are dis-
to be 44%, of the four-step cycle was 43% and of the three-step cussed. The parametric analysis work will be helpful for
cycle was 41%. Compared with the SeI cycle, the CueCl cycle figuring out the system's thermo-economic characteristics,
requires the lower temperature of thermal energy which can and the optimization work will be useful in directing the
be less than 550 C. Due to the relatively low temperature re- system's highly-efficient operation.
quirements, the CueCl cycle has been considered to be inte-
grated with a SWR [7,9] and a LFR [10] for the hydrogen and
electricity cogeneration. Recently, a conceptual design of System description and parameter settings
integrating a four-step CueCl cycle with a GFR has been pro-
posed by Al-Zareer et al. [11]. To improve the mismatch be- An improved conceptual design of the VHTR and CueCl cycle-
tween the four-step CueCl cycle's temperature requirements based nuclear hydrogen production system is proposed based
and the GFR outlet temperature, the high temperature helium on the study of Al-Zareer et al. [11], as shown in Fig. 1. From
Brayton cycle is employed. Namely, the high-grade thermal Fig. 1 it can be seen that the improved system still consists of
energy from the GFR is firstly used by the helium Brayton cycle four subsystems, namely the Brayton cycle-based reactor
to generate electricity, and then the moderate-grade thermal subsystem, the CueCl cycle-based hydrogen production sub-
energy is utilized by the four-step CueCl cycle to produce system, the SRC-based bottoming cycle subsystem, and the
hydrogen. In addition, the SRC is also employed as the bot- four-stage hydrogen compression subsystem. Different from
toming cycle to furtherly use the low-grade thermal energy of the conceptual design proposed by Al-Zareer et al. [11], in our
the GFR. Therefore, the principle of energy cascade utilization system, the radioactive high-temperature helium at the gas
is achieved in this integrated system. It is reported that under turbine (GT) outlet is divided into two branches, one stream
a specified operating condition, the integrated system is able will flow through the intermediate heat exchanger (IHX) to
to simultaneously supply 60.4 MW of the electrical power and transfer the high-temperature thermal energy to the second-
86.5 mol/s of the compressed hydrogen. ary loop helium heat carrier for hydrogen production, and
According to the literature review above, it can be seen that another one will be directly sent to the Mixer for adjusting the
the VHTR is a very promising reactor type that can be coupled temperature of the helium entering the steam generator (SG).
with some advanced thermochemical cycles to achieve the By employing the structure of two branches, the mass flow
large-scale hydrogen production with the characteristics of rate of the high-temperature helium flowing through the IHX
carbon-free and less-cost. The SeI cycle is a good candidate can be changed, which achieves the purpose of controlling the
that can be directly coupled with a VHTR for hydrogen pro- hydrogen production rate and regulating the temperature of
duction, and a few studies on the VHTR and SeI cycle-based the helium entering the SG. Thus, this improved system
nuclear hydrogen production systems have been carried out. design seems to be more feasible from the perspective of
The CueCl cycle is also a potential option that can be inte- controlling. After the SG, the helium will be compressed by the
grated with the VHTR (or the GFR) under the help of Brayton helium compressor (HC) and then sent back to the VHTR.
cycle. However, research on the VHTR and CueCl cycle-based As mentioned in the Introduction section, the CueCl cycle
nuclear hydrogen production systems has been seldom con- can be sorted into several different types, and for the same
ducted. Especially, the existing research on this topic is still at type of CueCl cycle, the actual cycle configuration can be also
the initial system conceptual design stage and could not reveal various, which mainly attributes to the diverse design of the
the thermodynamic mechanism of the system performance internal heat recovery circuit. Thus, for different types or
changes under different operating conditions. More specif- different designs of the CueCl cycle, the final hydrogen pro-
ically, the existing research only analyzes the thermodynamic duction efficiencies will be different. In this work, the CueCl
performance of the system under a specified operating con- cycle is considered as a “black box” and its internal configu-
dition, while the thermodynamic characteristics of the system ration is not specified, as shown in Fig. 1. Since the hydrogen
under variable operating conditions are unknown. Moreover, produced in the CueCl cycle needs to be compressed for the
some previous simulation results are unreasonable to be used storage and transportation, the hydrogen compression sub-
for directing the actual system operation owing to the lack of system is indispensable for a nuclear hydrogen production
considering some important operating restrictions. Besides, system. In this work, the hydrogen produced from the CueCl
research on the system's economic performance as well as the cycle is compressed by the four-stage compression subsystem
system optimization is also found to be insufficient. with intercooling, and it is finally pressurized into the high-
In order to figure out the unknown thermo-economic pressure hydrogen of 25 MPa that is stored in the hydrogen
characteristics of the system under variable operating tank [10,11]. Each stage of compression is set to have the same
Fig. 1 e Schematic cycle configuration of the improved VHTR and CueCl cycle-based nuclear hydrogen production system.
compression ratio in order to minimize the total power con- cases, the helium heat carrier will only flow through the
sumption, and the water of the SRC subsystem is preheated by Decomposition reactor and the Hydrolysis reactor in sequence
the compressed hydrogen in the Intercooler (IC) for waste heat as the thermal energies required by these two reactors belong
recovery. to the high-grade thermal energy that must be supplied by the
The main operating parameters used in this work are external heat source, as shown in Refs. [10,11]. According to
summarized in Table 1, most of which are determined based Ref. [8], the lowest heat supply temperature is recommended
on the relevant published literature. The reactor concept of to be 50 C higher than the thermochemical cycle's tempera-
VHTR NGTCC (nuclear gas turbine combined cycle) developed ture requirements. Considering that the decomposition reac-
by USA is adopted as the reactor subsystem, because this type tion and hydrolysis reaction respectively occur at the
of reactor has the relatively high thermal efficiency and the temperature ranges of 500e530 C and 370e400 C [10,11],
good thermodynamic cycle matching with our proposed nu- temperatures of the helium entering and leaving the CueCl
clear hydrogen production system. The hydrogen is produced cycle are set to 580 C [29] and 400 C, respectively.
at the ambient condition (i.e., temperature of 25 C & pressure As mentioned in the Introduction section, some early
of 0.1 MPa) [7,10,11] and about 41.6 kJ of electrical energy is simulation results are unreasonable to be used for directing
consumed by the Electrolysis reactor for 1 mol hydrogen the actual system operation due to the lack of considering
production [11,27]. The rated thermal and exergy efficiencies some key operating restrictions. In order to ensure the oper-
of the CueCl cycle are respectively assumed to be 41.1% and ational feasibility and safety, in this work, the terminal heat
60.9%, based on the studies of Al-Zareer et al. [10,11]. It should transfer temperature differences of the high-temperature
be noted that the CueCl cycle used in Refs. [10,11] is a typical heat exchangers (including IHX and SG) and the low-
four-step cycle whose main chemical reactions are illustrated temperature heat exchangers (including condenser and IC)
in Fig. 2. During the actual operating process, temperatures of are considered to be not less than 20 C and 8 C, respectively.
the helium heat carrier entering and exiting the CueCl cycle Moreover, the pinch point temperature difference in the SG is
should be kept constant in order to ensure the stable chemical set to be not lower than 8 C, and the exhaust quality at the
hydrogen production condition. By using an internal heat re- steam turbine (ST) outlet is set to be not smaller than 0.85 in
covery circuit, the low-grade thermal energy required by the order to prevent the ST's final stage blades from being eroded
Dryer can be provided by the CueCl cycle itself. Thus, in most by the high-speed liquid droplets.
Table 1 e Main operating parameters of the VHTR & CueCl cycle-based nuclear hydrogen production system.
System Operating parameters (Unit) Value Ref.
VHTR NGTCC Reactor thermal energy output rate (MW) 350 [28]
Outlet temperature of reactor ( C) 950 [28]
Inlet temperature of reactor ( C) 400 [28]
Primary loop working medium () Helium [28]
Inlet temperature of GT ( C) 950 [28]
Primary loop maximum pressure (MPa) 7.1 [28]
Primary loop pressure ratio () 1.94 [28]
CueCl cycle Electrical energy required to produce 1 mol of H2 (kJ) 41.6 [11,27]
Temperature of the H2 produced ( C) 25 [7,10,11]
Pressure of the H2 produced (MPa) 0.1 [7,10,11]
Thermal efficiency of CueCl cycle (%) 41.1 [10,11]
Exergy efficiency of CueCl cycle (%) 60.9 [10,11]
Temperature of the helium entering CueCl cycle ( C) 580 [29]
Pressure of the helium heat carrier (MPa) 2.9 [11]
SRC High pressure of SRC (MPa) 10 [7]
Low pressure of SRC (kPa) 10 [7,9e11]
Overall system Isentropic efficiency of the GT (%) 92 [30]
Isentropic efficiency of the HC or hydrogen compressors (%) 90 [30]
Isentropic efficiency of the ST (%) 90 [8,30]
Isentropic efficiency of the Pump (%) 85 [30]
Efficiency of the Generator (%) 98 [8,30]
Efficiency of the heat exchangers (%) 97 [8]
Fig. 2 e Schematic diagram of the main chemical reactions of a typical four-step CueCl cycle.
(2) The changes in kinetic and gravitational energies are

Thermodynamic modelling negligible throughout the system.
(3) The pressure drops of heat exchangers and pipelines
In this section, the thermodynamic model of the integrated are neglected.
system is built based on the energy and exergy analysis (4) The heat losses of VHTR, Mixer, turbines, pumps,
method as this method can not only show the system's energy compressors, and pipelines are omitted.
loss distribution from the viewpoint of energy quantity, but (5) The fluid at the condenser outlet (i.e., state point 10) is
also reveal the system's energy loss distribution from the the saturated water.
perspective of energy quality. Since the proposed cogenera-
tion system has a relatively complicated system configura- Before giving the energy conservation equation of each
tion, several reasonable assumptions are adopted to simplify component, it is necessary to classify the system components
the system's thermodynamic model [7,9e11,31], as follows: simply. In this work, all system components are sorted into
the following four types: the heat exchangers with heat losses
(1) The integrated system reaches a stable state. (including IHX, SG, condenser, and IC), the power generation
components (including GT and ST), the power consumption input rate (consumed by the Electrolysis reactor) of the CueCl
components (including compressors and pump), and the in- cycle, respectively. In addition, the LHV of hydrogen is
dependent units (including VHTR, Mixer, CueCl cycle, and considered to 244.8 kJ/mol in this work.
Generator). The electrical power generated by the Generator, E_ G,gen, can
be calculated by:
Energy model
X X
E_G;gen ¼ W_ i;gen W_ j;con ,hG (8)
Based on the thermodynamic first law, the mass and energy
conservation equations of an open steady-state system can be
expressed as: Exergy model
8X X
< m_ in ¼ m_ out Based on the thermodynamic second law, the exergy conser-
X X (1)
: Q_ cv ¼ _ out
ðmhÞ _ in þ W
ðmhÞ _ cv vation equation of an open steady-state system can be
expressed as:
where the terms Q_ cv and Ẇcv denote the heat exchange rate X X
_ _ ¼ _
ðm,exÞ _ _ _
and the power exchange at the control volume boundary,
Ex Q cv out ðm,exÞin þ Wcv þ Icv (9)
respectively. where the symbols ex and I_ represent the specific exergy and
For heat exchangers of the integrated system, the energy _ _ is the
the exergy destruction rate, respectively, the term Ex Q cv
conservation equation can be simplified to:
exergy flow rate of the heat exchange rate and can be calcu-
X X
Q_ he ¼ _ he;out
ðmhÞ _ he;in
ðmhÞ (2) lated by:
Z
where the term Q_ he represents the heat exchange rate be- T0
_ _ ¼
Ex Q cv 1 dQ_ cv (10)
tween the heat exchanger boundary and the external Tcv
environment.
where the term T0 is the ambient temperature.
For both the power generation components and the power
In this work, only physical exergy has been considered, and
consumption components, the energy conservation equation
other forms of exergy such as chemical exergy, kinetic exergy,
can be simplified based on the proposed assumption (4),
and potential exergy are neglected. Therefore, the specific
shown as:
exergy can be calculated by:
X X
0¼ _ out
ðmhÞ _ in þ W
ðmhÞ _ cv (3)
ex ¼ h h0 T0 ðs s0 Þ (11)
The detailed energy conservation equations of the above
Since there is no power exchange between the heat
components are summarized in Table 2.
exchanger boundary and the external environment, the
For VHTR, the energy conservation equation can be
exergy balance equation of the heat exchanger can be
expressed as:
expressed as:

Q_ VHTR;output ¼ m_ VHTR hVHTR;out hVHTR;in (4) X X
_ _ ¼ _
ðm,exÞ _ _
Ex Q he he;out ðm,exÞhe;in þ Iht (12)
where the term Q_ VHTR;output is the thermal energy output rate of
where the term I_ht is the exergy destruction rate caused by the
VHTR.
heat transfer process between the cold and hot fluids.
For Mixer, the energy conservation equation can be
Since the heat losses of the power generation components
expressed as:
and the power consumption components are neglected, the
m_ Mixer;out hMixer;out ¼ ð1 xÞ , m_ GT;out hGT;out þ x,m_ GT;out hIHX;out (5) exergy balance equations of these components can be
expressed as:
where the symbol x is the mass flow rate ratio used for
X X
hydrogen production and is defined as: 0¼ _
ðm,exÞ _ _ _
out ðm,exÞin þ Wcv þ Icv (13)

The detailed exergy conservation equations and exergy
x ¼ m_ IHX;hf m_ GT;out (6)
efficiency equations of the above components are summa-
It can be seen from Fig. 1 and Eq. (6) that the hydrogen rized in Table 3.
production rate of the integrated system is enhanced with the Most of the existing studies do not consider the exergy
increase of the mass flow rate ratio x. destruction in the reactor as the calculation of reactor exergy
For CueCl cycle, the energy conservation equation can be loss is relatively complicated and is related to the used nuclear
expressed as: fuel as well as the fission process. However, it is well-known
that the exergy destruction of the reactor is a main exergy
!
loss source and has a significant impact on the calculated
_ _ _
mH2 LHVH2 ¼ Q input;CuCl þ Einput;CuCl ,hth;CuCl (7)
system exergy efficiency. In this work, the exergy loss of the
VHTR is considered, and the exergy destruction rate (I_VHTR)
where the terms Q_ input;CuCl and E_ input,CueCl represent the ther- versus the exergy efficiency (hexg,VHTR) are respectively calcu-
mal energy input rate (see Table 2) and the electrical energy lated by the following equations:
Table 2 e The detailed energy conservation equations of heat exchangers, power generation components and power
consumption components.
Types Components Energy conservation equations
Heat exchangers IHX Q_ input;CuCl ¼ m_ IHX;hf ðhIHX;in;hf hIHX;out;hf Þ,hIHX ¼ m_ IHX;cf ðhIHX;out;cf hIHX;in;cf Þ
SG Q_ input;SG ,hSG ¼ m_ SG;hf ðhSG;in;hf hSG;out;hf Þ,hSG ¼ m_ SG;cf ðhSG;out;cf hSG;in;cf Þ
Condenser Q_CON ¼ m_ CON;hf ðhCON;in;hf hCON;out;hf Þ,h ¼ m_ CON;cf ðhCON;out;cf hCON;in;cf Þ
CON
Intercooler i (ICi) Q_ input;ICi ,hICi ¼ m_ ICi;hf ðhICi;in;hf hICi;out;hf Þ,hICi ¼ m_ ICi;cf ðhICi;out;cf hICi;in;cf Þ
Power generation components GT W _ GT;gen ¼ m_ GT ðhGT;in hGT;out Þ ¼ m_ GT ðhGT;in his;GT;out Þ,his;GT
ST W_ ST;gen ¼ m_ ST ðhST;in hST;out Þ ¼ m_ ST ðhST;in his;ST;out Þ,his;ST
Power consumption components HC W_ HC;con ¼ m_ HC ðhHC;out hHC;in Þ ¼ m_ HC ðhis;HC;out hHC;in Þ=his;HC
Compressor i (Ci) W_ Ci;con ¼ m_ Ci ðhCi;out hCi;in Þ ¼ m_ Ci ðhis;Ci;out hCi;in Þ=his;Ci
Pump W_ pump;con ¼ m_ pump ðhpump;out hpump;in Þ ¼ m_ pump ðhis;pump;out hpump;in Þ=his;pump
where the subscript H2(T0,p0) represents the hydrogen at the

_ fuel m_ VHTR exVHTR;out exVHTR;in
I_VHTR ¼ Ex (14) ambient condition.
Thus, the exergy destruction rate of the CueCl cycle can be
calculated by:
m_ VHTR exVHTR;out exVHTR;in
hexg;VHTR ¼ (15)
_ fuel
Ex !

_ _
_ICuCl ¼ Ex _
_ fuel is the exergy flow rate of the nuclear fuel Q input;CuCl þ Einput;CuCl , 1 hexg;CuCl (20)
where the term Ex
fission and can be calculated by:
The exergy destruction rate of the Generator can be
X
j
Q_ VHTR;output bfis;i 4i efis;i calculated by:
_ fuel ¼
Ex , (16)
efis;i j
P
i¼1
4i efis;i
i¼1
X X X X
I_G ¼ W_ i;gen W_ j;con E_G;gen ¼ W_ i;gen W_ j;con ,ð1 hG Þ (21)
where the terms efis,i, bfis,i, and 4i respectively are the fission Thus, the total exergy destruction rates of the integrated
energy, fission exergy, and fractional fission of the ith system, I_tot, can be calculated by:
fissionable element. In this work, the nuclear fuel parameters X
are determined based on the operational data of the HTR-10 I_tot ¼ I_ (22)
[30], and the main fuel parameters are summarized in Table 4.
For Mixer, the exergy destruction rate and the exergy effi- Economic model
ciency can be calculated by:
Economic analysis is a very essential work as the system's
economic performance plays an important role in directing
I_Mixer ¼ ð1 xÞ , m_ GT;out exGT;out þ x , m_ GT;out exIHX;out the design and operation of the system. In this work, the
m_ Mixer;out exMixer;out (17) method of cost functions is used to roughly estimate the
system's economic performance. The total fixed-capital in-
vestment of the system, Ctot, can be calculated by:
m_ Mixer;out exMixer;out
hexg;Mixer ¼ (18)
ð1 xÞ,m_ GT;out exGT;out þ x,m_ GT;out exIHX;out
X
j
CEPCI2020
Ctot ¼ Ck;ref (23)
For CueCl cycle, the exergy conservation equation can be CEPCIref
k¼1
expressed as:
where the term Ck,ref is the capital investment cost of the kth
!
component based on the reference year, and the abbreviation
_ _
m_ H2 exH2 ðT0 ;p0 Þ ¼ Ex _
Q input;CuCl þ Einput;CuCl ,hexg;CuCl (19)
of CEPCI represents the Chemical Engineering Plant Cost
Index.
The detailed investment cost functions of each compo-
m_ IHX;hf ðexIHX;in;hf exIHX;out;hf Þ

m_ IHX;cf ðexIHX;out;cf exIHX;in;cf Þ
m_ pump ðexpump;out expump;in Þ

nent have been presented in Table 5 [32e35]. In this work, the
m_ SG;hf ðexSG;in;hf exSG;out;hf Þ

Exergy efficiency equations
m_ ICi;hf ðexICi;in;hf exICi;out;hf Þ

m_ SG;cf ðexSG;out;cf exSG;in;cf Þ
m_ ICi;cf ðexICi;out;cf exICi;in;cf Þ

Table 3 e The detailed exergy conservation equations and exergy efficiency equations of heat exchangers, power generation components and power consumption
IHX and SG are considered to be the compact heat ex-
m_ HC ðexHC;out exHC;in Þ
m_ GT ðexGT;in exGT;out Þ
changers, while the condenser and IC are viewed as the shell
m_ ST ðexST;in exST;out Þ
_ pump;con
m_ Ci ðexCi;out exCi;in Þ
and tube heat exchangers. The area of heat exchanger is
_ HC;con
_ GT;gen
calculated based on the logarithmic mean temperature dif-
_ ST;gen
W
_ Ci;con
ference (LMTD) and the overall heat transfer coefficient (U).
W
W
W
Since the actual equipment cost data of the CueCl cycle are
currently lacking, a simplified fitting formula is used to
hexg;CON ¼ 0
hexg;pump ¼
hexg;IHX ¼
roughly estimate the fixed-capital investment cost of the
¼
hexg;GT ¼
¼
hexg;ICi ¼
hexg;ST ¼
hexg;Ci ¼
hexg;HC
hexg;SG
CueCl cycle. It should be noted that this fitting formula is

obtained based on the published literature [35] in which the
investment cost of a representative CueCl pilot plant is
theoretically estimated under different hydrogen production
capacities. Since the main purpose of conducting economic
analysis is to provide a rough data reference for the system's
economic characteristic analysis, under the limited actual
I_IHX ¼ m_ IHX;hf ðexIHX;in;hf exIHX;out;hf Þ m_ IHX;cf ðexIHX;out;cf exIHX;in;cf Þ
cost data available for the CueCl plant, it is assumed that this
I_SG ¼ m_ SG;hf ðexSG;in;hf exSG;out;hf Þ m_ SG;cf ðexSG;out;cf exSG;in;cf Þ
I_ICi ¼ m_ ICi;hf ðexICi;in;hf exICi;out;hf Þ m_ ICi;cf ðexICi;out;cf exICi;in;cf Þ
simplified cost fitting formula can be used to roughly esti-

mate the investment cost of the CueCl cycle. In addition, the
purchase costs of the Valve and the Mixer are neglected due
Exergy conservation equations
to their relatively small values [31,36].

The total fixed-capital investment rate, c_ tot, can be calcu-
_ pump;con m_ pump ðexpump;out expump;in Þ
lated by:
I_CON ¼ m_ CON;hf ðexCON;in;hf exCON;out;hf Þ
_ HC;con m_ HC ðexHC;out exHC;in Þ
Ctot ,CRF
_ GT;gen
c_tot ¼
_ ST;gen
(24)
_ Ci;con m_ Ci ðexCi;out exCi;in Þ
t
I_GT ¼ m_ GT ðexGT;in exGT;out Þ W
I_ST ¼ m_ ST ðexST;in exST;out Þ W
n
ir ð1 þ ir Þ
CRF ¼ n (25)
ð1 þ ir Þ 1
where the terms CRF, t, ir and n are the capital recovery

factor, the annual plant operation hours, the interest rate
and the number of operation year, respectively. In this work,
I_pump ¼ W
I_HC ¼ W
the annual plant operation hours, the interest rate and the
I_Ci ¼ W
number of operation year are respectively set to 8000 h

[32,33], 12% and 30 years [37].
In addition to the fixed-capital investment rate, the fuel
cost rate (c_ fuel) and the operation versus maintenance cost
rate (c_ O&M) should also be considered, as follows:
_ fuel ,cQ
c_fuel ¼ 3600,Ex
Compressor i (Ci)
(26)
Intercooler i (ICi)
Components
Condenser
m,Ctot
c_O&M ¼ (27)
t
Pump
IHX
HC
where the terms cQ and m are the nuclear fuel cost per unit
GT
SG
ST
thermal exergy of reactor (cQ ¼ 0.4 $/GJ [38]) and the main-
tenance factor (m ¼ 0.06 [32,33]), respectively.
Performance criteria model

Power consumption components
Power generation components
The outputted products of the integrated system include

electricity and compressed hydrogen, so the most direct
performance assessment criteria should be the net electrical
power output and the compressed hydrogen's production
rate. It should be noted that the compressed hydrogen stored
Heat exchangers
components.
in the hydrogen tank will be eventually cooled to the ambient

temperature.
The net electrical power output of the integrated system,
Types
E_ net, can be calculated by:

“Results and discussion”, their calculation equations are

Table 4 e Main fuel parameters of the HTR-10.
given as follows:
Fissionable Fission energy Fission exergy Fractional

elements (MeV/nucleon) (MeV/nucleon) fission (%) _ ST;gen W_ pump;con ,hG
_ W
Enet;SRC
U235 203.0 192.9 85.59 hth;SRC ¼ ¼ (32)
Q_ input;SRC P 4
Pu239 208.9 198.5 12.71 Q_ input;SG þ Q_ input;ICi
Pu241 210.8 200.3 1.49 i¼1

W _ ST;gen W_ pump;con ,hG
_
Enet;SRC
E_net ¼ E_G;gen E_input;CuCl (28) hexg;SRC ¼ ¼ (33)
_ _
Ex P 4
Q input;SRC _ _
Ex þ Ex _ _
Q input;SG Q input;ICi
The thermal efficiency of the overall system, hth,os, can be i¼1
calculated by:
where the calculation equations of the SG's thermal energy
where the subscript H2(T0,p ¼ 25 MPa) represents the hydrogen
input rate (Q_ input;SG ) and the ith IC's thermal energy input rate
at the ambient temperature and the pressure of 25 MPa.
The exergy efficiency of the overall system, hexg,os, can be (Q_ input;ICi ) have been given in Table 2.
calculated by:

_
E_net þ Q_ H2 ðT0 ;p¼25MPaÞ Enet þ m_ H2 LHVH2 þ m_ H2 hH2 ðT0 ;p¼25MPaÞ hH2 ðT0 ;p0 Þ
hth;os ¼ ¼ (29)
Q_ VHTR;output Q_ VHTR;output
_ fuel I_tot
_ H ðT ;p¼25MPaÞ Ex
E_net þ Ex
hexg;os ¼ 2 0
¼ (30)
_ fuel
Ex _ fuel
Ex Model solving and validation
The levelized cost of energy (LCOE, namely the specific
energy cost) of the cogeneration system can be calculated by: Model solving
c_tot þ c_fuel þ c_O&M

LCOE ¼ (31) The flow chart of model solving is presented in Fig. 3. As
E_net þ Q_ H2 ðT0 ;p¼25MPaÞ
shown in Fig. 3, after inputting all known system parameters,
Since the thermal and exergy efficiencies of the SRC sub- the model solving process of the VHTR subsystem starts.
system, hth,SRC and hexg,SRC, are analyzed in the Section - During calculating the inlet parameters of the HC, an iteration
Table 5 e The investment cost models of the system components [32e35].

Components Investment cost models Reference year
VHTR CVHTR ¼ c,Q_ VHTR;output c ¼ 283 $/kW 2003

GT 1 1994
CGT ¼ 479:34,m_ GT , ,lnðPRcÞ,ð1 þexpð0:036 ,TGT;in 54:4ÞÞ
0:93 hGT
IHX Q_ input;CuCl 1986
CIHX ¼ 2681,A0:59
IHX AIHX ¼ UIHX ¼ 0.7 kW/m2$K
UIHX ,DTLMTD;IHX
SG Q_ input;SG ,hSG 1986
CSG ¼ 2681,A0:59
SG ASG ¼ USG ¼ 1.6 kW/m2$K
USG ,DTLMTD;SG

HC or Compressors 1 1994
Ck ¼ 71:1,m_ k ,PRc,lnðPRcÞ
0:92 hk
ST CST ¼ 4405,W_ 0:7 2005
ST;gen
Condenser Q_ CON 1986
CCON ¼ 2143,ACON
0:514
ACON ¼ UCON ¼ 2.0 kW/m2$K
UCON ,DTLMTD;CON
Intercooler i (ICi) Q_ input;ICi ,hICi 1986
CICi ¼ 2143,A0:514 AICi ¼ UIC ¼ 2.0 kW/m2$K
ICi UIC ,DTLMTD;ICi
Pump Cpump ¼ 1120,W_ 0:8 2005
pump;con
Generator (Brayton) 0 10:7 1991
BW_ GT;gen W_ HC;con C
CG;Brayton ¼ 4 10 @
6
A
160000
Generator (SRC) CG;SRC ¼ 60 W_ 0:95 2005

ST;gen
CueCl cycle CCuCl _ H2 ¼ 0 mol/s), elseCCuCl ¼ 106 ð10:3575 þ0:5793 ,m_ H2 Þa
¼ 0 (m 2008
a
This fitting formula is obtained based on the fixed-capital investment data of a CueCl pilot plant [35].
process is employed by changing the HC's inlet temperature. If beginning of the phase change process, there is a position
the calculated HC's isentropic efficiency (his,HC’) under the where the minimum heat transfer temperature difference
given inlet temperature does not meet the convergence cri- easily occurs (i.e., the pinch point A-B shown in Fig. 4(b)). The
terion, the HC's inlet parameters will be calculated again by reason for making this statement is based on the fact that as
increasing or decreasing the HC's inlet temperature by 0.01 K. the cold fluid's mass flow rate decreases, the hot fluid's
After calculating the outlet parameters of the IHX, the temperature at the pinch point is declined, while the cold
thermal energy input rate of the CueCl cycle can be deter- fluid's temperature at the pinch point is kept constant,
mined, and then the mass flow rate of the produced hydrogen causing the decrease in the pinch point temperature differ-
can be calculated by using Eq. (7). Thereafter, the model ence (i.e., the pinch point moves from A-B to A0 -B, as shown
solving process of the SRC and the hydrogen compression in Fig. 4(b)).
subsystems begins, and another iteration process is used by Thus, the heat transfer processes in the four Intercoolers
changing the mass flow rate of water. Before conducting this and the SG are analyzed in order to check whether the
iteration process, an initial mass flow rate of water that is permitted minimum heat transfer temperature difference has
considered as the theoretical maximum mass flow rate, is occurred. If so, the minimum and optimal mass flow rate of
calculated based on the following formula: water will be solved and the second iteration process will end
up. Otherwise, the calculation of all unknown state parame-
Q_ input;SG ,hSG ters will be repeated by reducing the water's mass flow rate by
m_ water;max ¼ (34)
hsteamðpSRC ;q¼1Þ hpump;out 0.1 kg/s.
Next, the outlet parameters of the ST will be calculated and
where the subscript steam(pSRC,q ¼ 1) represents the steam at the exhaust quality at the ST outlet (qST,out) will be checked to
the high pressure of SRC (pSRC) and the quality of 1 (namely, make sure that its value is not less than the permitted mini-
the saturated steam at the high pressure of SRC). It should be mum value of 0.85. It should be noted that the SG's outlet
noted that the sole purpose of introducing the theoretical parameters (or the ST's inlet parameters) under the minimum
maximum mass flow rate is to set an initial value for the mass flow rate of water are already the highest parameters
iteration process. allowed by the current heat transfer condition. When the
Once the mass flow rate of water is determined, all un- calculated exhaust quality under the highest ST's inlet pa-
known state parameters of the SRC and the hydrogen rameters is still less than 0.85, unreasonable parameter set-
compression subsystems can be calculated based on the en- tings are inputted at the beginning of model solving process.
ergy balance law. According to the Carnot theorem, improving The system performance assessment criteria will be calcu-
the working fluid's average endothermic temperature or lated and outputted only under the safe ST's exhaust quality,
reducing the working fluid's average exothermic temperature and then the whole model solving process is completed.
can increase the SRC's thermal efficiency. Under the deter- The model solving process mentioned above is built in the
mined thermal energy input rate of the SG, the vapor tem- MATLAB environment (version R2016a) [39], and the thermo-
perature at the SG's outlet can be improved by reducing the dynamic properties of fluids including water, hydrogen, and
mass flow rate of water, which will increase the average helium are obtained using the NIST REFPROP database
endothermic temperature and enhance the SRC's thermal ef- (version 9.0) [40].
ficiency. In addition, reducing the water's mass flow rate can
also improve the temperature matching between the water Model validation
and the high-temperature helium, which furtherly reduces
the exergy destruction of the heat transfer process and im- Since the experimental data of the VHTR & CueCl cycle-based
proves the SRC's exergy efficiency. nuclear hydrogen production systems have never been re-
However, the mass flow rate of water cannot be too small, ported up to now, the thermodynamic models (including the
because it is limited by the minimum heat transfer temper- reactor subsystem model, the SRC subsystem model, and the
ature difference of heat exchanger. Fig. 4 schematically hydrogen compression subsystem model) and the model
shows the minimum heat transfer temperature differences solving method proposed in this paper are preliminarily vali-
of two different heat exchange processes. For four In- dated by comparing the present calculation results with the
tercoolers of the integrated system, there is no phase change simulation results obtained by Al-Zareer et al. [11]. The reason
that occurs during the heat transfer process, and with the why we use their data to verify our model is based on the fact
decrease of the water's mass flow rate, the water's outlet that the improved system is proposed based on their proto-
temperature is increased, causing that the outlet side of type system, and the same hydrogen production rate with
water is possible to reach the minimum heat transfer tem- their prototype system can be achieved in our system by
perature difference (DTmin ¼ 8 C), as shown in Fig. 4(a). The changing the mass flow rate ratio x defined in Eq. (6). Table 6
water is isobarically heated into the superheated steam in presents the main operating parameters used in the model
SG, and a phase change process therefore occurs. As shown validation process and the obtained comparison results.
in Fig. 4(b), when the hot fluid's inlet and outlet parameters It can be seen from Table 6 that after inputting all known
remain unchanged, the cold fluid's outlet temperature is parameter settings of Al-Zareer et al. [11] into the solving
increased with the decrease of the mass flow rate, and at this program we developed, the results calculated are almost
time, the cold fluid's outlet position (or the hot fluid's inlet identical to the research results of Al-Zareer et al. [11]. To be
position) is possible to achieve the minimum heat transfer more detailed, by setting the mass flow rate ratio x to 0.22, our
temperature difference (DTmin ¼ 20 C). In addition, at the system can achieve the hydrogen production rate of 87.7 mol/
Fig. 3 e Flow chart of model solving.
s, the overall energy efficiency of 14.2%, and the overall exergy including the mass flow rate ratio x, the reactor subsystem
efficiency of 20.7% (without considering the reactor exergy pressure ratio g, the SRC's high pressure pSRC, and the CueCl
loss). Generally, the comparison results show that the relative cycle efficiencies on the integrated system's performance.
error between our calculation results and the results of Al- Then, the system optimization under five different production
Zareer et al. [11] is controlled within 1.5%, so the thermody- strategies is carried out based on the PSO algorithm. Accord-
namic models and the solving method developed in this paper ing to the optimization results obtained, energy loss, exergy
can be used for the subsequent analysis and calculation. loss, and investment cost distributions of the system are
discussed at last.
Results and discussion Parametric analysis
In this section, parametric analysis is firstly conducted to For the integrated system proposed in this paper, the reactor
investigate the effects of several key operating parameters subsystem pressure ratio is no doubt a very important
Fig. 4 e Schematic diagram of the minimum heat transfer temperature of (a) the heat transfer process with no phase change
and (b) the heat transfer process with phase change.
operating parameter as it not only has a great effect on the ST's inlet will have a permitted minimum value. Based on the
efficiency of the topping Brayton cycle, but also affects the minimum heat transfer temperature difference restriction,
system's hydrogen production rate as well as the bottoming the outlet temperature of Mixer will also have a permitted
SRC's performance. Keeping the system parameters of Table 1 minimum value. Based on Eq. (5), the outlet temperature of
unchanged, the effects of the mass flow rate ratio x on the Mixer depends on both the GT's exhaust parameters and the
system performance are analyzed under four different reactor mass flow rate ratio x. It is clear that the GT's exhaust pa-
subsystem pressure ratios, as shown in Fig. 5. In Fig. 5, the rameters are decreased with the increase of the primary loop
pressure ratio of 1.94 is considered as the rated reactor sub- pressure ratio. At this time, according to the energy balance
system pressure ratio, as shown in Table 1. principle, the permitted maximum mass flow rate ratio, xmax,
It can be seen from Fig. 5 that as the mass flow rate ratio is must be reduced to ensure that the outlet temperature of
increased, both the hydrogen production rate and the specific Mixer is not less than the permitted minimum value. In other
energy cost are increased, while the system's net electrical words, the maximum hydrogen production rate (m _ H2,max)
power and overall efficiencies are decreased. Thus, it can be must be reduced to make sure that the SG's steam outlet
speculated that the cost of producing compressed hydrogen is temperature is not lower than the permitted minimum value
higher than that of generating electricity, while the effi- (the final purpose is to regulate the ST's exhaust quality and to
ciencies of producing compressed hydrogen are lower than make the ST operate safely).
that of generating electricity. In addition, under the same This phenomenon also occurs when the SRC's high pres-
mass flow rate ratio, both the hydrogen production rate and sure (pSRC) is increased, as shown in Fig. 6. It can be seen from
the specific energy cost are reduced with the increase in the Fig. 6(a) that when the SRC's low pressure remains unchanged,
reactor subsystem pressure ratio, while the system's net the permitted minimum outlet temperature of SG (Tout,min,SG)
electrical power output and overall efficiencies are improved. is improved with the increase of the SRC's high pressure. At
Thus, increasing the reactor subsystem pressure ratio is this time, the permitted minimum outlet temperature of
conducive to enhancing the system's thermo-economic per- Mixer is also increased. Furtherly, when the reactor subsys-
formance. However, as the pressure ratio is increased, the tem pressure ratio is kept constant (namely, the GT's exhaust
system's maximum mass flow rate ratio xmax (or the system's parameters are kept unchanged), the maximum mass flow
maximum hydrogen production rate m _ H2,max) is decreased, as rate ratio xmax will be decreased, as shown in Fig. 6(b). It can be
shown in Fig. 5(a), which means that the controllable range of seen from Fig. 6(b) that when the reactor subsystem pressure
the mass flow rate ratio is reduced. The reason for causing this ratio is set to 2.25 and the SRC's high pressure is set to 20 MPa,
result can be explained by using the parameter of the mini- the calculated maximum mass flow rate ratio is equal to 0.01,
mum outlet temperature of SG, Tout,min,SG. As mentioned in the which entails that the ST at this time is very possible to
Section - “Model solving”, the present solving procedure operate in the dangerous condition.
considers the ST's lowest exhaust quality restriction, which Under the rated operating parameters of Table 1, the ef-
entails that when the SRC's high and low pressures are fects of the mass flow rate ratio on the system's exergy loss
determined, the vapor temperature at the SG's outlet or the distribution are presented in Fig. 7. From Fig. 7 it can be seen
Table 6 e Main operating parameters used in the model validation process and the comparison results.
Main operating parameters (Unit) Al-Zareer et al. [11] Present work Relative error (%)

Inlet/outlet temperatures of the reactor ( C) 850/490 850/490 e
High/low pressures of the reactor subsystem (MPa) 9.0/2.9 9.0/2.9 e
Reactor thermal energy output rate (MW) 600 600 e
Energy efficiency of the four-step CueCl cycle (%) 41.1 41.1 e
Exergy efficiency of the four-step CueCl cycle (%) 60.9 60.9 e
High pressure of the SRC subsystem (MPa) 2 2 e
Low pressure of the SRC subsystem (MPa) 0.01 0.01 e
Ambient temperature/pressure ( C/MPa) 25/0.1 25/0.1 e
Isentropic efficiency of the gas turbine (%) 72a 72 e
Isentropic efficiency of the gas compressor (%) 72 72 e
Isentropic efficiency of the steam turbine (%) 72 72 e
Isentropic efficiency of the pump (%)b Unknown 72 Unknown
Efficiency of the generator (%) 95 95 e
The mass flow rate ratio () None 0.22 e
Comparison results (Unit) Al-Zareer et al. [11] Present work Relative error (%)
Hydrogen production rate (mol/s) 86.5 87.7 1.39

Overall energy efficiency of the integrated system (%) 14.1 14.2 0.71
Overall exergy efficiency of the integrated system (%) 20.7c 20.7c 0
a
This value is used in another literature of Al-Zareer et al. [9].
b
It has been proved that the isentropic efficiency of pump has a very tiny effect on the integrated system's performance.
c
_ H ðT ;p¼25MPaÞ
E_net þ Ex
These values are calculated without considering the reactor exergy loss [11], namely hexg;os ¼ 2 0
.
m_ VHTR ðexVHTR;out exVHTR;in Þ
Fig. 5 e Effects of the mass flow rate ratio and the primary loop pressure ratio on the system performance, (a) Hydrogen
production rate (b) Net electrical power (c) Thermal efficiency (d) Exergy efficiency and (e) Specific energy cost.
that as the mass flow rate ratio (or the hydrogen production performance. It can be seen from Fig. 8(a) and (b) that as the
rate) is increased, both the CueCl cycle subsystem's exergy mass flow rate ratio is increased, the SRC's thermal efficiency
destruction rate (I_Cu-Cl subsystem) and the system's total exergy is decreased, while the SRC's exergy efficiency is improved. As
destruction rates (I_tot) are obviously increased, while the mentioned above, the hydrogen production rate is increased
exergy destruction rates of the SRC and the hydrogen with the increase of the mass flow rate ratio, which causes the
compression subsystems (I_SRC&HC subsystems) are greatly outlet temperature of Mixer to be decreased. According to the
reduced. In addition, although the VHTR subsystem's exergy Carnot theorem, the SRC's thermal efficiency depends upon
loss rate (I_VHTR subsystem) is almost unchanged when more the average endothermic temperature and the average
hydrogen is produced, it is always the system's biggest exergy exothermic temperature. As the outlet temperature of Mixer
destruction source that accounts for more than 50% of the (i.e., the SG's helium inlet temperature) is decreased, the SG's
system's total exergy destruction rates, as shown in Fig. 7. steam outlet temperature is decreased, as shown in Fig. 8(c).
Fig. 8 shows the effects of the mass flow rate ratio and the At this time, the average endothermic temperature is lowered,
primary loop pressure ratio on the SRC subsystem's deteriorating the SRC's thermal efficiency. However, the heat
Fig. 6 e Effects of the SRC's high pressure on (a) the minimum outlet temperature of SG and (b) the maximum mass flow rate
ratio.
transfer process in SG is improved with the decrease of the energy. Unlike the conceptual design proposed by Al-Zareer
SG's helium inlet temperature, which reduces the exergy et al. [11], in this work, the IHX is employed to prevent the
destruction of the heat exchange process and enhances the primary loop radioactive helium from contaminating the
SG's exergy efficiency, as shown in Fig. 8(d). Since the exergy components and products of the CueCl cycle subsystem.
destruction of the heat exchange process in SG has a domi- Thus, the efficiency of the IHX (hIHX) should be considered. In
nant influence on the SRC's exergy efficiency, the results addition, since both hydrogen production and hydrogen
shown in Fig. 8(b) are obtained. compression processes will consume the electrical or me-
However, compared Fig. 5 with Fig. 8, it can be seen that the chanical energy, the thermal energy conversion efficiency of
changes in the system's overall efficiencies are not completely the SRC (hSRC) should also be considered when calculating the
caused by the changes in the SRC subsystem's efficiencies, total efficiencies of producing compressed hydrogen from
because exergy efficiency of the integrated system is nuclear energy.
decreased, while exergy efficiency of the SRC subsystem is According to Fig. 8(a) and (b), thermal and exergy effi-
increased. According to the integrated system's layout, it can ciencies of the SRC are approximately in the ranges of 34.3%e
be seen that when the reactor subsystem pressure ratio is kept 38% and 61%e66.5%, respectively. Based on these data and the
constant, the net electrical power outputted by the topping rated CueCl cycle efficiencies, hCu-Cl ¼ (41.1%, 60.9%), the total
Brayton cycle is constant, and the thermal energy inputted thermal and exergy efficiencies of producing compressed
into the SG (or the SRC subsystem) is reduced by increasing hydrogen from nuclear energy are found to be approximately
the mass flow rate ratio (or the hydrogen production rate). At in the ranges of 32.6%e33.3% and 51.4%e54.2%, respectively.
this time, part of the thermal energy previously used for the Since both the total thermal and exergy efficiencies of pro-
SRC electricity generation is consumed by the CueCl plant to ducing compressed hydrogen are lower than that of gener-
produce more compressed hydrogen. ating electricity (based on the SRC), the system's overall
Fig. 9 schematically presents the energy flow diagram of efficiencies are decreased when more compressed hydrogen is
the compressed hydrogen production based on nuclear produced.
In this work, the CueCl cycle is considered as a “black box”
and its internal configuration is not specified. Thus, by
employing different internal heat recovery circuits, the CueCl
cycle's efficiencies can be theoretically changed. Keeping the
system parameters of Table 1 unchanged, the effects of the
mass flow rate ratio on the system performance are analyzed
under five different CueCl cycle efficiencies, as shown in
Fig. 10. Similar to the previous analysis, both the hydrogen
production rate and the specific energy cost are increased
with the increase of the mass flow rate ratio, while the sys-
tem's net electrical power output and overall efficiencies are
decreased, regardless of which CueCl cycle efficiencies are
used, as shown in Fig. 10. In addition, it can also be seen from
Fig. 10 that under the same mass flow rate ratio, the hydrogen
production rate and the system's overall efficiencies are
increased with the improvement of the CueCl cycle effi-
ciencies, while the net electrical power output is slightly
Fig. 7 e Effects of the mass flow rate ratio on the system's reduced. The increase in the CueCl cycle efficiencies entails
exergy loss distribution. that under the same reactor thermal energy input rate, more
Fig. 8 e Effects of the mass flow rate ratio and the primary loop pressure ratio on the SRC subsystem's performance, (a)
Thermal efficiency (b) Exergy efficiency (c) Steam outlet temperature of SG and (d) Exergy efficiency of SG.
Fig. 9 e Schematic energy flow diagram of the compressed hydrogen production using nuclear energy.
hydrogen will be produced by the CueCl plant, causing more It should be noted that the effects of the CueCl cycle effi-
electrical/mechanical energy consumptions of the Electrolysis ciencies on the system's specific energy cost are not analyzed
reactor/hydrogen compressors. Thus, under the same mass in this study. This is because that the CueCl cycle cost model
flow rate ratio, the system's net electrical power output is used in this work is a simplified fitting formula derived from a
slightly decreased with the increase of the CueCl cycle published literature in which a specified CueCl cycle's capital
efficiencies. investment cost is roughly evaluated only under different
hydrogen production rates. Thus, the cost fitting formula used the genetic algorithm (GA) and the PSO algorithm are two
in this work can only reflect the capital investment of a CueCl outstanding optimization algorithms, which are widely used
plant under different hydrogen production rates and cannot in the system optimization.
reveal the relationship between the CueCl cycle's capital in- The PSO algorithm is a population-based random search
vestment and efficiencies. On one hand, the increase in the algorithm, which was developed by Eberhart and Kennedy [41]
CueCl cycle efficiencies generally entails that a more in 1995. The overall search strategy of PSO imitates the
complicated cycle configuration such as a dense internal heat flocking behavior of birds and is simpler than that of GA. Since
recovery circuit is employed, which increases the capital in- the swarm moves to the optimal region unevenly, the PSO has
vestment of the CueCl cycle. On the other hand, the increase the less time consuming of searching the optimal solutions in
in the CueCl cycle efficiencies indicates that the thermal en- most cases. In this work, the PSO algorithm based on the
ergy inputted to the cycle is utilized in a more efficient way MATLAB software optimization toolbox is employed to search
and more hydrogen can be produced under the same thermal the best operating conditions of the system under different
energy input rate, which ultimately reduces the fuel cost or production goals, and its calculation flowchart as well as the
the thermal energy cost of producing per unit of hydrogen. principle of particle swarm update can be found in our pre-
Thus, it can be concluded that the effects of the CueCl cycle vious work [31].
efficiencies on the system's specific energy cost are so According to the previous parametric analysis, the reactor
complicated that it is necessary to conduct a specialized subsystem pressure ratio (g), the mass flow rate ratio (x), and
research on this scientific topic. However, this issue is not the the SRC's high pressure (pSRC) are three very important oper-
research focus of our present work and exceeds the scope of ating parameters which have a great influence on the system's
our study. overall performance and safe operation. Thus, these three
parameters are set as the optimization variables of this study.
Optimization Table 7 shows the optimization variables and the tuning pa-
rameters of the PSO algorithm. In this work, to obtain a more
For the integrated system proposed in this paper, system accurate solution, the hybrid function solver of fmincon (find
optimization is a very important and necessary work as the minimum of constrained nonlinear multivariable function) is
current operating parameters are preliminary selected based used as the second solver that continues the optimization
on several published literature and maybe not the optimal after the particle swarm algorithm (i.e., the original solver or
operating condition. Among many optimization algorithms, the first solver) terminates. In addition, the upper and lower
Fig. 10 e Effects of the mass flow rate ratio and the CueCl cycle efficiencies on the system performance, (a) Hydrogen
production rate (b) Net electrical power (c) Thermal efficiency and (d) Exergy efficiency.
limits of the pressure ratio are determined based on the hydrogen production capacity of the system under the given
literature of Kowalczyk et al. [30], in which the pressure ratio optimization range, and the second optimization is to obtain
of the topping Brayton cycle is changed from 1.5 to 4. The the largest net electrical power output under the specified
upper and lower limits of the SRC's high pressure are selected production strategy. According to the previous parametric
based on the studies of Al-Zareer et al. [7,9e11], in which the analysis, the integrated system under the given optimization
pressure range of 2e20 MPa is covered. range will have a maximum hydrogen production rate,
Based on the previous analysis, the net electrical power m_ H2,max. When the hydrogen demand is very large and the
output, the thermal efficiency, and the exergy efficiency of the electricity demand is very small (i.e., production strategy I),
integrated system are decreased with the increase of the the system should operate in the 100% of maximum hydrogen
hydrogen production rate. Thus, the maximum net electrical production mode. At this time, the second optimization's
power and the highest system efficiencies will be simulta- mission is to search the system's largest net electrical power
neously achieved when the hydrogen production rate equals output at the same time achieve this maximum hydrogen
to 0. At this time, the integrated system turns into a pure production rate. Similarly, when the demand for electricity is
combined cycle (i.e., topping helium Brayton cycle and bot- very large and the demand for hydrogen is none (i.e., pro-
toming steam Rankine cycle) system without hydrogen production strategy V), the system should run in the maximum
duction. And this system will be the best option for scenarios power generation mode. At this time, the second optimiza-
where the electricity demand greatly exceeds the electricity tion's task is to search the system's largest net electrical power
purveyance. output without hydrogen production. It should be noted that
However, when the electricity demand decreases so that the so-called very large or very small here is a relative concept,
the purveyance exceeds the demand, the integrated system and there is no specific magnitude restriction. In the actual
will be in “overload” operating condition. At this time, in order production process, manufacturers should flexibly formulate
to make the system operate continuously in the highly- suitable production strategies based on their own production
efficient full-load operating mode, manufacturers have to conditions.
sell the excess electricity cheaply (or use the excess electricity Table 8 shows the solved optimal operating conditions of
through some energy storage technologies). Introducing a five typical production strategies under the rated CueCl cycle
relatively efficient hydrogen production subsystem can efficiencies of hCu-Cl ¼ (41.1%, 60.9%). It can be seen from Table
effectively relieve this issue. It should be pointed out that 8 that when the integrated system operates in the production
although the total hydrogen production efficiencies are lower strategy V (namely the pure combined cycle without hydrogen
than the SRC-based electricity generation efficiencies, using production), the optimal pressure ratio of the reactor sub-
nuclear energy to produce hydrogen is still a good option as system is found to be 2.59. This value is close to the research
the hydrogen production efficiencies are competitive with the data of Ref. [30] where the optimal pressure ratio of the
energy storage efficiencies. Moreover, the less-cost and combined cycle is reported to be about 2.5. The slight devia-
carbon-free hydrogen can be directly sold as an independent tion is considered to be caused by the different system
product to some hydrogen-consuming industries such as parameter settings and the adopted different SRC layouts (the
metallurgical plants, fertilizer plants, etc. The same as elec- SRC with reheating is used in Ref. [30]).
tricity demand, hydrogen demand also exists in some pro- According to the optimization results, the integrated sys-
duction activities. tem's performance under these five production strategies is
Thus, system optimization based on different production obtained, as shown in Fig. 12. From Fig. 12, it can be seen that
strategies should be performed to obtain the method of under the production strategy I (i.e., the maximum hydrogen
keeping the system in the continuous highly-efficient opera- production mode), the integrated system can achieve the
tion mode under fluctuating electricity or hydrogen demands. maximum hydrogen production rate of about 403.1 mol/s, the
Fig. 11 shows the detailed optimization process where five minimum net electrical power output of about 38.77 MW, the
different production strategies corresponding to different lowest thermal efficiency of about 39.3%, the lowest exergy
levels of electricity or hydrogen demands are formulated. The efficiency of about 41.26% as well as the highest specific en-
whole solving process adopts the idea of two-step single ergy cost of about 0.0731 $/kW$h. Under the production
objective optimization based on different optimization tar- strategy V (i.e., the pure combined cycle mode), the integrated
gets. The first optimization aims to search the maximum system can achieve the largest net electrical power output of
about 177.25 MW, the maximum thermal efficiency of about
50.64% (in Ref. [30], this value is found to be 50.6%), the highest
Table 7 e Optimization variables and tuning parameters exergy efficiency of about 53.29% as well as the lowest specific
of the PSO algorithm. energy cost of about 0.0268 $/kW$h. In addition, the same as
Parameters (Unit) Value the previous analysis, as the hydrogen production rate in-
creases, the net electrical power output and overall effi-
Hybrid function solver () fmincon
ciencies of the integrated system will decrease, while the
Swarm size () 50
Maximum number of iterations () 600 system's specific energy cost will increase, as shown in Fig. 12.
Function tolerance () 1e-6 Figs. 13e15 present the energy loss, exergy loss, and in-
Pressure ratio of the reactor subsystem g () [1.5,4] vestment cost distributions of the integrated system under
Mass flow rate ratio used for the hydrogen [0,1] three typical production strategies, and as a data reference,
production x () the state point parameters of the system under production
High pressure of the SRC subsystem pSRC (MPa) [2,20]
strategy III are summarized in Table 9. As shown in Fig. 13,
Fig. 11 e Solving process based on the two-step single objective optimization and variable production strategies.
when the integrated system operates at the production condenser and CueCl cycle, as shown in Fig. 14(a). However,
strategy I, the main energy losses of the system (nearly 95% of different from the fore case, under the production strategy III,
the total energy losses) are caused by CueCl cycle and the energy loss of the condenser exceeds that of the CueCl
condenser, whereas the main exergy destructions of the sys- cycle and becomes the biggest one, while the system's
tem (nearly 80% of the total exergy destructions) occur in largest exergy destruction still occurs in VHTR that has a low
VHTR and CueCl cycle which have the relatively low exergy exergy efficiency of about 71.2%, as shown in Fig. 14(b). Be-
efficiencies (less than 75%). In addition, the total fixed-capital sides, similar to the previous analysis, more than 60% of the
investment of equipment is the system's biggest cost source, system cost is caused by the total fixed-capital investment of
which approximately accounts for 64.2% of the specific energy equipment, which is mainly composed of the investment
cost of 0.0731 $/kW$h. According to the rough cost estimation, costs of the VHTR and the CueCl plant, as shown in Fig. 14(c).
it is predicted that in the maximum hydrogen production It is worth noting that when the hydrogen production rate is
mode, more than 95% of the system's total capital investment reduced to 50% of the maximum production rate, the invest-
will be occupied by building CueCl plant and VHTR, as shown ment cost percentage of the CueCl cycle is significantly
in Fig. 13(c). The reason for obtaining this result is based on the decreased from 60.7% to 42.9%, as shown in Figs. 13(c) and
fact that most of the reactor thermal energy is used to produce 14(c).
hydrogen under production strategy I, causing the very large When the integrated system operates in the mode of pure
investment cost of the CueCl plant. combined cycle without hydrogen production, the biggest
When the hydrogen production rate is reduced to half of energy and exergy losses of the system are respectively
the maximum production rate, the integrated system will caused by the heat rejection process in condenser (about
operate at the production strategy III, and at this time, more 93.2% of the total energy losses) and the nuclear fission & heat
than 90% of the system's total energy losses are still caused by transfer process in VHTR (about 61.7% of the total exergy
Table 8 e Five typical production strategies and corresponding optimal operating conditions.
Production strategies Electricity demand Hydrogen demand g () x () pSRC (MPa)
I. Largest net electrical power with 100% of the maximum Very small Very large 1.5 1 4.57
hydrogen production rate (E_ net,max & m
_ H2,max)
II. Largest net electrical power with 75% of the maximum Small Large 1.92 1 4.69
hydrogen production rate (E_ net,max & 0.75m
_ H2,max)
III. Largest net electrical power with 50% of the maximum Moderate Moderate 2.53 1 2.54
_ H2,max)
IV. Largest net electrical power with 25% of the maximum Large Small 2.5 0.49 5.69
_ H2,max)
V. Largest net electrical power without hydrogen Very large None 2.59 0 15.54
production (E_ net,max)
destructions), as shown in Fig. 15(a) and (b). The second paper, in order to figure out the unknown thermo-economic
largest exergy loss that accounts for about 13.5% of the total characteristics of the system under variable operating con-
exergy destructions, occurs in the SG which has a moderate ditions. Parametric analysis results show that increasing the
exergy efficiency of about 85.3%. In addition, it can be seen reactor subsystem pressure ratio can enhance the system's
form Fig. 15(c) that the total fixed-capital investment of thermo-economic performance, however, the system's
equipment is still the system's biggest cost source, which maximum hydrogen production capacity will be lowered. As
approximately accounts for 60.6% of the specific energy cost the hydrogen production rate is increased, the system's net
of 0.0268 $/kW$h. And under the maximum electricity gen- electrical power output and overall efficiencies are
eration mode, the system's biggest investment cost is caused decreased, while the system's specific energy cost is
by VHTR (nearly 80% of the total capital investment), followed increased. Thus, it is speculated that the total efficiencies
by ST and GT. and cost of producing compressed hydrogen from nuclear
In short, it can be concluded from Figs. 13e15 that more energy are respectively lower and higher than that of
than 90% of the system energy losses are caused by condenser generating electricity. Optimization results show that when
and CueCl cycle, while about 50e60% of the system exergy the system operates at the maximum hydrogen production
destructions occur in VHTR. About 60% and 30% of the sys- rate of 403.1 mol/s, the system's net electrical power output,
tem's specific energy cost are respectively caused by the total thermal efficiency, exergy efficiency, and specific energy cost
capital investment of equipment and the operation & main- are found to be 38.77 MW, 39.3%, 41.26%, and 0.0731 $/kW$h,
tenance cost, and the fuel cost contributes a small cost per- respectively. And when the system's hydrogen production
centage (generally not exceed 10%). The investment costs of load equals to 0, these values are respectively calculated to
VHTR and CueCl plant are the main capital investment be 177.25 MW, 50.64%, 53.29%, and 0.0268 $/kW$h. Lastly,
sources of the integrated system. case studies show that more than 90% of the system's total
energy losses are caused by condenser and CueCl cycle, and
about 50e60% of the system's total exergy destructions occur
Conclusions in VHTR with a low exergy efficiency of 71.2%. In addition,
about 60% and 30% of the system's specific energy cost are
An improved VHTR and CueCl cycle-based nuclear hydrogen respectively used for the equipment procurement and the
production system is proposed and investigated in this system operation & maintenance, and the system's total
Fig. 12 e The integrated system's performance under five different production strategies.
Fig. 13 e Energy loss, exergy loss, and investment cost distributions of the integrated system under production strategy I.
Fig. 14 e Energy loss, exergy loss, and investment cost distributions of the integrated system under production strategy III.
Fig. 15 e Energy loss, exergy loss, and investment cost distributions of the integrated system under production strategy V.
Table 9 e Detailed state point parameters of the integrated system under production strategy III.
State points Fluids _ (kg/s)
m T (K) p (MPa) h (kJ/kg) s (kJ/kg$K)
1 Helium 122.61 673.15 7.1 3522.4 23.413
2 Helium 122.61 1223.15 7.1 6377.1 26.512
3 Helium 122.61 874.50 2.8 4554.8 26.697
4 Helium 122.61 693.15 2.8 3613.3 25.490
5 Helium 122.61 693.15 2.8 3613.3 25.490
6 Helium 122.61 448.76 2.8 2344.4 23.233
7 Water 50.88 336.59 2.54 267.7 0.873
8 Steam 50.88 670.59 2.54 3233.7 7.000
9 Steam 50.88 318.96 0.01 2319.2 7.319
10 Water 50.88 318.96 0.01 191.8 0.649
11 Water 50.88 319.15 2.54 194.8 0.651
12 Water 50.88 322.64 2.54 209.4 0.696
13 Water 50.88 327.22 2.54 228.5 0.755
14 Water 50.88 331.84 2.54 247.8 0.814
15 Water 1961.4 298.15 0.1 104.9 0.367
16 Water 1961.4 310.96 0.1 158.5 0.543
17 Helium 119.82 673.15 2.9 3509.8 25.270
18 Helium 119.82 853.15 2.9 4444.3 26.500
19 Hydrogen 0.404 298.15 0.1 3931.8 53.376
20 Hydrogen 0.404 457.87 0.4 6241.0 53.889
21 Hydrogen 0.404 327.15 0.4 4349.5 49.026
22 Hydrogen 0.404 501.93 1.6 6889.1 49.541
23 Hydrogen 0.404 330.64 1.6 4405.8 43.491
24 Hydrogen 0.404 507.37 6.3 7003.3 44.012
25 Hydrogen 0.404 335.22 6.3 4497.5 37.979
26 Hydrogen 0.404 514.70 25 7253.5 38.525
27 Hydrogen 0.404 339.84 25 4680.4 32.415
capital investment is mainly occupied by building VHTR and splitting cycle for hydrogen production. Energy Convers
CueCl plant. In general, this study can provide some data Manag 2008;49(7):1873e81.
references for the research on the nuclear hydrogen pro- [3] Safari F, Dincer I. A review and comparative evaluation of
thermochemical water splitting cycles for hydrogen
duction systems.
production. Energy Convers Manag 2020;205:112182.
[4] Dincer I, Zamfirescu C. Sustainable energy systems and
applications. Springer; 2012.
Declaration of competing interest [5] Hydrogen scaling up. A sustainable pathway for the global
energy transition. Hydrogen Council; 2017.
The authors declare that they have no known competing [6] El-Emam RS, Ozcan H, Zamfirescu C. Updates on promising
financial interests or personal relationships that could have thermochemical cycles for clean hydrogen production using
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. nuclear energy. J Clean Prod 2020;262:121424.
[7] Al-Zareer M, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Development and
assessment of a novel integrated nuclear plant for electricity
and hydrogen production. Energy Convers Manag
Acknowledgments 2017;134:221e34.
[8] Jaszczur M, Rosen MA, Sliwa T, et al. Hydrogen production
Qi Wang greatly acknowledges the financial supports from the using high temperature nuclear reactors: efficiency analysis
China Scholarship Council (CSC, No. 202006280024). The au- of a combined cycle. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2016;41(19):7861e71.
thors are very grateful for the comments and suggestions
[9] Al-Zareer M, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Performance analysis of a
from the Editors and Reviewers. supercritical water-cooled nuclear reactor integrated with a
combined cycle, a Cu-Cl thermochemical cycle and a
hydrogen compression system. Appl Energy
references 2017;195:646e58.
[10] Al-Zareer M, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Assessment and analysis of
hydrogen and electricity production from a Generation IV
[1] Suman S. Hybrid nuclear-renewable energy systems: a lead-cooled nuclear reactor integrated with a copper-
review. J Clean Prod 2018;181:166e77. chlorine thermochemical cycle. Int J Energy Res
[2] Granovskii M, Dincer I, Rosen MA, et al. Performance 2018;42:91e103.
assessment of a combined system to link a supercritical [11] Al-Zareer M, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Analysis and assessment
water-cooled nuclear reactor and a thermochemical water of the integrated generation IV gas-cooled fast nuclear
reactor and copper-chlorine cycle for hydrogen and hydrogen production processes using Aspen Plus software.
electricity production. Energy Convers Manag Energy Convers Manag 2012;63:70e86.
2020;205:112387. [28] McDonald CF. Power conversion system considerations for a
[12] Rodrı́guez DG, Brayner de Oliveira Lira CA, Garcı́a Parra LR, high efficiency small modular nuclear gas turbine combined
et al. Computational model of a sulfur-iodine cycle power plant concept (NGTCC). Appl Therm Eng
thermochemical water splitting system coupled to a VHTR 2014;73:80e101.
for nuclear hydrogen production. Energy 2018;147:1165e76. [29] Sadeghi S, Ghandehariun S. Thermodynamic analysis and
[13] Sakaba N, Kasahara S, Onuki K, et al. Conceptual design of optimization of an integrated solar thermochemical
hydrogen production system with thermochemical water- hydrogen production system. Int J Hydrogen Energy
splitting iodine sulphur process utilizing heat from the high- 2020;45(53):28426e36.
temperature gas-cooled reactor. Int J Hydrogen Energy [30] Kowalczyk T, Badur J, Bryk M. Energy and exergy analysis of
2007;32:4160e9. hydrogen production combined with electric energy
[14] Xinhe Q, Gang Z, Jie W. Thermodynamic evaluation of generation in a nuclear cogeneration cycle. Energy Convers
hydrogen and electricity cogeneration coupled with very high Manag 2019;198:111805.
temperature gas-cooled reactors. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2020. [31] Wang Q, Wu W, Li D, et al. Thermodynamic analysis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.06.080 [in press]. and optimization of four organic flash cycle systems for
[15] Rodrı́guez DG, Brayner de Oliveira Lira CA, Garcı́a waste heat recovery. Energy Convers Manag
Herna ndez CR, et al. Hydrogen production methods 2020;221:113171.
efficiency coupled to an advanced high-temperature [32] Chuang W, Shun-sen W, Jun L. Exergoeconomic analysis and
accelerator driven system. Int J Hydrogen Energy optimization of a combined supercritical carbon dioxide
2019;44(3):1392e408. recompression Brayton/organic flash cycle for nuclear power
[16] S‚ahin S, S‚ahin HM. Generation-IV reactors and nuclear plants. Energy Convers Manag 2018;171:936e52.
hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2021. http:// [33] Xurong W, Yiping D. Exergoeconomic analysis of utilizing
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.12.182 [in press]. the transcritical CO2 cycle and the ORC for a recompression
[17] Ozcan H, Dincer I. Modeling of a new four-step magnesium- supercritical CO2 cycle waste heat recovery: a comparative
chlorine cycle with dry HCl capture for more efficient study. Appl Energy 2016;170:193e207.
hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy [34] Mohammadi K, Ellingwood K, Powell K. A novel triple power
2016;41:7792e801. cycle featuring a gas turbine cycle with supercritical carbon
[18] Ozcan H, Dincer I. Performance investigation of magnesium- dioxide and organic Rankine cycles: thermoeconomic
chlorine hybrid thermochemical cycle for hydrogen analysis and optimization. Energy Convers Manag
production. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2014;39:76e85. 2020;220:113123.
[19] Canavesio C, Nassini HE, Bohe AE. Evaluation of an iron- [35] Orhan MF, Dincer I, Naterer GF. Cost analysis of a
chlorine thermochemical cycle for hydrogen production. Int J thermochemical CueCl pilot plant for nuclear-based
Hydrogen Energy 2015;40:8620e32. hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy
[20] Kasahara S, Kubo S, Hino R, et al. Flowsheet study of the 2008;33:6006e20.
thermochemical water-splitting iodine-sulfur process for [36] Wang Q, Wu W, He Z. Thermodynamic analysis and
effective hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy optimization of a novel organic Rankine cycle-based micro-
2007;32(4):489e96. scale cogeneration system using biomass fuel. Energy
[21] Kunitomi K, Yan X, Nishihara T, et al. JAEA's VHTR for Convers Manag 2019;198:111803.
hydrogen and electricity cogeneration: GTHTR300C. Nuclear [37] Sadeghi S, Ghandehariun S, Naterer GF. Exergoeconomic and
Engineering and Technology 2007;39(1):9e20. multi-objective optimization of a solar thermochemical
[22] Sato H, Kubo S, Yan XL, et al. Control strategies for transients hydrogen production plant with heat recovery. Energy
of hydrogen production plant in VHTR cogeneration systems. Convers Manag 2020;225:113441.
Prog Nucl Energy 2011;53(7):1009e16. [38] Seyyedi SM, Hashemi-Tilehnoee M, Rosen MA. Exergy and
[23] Verfondern K, Yan X, Nishihara T, et al. Safety concept of exergoeconomic analyses of a novel integration of a 1000
nuclear cogeneration of hydrogen and electricity. Int J MW pressurized water reactor power plant and a gas turbine
Hydrogen Energy 2017;42:7551e9. cycle through a superheater. Ann Nucl Energy
[24] Bai Y, Zhang P, Guo HF, et al. Purification of sulfuric and 2018;115:161e72.
hydriodic acids phases in the iodine-sulfur process. Chin J [39] MATLAB. MATLAB/Simulink: version R2016a MathWorks,
Chem Eng 2009;17(1):160e6. USA. https://www.mathworks.com/products/matlab.html.
[25] Guo HF, Zhang P, Bai Y, et al. Continuous purification of [40] Lemmon EW, Huber ML, McLinden MO. NIST standard
H2SO4 and HI phases by packed column in IS process. Int J reference database 23: reference fluid thermodynamic and
Hydrogen Energy 2010;35(7):2836e9. transport properties REFPROP version 9.0. Gaithersburg:
[26] Zhang P, Wang L, Chen SG, et al. Progress of nuclear National Institute of Standards and Technology, Standard
hydrogen production through the iodine-sulfur process in Reference Data Program; 2010.
China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;81:1802e12. [41] Eberhart R, Kennedy J. A new optimizer using particle
[27] Orhan MF, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Efficiency comparison of swarm theory. Proc Sixth Int Symp Micro Mach Hum Sci
various design schemes for copperechlorine (CueCl) 1995:39e43.

Thermo-Economic Analysis and Optimization of The Very High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor-Based Nuclear Hydrogen Production System Using Copper-Chlorine Cycle

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thermo-Economic Analysis and Optimization of The Very High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor-Based Nuclear Hydrogen Production System Using Copper-Chlorine Cycle

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 6 ( 2 0 2 1 ) 3 1 5 6 3 e3 1 5 8 5

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

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

Thermo-economic analysis and optimization of the

Qi Wang a,*, Chunyu Liu a, Run Luo a,b, Xiaodong Li a, Dantong Li c,

highlights graphical abstract

An improved conceptual design of

article info abstract

Nomenclature q quality ()

emission, but also increase the cost competitiveness and

(2) The changes in kinetic and gravitational energies are

where the subscript H2(T0,p0) represents the hydrogen at the

The detailed investment cost functions of each compo-

m_ IHX;hf ðexIHX;in;hf exIHX;out;hf Þ

m_ pump ðexpump;out expump;in Þ

m_ SG;hf ðexSG;in;hf exSG;out;hf Þ

m_ ICi;hf ðexICi;in;hf exICi;out;hf Þ

m_ ICi;cf ðexICi;out;cf exICi;in;cf Þ

IHX and SG are considered to be the compact heat ex-

roughly estimate the fixed-capital investment cost of the

CueCl cycle. It should be noted that this fitting formula is

I_ICi ¼ m_ ICi;hf ðexICi;in;hf exICi;out;hf Þ m_ ICi;cf ðexICi;out;cf exICi;in;cf Þ

simplified cost fitting formula can be used to roughly esti-

to their relatively small values [31,36].

_ HC;con m_ HC ðexHC;out exHC;in Þ

I_ST ¼ m_ ST ðexST;in exST;out Þ W

where the terms CRF, t, ir and n are the capital recovery

number of operation year are respectively set to 8000 h

Performance criteria model

The outputted products of the integrated system include

in the hydrogen tank will be eventually cooled to the ambient

E_ net, can be calculated by:

“Results and discussion”, their calculation equations are

c_tot þ c_fuel þ c_O&M

Table 5 e The investment cost models of the system components [32e35].

Generator (SRC) CG;SRC ¼ 60  W_ 0:95 2005

Fig. 3 e Flow chart of model solving.

Results and discussion Parametric analysis

Hydrogen production rate (mol/s) 86.5 87.7 1.39

You might also like

Generator (SRC) CG;SRC ¼ 60 W_ 0:95 2005